AIR DISASTER

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18613, 22 July 1922, Page 13

AIR DISASTER

MACHINE CRASH IN THE CHANNEL. THREE LIVES LOST. NOSE DIVE INTO THE SEA. <ft ■ SUNSTROKE THEORY. (From Oub Own Correspondent.) LONDON, July 9. Safety in the air has been the. subject this week of a great deal of discussion, as the outcome largely of the crash into the sea, three miles off Folkstone, at 3000 ft, of ji French “ Spad” machine, with pilot and two passengers, oUyof whom were killed. The machine was seen suddenly to. nose dive. It crashed on to. the waters with such force that it was ” smashed to matchwood,’ 1 as one witness, said, and 1 two. or the bodies —those of Mr Gordon Ley, of Cumberland Mansiims, an eminent consulting surgeon to several London hospitals, who was a passenger, and M. Morin, the pilot— 'were terribly mutiltatod when recovered from the wreckage. The body of the other passenger, M. Paul Carroll, & Frenchman, has not yet been found. Mr Ley had recently made several visits to Paris on professional business. His special work was in obstetrical _ science. A pathetic coincidence is that his body, mutilated though it was, was identified hy a brother surgeon, Dr G. Varley, of Cadogan place, who was on board the Maid of Orleans, a cross-Channel steamer, which stood by immediately the accident happened, and was one of the occupants of a small boat lowered' to render assistance. An official at the Croydon aerodrome believes that this medical man had mode more journeys by air than any other passenger since the start of civil flying. As long ago as the early days of 1920 he attracted attention at the London Air Station by the regularity with which he passed through on his way to and from Pans. At the inquest the second' officer of toe Maid of Orleans said the state .of the mar chine suggested that it had been smashed by contact with the water. _ There was nothing to show that an explosion, had taken place. It was a perfectly clear morning, and there was no fog. , _ , M, Georges Didier, manager at Croydon aerodrome, for the Messageries Aenwines, said that the pilot, M. Mom, .tested tod machine before starting. He himself was present when the engine was tested, and in his view everything was in perfect order. Morin, who had flown during the war, was on experienced pilot, and so fair as he knew % never had an accident before, e Coroner: Have y« formed any opinion as to why this accident occurred? The pilot may’ have had sunstroke or become ill for a moment, and he ma y * lave slipped on the “ joy stick. . , , The coroner returned a verdict, that Mr Ley and M. Morin died from injuries accidentally received. SEEN FROM THE CHANNEL STEAMER. ” I heard a splosh a a wo were rounding the Folkestone pierhead,” wad Carey, first officer of the Maid of “I did not see the plane fall. This was at 11 27. Soon afterwards our operator picked up a wireless message from another ship saying that an aeroplane had into the Channel. I altered and when we came near to where the_ machine iw fallen I lowered a boat. We were then between a mile and a-half and two miles from shore, and the sea was strewn with wreckage. I had 1000 passengers aboard, and as soon as I realised that there were bodies to be picked up, too mutilated to be alive, I sent back a wireless message to the Engadine, asking het to come out and pick up the bodies. Before she could do so, however, the motor boat Skylark came out, and took charge of them. TTierqr was a tragic incident when we were examining the papers of Dr Gordon Let- .Without their aid we could not have identified him, as hia head was missing. Dr Vaney, who hkd gone in the boat we had lowered to see if he could he of any assistance, at once said that he knew the dead man well. ’ Lord Derby and Field-marshal Sir Henry Wilson were on board the Maid of Orleans. oS waa also a party of Folkestone schoolboys, who were going to lay flowers on the graves of British soldiers at Boulogne, It is claimed that if there had beer duplicate steering mechanism and a reserve pilot, as there is on the newer aeroplanes, the accident might have been averted, and there is everything to be said for making these precautions compulsory. In a heaviei than air machine the penalty for a lapse comes more suddenly and is more grave than in any, other form of transport, and we cannot be too in the regulations made for safety. On English machines the regulations are in fact already very strict, and if the cross-Channel air service is to work smoothly it .is desirable. that all the machines taking part be’ .subject to the same regulations, irrespective, of nation"ality. That is no, less in the intoftst of the companies than of the passengers.. The record of the British machines in particular -is a very creditable/-one, and while , airtravel is not yet as safe as travelling in' a train, prudent regulations and the improvement of machines—a perfect helicopter foi example—may make it so in the near future. SAFEGUARDS IN BRITISH MACHINES. The Aviation Correspondent of the Daily Telegraph records that since the beginning of the cross-Channel services there )have been upwards of 10,500 flights between'England and the Continent, and it is a remarkable fact that on only six of these occasions have machines come down into the sea. In two oases before this last disaster there wa« loss of life from this cause. For some time past groat attention has been given to -this question, and safeguards have been introduced which should remove the danger. In all British machines lifebelts are com-, pulsory, and in nearly all types there a provision for quick exit of passengers in caso of the machine coming down to the sea, and if the French Spad had made a normal descent the passengers could have emerged through the pilot’s cockpit. Aeroplanes are capable of floating for sopio time, according to circumstances, and in most cased in crossing a frequented seaway the pilot, provided ho flies at a good height, should be able to descend in the neighbourhood of. a ship. This was exemplified in the mishap of October 31, 1919. - The failure of the engine ought not to involve loss of life or of mails; jt is fairly certain that the disaster on Saturday waa not due to this cause. The dive into the water must hFve 'been due to some structural defect in the machine, or to sudden illness of the pilot. The machine struck the sea with such violence that- it was smashed; and no doubt the death of its occupants was duo to this violence. In such a case water is, in effect, as hard as granite. . The accident points to the need for strict examination of aeroplanes and for measures securing the medical fitness of pilots. Judging from the descriptions of some of the eye-witnesses, the nilot was in ian uncertain frame of mind before. he left the British coastand the belief is entertained in some quarters that lie felt unwell, and then decided he could carry, on. Most British machines have on experienced mechanic (who is also a pilot), in addition to the pilot; and it would seem to bo a reasonable regulation that all airservice passenger machines should have a crow of aJf least twa Questions of the use of one or two-engine machines, and of regulations as to crew, are involved; but it may be stated that British machines (.have earned a good reputation for reliability, and that the inspection and regulations as to pilots imposed by the Air Ministry, are bearing good results. British aero-engines arc certainly superior; and the air-line companies are rapidly learning the business, and are showing a good deal of enterprise in a policy that aims at. scouring pubflio confidence by immunity from accident. • ‘ PERFUNCTORY ” INQUIRY. Mr H. H. Asquith has written to The Times complaining of what seems to him the “most perfunctoiy character” of the inquiry into the disaster. Ho says that his two daughters recently flow to Paris, arriving safely there after suffering, with infinite bumping and tossing, all the pangs of seasickness in the air, while they looked down upon the old familiar Channel steamer plodding its even way through an oil-calm sea. But the practical ouestion is one, not of taste or comfort or speed, but of safety. “The only hypothesis advanced by its responsible owners to account for the disaster is sunstroke or sudden sickness on the part of the pilot, on which I lie obvious comment is that it is wicked to run possibly fatal risks with a single pilot, subject to such hazards, in charge. I was informed, when I was at Croydon, that ouv English machines always carry two pilots. At this local inquiry none of the really relevant and serious questions seems to have been raised.

