18/10/07 - News section
Military helicopter crew 'wrecked conservatory by flying down to
ogle sunbathing au pair'
by EMILY ANDREWS
A military helicopter destroyed the conservatory of a £1.75 million
mansion when its pilot swooped too low to look at a sunbathing au
pair, a court heard yesterday.
The four servicemen flying the Merlin helicopter were said to have
dropped to 500ft or lower for the "frolic" in July.
The house's owners claim the downdraught from the aircraft
seriously damaged the 23ft-high glass conservatory, leaving it
needing to be replaced.
Barry and Anna George, who own The Old Stables in Eastbourne, East
Sussex, are claiming £250,000 in damages plus legal costs.
The Ministry of Defence denies all liability in the case.
Their barrister, Daniel Crowley, told a preliminary hearing at the
High Court in London that the helicopter dropped to 500ft so the
crew could "communicate" with the au pair.
He said the crew was not given permission to fly at under 1,000ft
and that "their own regulations say they should not have been
flying low over a built-up area of Eastbourne".
Mr Crowley claimed that when the MoD Merlin - which is 75ft long
and weighs 14tons - flew over the mansion on the afternoon of July
23, 2004, the downdraught from its rotors damaged the
conservatory's glass roof.
This left it leaking and, he said, "pretty much most of it" needed
to be replaced.
Mr Crowley told the judge that Mr and Mrs George's home - which has
two other houses attached - was valued at £1.75 million at the time
of the incident.
Around 50 per cent of the roof of the property - which has a
floor-space of 7,000 square feet - is made up of "steel and
aluminium double glazed glass panels" and is highly visible from
the air, Mr Crowley said.
He added that the conservatory had won an architectural prize in
2000.
The eight-day case, to start in February, is likely to generate
hundreds of thousands of pounds in legal costs.
If the MoD loses the taxpayer will have to pick up the bill.
The judge, Jonathan Foster QC, described the incident as an
"alleged frolic".
Conceding that suggesting the damage was caused as a result of a
frolic gone wrong was a "serious allegation", Mr Crowley said he
would seek to develop the point during cross-examination.
He said there was an issue as to whether "those piloting the
aircraft were deliberately flying at a low height for fun".
"They have got this expensive equipment, it's fun to fly and,
rather than just sit around, they want to fly it," Mr Crowley
added.
But James Maxwell-Scott, for the MoD, insisted a 'helicopter flying
at 500ft or above simply could not have caused the damage'.
He added that although, "technically", permission needed to be
granted for flying the helicopter at under 1,000ft, a chart the
pilot was using did not indicate that he needed it and that he
'felt he could fly down to 500ft'.
Central to the case is a piece of equipment on the Merlin which
measures the height at which the helicopter is flying.
That was not working at the time.
Find this story at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=488401&in_page_id=1770
©2007 Associated New Media