Viewing page 249 of 507


  We are all aware of what occurs during floods and the like. By and large, it is our view that the helicopter service can also be compatible with the present fixed-wing operation in that the helicopter operates in air space that is not generally used by fixed-wing aircraft. This means that they are not, in effect, cluttering up the traffic control situation. 
  It is conceivable, also, as helicopters go into instrument-flight-operations, which, it is evident to me, they will have to do if they are going to maintain a schedule integrity that will be attractive to the public, they will then, at least, in the conditions of instrument conditions, have to use the facilities that are used by fixed-wing aircraft, at least, initially. 
  There may come a day when a vertical descent can be made on instruments. That is not, to my knowledge, a possibility at this time.
  By and large, I think the U.S. Government would be remiss if it chopped off the final development of this type of research.
  I would be glad to answer any questions, if possible, and I am sure Mr. Carter can make some observations and answer more technical questions than I can.
  (The statement follows:)


  We are here today to present the position of the Air Line Pilots Association regarding support for the continued use of scheduled helicopter operations in the several locations in the United States. Specifically, at this time, Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York.
  Bill Stout, who built the Ford Tri-Motor, once said, "An airplane has to be self-supporting, economically, as well as aerodynamically." The U.S.-helicopter program has proven successful and safe, and there is every indication that the money and efforts expended in LAX, CHI, and NYC operations in the past will result in self-sufficiency as the state of the art advances. Further, the knowledge, skills, and capabilities accumulated in this program must make it possible for other communities to achieve similar self-sufficient vertical-lift operations. Certainly, to name a few, Boston, Baltimore-Washington-Dulles, Detroit, Atlanta, Houston, Fort Worth-Dallas, San Francisco-Oakland-Sacramento, and Seattle, can look forward to this eventuality.
  The airlines were subsidized for many years through mail pay rates with subsidy continuing into the era of the DC-3's. Termination of subsidy came about with the public acceptance of air transportation, and the airplane grew in size and speed with this demand. Instrument-flight techniques improved schedule and reliability. Unit costs gradually came down and public service was improved. Subsidy termination was not accomplished by amputation-but gradually as the state of the art advanced. 
  The Air Line Pilots Association believes that the helicopter business is progressing along the same track, just described. As newer, larger, and faster helicopters have been placed into service, the passenger-load factors have shown a steadily rising trend. Instrument-flight operations are just around the corner, and in fact, the instrument equipment is now being flown by NYA and LAA.
  Twin-engine turbine powerplant installation has improved helicopter reliability, load-carrying ability, and safety. Unit costs are diminishing. Public acceptance is increasing. These facts support our contention that scheduled helicopter air transportation will continue to progress toward self-suffiency. To cut off subsidy now would be like cutting off all power when the runway is just in sight. 
  The primary factor affecting reliability in scheduled helicopter transport service to date has been the inability to operate under extremely adverse weather conditions. It is especially ironic that after 17 years of being limited to visual flight limitations, the helicopter industry is faced with a threat to its continued existence, at the very time when it is on the verge of significant breakthrough in the area of instrument-flight capability, with its profit-producing factor. Helicopter instrument operations potential is showing up favorably on both Los
Please note that the language and terminology used in this collection reflects the context and culture of the time of its creation, and may include culturally sensitive information. As an historical document, its contents may be at odds with contemporary views and terminology. The information within this collection does not reflect the views of the Smithsonian Institution, but is available in its original form to facilitate research. For questions or comments regarding sensitive content, access, and use related to this collection, please contact