Maintaining that if civil aviation is to prosper, and prosper it must for the national good, Tho. Times says that the circumstances that give rise to those doubts must be removed. “Civil aviation must secure public confidence before all tilings. It is fitting to examine the conditiops in which aerial transport ia carried on and to see. what improvements can be made in it. There arc two facts that stand as a text. One is that aircraft, before they make a flight ml which members cl

the public ore carried, are examined by ground engineers (holding an Air Ministry certificate) employed by the firm owning the machines. The other is that pilots are at liberty to decide whether or hot they will make a flight. “What are the grounds on which a pilot may decide that he will not fly? Generally he refused on account of fog. That refusal suggests a doubt in the capabilities of the machine, or the engine, or the ground organisation on the route. It is generally admitted that the wireless arrangements on the Loudon-Paris route are bad, but the plea that aviation is in its early years, and that fo bo able‘ to get across the Channel in foggy weather is asking too much of it has been made ever since aviation was in its infancy. Ground organisation should be taken in hand and overhauled at onca Civil aviation can only hope to develop and attract the public if, in addition to being entirely safe, it is also unfailingly regular. It appears to be neither at present. Machines for passenger work ought to be capable of very slow landing speeds, so that alighting on rough ground in bad weather can bo done without risk. Passengers also ought to have the assurance that a fall into the Channel dhes not mean death by drowning. It is possible to use machines with some sort of flotation gear, but their employment is not insisted on. The air lines are heavily subsidised, and with the use of that system of helping civil aviation to make its way we have no quarrel. Indeed, the provision of a subsidy has been systematically advocated in these columns in the past. It has, however, to be remembered that the ■ subsidy comes out of public funds, and tbe public is entitled to demand a fair return for its money. That fair return is an air service that is sate, regular, and efficient.” SPEED DANGER. Tqp high a speed is recognised by pilots as a danger in passenger ’planes. There is a tendency,- in present conditions, to keep cutting tile time on the journey between London and Paris. “What does it really matter,” said a pilot, “if one air line does the crossing in ten minutes less than another? / This rivalary in speed simply means extra'oanger on landing. Some of our British machines land at 60 miles au hour. This is too great a speed. A minimum timA limit for the journey should be fixed.” / Colonel J. T C. Moore-Brabezon, M.P., a pioneer aviator, agrees that the 'exacting certificate of air worthiness imposed by the Air Ministry on 1 British air firms should be made the standard throughout all countries. “I think,” he said, “the present difficulties will be overcome with experience. What is needed is more research work in order to clear up those inexplicable hose dives which have _ occurred not only on the Lon-don-Paris air route, but also in the Royal Air Force. Large passenger carrying aeroplanes should certainly have a reserve pilot, who could take control in the event of the pilot being overtaken by faintness or illness. It is essential that, tbe study of inherent stability of aeroplanes Should be continued without regard to economy. As aeroplanes become larger, with more powerful engines, new problems arise which have not so far been thoroughly examined. _ I am convinced also that machines are being allowed to leave both sides of the Channel too-near the Tlimsoll’*mark of overloadMr H. Oswald Short,/the seaplane designer, is of qpinion that the 1 chief cause of accidents is that insufficient attention has been paid in design to the controllability of the machines at low speed. “I am surprised,” he_ said, “that there have not been more accidents witli_ cross-Channel machines owing |o faulty design.”