FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1916
1916 - 0589.PDF
JULY 13, 1916. Mr. Billing contended that it had everything in the world to do with it. The Chairman replied that they would not argue the point. Sir David Henderson said he had never admitted that he would not under certain circumstances refuse to send up a pi'ot. In regard to the second fatal case Sir David Henderson said the accident was not due to a defect in the machine, but to the explosion of a hand- grenade, and the machine fell within our line?. Replying to Mr. Billing, Sir David Henderson said that pilots were at onetime allowed to carry hand-grenades without permission, but he rescinded that order. He could not say whether this was prior to the accident or not, but he did not recollect that there was any evidence of disobedience, and probably Captain Hughes had authority to carry grenades. The Chairman intimated that they had now arrived at a point when Sir David Henderson's evidence should be taken in camera. But before doing that they would permit Captain Bennett Goldney or Mr. Pemberton Billing to ask any questions on the specific cases which he had dealt with in public. If they wished they could reserve any questions until Monday, and in the meantime they could consider what quest'ons they would wish to ask. Mr. Billing asked whether he would be allowed to be present while General Henderson was giving his evidence in camera. The Chairman : No, there are matters which only concern the Commission on which we desire to examine the witness. Mr. Billing : General Henderson was present during my evidence in camera. The Chairman : All your specific allegations have been dealt with in public in the evidence given in your presence, and you will be permitted to ask questions on these. Mr. Billing said he would like to hear if any reference was made to himself personally. The Chairman said they had had a most exhaustive examination as to all allegations which Mr. Pemberton Billing had made, and he (the Chairman) would take care that any further reference to these would be duly considered. Mr. Billing said he had sufficient questions to last a whole day. The Chairman : If you ask any now you will not be allowed to ask them again on Mondav. Mr. Billing said he would reserve his questions until Monday. Sir David Henderson said, in reply to Mr. Bright, that he had taken a full course of engineering at Glasgow University before he joined the Army, and for ten or twelve months he was in Lord Kelvin's labora'ory. He had been employed for twenty months in the Royal Engineers building defences at foreign stations, and from then until he became interested in aercnautics, in 1911, he had had no further practice or study. In reply to a question by Mr. Bright, the witness said that there would always be most violent differences of opinion between pilots in the matter of design. With regard to Mr. Bright's sug gestion that it might be good to have an Ordnance Board for choosing machines similar to that at Woolwich for choosing guns, Sir Davij Henderson pointed out that we ha.l dealt in artillery for centuries, and there were not in existence in this country, to his knowledge, the personnel for forming such a Board as was suggested. Since Mr. Billing had referred to the fact that he (General Henderson) had never flown over the enemy's lines, he should like to state that when he went to France he was personally forbidden by the Field- Marshal commanding ever to go up over the lines so long as he was in command. Lord French could be called to corroborate that statement. Mr. Billing said there was nothing pers-mal in the comment which he had made. He had been obliged to ask the question. The Committee then continued the sitting in piivate, and held sittings on the three following days. At the resumption of the public sittings on July 10th, the Chairman explained that the Committee had been sitting in camera for the past days to hear evidence partly from General Sir David Henderson, about matters that it was thought it would not be wise to take in public, and also from several gentle men who were members of the Flying Corps, who had a natural reluctance to come forward in public so that their names would appear. There was a fear that it might have a damaging effect on their careers. Their evidence was taken in the absence of General Henderson. While in camera, one or two cases that had been made the subject of charges in public were mentioned, and these would be dealt with in public. The two most important instances related to qharges in reference to accidents that had happened to flying men—charges in particular by Mr. Pemberton Billing. The first case was thai of Lieut. Brock, killed at Birmingham. The charge was that the machine made a spiral skim and cose- drive, and the suggestion was that the reason of that was because it was a B.E. 2 C machine, and because it was said that that was the way these michiues had a habit of behaving. As a matter of fact, according to the evidence before them, the machine was not a B.E. 2 C at all, but an Avro. Mr. Billing : I distinctly stated in the House that I could not give the name of the machine. The Chairman : I am confining myself 10 what you s»id in the House. Mr. Billing : Did I say that it was a B.E. 2 C ? The Chairman: You said it sounded like a B.E. 1 C, because that was the way the machine behaved. Mr. Billing : I did not say that it wa«, but that the accident sounded like a B.E. 2 C. The Chairman added that the other case was that of Lieutenant Downing, killed at the Central Flying School. This was a cast- again of a nose dive, and into the accident there was the usual inquiry. The finding was that Lieutenant Downing lost his life owing to the machine nose diving and striking the earth. The machine was in proper flying order, and the engine running satis factorily. The controls were intact and in working order at the time of the accident. There was no evidence to show why the machine should nose dive. It was a B.E. 2 B., which was not a stable machine. Mr. l'emberton Billing said he had said that this machine made the usual B. E. spiral. He did not say either that it was a B.E, 3 C. or a B.E. 2 B. Was he to understand that this statement was unjustified ? The Chairman: You are to understand neither one thing nor the other. I am only telling you the evidence given in camera, and I am reading it out because it was a piece of evidence which should have been given in public. I really thought that I had made thai quite clear. Sir David Henderson was then cross-examined by Mr. A. Lynch, M.P. Mr. Lynch : Are you content with the present output of aero planes ?—No. In what direc'ion do you think there might have !>een more efficiency?—I should like to see a better all-round efficiency. In what direction do you find deficiencies ?—I do not find parti cularly any deficiencies, but I should be glad to have more. Machines, pilots, and, in fact, everything ?—Chiefly engines. Do you think that in any circumstances, and witli the very best possible organisation, and with the greatest energy of work, it would have been possible that we should have at the present moment 20,000 aeroplanes?—No, I don't think it possible, because you have got to have engines, mechanics, and pilots as well as machines. Do you think any scheme could have been devised if that object were kept steadily in view with the determination on the part of everyone concerned to realise it, to train the requisite number of pilots ?—No. That being so, could you put your finger on the main obstacle against the realisation of such a project?—There are various obstacles, and I do not know I could call the provision of pilots a serious one. There is the provision of mechanics—with the com petition of munitions, &c.—the provision of engines, and certain parts of the aeroplanes are difficult to buy in quantities for the same reason. Asked as to whether in the case of an inventor producing plans of a proposed new machine a communication would be sent that the Government would do nothing until the machine was produced and had bten flown by bim, witness said that in certain cases that would be done. Unless there was a fair chance of an invention proving valuable they had no time to go into the matter. If a struggling inventor wanted information he could go to the National Physical Laboratory and get it. Extremely good ideas had come from private firms, but he could not say whether they were under Govern ment control. He denied that the attitude of the Government had been to refuse help until inventors were in a position to show that they had no need of help at all. He thought experiments with large machines ought not to be abandoned. Mr. Lynch named a private firm who3e activities, he alleged, had been hindered by "back-stairs policies." The witness said that one of the directors of the firm would be called. Mr. Lynch: Is there now a British machine superior to the Fokker?—Yes, there are British machines at the front superior to the Fokker. Since when have they become superior ?—At the start we had machines equal to the Fokker, and about February or March this year we had a very large number of superior machines to the Fokker. Was the Fokker machine first offered to this country ?—No, not the first; but I sent two officers over to Holland to see it, and their report was very unsatisfactory. The designer of the Fokker did not improve his machine until the war was pretty well under way.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
