Viewing page 54 of 507

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

46    HELICOPTER AIR SERVICE PROGRAM

I don't say for a moment that this will solve the problem.  This is at the margin.  But it will permit more effective utilization of equipment, personnel, and ground facilities in which they have a fixed capital investment.

I think there is some hope as well in the experience that the operators are gaining with their new powerplants.  The time between overhauls for engines and components is a fraction of what it is for the long-range jet transports.  We are now authorizing the use of the J-3 and JT-4 engines on the big jets for 4,000 and 5,000 hours between overhauls.  They have proved that reliable.  Comparable times on the helicopter powerplants are in the order of 600 and 700 hours, which gives you an idea of why the powerplant operation and maintenance costs contribute so heavily to the deficit of these operations.

At some time in the future, there will be the ability to operate at higher times between overhaul.  I don't think they will ever achieve the rates of the long-range jets, for the simple reason that they operate at higher power levels throughout their normal flights and they have much, much more frequent landings and takeoffs, which place the relatively greater strain on the engine.

The utilization of the aircraft also is a problem, but there is progress being made on it.

For example, the latest model of the Sikorsky 61 under favorable auspices is getting in the order of 4 to 5 hours per day, compared to 10 to 13 hours per day achieved as the utilization rate on the big jet transports.

The Vertol 107 has an even lower rate.  This is because of the complexity and the maintainability of these relatively adolescent aircraft, and it is not because of any lack of capability or desire on the part of the management of these operator to achieve higher utilization.

There are in the military inventory improved engines that will be available within the next 20 to 24 months that offer the prospect of higher utilization and longer periods between overhauls.  The commercial carriers can buy them, we think, and fit them, if they are capitalized and supported during this period.

There is an obvious possibility and in fact a reality of sales abroad.  The helicopter manufacturers have, it seems to me, a lot of work to do to enable these operators to succeed.  They need to design and build better helicopters and then need to sell more of them abroad.

For example, in the last 5 years, some 2,000 helicopters have been exported to a total of 74 countries at an earning of export and foreign exchange of $134 million.  Recently, while in Pakistan, we learned of the Dacca-Khulna helicopter run.  There they use an S-61 to fly in 32 minutes a flight that takes 22 hours by an ancient river streamer meandering up the river.  This kind of dramatic potentiality all around the world encourages us to think that more of these choppers can be built, sold and operated, and perhaps the unit and operating cost can be brought down.

There is one helicopter carrier on scheduled service without subsidy.  In 2 of the last 4 years, it is my understanding; and I believe he will be available to the committee, he has operated at a profit.

He had recently had the ingenuity to acquire supplementary business and income and it is my understanding that it is possible for him on the basis of overhaul and maintenance work in his companion.