Before nationalisation, the french private industry had it chance, but it was weak and depending on 95% from state commands. Laurent-Eynac and Caquot were not leftist, and supported aeronautical (private) industry with public grants, leaving progress initiative to private firms and entrepreneurs.
At result: a failure, not almost but near complete, from 1928 to 1933. Without special troubles inside factories...
The same error was repeated from 1934. At results, french governement with all tendencies, including even french nationalists from ultra-right hand, was fed-up with the situation. Is why the privatisation was adopted at waste majority of the deputy chamber, not only leftists: 485 voices against 45 maybe corruted by industrial magnates.
I would also recall the fact that many aviation industries reminded private, as Breguet, Caudron, M-S and Amiot, and the whole engine industry, this weakest branch paradoxally needing the highest recapitalisation.
Regards
After the nationalisation of most of the French aviation industry, in May 1936 French aviation workers in what is by most historians referred to as communist inspired unions, launched the greatest strike of "the 3rd Republic" not only withdrawing labour but occupying factories.
The book "State Capitalism and Working-Class Radicalism in the French Aircraft Industry By Herrick Chapman" is one source of information.
Also the book: "Fortress France: The Maginot Line and French Defenses in World War II By J. E. Kaufmann, H. W. Kaufmann"
1936 would have been a critical year for aircraft such as the Bf 109, Spitfire an important engines such as the Merlin and DB600/DB601, when the critical ground work for the early war periods critical aircraft designs and the costs associated with this would have effected R&D the French were having a massive strike based on ideas around class warfare.
National Socialist ideology or rather objectives were based around the idea of the harmonisation of capital and labour (rather than adversarial) as well as the elimination of class conflicts for the common good of the folk (people). The "race" was to be ahead of the idea of an abstract nation or an abstract economy, wealthy or poorer classes. Unions were allowed and given representation even on board of directors but if any factory owner or militant unionist stepped out of line the National Socialists would begin to knock heads together. Industrial disputes were to be resolved by talking and any dispute based not on a work related issue but on an ideology such as the Marxist idea of class warfare and the inevitable eliminatin of classes and the rule of the proletariat would not be tolerated.
To National Socialist It didn't matter if something was done by government or private industry what mattered to National Socialists was being dynamic: doing something and effective. Aggressive completion and fly offs were favoured. AFIKT only Junkers was nationalised (not because Hugo Junkers was anti-nazi) but because his company went broke and his directors and shareholders revolted.
Contracts started out as cost plus incentive and then went to fixed price with renewal at lower prices.
Without an air force in the 1930s the Germans subsidised the airlines and hence had by far the largest passenger mile numbers of any nation in Europe I think several times larger than France and UK combined.
In France things were different:
In 1934 Denian began to build a 1000 plane air force, this action ensuring old types of aircraft were built rather than new types. It also seems to have retriggered German rearming well beyond the repudiation of Versailles Treaty. (Incidentally this hideous treaty was reinstated after WW2 and the final payment made in 2010)
In 1936 2950 obsolescent aircraft were ordered of PLAN I not the more modern PLAN II.
New Models were not ordered belatedly till 1937. They tried reform and ordering PLAN V aircraft in 1938.
difference between 500 km/h (310 mph) from Messerschmitt booklet and Messung E.Stelle Bericht Nr. 2652/39, 280 mph at SL? 
