BRITAIN鈥檚 aerospace industry will go the same way as shipbuilding unless the government reverses the 鈥渕assive鈥� reductions in support for research and development over the past decade, warns a panel of prominent industrialists and academics (see Diagram).
Britain鈥檚 aerospace industry must receive the same level of support for R&D as its rivals in Germany and France, the panel argues in a strongly worded report released last week. The report was prepared as part of the government鈥檚 Technology Foresight Programme, which aims to identify the technologies and markets critical to industry鈥檚 survival. Aerospace was one of 15 areas examined by panels of specialists over the past 18 months.
The aerospace report warns that the industry鈥檚 share of the world market could fall by half to 4.9 per cent over the next 15 years unless flagging investment in R&D is revived. 鈥淭here was widespread concern among experts we consulted that Britain鈥檚 aerospace industry is rapidly consuming its technological inheritance,鈥� says Roy McNulty, who chaired the panel.
Advertisement
McNulty, chairman of aerospace company Short Brothers, stresses that the industry must shoulder most of the burden of rebuilding its technology base, but that its success depends on the government鈥檚 contribution. 鈥淲e will be at a competitive disadvantage otherwise, because what we get is significantly below what our competitors get,鈥� he says.
One of the biggest obstacles the industry faces is the lack of help in demonstrating technologies, for example scaling up an engine beyond the prototype stage. 鈥淲e think there鈥檚 too much of a skew towards supporting the early stages of commercial development,鈥� says McNulty.
Over the past decade, the Department of Trade and Industry has halved its funding for developing civilian aircraft to just 拢20 million. This compares with 拢103 million set aside by the French government this year, 拢123 million by the German government and 拢646 million by the US (see Table).
The panel wants the DTI to increase its annual spending on civil aircraft development to 拢25 million. Industry should match this figure, it says. The panel also wants an immediate injection of cash for demonstrating technologies, increasing funding to 拢30 million next year, rising to 拢65 million a year in three years鈥� time. Again, it says, industry should match the government鈥檚 contribution.
The panel also asks for 拢24 million for universities developing dual-use technologies of equal value to industry and the military. Universities should also receive another 拢40 million a year for civil aerospace research, it says.
Cyril Hilsum of GEC, a member of the panel, says that if these demands are not met, Britain will suffer a 鈥渄ouble-whammy鈥�. First, it will have trouble selling exports of inferior quality, reducing the country鈥檚 trade balance. Second, the industry could become increasingly dependent on technology from abroad, possibly in areas vital to national security.
In the past, the government has ignored the industry鈥檚 pleas, preferring to try to persuade other countries to reduce their subsidies to achieve 鈥渁 level playing field鈥�. McNulty says: 鈥淚f it had worked, we would not have any argument today. But while we鈥檝e been reducing the level of support, our competitors have been increasing it.鈥�
The panel鈥檚 concerns are shared by John Chisholm, head of Britain鈥檚 biggest defence technology organisation, the Defence Research Agency. Chisholm is also a member of a government steering group that is to publish a 鈥渕aster plan鈥� this month for implementing the findings of the 15 foresight panels. Defence and aerospace deserve special treatment, he says, not just because they are important to national security, but also because the success of the industry depends as much on competition between governments as on competitions between companies.