Fatal crash of Puss Moth CF-APK Italy 1933
 

Hi Folks.

If anyone can help I am trying to find a copy of an Italian Report into the fatal crash of Puss Moth CF-APK in the Appenine Mountains in Italy in January 1933. The crash resulted in the death of Pioneer Australian Aviator Bert Hinkler.

Any information would be appreciated.

I am also interested in any Bert Hinkler memorabilia that anyone may have for sale. Books, magazines, autographs, letters etc.

Also interested in autographs/signatures of British Pilots/Test Pilots John Boothman, Hubert Broad, Humphrey Edwardes-Jones, Augustus Orlebar, Leonard Snaith, Sammy Wroath, Mutt Summers etc

Thank you for any assistance that you are able to provide.

I can be contacted off list at [email protected]

Regards, Ian from Oz.

Dont know if you have the following book - entitled -

- SOLO
The Bert Hinkler Story - by R D Mackenzie

Published 1963 - Angus and Robertson Ltd - London
(Austraia - H Pole anD Co Ltd Brisbane)

160 pages with some photos

Thanks for the information and the reply.

I have the original hard cover version and the later paperback with some updated information on the fatal crash.

I also have a copy of "ARC R & M 1699 Report on Puss Moth Accidents" which refers to an Italian Investigation into the crash. I have been looking for a copy of this Italian Investigation for many years but have not been able to locate a copy.

There is also a book by Ted Wixted called "The Last Flight of Bert Hinkler" which suggests Hinkler was murdered when someone tampered with the propeller of the Puss Moth. I do not agree with his theory.

Thanks again for your reply and helpful suggestion.

Do you have the title of the Italian investigation? I speak Italian and that will help me search for it.

I'm not able to help, but with apologies for a very slight drift in thread....

Was it true that Hinkler survived the crash only to die of hypothermia? If so, it's always struck me as spoky that Neil Williams also survived crashing his He-111 en route UK from Spain, again only to succumb to the cold.

Sir George Cayley

Part of the problem with any investigation into this crash is that the crash occurred on the 7th of January 1933 and the wreckage was not found until April of that year.

His body had significant head injuries but the suggestion is that he walked some distance from the wreckage and lay on the ground where he was later found.

There is no real way of knowing whether the injuries sustained in the crash were survivable.

A sad and lonely end to a truly great Aviator.

Sorry, I don't have a title to the report.

I have found reference to the report in other documentation but have never been able to find a copy (in any language).

I am assuming that the people responsible for the report into the 9 Puss Moth crashes had access to a copy as they quoted from it in their report.

Crash occurred on the 7th of January 1933 in the Appenines in Italy. The aircraft was a Puss Moth with Canadian Registration CF-APK. The pilot was Herbert John Louis (Bert) Hinkler who was Australian by birth but was living in the UK at the time. The wreckage was found by charcoal gatherers in April 1933.

Thanks for your offer of help.

Regards, Ian.

Sir George Cayley wrote;
"Neil Williams also survived crashing his He-111 en route UK from Spain, again only to succumb to the cold."

I have never heard that before. Do you have a reference? Was the information within the Spanish accident report?

Sorry for thread drift, but to answer my own question, I have just come across this from the AAIB report of the accident that killed Neil Williams. It states that he was killed instantly.
There is evidence that at the time
both engines were developing power.
The aircraft had broken up on impact
and then caught fire. All four
occupants were killed instantly. No
evidence was found of any pre-crash
failure or defect on the aircraft.
The pilot had considerable experience
of flying the Heinkel 111 on
ferry flights, and had previously flown
the type from Madrid to the UK. 3 3

Why was Bert Hinckler flying a Canadian-registered aircraft, rather than British or Australian?

Hinkler was in America trying to sell his own design which was called The Ibis. He purchased the Puss Moth and left it with Canadian Registration.

He then flew the Puss Moth across the Atlantic and back to the UK.

I honestly don't know why he kept the Canadian Registration.

The Avro Avian he flew to Australia had british registration G-EBOV.

Bert Hinkler
 

Sir George

In 1974 I visited Mount Pratomagno, Italy, in the company of the Arezzo Aero Club (then) President, Prince Amedeo di Savioa, and one of the carbon collectors who found Bert Hinkler's remain in April 1933. I was shown where he attempted to land his Puss Moth and where he died, some 80 metres down the mountainside from his demolished aircraft.

Bert obviously walked or crawled that distance.

Together with Prince Amedeo, we marked both spots with markers. They may still be there.

