Richard Smithson

Name : Richard Smithson

Rank : Pilot Officer, No.96 Squadron

Ser. No. : T.B.C.

Dates at Cranage : Dec 1940 - 22 July 1941

When I started this web site I received numerous files from various researchers and enthusiasts and amongst these files was a small piece about Richard Smithson, a Boulton Paul Defiant pilot with No.96 Squadron. The piece told one of the theories on how Pilot Officer Smithson and his gunner, Sergeant Ivan Robinson were killed, it was thought that they were ‘show boating’ to two nurses that they knew and as a result, the Defiant crashed into the hillside, killing both men instantly. While some may see this as a ‘romantic’ wartime story it appears that after much time spent on research that this was most definitely not the case.

While Richard’s nephew, David, pointed out to me that the piece hadn’t caused any offence, I decided to remove it in order that in the piece shown below I can, with David’s permission, let you read the real cause of the death of a pilot and his gunner, Sgt Ivan Robinson.

Early life & R.A.F. Career - by David Smithson

I was not born when Richard was killed so never knew the man, but he was quite revered by his two younger brothers, (both of whom were serving soldiers during the war, my father served in the North Africa, Sicily and Italian campaigns, my other uncle in Burma), and his younger sister. From childhood though, I lived in the knowledge that Richard died heroically and paid the ultimate sacrifice.

From my research I now know that my childhood illusions were so wrong and his death was potentially avoidable. Please let me explain: -

After Richard was killed, the RAF informed my grandmother of the circumstances of his death. She was told, allegedly, that Richard had been on a nighttime sortie and had encountered enemy aircraft approaching Manchester. He was involved in a dogfight, in which his aircraft was damaged but still able to fly. Rather than order a bail out with the potential of his aircraft falling to earth in a populated area and having the probability of killing civilians on the ground, Richard attempted to get the aircraft back to base but failed to do so when on approach to the airfield, it crashed into a nearby field, killing both himself and his rear gunner, Sgt. Ivan Robinson from the RNZAF.

A highly commendable action if this was the case and making Richard worthy of not only being a childhood hero, but also a hero in the eyes of his family.

In the height of war and the outcome of it being very uncertain at that time, and with public morale tottering upon a knife-edge, I can understand why the R.A.F. promulgated this myth. A loved one had died. Better for the family to believe the death was heroic rather than one which should and could have been avoided.

I lived within “the security” of this myth until about 6 years ago. By this time, the family had fragmented and had for many years lost touch with each other. My grandmother had long passed away, and Richard’s siblings were also no longer with us.

Being a round the clock shift worker at that time, on one night I couldn’t sleep so I went downstairs, and being wide-awake I decided to trawl the internet to see if I could find anything out about Richard. I quickly found that the Sunderland Echo had completed an article which they published in 1999 (but didn’t put online until 2006) regarding Wearside RAF “Heroes” of the Second World War. Richard was one of several pilots mentioned, but his was a mention rather than a full article as all of the others were full articles. However, the historian who wrote the piece asked for any existing family, or anyone who knew Richard personally, to contact him, as he needed to know more about this elusive pilot. After 7 years of not hearing anything, the historian believed the family had all died out.

I made contact with this historian, and I was invited to his house where I spent a very pleasurable afternoon with him. From our conversations, he got some background history of the Smithson family from me and he provided me with an awful lot of information he had uncovered, which included books and newspaper articles in which Richard was mentioned. I also provided him with photographs of Richard in full RAF uniform.

As a result of this meeting, my interest in researching my family history started, of which the story of Richard formed the initial part. I have also managed to bring the Smithson family back together again as a result of it.

Tony Harratt’s article on 96 Squadron “The Nightfighters” was found on the internet and Richard was mentioned on a couple of occasions. What shocked me was the second mention – “killed whilst conducting an air test”.

“Killed whilst conducting an air test”? This can’t be true! Richard died a hero’s death trying to get a damaged aircraft back to base? This needed more researching.

Being from an investigative employment background, I started researching Richard’s time prior to and whilst in the R.A.F. His story, if you are interested, is as follows: -

Richard was born in 1916, the eldest child of Johnson Smithson, a Colliery Blacksmith. At the age of 14 yrs he started his working life as a Trapper Boy in South Hetton Colliery, working for up to 10 hours a day, in the dark, opening safety doors to allow coal tubs to pass back and forth to the coal face. When R.A.F. Usworth (near Sunderland – now the Nissan Car Factory) was opened in 1932, they advertised locally for men to work at the base. Richard saw the adverts and dreamed of better things and wanted to leave the coal mine. My grandfather refused to let him leave the pit.

I never knew my grandfather, but I am told he was a typical hard working, hard drinking, fearsome man. He was from a middle class business people family yet chose to shun that lifestyle for a more heavy manual labour working class way of life. He ruled his home with a fist of iron. He has been described (through my consequent family research) as a “Black Sheep”, hating anything which would mark him to be above his station in life. My grandmother was also from a middle class business people family but remained like this until her death. I can imagine Richard, like my father and other siblings, would have been somewhat confused about where they fitted in with the class system, father not letting them better themselves, and mother wanting them to do better, but this is conjecture.

Johnson was tragically killed in a railway accident in 1933, and Richard saw his chance to apply for work at R.A.F. Usworth. He was accepted and his R.A.F. career began in 1935 as an “A/C Plonk”, a term I was not familiar with until corresponding with his former colleagues. He eventually ended up at RAF Leconfield in East Yorkshire as a Sergeant aircraft mechanic.

