SOUTHERN CROSS LANDING.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19624, 21 May 1929, Page 9

SOUTHERN CROSS LANDING.

ENQUIRY CONTINUES. ULM'S EVIDENCE. QUESTIONS REGARDING RADIO. (UEITED PRESS ASSOCIATION—BT ELSCTBIC T*L«o*APR—COPTRIGHT.) (Received May 20th, 7 p.m.) SYDNEY, May 20. When the Air Enquiry into the forced landing of the Southern Cross was resumed, Mr H. J. Hammond, who is assisting the Commissioner, disclosed that a number of anonymous letters bearing on the forced landing of the Southern Cross had been received, but no notice could be taken of these. Flight-Lieutenant C. T. P. Ulrn, in the witness box, stated that the London flight was financed by SquadronLeader Kingsford Smith and himself. It was not backed by Australian Airways, Limited. Ulm was questioned by Mr Hammond about Captain Chateau's telefram, received on the day before the ight: "Weather fine, with a drying wind. Further advice later." "Did you regard that as the final O.K. P" enquired Mr Hammond, to which Ulm replied: "We regarded that wire, in conjunction with the wires received previously, as sufficient to enable us to make a start." Mr Hammond: You did not wait for later advice from Chateau ?—We feared Chateau might omit to send the final O.K.

If your aerial had been in position it would have been possible to recall you t—Experts tell us that was impossible, because we were too far away when Chateau's final message arrived. Questioned about the emergency radio set carried on the transpacific flight. Ulm said that James Warner, the radio operator on that occasion, described it as so much junk. Mr Hammond: Then why did you describe it in your book about the flight as a great factor in the safety of that flight? "I was n->t on oath at that time, and the wireless people had helped us greatly," replied Ulm. "We were not going to turn round and tell them that their wireless goods were so much junk just because Jim Warner said so." A Coincidence. Ulm said that if they had landed at the Mission Station, there would have been a certain crash. The machine would have gone over on its nose. Mr Hammond examined Ulm about the entries in his diary at "Coffee Royal." Ulm said that some of the entries were written under extraordinary circumstances. On re-reading it he found he had written that they ,T might get acclimatised, and would probably be able to walk to Derby." He now found that was impossible. Mr Hammond: You had neither an emergency wireless set nor a proper set of tools? These were not necessary. Mr Hammond: So you would rather cut down a tree with a screwdriver ?—I doubt whether a hacksaw would have been much good. Mr Hammond: Is it mere coinci-; dence that the agreement with your company sets out that you were to start the flight not later than March 13th? —Nothing more than coincidence. Mr Hammond showed Ulm a photograph of the marooned crew on the mud flat after the rescue crew had arrived, in shorts, stripped to the waist, all grinning, and holding Pilot Heath on their shoulders. "Was that the most suitable way to dress with the flies and mosquitoes so bad?" Mr Hammond asked.

Ulm replied: Flies on your bare skin are not so troublesome aa inside your shirt. Ulm denied absolutely that there was anything in the nature of a stunt about the forced landing. Michael Shanahan, editor of "Plain Talk" newspaper, which commented adversely on the flight, gave evidence that bis Article was based on rumours from the man in the street. He declared that he was now glad to dissociate himself from such rumours.

The enquiry was adjourned.—Australian Press Association.