THE billion-dollar battle to dominate our skies is fiercely contested by military aircraft manufacturers around the world.

A small player like Slingsby Aviation can only survive by producing a reliable, good value aircraft: the Firefly.

This little training plane has won admirers among the British forces, in the United States, and in several other countries around the world. But its reputation has been shot full of holes by an American court ruling that found the Firefly was "defective and unreasonably dangerous".

Slingsby Aviation is used to adversity. During a turbulent period in the 1990s the Kirkbymoorside firm was twice insolvent and even shut down for three months. Then its bid to supply training aircraft to the RAF was rejected: the Ministry of Defence awarded the contract to a German firm.

This blow followed the news that the United States Air Force had grounded its fleet of Fireflys after a series of crashes in which six trainee pilots and three instructors died. At the time, the USAF said it had confidence in the small aircraft.

However, this being America, a court case was sure to follow. Ruling that the Firefly was defective, the Miami court awarded £2.74 million in damages against the aircraft manufacturer.

It is difficult to understand how any jury could have come to a safe verdict in a case that hinged on such obscure technical arguments as this one. But the 12 laymen and women were clearly convinced by the lawyers representing the family of a dead American airman.

Slingsby has always maintained that the crashes had more to do with the fact that they occurred while the pilots were under instruction from military, rather than civilian trainers. Tellingly this policy was changed by the USAF after the accidents.

If any firm knows how to battle for survival, it is Slingsby Aviation. But the court verdict is by far the biggest setback yet.

The firm must now fight this ruling to restore the Firefly's reputation if it is to stay airborne.

Updated: 11:43 Friday, February 16, 2001