With the outbreak of war, Richard seized his chance to become one of the first Sergeants to be trained as a Pilot. He flew for the first time with 249 Squadron out of Leconfield on interception sorties in early summer 1940 and went with the squadron when they moved to R.A.F. North Weald in Essex.

The 7th September 1940 was one of the pivotal days in Battle of Britain history. Richard was involved in a dogfight over Kent around 5pm when another German plane, I believe it was a Messerschmidt 109, came in from the side and riddled Richard’s Hurricane with bullets. He was badly injured, the aircraft was badly damaged, but Richard tried to get the plane back to base. He crash-landed in a field just outside Eastchurch on the Isle of Sheppey, a local farmer pulling him from the wreckage. The plane was a right off. Richard's name was mentioned in despatches.

Richard was hospitalised and on being released, was sent home to South Hetton having been given 6 months off to rest and recuperate.

My father told me that Richard’s flesh on his right side of the body was reminiscent more of a kitchen colander than a human being.

Richard hated not doing his bit, and much to the protestations of my grandmother and medical advice, Richard returned to his unit within 6 weeks. On going back the Medical Officer refused to certify him fit for front line flying, and his days at a Front Line Battle of Britain R.A.F. station were numbered.

I have corresponded with Richard’s former flying colleagues at R.A.F. North Weald who have spoken fondly of my uncle, and who have provided me with signed testimony that Richard was a very good pilot, one of the best who came through the ranks (class system initially prevailed in the early years of the war which you probably already know), careful, thoughtful and not a gung-ho risk taker.

R.A.F. North Weald had a pilot, Ronald “Boozy” Kellett, also from the Wearside area, (and one who had been in the earlier mentioned historian's articles) who was tasked in forming a new “Nightfighter” squadron, which he did at R.A.F. Cranage. He took Richard with him, whether by choice or instruction (I like to think the former). 96 Squadron was now in operation, but flying Boulton Paul Defiants, an aeroplane which was generally hated amongst pilots, especially to former Hurricane and Spitfire pilots, who would often complain about inadequate power and performance.

Richard hated them too as he now had another person on board, the rear gunner, another life to take into consideration when (or if) the heat was on. This, I suggest, shows that Richard was a cautious thinker rather than a gung-ho showboater.

Owing to his injuries and the memories of what happened to him on the 7th September 1940, Richard became even more cautious when flying. This became apparent after he was teamed up with his last rear gunner, Sgt. Ivan Norton Robinson.

After the fateful crash of the 22nd July 1941, the R.A.F. wrote to Ivan’s mother, via the R.N.Z.A.F., but actually told her in the letter that he had died as a result of a plane crash in which the cause was pilot error, talk about being blunt and lack of sympathy. I know what they told my grandmother was incorrect and Richard did not die a valiant and courageous death, but at least it must have given her some comfort in some way to think that his sacrifice was for a greater cause.

Now I’ll get to my research into the crash. This is gleaned from former colleagues, The Air Historical Branch of the R.A.F., the Air Accident Investigation Branch, the R.A.F., Cheshire Coroners Reports, and the Freedom of Information Bureau.

Boulton Paul Defiant T4071 was a relatively new aeroplane, having only 60 hours recorded flight time on its airframe. It had been involved in an incident in which it had undergone a “heavy” landing. It was touch and go whether or not it should be repaired or scrapped. It was taken to R.A.F. Squires Gate (near Blackpool I believe) where it underwent extensive repairs.

Richard was tasked in flight-testing it on its return to Cranage. Richard wanted to go alone, but Ivan was determined not to miss out on any action, should the flight test be interrupted for approaching enemy aircraft. Ivan got his way. The flight took off just after 4.30pm and all was going well until just after 5pm when a Police Sergeant in Delamere village saw the aeroplane flying low over the village and the engine noise made him think that the plane was in trouble. Seconds later he heard an almighty explosion come from Eddisbury Hill direction. He knew that this was the plane crashing into the hillside. Both occupants were killed instantly on impact (Richards Death Certificate is quite graphic and grimly to read).

At a Board of Enquiry the following week, the R.A.F. adjudged that it was pilot error. They ignored the facts that the aircraft should not have been repaired. They ignored testimony from colleagues that Richard was a very able, careful, cautious pilot. They did not ask any of the “A/C Plonks” who had repaired the aircraft to attend the tribunal. This, to me, was to avoid any awkward questions being asked about the aircraft condition after repair. There was no examination of the wreckage to determine any mechanical failure. They didn’t even call the Police Sergeant to give his evidence.

There is a total lack of thoroughness clearly apparent in any documentation still existing regarding this crash (other than from the Coroner). There is a general air of “sweep it under the carpet and everyone will forget about it” attitude and “Let’s blame the pilot” ethos.

I understand that thoroughness takes time and effort, both of which would have been at a premium and therefore lacking at that time, when aeroplanes were being lost at an alarming rate on a daily basis, but it is too easy to blame pilots if not enough or no meaningful post crash investigation is completed.

So it came as a shock to read your website which suggested showboating. Not only was this news to me, it went against everything I have uncovered over the past few years. If true however, it would endorse the RAF’s conclusion as pilot error. It would also make me have to re-assess everything, which can have its benefits in life.

I am extremely grateful to you for having those comments on your website. I was not offended by them in any way. In fact, it has promoted lengthy discussion between myself and my cousin (another nephew of Richard) over a glass of wine after Sunday lunch last weekend. We’ve concluded that the truth in those comments is unlikely, given my research, but they cannot be discounted. The only people who can truthfully answer the validity of that comment both died in the crash, or in the case of the two nurses, are themselves likely to be now no longer with us.

Either way, thank you for providing such a topic of conversation. It has been appreciated.

Regards

Dave S.