I have long been associated with Bert Hinkler, and still have connections with the Bert Hinkler Museum in Bundaberg Queensland. This connection came out of my friendship with Ted Wixted, a great Australian

There is no doubt that Bert was attempting a crash landing. He did not fly into the mountain through error.

Compelling evidence exists showing that one of his propellers broke off in flight. By any measure, an extraordinary event. The events which followed surrounding his funeral and his personal affairs were equally extraordinary and give rise to the view that his crash was not unexpected by certain people.

What was equally unexpected however was that Mussolini would accord Bert a State Funeral. His remains are in a Florence cemetry.

"Compelling evidence exists showing that one of his propellers broke off in flight."

I'd be interested to come across a Puss Moth with more than one propellor!

Crash of Puss Moth
 

I am at present working with a retired Air Crash Investigator to establish the definitive cause of the crash. It has been suggested that the propeller of the Puss Moth was tampered with and that a blade of the propeller was ejected from the hub.The makers of the propeller are of the opinion that it would not be possible for a blade to be ejected from the hub.

The photographic evidence and all other available evidence suggests that a wing came off the aircraft as a result of flutter.

There is a report from the 1930's which includes the crash of CF-APK as one of 9 instances where a wing came off a Puss Moth Aircraft due to flutter.

The Italian Investigation which is referred to in the report mentioned previously also states a wing came off the aircraft.

I might add that both propeller blades were found at the scene and are shown in photos of the wreckage.

If a blade were ejected, the forces on the engine would tear it from its mounts.

I will be happy to post the results of my investigation when they are complete.

Regards, Ian.

Still looking for a copy of the Italian Investigation/Report into the fatal crash of Puss Moth CF-APK in the Appenine Mountains Italy in January 1933 that reuslted in the death of Australian Aviator Bert Hinkler.

I recently visited the Hinkler Hall of Aviation in Bundaberg, Queensland.

Overview | Hinkler Hall of Aviation

They have a fully restored (and flyable) Puss Moth painted in the markings of Hinkler's Aircraft CF-APK.

Also of interest:

Bert Hinkler - homepage

All the best from Oz. Regards, Ian.:)

Still looking for a copy of the report on the Italian Investigation into the crash of Hinkler's Puss Moth CF-APK if anyone can help.The Italian Report is quoted in a British Report on 9 Puss Moth crashes (CF-APK is one of the 9).

Does anyone have details on the relevant Government Department which may have the archives that relate to this report?

Thanks for any help that anyone can provide.

Regards, Ian from Oz.:)

Most helpful if you can. I'm familiar with all the published works of Wixted, Mackenzie, Bettiens and some lesser chroniclers of the Hinkler story. What I would dearly like to know is whether there are any useful resources and archives apart from what is held in the Queensland Museum library and at Bundaberg in the Hinkler archive there.

The Mackenzie biography was in some ways a disappointment, for I feel the author failed to reveal the true heart and soul of his subject. On the more practical, functional side, Hinkler's greatest contribution to the advancement of aviation was the manner in which he showed the world convincingly that by 1928 the light aircraft was capable of proving it's safety, reliability, ease of maintenance, usefulness and for many it's affordability.

When in Australia in 1928, after accomplishing his record breaking solo flight from England in sixteen days ("Hinkle, Hinkle, little star, sixteen days and here you are" as Punch magazine had it in a full page cartoon)
our man spared no effort in promoting the light aeroplane.
He recorded on both sides of a gramaphone record his advice to the nation about flying as it was then, and his predictions. It is rivetting listening, (even though he mispronounces Hargrave in his rapid fire monologue.)

This should find the audio clip, accessing one side of the recording..-

Hinkler’s Message to Australia; Incidents of My Flight (1928) clip 1 on ASO - Australia's audio and visual heritage online[/SIZE][/FONT]

ian.whalley wrote:-
Interesting - I've never bought the prop blade explanation either. I also feel the wreckage in the crash site photos was far too mangled & "pancaked" to be the result of a forced landing attempt - especially from a pilot of Hinkler's experience.
However - if a the wing did seperate, Hinkler is unlikely to have survived the following uncontrolled spiral into the ground, so perhaps the distance between his body and the aircraft can be explained by him being "flung" or ejected on the way down.
I would also be very interested in seeing your completed report Ian :-)

Seeing as it was Canadian registered, is it possible that a report was sent to Canada and is somewhere deep in those archives?

Now that is what I call thinking outside the square.

