FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1961
1961 - 1180.PDF
282 FLIGHT, 31 August 1961 Two specials owned and operated by Chris and Claire Roberts at Luton Airport: (top) Leopard Moth G-AIYS, only one year younger than its owners, has been busy this sum- mer flying jockeys, trainers, company directors, engineers, holiday-makers and first-fight joy-riders; (bottom) souped-up, canopied and spatted Tiger Moth G-AHVU in- corporates side-opening canopies, upholstered cockpits, new instrument panel and lowered inter-cockpit decking, and has included a 15,000ft crossing of the Italian Alps among its touring trips. Both Leopard and Touring Tiger were rebuilt by Mr and Mrs Roberts IN THE OPINION of the Chief Inspector of Accidents, Ministryof Aviation, the fatal accident to Mr D. Dillow in Rollason Turbu- lent G-APKZ on December 6 last was caused by a structural failureof the starboard wing which in turn was caused by the pilot over- stressing the wing structure while performing aerobatic manoeuvres.The official report of the accident, published last week by HM Stationery Office at Is 6d, called attention to a discrepancy in theprocedure for the issue of Permits to Fly for light aircraft, and the Ministry of Aviation has announced a clarification of this. The Turbulent flown by Mr Dillow, who was a member ofBiggin Hill Flying Club, was owned by Mr George Stewart, club chairman, and was operated by the club. The cockpit contained anotice stating that the aircraft was non-aerobatic and must not be flown at speeds exceeding 1O7kt. On the date of the accident theaircraft took off from Biggin Hill at 3.23 p.m. and about 20min later was seen to be performing a succession of aerobatic man-oeuvres at an estimated height of between 5.000 and 6,000ft. The aerobatics continued for 10-15min and terminated when thestarboard wing broke away from the main structure and the aircraft spiralled to the ground. The accident report concluded that (1)the aircraft had been maintained in accordance with the conditions of its Permit to Fly, (2) the starboard wing became detached because Sport and Business of a structural failure of its main spar under g-loading imposedduring aerobatic manoeuvres, (3) such manoeuvres were prohibited under the terms of the Permit to Fly, (4) the main spar was manufac-tured from materials which conformed to specification, and (5) a discrepancy in the procedure under which Permits to Fly wereissued had no bearing on the cause of the accident. The discrepancy mentioned concerned the delegation of air-worthiness responsibility to outside bodies by the Ministry of Aviation. In the case of permits to fly for light aircraft, the Ministryhad delegated authority to the Air Registration Board but not, it became evident during the accident investigation, to the PopularFlying Association. The Ministry had in fact been accepting recom- mendations from the PFA, which therefore were not in accordancewith statute. A Ministry announcement published together with the accident report stated that, in future, the Popular Flying Associa-tion would make recommendations for the issue of permits to fly for ultra-light aircraft to the Air Registration Board. The Boardwould then advise the Ministry on the issue of such permits. An additional observation in the accident report was that, if thereported light stick forces of the Turbulent were truly representa- tive of the type, it was extremely important for pilots to observe theoperating limitations of the aircraft. Seen at the recent Reseau de Sport de I'Air rally at Morlaix: (upper photographs) the Paumier Baladin (90 h.p. Continental); (lower left) the Croses Pou- plume (10 h.p. Monet Goyon two-stroke), a variation on Henri Mignet's Pou theme; (lower right) a three-seat Mignet, the HM.390 (90 h.p. Continental)
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
