PILOT CONVICTED

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 202, 11 September 1937, Page 3

PILOT CONVICTED

-Pres» ABSociation.).

Charged With Unsatislactory Loading THE BIG BAY CRASH

(By Tolegraph-

INVERCARGILL, Last NighL Convictions on two charges and costs totalling £13 15s were entered in the Magistrate's Court .to-day against Arthur John Bradshaw, pilot of the machine which crashed when about to land at Big Bay on December 30, 1936. The charges against Bradshaw were: (1) That on December 30, 1936, at Invercargill, he failed to satisfy himself before commencing a flight that the aircraft was satisfactorily loaded for the flight; (2) that the conditions governing the certificate of airworthiness for a DH Fox Moth aeroplane, registered as ZK — ADO, had not been eomplied with in that the niaximum commercial load was exceeded; (3) that he flew an aeroplane in which the maximum total weight exceeded 2116 lbs., as laid down in the certificate of airworthiness and (4) that he used an unlicensed landing place (Big Bay) wMle carrying passengers for hire. Defendant, who pleaded not guilty to all four charges, was convicted on the first and fourth. Mr. H. J. Macalister conducted the prosecutioi for the Air Department; Mr. R. B. Bannerman (Gore) appeared for defendant, and Mr. N. L. Watson for the Southland Aero Club. - Plane Crashed Mr. Macalister said the four informations which were laid .against Bradshaw and the one against the Southland Aero Club arose out of an aecident to a Fox Moth aeroplane while it was under hire to Bradshaw on December 30, 1936. It was being used for a flight over Big Bay when it crashed and. one passenger was killed and otkers injured. The main charge arose out of the loading of the machine when the pilot left Invercargill. It was not suggested that the load was directly responsible for the aecident, for there was little • doubt that when it eccurred the total weight was within the maximum Counsel then dealt with the regulations governing civil aviation and the grounda on which the prosecution contendei they had not been observed. Mr. Bannerman said that Bradshaw was an experienced pilot an experienced pilot knew how to load his machine. He did not think there would be the question of the machine not being properly loaded. If there had not been 'tho question of weight .there was no evidence that the load was not properly distributed or that it was exceeded. Counsel 's interpretation of the regulations was that a pilot could land auywhere in New Zealand provided he did not make a nractice of it, "Learned His Lesson" ''The pilot in'this case has suffered very severely," said Mr. Bannerman in addressing the Court. "He has lost a machine valued at £800 and has been without his license for eight months." The Magistrate: But the commission gave it back. Mr. Bannerman: It has not been reflirned to him. The Magistrate: I take it that it wili be given back. , "At the scene of the tragedy Bradshaw 's work iramedlately after the ciash was absolutely amazing," said Mr. Bannerman. "He had scalp wounds exposing the scalp in two places, two fingei-s wero practically_ wrenched off and he had a sprained ankle. Yet he dragged two passenger s on to the plane, carried a 12-stone passenger through the surf, helped two others back to the shore and went back to help with Sutton and Jones after which he collapsed, Financially he is practically ruined. I think he has learned his lesson and in the eircumstances I think a nominal penalty would meet the ease." . The Magistrate took into consideration the heavy fxnancial loss snffered by defendant in consequence of the aecident and ordered him to pay the costs of the prosecution. The charge against the Southland ' Aero Club, as owner of the aeroplane, of failing to notify the aecident by telegram to the Controller of Civii Aviation, Wellington, as soon as possible was dismissed.