Viewing page 5 of 7
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
344 VOL. 66 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL AERONAUTICAL SOCIETY JUNE 1962 [[image]] Figure 3. The standard V-107 instrument panel. it is not unusual to find an air passenger's ground travel time at least equal to his flight time. That this will not long be tolerated by the public, once a solution becomes available, is perfectly clear. If it continues the way it is, the usefulness of air transport in journeys of up to 200 or 300 miles will be questioned more and more frequently. The travel time between city centers and airports must be reduced to a maximum of ten minutes - instead of the current average which comes close to an hour or more. In view of these circumstances, it is difficult to understand how responsible officials in any airline can continue either to ignore the problem or consider it someone else's responsibility. An evasion of this magnitude is not supportable. It is like a child in a dark room or a horse with blinders - lacking vision and frightened of what the facts may be. The long term business interests of our industry and the welfare of our passengers demand a diametrically different approach. More than mere offers of technical co-operation with public authorities is involved. It is an occasion for aggressive imaginative leadership - and this does not need to involve heavy financial investment or business risk of any sort. The twin-engine helicopters now being put in service, capable of continued flight with one engine failed and operation in instrument weather conditions, can play an important part in helping to solve this problem. The performance of these machines, including the ability to fly vertically, means that passengers can be moved on schedule directly from city centre heliports (including rooftops) to outlying airports or other community centers in a matter of minutes. While it must be acknowledged that the inherent inconvenience and frustration of short-haul travel in a densely populated urban area such as New York will, as a matter of logic, never be completely overcome, it does appear that out company can perform an increasing public service. Although private automobiles, taxicabs, buses, trucks, underground railroads, ships, helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft are already engaged in short-haul transportation in this giant community, there will be a continuing need (subject to budgetary considerations) for modernization of the public transport complex. New systems supplementing the old will doubtless become economically feasible. The problem is so large and evolving so fast that there is little chance of basic conflict or damaging competition. For example, it is noteworthy that studies have been made in New York, as well as many other cities in the United States (among them Washington, New Orleans, Chicago, Seattle, Los Angeles and San Francisco), involving the possible use of different types of monorail. Unfortunately, up to the present time there has been virtually unanimous agreement that the advantages that might be gained from this means of transport do not yet justify the initial heavy capital expenditures and subsequent operating costs. However, as time passes, and surface congestion increases, current thinking will doubtless be subject to review and the economic balance that prevails will be modified. Encouraged as we are by the impressive prospects for expanding our inter-airport and airport-downtown traffic, we know that, with turbine power, the development of heretofore untapped [[image]] Figure 4. One phase of the wind tunnel work on air currents done by the Company.
