Trippe's Inning

Pan-American Airways' usually calm Juan Terry Trippe was quietly indignant as he appeared before a Senate subcommittee last week. The reason: the committee had been told that the high operating costs of Pan Am are the best argument against Trippe's monopolistic chosen instrument (TIME, April 23). Now it was Trippe's turn to give his side.

The comparison between Pan Am's globe-girdling operations and those of the domestic airlines was misleading and shockingly unfair, said Mr. Trippe. He argued that it is impossible to compare the two because 1) traffic on Pan Am's pioneering routes is necessarily far smaller than on domestic airlines, consequently costs of carrying it are often higher and 2) Pan Am had to build and operate its own airports, navigation guides, etc. instead of having them furnished free by the Government. For example, Trippe said, Pan Am contributed $150,000 toward improving the airport at Mexico City. Later, when American Airlines started to fly there, it was able to use the airport for nothing.

If the committee wants the facts on whether Pan Am is doing a better job than the domestic lines, he said that it could get a true comparison from the Army's Air Transport Command. Many of its globe-girdling routes are being flown by both Pan Am and domestic lines. On these figures Juan Trippe is perfectly willing to rest his case.

There was little evidence that Trippe's words changed anyone's mind. The committee wound up its hearings with a majority still opposed to Juan Trippe's chosen instrument plan, still in favor of a U.S. policy of regulated competition.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.