History of BOAC
Thread Starter
History of BOAC
We have discussed before,a rare book-The History of BOAC by Winston Bray.
I have been looking for a copy for many years and have just found one at reasonable cost.
There are also another 2 copies on the river site at an unreasonable price.
I am still confused though.As I understand it the book was originally written in 1975 and then suppressed by the company.
The copies on sale are a 1986 edition which I didn't know existed.
Does anyone know the full story and where the 1986 edition came from?
I have been looking for a copy for many years and have just found one at reasonable cost.
There are also another 2 copies on the river site at an unreasonable price.
I am still confused though.As I understand it the book was originally written in 1975 and then suppressed by the company.
The copies on sale are a 1986 edition which I didn't know existed.
Does anyone know the full story and where the 1986 edition came from?
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If good timing is the secret of success, then a senior BA manager writing a book about BOAC in 1975 must be a masterclass in bad timing.
In 1975 the BEA/BOAC merger was clearly seen to be a disaster. David Nicholson had failed to give any sense of vision or common purpose to the staff of the two merging companies, which had dissolved into factionalism and in-fighting. In the subsequent repeated attempts to end this almost all the senior managers went (including Mr Bray, I think) and any mention of BOAC and BEA was very strongly discouraged.
It didn't work and the chaos continued throughout the 1970s until a desperate Margaret Thatcher bought in the biggest bully she could find, and John King finally imposed a single structure and some sense of vision and purpose to the BA we now know.
Not surprising, then, that Mr Bray's work was not widely known and circulated in 1975.
By 1986 the situation was radically different. In the frenzy of the BA privatisation, BOAC had long been forgotten by all but a few. If the book was then reprinted I doubt there would have been much interest. The moment had passed. History had been rewritten and BOAC was now bad inefficient airline. Anything saying otherwise was out of step.
In 1975 the BEA/BOAC merger was clearly seen to be a disaster. David Nicholson had failed to give any sense of vision or common purpose to the staff of the two merging companies, which had dissolved into factionalism and in-fighting. In the subsequent repeated attempts to end this almost all the senior managers went (including Mr Bray, I think) and any mention of BOAC and BEA was very strongly discouraged.
It didn't work and the chaos continued throughout the 1970s until a desperate Margaret Thatcher bought in the biggest bully she could find, and John King finally imposed a single structure and some sense of vision and purpose to the BA we now know.
Not surprising, then, that Mr Bray's work was not widely known and circulated in 1975.
By 1986 the situation was radically different. In the frenzy of the BA privatisation, BOAC had long been forgotten by all but a few. If the book was then reprinted I doubt there would have been much interest. The moment had passed. History had been rewritten and BOAC was now bad inefficient airline. Anything saying otherwise was out of step.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cornwall UK
Age: 79
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why did BSAA and BEA split away from the British Overseas Airways that emerged from WWII (curiously the name British Airways was marked on many of BOAC's aircraft and signs/labels in 1941-1945 )?
Whose idea was it around 1972 to combine BOAC/BEA?
Whose idea was it around 1972 to combine BOAC/BEA?
Thread Starter
BOAC was a merger of Imperial Airways and the original British Airways.
I imagine that ex British Airways managers were in control for a while resulting in the use of British Airways on the aircraft.
The emergence of BSAA and BEA and the eventual merger to form the new British Airways were purely political decisions by the governments of the day.
I imagine that ex British Airways managers were in control for a while resulting in the use of British Airways on the aircraft.
The emergence of BSAA and BEA and the eventual merger to form the new British Airways were purely political decisions by the governments of the day.
Why did BSAA and BEA split away from the British Overseas Airways that emerged from WWII
BEA really came out of Railway Air Services although some early European operations were carried out by BOAC before BEA was completly organised.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cornwall UK
Age: 79
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I always assumed that it was the influence of ex British Airways Ltd staff which accounted for the wartime fleet carrying either 'British Airways' or just the Speedbird on the nose (but maybe they were trying to save paint/labour/space!)
