Ex-RAF aircraft technician near Lutterworth launches compensation claim against MOD - saying his work left him deaf

Martin Smith, now 62, claims he was exposed to dangerously high levels of noise at work when he served between 1978 and 1992, and now needs hearing aids around 21 years earlier than he should have done.

Mr Smith, of Gilmorton, is claiming damages of up to £60,000 from the MOD for his injuries.

Case documents just made publicly available at the court in London say he was exposed to high levels of noise during training at RAF Swinderby during range training with self-loading rifles, firing around 70 rounds a day in a group of 30 people in 12 firing lanes.

Mr Smith says he spent five years at RAF Marham on the flight lines, carrying out checks close to aircraft engines when they were running, and was exposed to severe aircraft noise during daytime sorties from Handley Page Victors tanker aircraft, English Electric Canberra aircraft, and sometimes B-52 Stratofortresses. Although he wore plastic and foam ear defenders, these were ineffective, he says.

During 18 months at RAF Brawdy, he says he was involved in testing engines up to full throttle, which was incredibly loud.

He says he also worked on Harrier GR3 and GR4 aircraft with vertical or short take off and landing capabilities during his five years at RAF Gutersloh in Germany.

Mr Smith says throughout this career with the RAF, he travelled extensively in military aircraft, including the C130 Hercules and the Handley Page Victors, on journeys lasting up to 24 hours, without any hearing protection.

He says that during his service, he developed ringing in his ears or muffled hearing, which he thought was temporary, but now he has significant and permanent noise-induced hearing loss. He accuses the MOD of negligently exposing him to harmful levels of noise without adequate hearing protection, failing to supply adequate hearing protection, carrying out exercises without adequate regard to the risk of harm from noise, and failing to provide adequate training to reduce the level of noise exposure. The MOD, he says, failed to warn him about the risk of harm from noise, failed to monitor his hearing properly, failed to arrange adequate hearing protection, and failed to have regard to literature showing the importance of hearing protection and double hearing protection to avoid damage to hearing.