FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1913
1913 - 1167.PDF
NOVEMBER I, 1913. 1/iM] ACCIDENTS INVESTIGATION COMMITTEE OF THE ROYAL AERO CLUB. REPORT No. 18. REPORT ON THE FATAL ACCIDENT TO MAJOR GEORGE CHARLETON MERRICK, WHEN FLYING AT THE CENTRAL FLYING SCHOOL, UPAVON, ON FRIDAY, OCTOBER 3RD, 1913, AT ABOUT 11.45 A-M- Brief Description of the Accident.—Major George Charleton Merrick was flying a Short Biplane, fitted with a 70 h.p. Gnome Engine, at the Central Flying School, Upavon, on Friday, October 3rd, 1913, at about II.45 a.m. He was coming down apparently with the object of alighting at the sheds. When at a height of about 300 ft. he was observed to be descending at a very steep angle. Shortly after this, he fell out and was killed. Major Merrick was granted his Aviator's Certificate, No. 484, on May 17th, 1913, by the Royal Aero Club. Report.—The Committee sat on Monday, October 13th, 1913, and received the report of the Club's representatives who were on the spot within a short time of the occurrence, together with the evidence of eye-witnesses. Mr. Horace Short of Messrs. Short Bros., attended and produced plans of the aircraft, and gave evidence on various points raised by the committee. From the consideration of the evidence, the Committee regards the following facts as clearly established :— I. The aircraft was built by Messrs. Short Bros., at Eastchurch in March, 1913. 2. There was practically no wind at the time of the accident. 3. After the pilot fell out the aircraft turned on its back, and then landed upside down. The condition of the aircraft showed that it landed very gently. 4. When examined after the accident all the controls were found to be in order. 5. The pilot had made at least eight short flights on this particular aircraft, one of them lasting about fifteen minutes, earlier on the day of the accident. 6. The pilot was not strapped in. Opinion.—The Committee is of opinion that the accident was due primarily to the pilot forcing the aircraft down at too steep an angle, resulting in his falling forward on his control and accentuating the steepness of the descent. Recommendation.—The committee recommends that attention be directed to the great dangers involved in a steep descent when undertaken by a comparatively inexperienced pilot. An aircraft, when carrying out a steep vol plane' descent, is very much more sensitive to external influences than when descending at its natural gliding angle. The Committee also draws attention to the fact that the pilot was not strapped in. It is quite possible that, in this particular instance, had he been so, the accident might have been averted. Royal Aero Club, 166, Piccadilly, London, W. October 28th, 1913. PEGOUD'S FEATS—AN APPRECIATION. By E. C. GORDON ENGLAND. I HAVE read with a great deal of interest the many and varied comments, in both the technical and lay press, on Pegoud's flying, and it is remarkable to me that the writers have failed to grasp their true significance. Many people say that his flying is merely an acrobatic performance, and that he has undertaken these feats in the hopes that their extreme daring and novelty will result in the attract- tion of large gates, and that they should therefore be prohibited. Other people have expressed themselves very forcibly as to the mental condition of the man who takes such liberties with the aeroplane of to-day. Inventors claiming inherent or automatic stability for their machines loudly protest that we do not want a machine that will turn over any number of times without getting out of the control of the pilot, but one that will not turn over at all. Others admit that there may be some service rendered to the science by these demonstrations, but at the same time, they deplore the performing of them in public. But there are many who welcome his performances wholeheartedly, and pay tribute to the man who had the courage and the faith in the Bleriot to carry them out. In the first place, what we are all striving for is " safe " aviation, and, to my mind, if only proper consideration be given to these feats of Pegoud, the science of aviation will be greatly advanced, and the death roll reduced to an extraordinary extent. If a study be made of the enormous number of fatalities during 1913, one is struck by the ex traordinary number of unexplained nose dives and cases of pilots being thrown from their machines while in flight. Here is, in my opinion, the real lesson that we can learn from Pegoud's flights. I maintain that, had all these pilots been strapped in, none of them would have been killed. He has proved that on a modern machine of good design, there is no cause to give up all hope of effecting a safe landing should your machine be upset while flying at a reasonable height. This proves that all pilots should be strapped to their seats in such a manner as to preclude all possibility of their ever being thrown out, but at the same time, not hamper their movements in any way. I consider it the duty of every responsible person in the aviation world to impress this fact on pupils and inex perienced pilots. This point cannot be too seriously considered, as it is essential if we are to continue flying in anything like bad weather. I am convinced, as the result of the study of air currents while conducting gliding experiments some years ago, that there are certain conditions existing which would destroy momentarily the stability of any machine of the present size, however naturally stable it may be. It is therefore useless for the machine to be self-righting unless the pilot is still on board. Therefore, let all pilots be strapped in. ^ The claims of the designers of automatically or inherently stable machines that these cannot be upset, leave me cold, for the above reason, and to other designers, I say unhesitatingly, " make certain that your machines are capable of being brought back to their normal position, whatever the position into which it may have been thrown, otherwise, your machines are useless, when pitted against the elements. This brings me to the next important point. Pegoud has proved that, for a machine to be absolutely reliable, the engine must be capable of running in every position into which the aeroplane may be turned. Motor designers, are therefore faced with yet another problem, and that is how to keep the motor running although upside down. So far, the Gnome is the only one which can fulfil this condition. To deplore the performance of these feats of Pegoud in public is inconsistent, as, if he is really doing good work, why should not everyone watch him ? Surely that would do still more good, and I hope I am not alone in thinking this. I trust that these facts will help to call attention to the pressing need of safety belts of really satisfactory design and their universal adoption by pilots. I sincerely hope that M. Pegoud will continue to demonstrate his remark able feats, as only by constant repetition will the necessity of safety belts and a reliable motor be impressed on the minds of those who fly. To my mind, Pegoud has rendered the very finest service to the science of aviation, and has been the means of saving many lives. Let us not ungratefully hurl mud at one who is doing such a splendid work. "93
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