The sequence with BSAA seems to have been foundation as privately owned British Latin American Airlines, name change to BSAA, Nationalisation and ownership by BOAC, start of service as separate Nationalised Corporation BSAA, period of service with several aircraft losses, reincorporation into BOAC and departure of Don Bennett
Attached a photo of the BOAC desk in the Heathrow Northside Terminal about 1948 showing the graphic attempt to 'unify' the 3 corporations
And for no particular reason some photos of Giles Guthrie (BOAC chairman ca.1964) when he flew BA Ltd first Lockheed 14 service to Warsaw in 1939 (click on pics to enlarge)
Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp
Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp
Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp
The sequence with BSAA seems to have been foundation as privately owned British Latin American Airlines, name change to BSAA, Nationalisation and ownership by BOAC, start of service as separate Nationalised Corporation BSAA, period of service with several aircraft losses, reincorporation into BOAC and departure of Don Bennett
Attached a photo of the BOAC desk in the Heathrow Northside Terminal about 1948 showing the graphic attempt to 'unify' the 3 corporations
And for no particular reason some photos of Giles Guthrie (BOAC chairman ca.1964) when he flew BA Ltd first Lockheed 14 service to Warsaw in 1939 (click on pics to enlarge)
Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp
Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp
Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp
Last edited by A30yoyo; 21st Aug 2011 at 12:38.
Merger of Imperial AW and British AW Ltd at the end of 1939 had been agreed before the war but by the time it was carried out both carriers' services, being international only, had either been suspended, or become a quasi-military operation, and the bulk of the staff had gone into the forces. Ironically the few UK domestic civilian services which remained through the war, to outlying islands etc, remained independent outside this merger.
Quite why BSAA was set up as a separate state-owned intercontinental operation is just one of those mysteries. Would't be surprised if Bennett had just strongarmed some civil servants into it. I'll probably get some comments if I say it was a shambolic operation from beginning to end, but I'll say it anyway.
BEA really started as an offshoot of BOAC operations, and some staff were transferred across to begin with. Other independent carriers were merged/forced to merge with it. Railway Air Services, which had continued some minor operations through the war and was expanding again, though just domestic services, was one of these. It was owned mainly by the major railway companies, who themselves were about to be nationalised, with a minority interest by Imperial, which had come down to BOAC.
Quite why BSAA was set up as a separate state-owned intercontinental operation is just one of those mysteries. Would't be surprised if Bennett had just strongarmed some civil servants into it. I'll probably get some comments if I say it was a shambolic operation from beginning to end, but I'll say it anyway.
BEA really started as an offshoot of BOAC operations, and some staff were transferred across to begin with. Other independent carriers were merged/forced to merge with it. Railway Air Services, which had continued some minor operations through the war and was expanding again, though just domestic services, was one of these. It was owned mainly by the major railway companies, who themselves were about to be nationalised, with a minority interest by Imperial, which had come down to BOAC.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cornwall UK
Age: 79
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting back to the Winston Bray book, what does he have to say on some of the underlying BOAC themes.....why didn't BOAC takeover the RAF Skymasters?....why Lancastrians not Yorks?........not being able to buy enough Constellations (was the Aer Linte Constellation purchase a 'back-door job' from the beginning?)....why was BOAC negative about the VC-7/V-1000? ...does he mention the unions at heathrow?
(Pre-war Imperial HAD responded to the arrival of the DC-2/DC-3 by ordering aluminium monoplanes off the drawing-board from Short's but made the strategic error of choosing flying-boats.... the inadequate DH Albatross and underpowered AW Ensign arrived too late to restore Imperial's fortunes. The pre-war BA had no qualms about buying American but were a smaller operation than Imperial.)
(Pre-war Imperial HAD responded to the arrival of the DC-2/DC-3 by ordering aluminium monoplanes off the drawing-board from Short's but made the strategic error of choosing flying-boats.... the inadequate DH Albatross and underpowered AW Ensign arrived too late to restore Imperial's fortunes. The pre-war BA had no qualms about buying American but were a smaller operation than Imperial.)
