FATAL CRASH

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 58, Issue 89, 25 January 1938, Page 3

FATAL CRASH

BOARD OF INQUIRY HELD. EXPERTS GIVE EVIDENCE. (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, January 24. An inquiry into the death of Ridley Lenderyou Elliott, who was killed in an aeroplane crash near the Rongotai aerodrome shortly after 6.30 p.m. on December 3, was held by an Aviation Board of Inquiry, consisting of Mr \V. F Stilwell, S.M,. Squadron Leader H. B. Burrell (Royal New Zealand Air Force), and Commander A. G. Gerrand (Union Airways). William Smillie, pilot of the aeroplane when it crashed, described the various telegraphic and telephonic commuhications which eventually led up to Elliott’s flying down to Wellington on that particular night to pick him up. He said he arrived at the Rongotai aero.drome in time to see the aeroplane circling the aerodrome. They eventually took off after seven minutes’ wait at Rongotai. The time was approximately 6.40 p.m. Witness said he noticed that the revolutions were approximately 1850 just after leaving the ground. He took a wide climbing turn to the left after attaining a height of approximately 200 feet, when he eased the throttle back. He imagined the speed before turning to be about 60 miles an hour. He could not remember what his horizon was before starting the turn. He said he remembered heading straight- up Evans Bay after taking a turn through approximately 180 degrees, designed to bring him on his ordinary course. The machine was bumping about a bit turning the left, and lie moved the stick to the right, and the left wing dropped. The bumping was consistent with a downdraught from the hill. He did not remember what he had done after the wing dropped, and he moved the stick to the right. He admitted, however, that the machine was out of control, and he could not handle it. Flying After Sundown. There was ilo/ conversation between him and Elliott from the time of taking off until the machine crashed. Dr. N. A. Foden (who conducted the inquiry on behalf of the Air Board): Isn’t there a rule prohibiting flying after sundown? Witness: I have never heard of it.

Witness. said they desired to get back to Palmerston North - without any waste of time. He did not consider that darkness would in any way have been dangerous. After further discussion on the sundown rule, Dr. Foden asked witness: “You are not putting forward cither the bumping or the dropping of the left wing as the cause of the crash, are you?” Witness: No, sir.

Evidence was also given by Reginald William Root, an engineer’s assistant at Rongotai, as to the mechanical condition of the machine.

Roy Champion Kean, inspector of aircraft and investigator of accidents, said, concerning the regulations about flying not being allowed after sundown that there was no definite rule, but that the regulation stated that machines flying after sundown must be equipped with landing lights. In answer to a question by Mr Ongley, he agreed that the return flight was being cut a little fine. The pilot had no time to lose, and because of this there may have been some .haste and neglect of precautions. He also explained why, in his opinion, he considered that the pilot’s last manoeuvre was a faulty one, stating that the adjustment which the pilot had made after turning was not normally made till the pilot had gained height. It had no effect on the machine, but merely made flying easier, and eased the load on the control column. Kean added that in a machine that was badly stalled, all lateral control was lost. The slightest disturbance could cause a wing to drop, in this case the port wing. The instinctive thing for a comparatively inexperienced pilot to do would be to endeavour to correct it. In normal flight he would correct a drop of the port wing by moving the stick to the right. When in a badly stalled condition, this would he the very worst thing that he could do, insofar as it would make the port wing drop further.

A Contributing Factor. “The main contributing 1 actor to this accident, in my opinion, is the turn to the left, contrary to the circuit signal, when showing,” said witness. “After making the turn he would bo under the influence of down currents of air from the hills, and ho would also he under the impression of a high air speed. The controls of the machine were definitely misused; otherwise the machine would not have been brought into that stalled condition.” After being cross-examined by Mr Ongley, witness said to Dr. Laden that a scheme where pilots from other aerodromes would he required to report to the instructors at the aerodromes the men might he visiting would he a good one. It would, however, he limited to holders of A licences and student pilots. Percy Robert Hughes, ground engineer at Milson aerodrome, said he had no doubts about letting the machine go from Milson. He did not think the flight was prepared in a hurry, or at the last minute. Elliot was not told that the machine was wanted at Palmerston North that night. Witness knew of the left and right-hand rules at Rongotai, but did not mention them to Elliot, as all pilots received notification. The machine had full equipment for night flights except for navigation and dashboard lights.

A Serious View Taken. “The department takes a serious view of the accident, and considers the pilot guilty of gross carelessness and neglect of his responsibilities as a pilot in three ways—-to his passenger, to the aero club in respect to the aero-

plane, and to third parties,” said Dr. Foden, addressing the board. He submitted that the safety rules which had been designed should be strictly adhered to, because if ignored it would not be long before there would be an air disaster of much greater magnitude than had yet occurred, which might involve a commercial aircraft. “Last year,” he said, “there were five lives lost in civil aviation; but in commercial flying aeroplanes travelled more than 1,000,000 miles without mishap to the 40,000 passengers carried. I make the contrast to show that if the safety rules are ignored it will not be long before some pilot disobeying them might involve a commercial aircraft in disaster. The department takes the view that the onus is on the pilot to make himself acquainted with the general rules and regulations, and local rules.

“The success of flying in New Zealand, or elsewhere, must necessarily depend on strict appreciation by the pilots of their responsibilities. Flying in itself is not dangerous, but pilots who lack a sense of responsibility are. The very fact of this accident happening indicates the desirability of strict compliance with local rules. This particular rule is such that it lends itself to easy observance. In this case, a notice to airmen was made available, and it seems clear that, though his attention had not been drawn to the notice, the responsibility was his to have become familiar with it.”

“Unfortunate Circumstances.” Rongotai was exempt from the general regulations, as pilots bad found there was difficulty in leaving it as the orders were left, said Mr Ongley. Though a breach had been committed in this case, its explanation could be found in a set of very unfortunate circumstances. Elliot was a pilot of very limited experience, lie said. The instructor was away from Milson, and* had no opportunity of explaining the trip to Rongotai, or of giving him any particular instructions. Elliott made a breach of the rules when landing at Rongotai, and Smillie, having seen him land, was lulled into a sense of false security—that of going out the same way as coming in. It was unfortunate that there was no one at Rongotai when Elliott landed, for had there been, the breach would have been corrected. “If Smillie’s breach of the rule is not totally excusable, it is very well explaiuable,” he said. The hoard then adjourned to consider the evidence, and to make its recommendation to the Minister in Charge of Aviation.