Search results

The Ministry of Technology represents an entirely new approach to the interaction of Government and industry. On its formation, Mintech was given the task of ‘guiding and stimulating a major national effort to bring advanced technology and new processes into British industry’. What has happened is that the old idea has been abandoned that science should be kept at arm's length from the main Government machine in order to preserve the integrity of research. The task is now seen as one of bringing industry and the Government research establishments together, in order to get the best possible cross‐fertilization and market orientation: ‘we now regard science and technology as being in industrial policy right up to the neck’.

This is a large and complex subject and one which cannot be treated comprehensively and in depth in the course of a short lecture such as this. However, an attempt will be made to acquaint you with the main series of specifications and standards which are employed in the UK to shape and govern the design of aerospace vehicles and to say something about their purpose, broad classification and genesis.

A Selection of Equipment of Use in the Production and Maintenance of Aircraft, Missiles, Space Vehicles and Components. Last year the Ministry of Technology placed a pre‐production order with Ferranti Ltd., of Edinburgh, for the purchase of 11 drawing measuring machines to be allocated to selected companies and other organisations representative of a wide field of engineering for a period of appraisal. The Mintech scheme is designed to shorten the time‐lag between the development of advanced types of machine tools and associated equipment and their acceptance in industry on a scale which would justify worth‐while production.

FOUNDED in 1956 by Mr E. L. Cook, Aircraft Supplies Ltd. have come a long way since then. Mr Cook left the flight test department of the de Havilland organisation at Christchurch to set up his own company to supply aircraft spares, particularly electrical items and aircraft flight instruments such as artificial horizons and other gyro‐based instruments. There can be few things more damaging to the airline operator than to have an aircraft worth hundreds of thousands of pounds grounded for a prolonged period due simply to the inability to obtain quick delivery of some small piece of equipment costing perhaps as little as a few pounds. The initial stores consisted of two hangars discarded by B.O.A.C. and the company was quickly established. As the organisation grew, it was able to offer full overhaul and repair facilities for instruments and electrical equipment and quickly obtained a reputation for the quality of their workmanship and the extent of their stock. Workshop facilities were approved by Mintech and the Air Registration Board gave approval for the manufacture, overhaul and repair of equipment for civil and military operators. A significant advance in the company's capabilities was made when it took over the manufacturing rights of the Midas range of flight data recorders in the U.K. This range of recorders was popular with airline operators wishing to meet the B.o.T. mandatory requirements.

AS a preliminary to the detail description of the Harrier V/S.T.O.L. Operational Trainer — designated Harrier T. Mk. 2 — it is worth recalling that Hawker Siddeley first made proposals for a dual version of the P.1127 as early as September 1960 (Fig. 1). However, due to the relatively small number of early P.1127 and Kestrel aircraft, efforts to introduce a trainer proved abortive until the Harrier G.R. Mk. 1 production order materialised, following the batch of six Harrier development single seatcr aircraft. A feasibility study for a V/S.T.O.L. Dual Version Harrier was submitted to MinTech in September 1965. This was followed up by a project study in April 1967, which culminated in firm orders for two development two‐seater aircraft, to be followed by a batch of production aircraft.

On August 5 MinTech published the booklet GRADUATE TRAINING IN MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY (HMSO 22½p.) It is the second report of the Working Group on Engineering Training and the Requirements of Industry. The first report of this working group was published in 1966 and is now known as the Bosworth Report. This present report can best be described as Bosworth Two. We take this opportunity of setting out formally the Bosworth system and show how Bosworth Two relates to it.