Thank you very much for your suggestion. I have a friend in Canada and I will ask him to make the appropriate enquiries. :)

Bert Hinkler and Canada by Fred W. Hotson
In this 10 page article in CAHS Journal Vol 30 No 1 Spring 1992 you can find the following:

@India Four Two
"...During the otherwise routine transatlantic paperwork, Canada's E.W. Stedman, Senior Air Officer, wrote S/L Lawrence that, under the circumstances, the Canadian registration should be cancelled and a British registration taken out. Lawrence came back promptly with a reply, indicating he had discussed the subject with Hinkler. "The reason this certificate was endorsed at this office was primarily due to the fact that the Squadron Ldr. Hinkler's plans are to return to Canada via Australia, and on this account he put forward a very strong plea for the retention of the Canadian registration." The letter ended, "Squadron Leader Hinkler does not wish his projected flight to receive any publicity, it is requested, please, that it be treated as confidential.""

@ian.whalley
about the accidents involving wing separation in flight:
"Bert must have been in on all the detailed investigation carried out by the Air Ministry and de Havilland but little did he know that he would be number eight in that list."
(2 in Australia VH-UPM, VH-UPC, 2 in Europe G-ABDH, G-ABJU, 2 in South Africa ZS-ACC, ZS-ACD, 1 in Canada G-CYUT, the only one with a survivor report - the ninth happened 22.6.33 in Siam HS-PAA)
"All Puss Moth owners were kept informed of the details and the step-by-step modifications. The 1932 C of A renewal report on CF-APK, done prior to Hinkler's last flight, showed all the modifications installed and approved airworthy according to Air Ministry standards."

Martin

So what exactly does that information tell us? What were the modifications that are mentioned?

Hinkler crashed in January 1933 and there was another crash in Siam in June 1933 so whatever the modifications were it seems they did not cure the wing flutter problem. The nine puss moth crashes mentioned in the R & M report (including Hinkler and Siam) are all believed to be the result of flutter.

I have not yet located a copy of the Italian Report into Hinkler's crash. A friend in canada is working to establish whether a copy exists in the Canadian Archives. :)

This would suggest that a copy of the Italian report could be in UK archives; was any wreckage of CF-APK sent to the UK?

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA267086

Thanks for the link. I had spoken to John Kepert re the Puss Moth crashes and he agreed that flutter was the likely cause of Hinkler's fatal crash in CF-APK. I had also spoken with John Watkins who investigated an Australian crash of a Puss Moth. There was a witness who observed the wing seperate from the aircraft.

I have not been able to find a copy of the Italian Report in Australia. I have had no luck finding one in the UK but if someone has the right contacts I would certainly appreciate help in finding a copy.

The wreckage of CF-APK was carried down from the mountains and buried at Florence Airfield. Hinkler's body was buried in Florence. As far as I know no wreckage was transported to the UK.

Thanks for your help and interest. :)

A friend in Canada has located a copy of a file on CF-APK but unfortunately there is no copy of the Italian Investigation into the crash in the file.

Does anyone have contacts in the Air Crash Investigation Office in the UK?

Or could anyone suggest which archives or Government Department would have information used to publish the "ARC R & M 1699 Report on Puss Moth Accidents"? There is reference to the Italian Report in that publication so I would assume they had a copy to refer to.

Enquiries in Italy suggest their records were destroyed during the war.

Thank you for your help. It is very much appreciated. :)

Ian,

Here's a link to the Air Accident Investigation Branch at Farnborough. It's an arm of the Department for Transport.

Air Accidents Investigation: Home

In the first instance I'd write to Keith Conradi who is the Chief Inspector.

There is also the National Archive (formerly the Public Records Office) at Kew, West London. You have to employ a "reader" to gain access to any particular file though I don't know the cost or how to go about it.

SGC

Thank you Sir George. Your help is very much appreciated. :)

There's a new book out by Grantlee Kieza all about Bert Hinkler

Went to his signing tonight at Bundbaerg Library.

Haven't read the book yet but will get back to you about it!


Alex.

Thanks Alex. I have a copy of the new Hinkler book. The cause of the Puss Moth Crash is discussed on page 440. No definitive cause is given and different theories are mentioned.

If you are a Bert Hinkler fan or have an interest in the early days of Aviation, a copy of the book "Bert Hinkler" by Grantlee Kieza published by Harper Collins is worth buying. :)

Hi guys - re Bert Hinkler crash
 

Hi guys
I have some crash reports compiled by Italian authorities in the days after Bert's body was found.
If anyone would like to see them please email me on
[email protected]

Thanks for your interest in my book:ok:

Hi guys - re Bert Hinkler crash
 

Hello everyone
Thanks for your interest in my book on Bert Hinkler.
I have a copy of the crash report compiled by Italian investigators in the days after Bert's body was found.
If anyone would like to see the report please email me at
[email protected]

Thanks very much:ok:
Grantlee

Thank you Grantlee and congratulations on the Hinkler Book. Welcome aboard. :)

A very big public thank you to Grantlee Kieza for providing a copy of the elusive Italian Document which documents the cause of the crash of Puss Moth CF-APK. :D

This ends my 30 year plus search for a copy of the document involving enquiries in Italy, the UK, Canada and Australia.

