FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1917
1917 - 0042.PDF
164. The incident in itself is not at all worth relating atsuch length, but it discloses a system, or rather want of system, which we much deprecate. We were told these tele-phonic messages are quite common and that no record is kept of them. 165. We are of opinion that whenever the duty of detailinga pilot to fly a machine abroad Is taken out of the hands of the officer primarily responsible, or indeed when any importantorder is given by telephone, a record should be entered in a book kept for the purpose giving full particulars of the orderreceived and certainly the name of the person giving the order. Without such a record it is impossible to fix responsibility. 166. Lieutenant Littlcwood may have been a suitable pilot,but the staff officer ought not to have been sent with him. Some criticism was made upon the map supplied, but we findno fault in that respect. J67 •168. We have stated our conclusions upon the charges sub- mitted to us when dealing with each particular charge, andneed not repeat them. 169. We arc asked to make such recommendations* as weconsider necessary. This we now proceed to do. (• These recommendations were published in " FLIGHT," December 21st.) 174. We desire to put on record our appreciation of the services of our secretary, Mr. D. Cotes-Preedy—services rendered gratuitously and at the expense of some loss to him in his practice, which he put aside when his duties as secretary prevented Ws fulfilling his other engagements. : • e are, Sir, your obedient servants, ..•-.•ELEMENT M. BAILHACHE Chairman), H. L. SMITH- DORRIEH General), CHARLES A. PARSONS, J. H. BALFOUR BROWNE. tJ- G BUTCHER, EDWARD SlIORTT, fCHARLES BRIGHT. t D. COTES-PREEDY, Secretary. MEMORANDUM FROM MR. CHARLES BRIGHT AND MR. J. G. BUTCHER. We desire to express our dissent from that portion of the Final Report which states (paragraph 44) :—" We think the reason why the R.A.F.-Napier engine was selected for the gamble was because it was—at any rate, partly—of R.A.F. design, and that this is an instance in which great reliance has been placed in the R.A.F." This view is not, in our opinion, established by the evidence. Difficulties had occurred in the production of the Rolls-Royce engine as mentioned in para- graphs 123 of the Report, though more fully set out in the evidence of the 15th day of our enquiry. This evidence makes it clear that not one of the three firms approached by the Directorate could come to a mutually satisfactory arrange- ment with the Rolls-Royce Company for the construction of their engine. It was for this reason that General HendersoD did not give large orders for the Rolls-Royce engine at the time when he gave large orders for the R.A.F.-Napier engine. *' In the circumstances, we think that, in giving these orders for the R.A.F.-Napier engine, General Henderson acted rightly. CHARLES BRIGHT. J. G. BUTCHER. V? FURTHER MEMORANDUM FROM MR. BRIGHT -;'::. ' AND MR. BUTCHER. Since the issue of our Interim Report attention has been called to the finding of the Royal Aero Club's Public Safety and Accidents Investigation Committee regarding the fatal accident to Lieutenant Desmond Arthur. It is to be regretted that the said Committee's Report—and the evidence dn~which it was founded—was not brought to our notice by any witnesses dealing with the subject during the course of the enquiry'. Whilst we have not had the opportunity of testing the evidence on which the Committee's finding was based, it now appears to us to be more than likely that at least one highly defective repair had, in actual fact, been made at some time or another to the machine. There is, however, no evidence to show where or by whom. In any case, it seems to have been effected by some unauthorised person—certainly by an unskilled hand. It appears probable that the machine had been damaged accidentally, and that the man (or men) responsible for the damage had repaired it as best he (or they) could, to evade detection and punishment. In making this statement we are taking tho first suitable opportunity of amending—so far as we personally are concerned, and to the extent indicated—what appears on pages 7-8 of the Interim Report regarding the last case dealt with. We desire further to express our complete sympathy with the resultant recommendations of the said Committee as expressed in the following terms :— " The accident points to the necessity for expert superin- t Subject to the Memoranda appended. JANUARY II, 1917. tendence of every repair, however slight, of the structure, andindependent inspection of such repair when completed, full details being recorded in the history sheet of the aircraft.Afte'r any important repair to the structure has been made, it should be so marked that both the workman by whom it wasdone and the examiner who subsequently passed it fit for service can be identified." This accident occurred, it will be seen, in comparativelyearly days—well before the war—and the above recommenda- tion has, we understand, since been in effect generally enforced. ^ CHARLES BRIGHT. J. G. BUTCHER. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS OF MR. BRIGHT. Whilst some of the following recommendations may beconsidered rather outside the scope of our immediate terms of reference, it has seemed to me that a useful purpose mightbe served by presenting the conclusions arrived at after (1) a six months' complete concentration on the wholesubject, (2) a previous study, covering several years, regard- ing special aspects, and (3) some little experience in the air. Aerial warfare generally is now attracting a great deal ofpublic interest—besides becoming every day of increasingly wide importance—and I here call attention to what, as theresult of close investigation, strikes we more especially as points requiring consideration.I should add that some of my recommendations, as set forth below, are only presented as objects to be aimed at asfar a possible if and when circumstances permit ; others have reference to what may already be to some extent thepractice nominally—though not, perhaps, fully carried out at the present time. (i) CIVILIAN TRAINING SCHOOLS.Whilst I am satisfied that the attention to Civilian Train- ing Schools has been considerable, it appears to me that indays to come all possible encouragement should be accorded to civilian pilots on a really lasting basis, and that anextended study might suitably be made of the future develop- ment of civilian schools for war equipment purposes. , • (ii) ADVICE FROM ACTIVE SERVICE PILOTS.I am of opinion that Squadron Commanders and active service Pilots of considerable experience at the front mightbe more taken into consultation, in an official way, regarding machines and engines. An additional advantage would be gained here in the eventof a second misfortune with a given machine—whether with the same pilot or otherwise—in view of the fact that there isalways a chance of the blame being thrown on the engine or machine, where it should not be.It might be arranged that on the occasion of an officer returning from the front, he should hand in any suggestionsarising from his experiences to the Aircraft Committee pro- posed in Recommendation xv. (iii) INVENTIONS.Every possible encouragement should, I think, be given to any new practical inventions in the field of military avia-tion ; and, in the case of one that seems really likely to- prove of material value if developed, suitable financial aidshould, where desirable, be granted for that purpose by the Government. If a public research laboratory were established—either bythe State or by private enterprise—a considerable impetus to invention should accrue, especially if official aid wereavailable. M. Eiffel's Laboratory in Paris, which answers to this description, has proved its public utility. (iv) INSPECTORS. I am strongly of opinion that in view of the extreme importance of highly efficient inspection of war aircraft and aero engines, steps should be taken—at any rate as soon as the war pressure passes off—to introduce into the Aeronautical Inspection Department (A.I.D.) more who have had a training that would especially fit them for the work in a technical sense, including a substantial knowledge of the materials involved. With this object in view I would, indeed, urge that application might be suitably made to such recog- nised organisations as the Institution of Civil Engineers and the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, who would no doubt be able to recommend suitable engineers. This want of trained men, in my opinion, applies— (a) To the department considering proposed designs ; (b) To that inspecting the designs when carried out; (c) To service at the front for reporting on the perform- ance of new machines in active service. No doubt the present arrangement quite suitably applies to many of the supernumeraries, but not, I think, to those carrying out the more responsible work. 42 "V1,.;
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