I'm not particularly aware that the RAF had any Skymasters at all. Loads of DC3s (which BOAC did take) but not DC4s.
There weren't a lot of Yorks built, and the RAF seems to have wanted to keep those that were around. The Lancaster (and the Halifax) were however readily available for conversion. There were very few commercial passengers at this time, mostly government personnel. The York seems to have had the same payload as the Lancaster (it did after all have the same engines), just a greater space to put it in. At this perod carriage of mail was as important, if not more so, than the carriage of passengers.
Minimal number of Constellations (and Stratocruisers) was all about supporting British types and British manufacturing industry. The civil servants could not understand that the Tudor, the Hermes, and in fact just about every post-war attempt before the Viscount, were complete crocks. The Hermes cruisd with an attitude of about 20 degrees nose-upwards which ruined its economics and range (I believe this led to some passing crews overseas asking if everything was OK). Quite how such an elementary error could be made by anyone who got past Aircraft Design 1.01 at college I cannot imagine.
By the way, in case you think I'm being unpatriotic, what the French commercial manufacturing industry turned out between 1945 and the Caravelle was notably worse ! There were also some poor attempts from the USA.
There weren't a lot of Yorks built, and the RAF seems to have wanted to keep those that were around. The Lancaster (and the Halifax) were however readily available for conversion. There were very few commercial passengers at this time, mostly government personnel. The York seems to have had the same payload as the Lancaster (it did after all have the same engines), just a greater space to put it in. At this perod carriage of mail was as important, if not more so, than the carriage of passengers.
Minimal number of Constellations (and Stratocruisers) was all about supporting British types and British manufacturing industry. The civil servants could not understand that the Tudor, the Hermes, and in fact just about every post-war attempt before the Viscount, were complete crocks. The Hermes cruisd with an attitude of about 20 degrees nose-upwards which ruined its economics and range (I believe this led to some passing crews overseas asking if everything was OK). Quite how such an elementary error could be made by anyone who got past Aircraft Design 1.01 at college I cannot imagine.
By the way, in case you think I'm being unpatriotic, what the French commercial manufacturing industry turned out between 1945 and the Caravelle was notably worse ! There were also some poor attempts from the USA.
Thread Starter
I have just received the book and am plowing my way through it.
I think I can see why it was suppressed ,it goes into the political problems in great detail.
The RAF did have a handful of Skymasters including a personal one for Churchill but almost nothing seems to have been written about their operations.
The book does mention that BOAC were interested in DC-4 and Constellation and of course ordered the latter.
I think I can see why it was suppressed ,it goes into the political problems in great detail.
The RAF did have a handful of Skymasters including a personal one for Churchill but almost nothing seems to have been written about their operations.
The book does mention that BOAC were interested in DC-4 and Constellation and of course ordered the latter.
Last edited by renfrew; 23rd Aug 2011 at 12:28. Reason: spelling
The Argonaut was of course an uprated DC4/Skymaster, with UK (Rolls Royce) engines, pressurisation, etc, and built in Canada, all to circumvent the critical shortage of US Dollar foreign exchange. They served BOAC particularly well and stood in for a range of supposedly better UK-built types over the years that followed.
I can't find a single Skymaster/C-54/DC4 in a production list of them which operated for the RAF. Didn't Churchill use a Liberator for major foreign visits ?
I can't find a single Skymaster/C-54/DC4 in a production list of them which operated for the RAF. Didn't Churchill use a Liberator for major foreign visits ?
Vic Flintham's book Aircraft in British Military Service indicates 232 Squadron operated 23 Douglas C-54 Skymasters 1944 - 46. Based at Palam in India. Guess they may not have been seen in European skies too often.
Planemike
Planemike
Thread Starter
Churchill goes to War by Brian Lavery is excellent on his wartime travels.
It has photos of the Boeing 314,Liberator,York and Skymaster which he used.