The document states that the wing seperated from the fuselage in flight in part due to a defect in soldering which resulted in the breaking of a bolt slot which allowed progressive play in the wing joint. This eventually resulted in the wing breaking away.

The seperated wing was found 250 metres / 820 feet from the main wreckage.

Thank you again to Grantlee. Make sure you buy a copy of his book on Bert Hinkler. Thank you also to those on this forum who helped me in my quest.

I think we can categorically say that the propeller of CF-APK was not tampered with and the aircraft did not collide with a tree while attempting an emergency landing.

Rest in Peace Bert Hinkler and Godspeed. :)

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a267086.pdf

Some info in here on the aircraft in question.

Thanks Jammedstab. Already mentioned in post #23 above by Airways Ed but your help is very much appreciated. :)

Firstly John I take great exception to my emails to you being posted here on a forum. Please remove it immediately.

Fantome is entitled to his opinion. That is all it is. One mans opinion. Is fantome an aircrash investigator. An investigator of any sort? Does he know more than John watkins of TAA fame? It may be of interest that John Watkins investigated one of the 9 documented crashes in the R&M publication that happened here in Australia. There was a witness on the ground who looked up when he heard the aircraft and actually saw the wing come off the aircraft. I had many long conversations with John about the Hinkler crash. John's opinion is contained in the 1979 second edition of Solo by Mackenzie that fantome has not bothered to read.

Do not denigrate the opinions of others. Opinions based on years of research and information contained in ARC R & M 1699 Report on Puss Moth Accidents plus correspondence between the Italian Air Ministry and the Air Attache at the British Embassy in Rome. Perhaps one should obtain a copy of said document and have a read. Then consider the information contained therein.

If there is an official explanation for the crash of CF-APK then it is accepted as wing flutter causing the wing to separate from the fuselage in flight. Hinkler's crash was one of 9 such documented cases. Seems fantome knows much more than the experts who put together the report on Puss Moth crashes.

I do take exception to people who pretend friendship in order to advance their own causes and post private emails on a forum without even asking permission first. So my ideas have no merit because fantome has no confidence in the credentials of the Italian Air Ministry? So where does that leave his "outhouse musings"? No evidence there at all. It is a fact that the wing separated from the fuselage in flight. If fantome does not wish to accept historical fact, that is his problem.

The simple laws of physics indicate that it is not possible for an aircraft to fly so low as to strike a tree and shed a wing then have the remaining wreckage continue on for 250 metres without striking the ground. Simply not possible.

Hinkler was trying to break the record for flight from England to Australia so would have been travelling at maximum speed. Crossing the Atlantic in the same aircraft would have him flying in maximum endurance mode. Lang Kidby suggests Hinkler was trying to descend through bad weather so what was it? Weather good? Weather bad? Can't have both. Anyone heard of turbulence around mountains? Maximum speed, extreme turbulence, design fault that makes aircraft susceptible to flutter, defect in weld that allows a bolt to move thus allowing even more pronounced flutter, wing separates from fuselage, 250 metres between wing and rest of wreckage. Hinkler deceased. Official documentation/correspondence between Italian Air Ministry and British Embassy states definitely that aircraft did not strike tree. I rest my case.

Sorry John/fantome I will take the experts who put together the publication ARC R & M 1699 Report on Puss Moth Accidents and John Watkins and the laws of physics over your opinion any day.

Insufferable patronisation! ?

Insufferable : intolerable/unbearably conceited

patronisation : can't find that one in my oxford dictionary

patronising : treat condescendingly

Don't know where you get that from. Obviously your opinion and you are entitled to it. My opinions are based on documented research. Yours based on not a shred of evidence. Simply opinion. I am most certainly not conceited in any way shape or form. I am the sort of person that if you show me evidence to the contrary (Evidence!!) I am more than happy to change my mind. 30 years with the police force, 18 months at the RAAF Academy, solo in a glider and a powered aircraft, good understanding of physics, a life time of research and interest in Aviation and Space History, an interest in Bert Hinkler as I grew up in Bundaberg, years of donating copies of everything I have found to Lex Rowland and Hinkler House, Hall of Aviation gives me some confidence in my research and analytical abilities. PM you? Not on your life. Did like the comment "If you can be bothered" when I missed answering a question. Shows me where the conceit etc is.