AEROPLANE CRASH

Evening Star, Issue 22379, 1 July 1936, Page 12

AEROPLANE CRASH

CLAIM AGAINST PILOT £5,000 DAMAGES SOUGHT FOR ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE HEARING IN SUPREME COURT The ifirst case of its kind heard in Dunedin came before His Honour Mr Justice Kennedy in the Supreme Court this morning, when Jessie Marguerite Bailey claimed £5,000 from Francis Cecil Taylor, the pilot of an aeroplane which crashed at' St. Andrews, near Timani, on November 24, 1934, plaintiff’s husband being killed in the accident. The allegation of the plaintiff was that defendant failed to .use reasonable care and skill in piloting the aeroplane, in that ho failed to maintain adequate flying speed and adequate height above the ground, as a result of which the plane stalled and crashed. Mr F. W. Ongley (of Oamaru) and Mr H. J. S. Grater appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr A. C; Hanlon, K.C., and Mr J. G. Warrington for the defendant. . Mr Ongley, in opening the case, said that Bailey intended to visit Wellington. Defendant, who was going north in an aeroplane, made arrangements that he would take Bailey with him, the latter to make a voluntary contribution towards the expenses. _ The plane was inspected and passed in the ordinary way, the flight commencing on the morning of November 24. On the journey north mist was encountered, and it became advisable to make a landing. The pilot knew the landihg ground at St. Andrews, .and went inland with a view to landing. He circled twice in the vicinity, and then went in the direction of St. Andrews to the south landing ground. On his- way he passed over a ploughed field, in which a man named Woods was working. The behaviour of the machine very pointedly drew, the attention of Woods, who realised that something was wrong. As the plane'wfent south the engine was shut off, and it flew close above where Woods was standing. It was so close to Woods that he thought it was going to land in the paddock in which he was standing. It returned again directly over the field!and directly over Woods, still flying low and at no great speed, but with the engine then running. When it reached the place where Woods was standing it turned .sharply to the loft and proceeded in a westerly direction for a distance of about 600 yards. Woods was watching the machine carefully to see what would happen. He thought it would land in iflie next field, at the end of which was a clump of trees surrounding a,house, and from the point of view of Woods it was not flying sufficiently ’ high to clear the trees. He could hear the engine ticking over, just running. Approaching the trees, the pilot seemed to _ make a sharp turn to the right to avoid'them. The machine collapsed in the act of turning into the paddock, and Bailey was killed. It was submitted, said counsel, that the defendant failed to maintain a sufficient flying speed. There would be evidence that there was nothing wrong with the machine, and that the only reason for the low flying speed was the act of the pilot. Failure to maintain sufficient flying speed was a failure to use the skill and care that a pilot should have and should use, particularly when the life of another man was at stake, and- particularly when flying at such a low altitude. It was submitted that the plane flew at such low speed that this caused the engine to stall, and, the plane being so near the ground at the time, there was no time for recovery. Bailey, who was 49 years of age, was an auctioneer and had been married for 12 years, there being no children. ' Evidence was given by John Henry Tresider, registered surveyor, of Oamaru, who was examined in respect of a plan of, the locality. Witness said the trees at the end of the paddock were between 40ffc and 50ft high, and it was about two chains from the trees to the point where the crash occurred. Andrew Woods, hotelkeeper and farmer, of St. Andrew’s, gave evidence of seeing the plane fly over him as he was working in a paddock. There 'was a misty fog on the morning of the accident, he said, and there was no wind. Just as it seemed to have made the turn to avoid the trees the plane went straight down. The visibility .was the mist having gone. Evidence was also given by Brian Morgan Binder and Elliott Anderson Hogg, students, who 'were cycling on the main road, and who saw the plane flying low at a slow speed before it came down. William Simmonds Dini, aircraftsman of the Royal New Zealand Air Force, said he inspected the fallen machine to see if there were any defects in it. As far as he was able to ascertain, all the controls were connected and working. To Mr Warrington; He bad heard of cases where it was presumed the controls jammed momentarily. Squadron-leader J. D. Findlay said he had had 18 years’ experience of flying. In reply to Mr Ongley witness said a plane required a certain minimum speed to keep it in the air. At a less speed than that it stalled, and control was lost. Witness described the various causes of an engine stalling, and agreed that it wqnld he dangerous to stall near the ground. At a height of 100 ft a recovery could not be made from a stall. A sharp turn at a low speed would add to the danger of stalling. To Mr Hanlon: He agreed that loss of speed caused most crashes. The landing speed of planes was about 60 miles an hour, and at that air speed a Moth could be pulled up on the ground at from 100 to 150yds. Flying-instructor E. G. Olson corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. He said he saw_ the crashed plane, the position of which was consistent with a sharp turn to the right. This closed the case for the plaintiff, and Mr Hanlon asked for a non-suit upon the ground that there was no evidence whatever to, support the allegation of negligence. His Honour said that in a case like this he was disposed to reserve the nonsuit point and hear any evidence for the defence. That was the usual course followed in cases of this kind except in the clearest possible case. His Honour decided to reserve consideration of the motion for a non-suit. Mr Warrington, in opening for the defence, said the explanation of the pilot would be that he was flying, when the flight commenced, in reasonable weather and that later the plane became immersed in mist. He decided, in accordance with the rules of safe flying, to make a forced landing at St. Andrews. He circled round to find a landing field, and was in the course of coming into the landing field when the crash occurred. Unfortunately the defendant 'suffered concussion, and his last memory prior to the crash was at the moment when approaching the trees. The next thing he remembered was

being assisted from the wreckage. It was unfortunate that of the two men who could assist the court in arriving at the real cause of the accident one was dead and the other had no memory of the last seconds before the accident. Francis Cecil Taylor, the defendant, said he was the holder of an endorsed A pilot license, allowing him to carry a passenger without hire. On approach-' ing St. Andrews he became immersed in mist. On finding a break in the mist he decided, for safety, to land. He picked out a paddock, and throttled back his engine to reduce his flying speed so as to land. When about 200 ft above the ground he was flying too high to go in at the end of the paddock he intended, and he put the engine on. H© made a circle so as to bring him directly in front of the paddock he intended to go over. Judging his height to be the correct one to take him into the paddock, be again throttled back the engine and reduced his flying speed to 65 miles an hour. He continued thus towards the paddock, intending to cross the eastern end of the row of trees but not to go over them. Something occurred, which he did not know, causing the accident. The last thing he remembered before the crash was approaching the trees and heading in the direction of the paddock. His flying experience was 80 hours solo and 20 hours dual flying. He had made a number of cross-country flights before, including flights to Palmerston North and Masterton, to Christchurch (three times), to Pembroke, to Gore, and to Heriot. He knew of no reason why the plane should have crashed. On coming to land he took every possible precaution he knew of. Mr Ongley had commenced his crossexamination when the court adjourned till the afternoon.