It has photos of the Boeing 314,Liberator,York and Skymaster which he used.
Last edited by renfrew; 23rd Aug 2011 at 13:51. Reason: spelling
Minimal number of Constellations (and Stratocruisers) was all about supporting British types and British manufacturing industry.
Each time BOAC bought American aircraft (first the Constellation, then the Startocruiser and finally the DC-7C) they had to provide proof to the UK Government that they were being severely disadvantaged in competition with US and European airlines.
DC4 Skymaster
Thetfords 'Aircraft of the Royal Air Force' published by Putnams ( I think! Mine is a Book Club version) states 23 were in RAF service with 232 & 246 SQns on routes between UK and Far East, serial nos EW999,KL 977-986 and KL 988-999.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cornwall UK
Age: 79
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skymasters
The 24 Sqdn Newsletter has a piece on Churchill's Skymaster (interestingly it was an early model still with fuel tanks in the fuselage)
http://www.24sqnassociation.royalair...ds/24iss10.pdf
and there's a series of articles by Churchill's Navigator Wing Cmdr John Mitchell from about Issue 12 (mainly Yorks)
Newsletter Articles of 24 Sqn Association
BOAC's competitor KLM had civilian DC-4s on order from Douglas and was loaned surplus C-54s by President Truman until they were delivered, operating as 'The Netherlands Government Air Service' they started flying to the Far East as early as November 1945
The Hermes/Hastings was Handley Page's response to the Skymaster....it probably didn't help the Hermes that it was delivered late and overtaken by the Canadair Argonaut which was delivered rapidly leaving BOAC with more than enough aircraft for a change....I can't believe the Hermes was as bad as it was painted ( surely not as much as 20 degrees nose-up attitude?)...the RAF got on OK with the Hastings
http://www.24sqnassociation.royalair...ds/24iss10.pdf
and there's a series of articles by Churchill's Navigator Wing Cmdr John Mitchell from about Issue 12 (mainly Yorks)
Newsletter Articles of 24 Sqn Association
BOAC's competitor KLM had civilian DC-4s on order from Douglas and was loaned surplus C-54s by President Truman until they were delivered, operating as 'The Netherlands Government Air Service' they started flying to the Far East as early as November 1945
The Hermes/Hastings was Handley Page's response to the Skymaster....it probably didn't help the Hermes that it was delivered late and overtaken by the Canadair Argonaut which was delivered rapidly leaving BOAC with more than enough aircraft for a change....I can't believe the Hermes was as bad as it was painted ( surely not as much as 20 degrees nose-up attitude?)...the RAF got on OK with the Hastings
I can't believe the Hermes was as bad as it was painted ( surely not as much as 20 degrees nose-up attitude?)...the RAF got on OK with the Hastings
Well I suppose the prototype's first flight (G-AGSS, December 1945) getting completely out of control on liftoff and crashing just three miles away, killing all the senior Handley Page test pilot crew, is some indication of the aerodynamic design issues.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cornwall UK
Age: 79
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF Skymasters and Lancastrians
This webpage gives an idea of RAF Skymaster use in late 1945 and its replacement by Lancastrians
http://sforsugar.com/chapter5.html
http://sforsugar.com/chapter5.html
Thanks to the above I have dug out the details of the C-54 Skymasters with the RAF, whose existence I was attempting to deny. It would have helped if I had computer-searched my source for them, not as "RAF", but as "Royal Air Force", which is how they were listed 
Most of them seem to have been with the RAF in India around 1945, transferred from the USAF, and later transferred back maybe 12 months later using the same USAF tail numbers as before, which sort of points to a loan arrangement rather than actual purchase. There were just a handful which look to have made it to European bases.
Most of them seem to have been with the RAF in India around 1945, transferred from the USAF, and later transferred back maybe 12 months later using the same USAF tail numbers as before, which sort of points to a loan arrangement rather than actual purchase. There were just a handful which look to have made it to European bases.