In Hager v. Romines, 913 S.W.2d 733, 735 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 1995, no writ), the plaintiffs failed to present their own expert to controvert the defendant-applicator's testimony that he had met the standard of care of an aerial applicator. See id. The court stated, "Not only is flying an airplane not within the realm of experience of the ordinary, prudent person or juror, applying herbicide and pesticide aerially requires use of specialized equipment and techniques that are not familiar to the ordinary person." Id.