In another article I have on the Vanguard Sir George Edwards is quoted as saying in a TV interview in Sept '59DaveB wrote:The main reason for it's lack of success was all in the timing. When Vickers unleashed the Vanguard, jet's had started to creep into airline service so who needed a turboprop :roll:
ATB
DaveB :tab:
"this sort of hysterical situation about using jets....you don't have propellers on and everyone gets emotional about going a bit quicker. Whether it costs any more to go quicker seems to be secondary....The Vanguard is designed to have maximum economy. By international agreements, and one thing and another, it doesn't get the chance to use it. It's just the same as building a fast aeroplane and putting a speed limit on it. There's no difference in philosophy so far as I can see. I don't understand it".
The author of that article said "Every time I squeeze myself into a DC-9 for a flight to Toronto, I think about the Vanguard's huge windows and roomy seats. Somehow the 14 minutes that the DC-9 saves over the Vanguard's scheduled flight time do not seem a real advantage any more.....If Air Canada's Vanguard flights were available today, i would book myself on them every time. I bet a lot of other seasoned travellers would too".
I once spoke briefly to Sir George about the VC10, he said it was just a couple of years too late, it would have been a world beater. It seems to me that that could equally apply to the Vanguard
Paul







