Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SPEED AND ALTITUDE

AEROPLANE'S COURSE

AIRLINES APPEAL CASE

Manoeuvres made by the aeroplane piloted by Ivan Louis Kight, and the speed and the altitude of the machine immediately before it crashed at Wairoa in February last year, killing Kight and his two passengers, were matters to which close consideration was given in the Court of Appeal by Mr. T. P. Cleary, leading counsel for the respondent, William Thomas Strand, in the appeal of Dominion Airlines, Ltd. (in liquidation), against Mr. Justice Reed's award of £3000 damages to Mr. Strand against the company. Mr Strand's son, William Charles Strand, -was one of the passengers in the aeroplane. To-day was the third day of hearing of the appeal, i Mr. P. B. Cooke, Mr. G. G. Watson, and Mr. H. J. V. James appeared for Dominion Airlines, Ltd., and with Mr. Cleary (for the respondent) was Mr. M. O. Barnett. EXPERTS' VIEWS. Continuing his examination of the facts, Mr. Cleary said that both the experts, Captain Bolt and Wing-Com-mander Grant-Dalton, in their evidence, attributed the crash to the result of the final turn attempted by Kight. He submitted that apart from any question of engine trouble, that turn could not be justified under any circumstances. In dealing with the question of engine trouble, set up by the appellant, Mr. Cleary_ asked the Court to notice from the evidence-that engine trouble was a very rare occurrence, and also to consider the position in which Kight found himself immediately upon dropping the parcel of mail. It was submitted that it was clear that there was then no engine trouble. Furthermore, it was contended that at the moment of the dropping of the mail Kight was in a position _of potential peril. He had been losing altitude gradually for some time, and was flying, whether he knew it or not, at a very slow speed, which no doubt accounted for his loss in altitude, and that meant that if he continued for a very short time in the way he was flying he would be in serious trouble. It was very necessary for Kight to do something - within a very few seconds after dropping the mail, and there were only two possible things he could have done. The first was to continue on the same course and gain speed—the proper thing to do if he did not have speed enough to turn—and the second was to turn in the same manner as he had turned previously, which was an act he should not have attempted unless he had the proper speed. RIGHT'S PROPER COURSE. Replying to questions from the Bendi, Mr. Cleary. submitted that even if there were engine trouble, Kight did the wrong thing. It was clear from, the evidence of the experts that his proper course was to.go straight ahead. Mr. Justice Smith said that if there was open country ahead he did not see how the company could answer the allegation of negligence, but the trouble was that the evidence on the point was conflicting. There was the alternative submission by Mr. Cleary, however, that Kight before dropping the.parcel was flying down wind at too slow a speed and at too.low an altitude. Mr. Justice MaeGregor referred to the passage in the evidence in which Captain Bolt said that, not knowing the difficulties with which Kight was faced, it was impossible to lay down what Kight should have done. Mr. Cleary passed on to deal with the fact that Kight did not have a B flying licence entitling him to carry passengers for hire. He submitted that tho Aviation Act of 1918 and the regulations thereunder imposed an absolute duty on the appellant, and that breach of the Act was negligence in itself. Another submission was that breach of statutory duty was. actionable if (a) the injured .individual was a member of a class for whose benefit the duty was imposed, and (b) the statute had not excluded remedy by ►action either expressly or impliedly. Many other submissions on the legal aspects of the case were made by Mr. Cleary, whose address was not completed at the time of going to press. He had then been addressing the Court for something like six hours.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19321014.2.98

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 91, 14 October 1932, Page 10

Word Count
702

SPEED AND ALTITUDE Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 91, 14 October 1932, Page 10

SPEED AND ALTITUDE Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 91, 14 October 1932, Page 10

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert