Evening star., 1950-12-30
IAF Forced 10 Revise
|6 Years Of PLANNING
Under Emergency
By jones J. Strebie
Associated Press Ayjotion ReporteI

ASSocioted PreSS AViofIon kepoff6
Six years of Air Force mobiliza-
ton planning was thrown out Of
Joint by President Truman's dec
laration of a national emergency.
And the aircraft industry Is
complaining because some of the
contracts it expected under the
plan are going to automobile COM
panies.
The situation as it has developed
thus far is this:
The Air Force began in 1914 to
study methods under which its
supplying industry would be ready
for rapid expansion in a future
Millions of dollars
were invested in such projects.
In general, the program called
for an initial stage of expansion
a first phase preceding an actual
- by having aircraft
companies reoccupy plants built
during the war. There are IS
such plants in reserve, some in
use by non-aviation industries and
some used merely for storage.
Forced to Skip First Phase.
The next step in the plan called
for full mobilization. In this phase
automobile manufacturers would
be converted to airplane builders
as some were in World War II.
But things didn't work out that
way Rapid expansion of air
power to meet the emergency
caused the Air Force to skip the
first phase of its planning and
give automobile companies a size
able share of aircraft production
without waiting for idle aircraft
plants to reopen.
The aircraft industry doesn't
like this change.
Air Force officials explain that
the speed up stemmed from Mr..
Truman's emergency declaration
December 16. 1t called for a cut
back in civilian products and allo-
cation OF strategic materials to de-
fense contracts.
Output Would Be Reduced.
The emergency meant that
plants building such things as
automobiles. refrigerators and
television sets would have to re-
duce output. 1t meant many work.
ers would be unemployed if the
new items to be built were pro-
duced in plants not yet reopened
and retooled.
Secretary Of Defense Marshall
told the three services Ito spread
contracts across industry as widely
as possible to take up slack
in industries now facing cutbacks.'
The answer was to select soma
items-in this case airplanes-
which could be produced in Gov.
eminent standby plants now In
use by other industries. The All
Force decided that although the
time it would take to start mill.
tary production in these plants
would be about the same as fol
reopening idle plants. the new
policy would avoid dislocation OF
labor.
The first two examples of thii
policy were decisions to hau
Kaiser-Fraser build the Fairchild
C-l19 Packet transport at tn,
Willow Run plant near Detroit
and to have General Motors build
the Republic F-84F Thunderjei
fighter at the so-called NORTH
American plant near Kansas City
KanS.
Will Return to Original Plan.
Both Fairchild and Republic
were knee deep in expansion planI
at the time.
If still further expansion i,
necessary. Air Force officials say
it will be done through airplans
companies along the lines of theil
original mobilization planning.
Aviation industry leaders de-
not quarrel with the logic Of the
plan as it relates to disruption
of labor markets and broadenina
the military production base
But they contend that:
/. Industry should have beer
told beforehand what would hap.
pen in situation such as devel-
oped-that is, an unanticipated
emergency declaration. Since II
wasn't told. they point out that
mobilization plans drawn with
six years work are put on ice
and the hopes of aircraft COM
pany workers for bigger Jobs
are dashed.
2. World War II history indi.
Gates use of outside industries ia
build airplanes should be a lasi
rather than first step. The rec.
ords show that from 1910 through
1945, Is non-aviation companie,
produced 29,107 aircraft (includin,
13,473 Navy fighters built by
single automobile company
while 26 aviation companies built
303,218 planes.
3. The Air Force turned h
automobile companies for new
production without using addi,
tional capacity now available In
the aircraft industry where, with
a few exceptions, the 40-houl
workweek still is more or less the
standard. The Air Force answer
to that criticism is that while
pushing present aircraft plants ts
maximum production would re.
suit in more aircraft right now
it would not broaden the produc.
ton base, which is a major OBJ