Read the forum code of contact
By: - 12th October 2012 at 01:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
According to the guys over on Air-Britain it was c/n21348 registered as XB-MNP for the test with previous reg quoted as N293AS.
By: - 12th October 2012 at 07:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Whole load of details here:
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-plane-crash/articles/your-aircraft
:)
Zeb
By: - 12th October 2012 at 08:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ex Singapore Airlines 9V-SGB
By: - 12th October 2012 at 18:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would've been nice if they put in a couple of rows of rearward facing seats and did a comparison!
By: - 12th October 2012 at 18:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I thought that as well, the RAF Ten fleet has them, trouble is they would need some Ten seats, as they are stressed differently, you cannot just turn a row around..
I see there is some moaning going on about the virtual booking that channel 4 ran in conjunction with the show, you could book a seat and they would tell you if you would have survived etc.. I thought what a cracking idea to raise awareness, sadly some nimby's didn't agree.
I thought it was an interesting and well made programme, thank gawd they didn't wait for a replacement fuel pump for the Marchetti, I waited 6 months for a new nose U/C trunnion for one, and that was AOG from the manufacturer.
By: - 12th October 2012 at 19:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would've been nice if they put in a couple of rows of rearward facing seats and did a comparison!
Agreed, but I fear all they would have done would have been to turn a row around and as the dummy would produce a higher cg I'd guess that the seat backs would fail or the seats rip out of the floor rail. The dummy would also be likely to get a face full of wreakage resulting in the conclusion that rearward facing seats are not safe. Ignoring the fact that the seats wern't designed for that orientation and the overhead lockers and trim shouldn't be coming loose at g loads which are survivable in the first place.
RC range restricted? well if you will have both transmit and recieve antenna inside aircraft fuselages what can you expect?
And as for leaving the baggage hold empty, even they realised that invalidated some of their results but it begs the question; 'Was the AUW at landing representative?' No freight, next to no pax and how much fuel?
On the whole I feel that this was more a stunt for TV rather than a proper scientific exercise.
Was this an excellent programme ruined for me by my twenty five years of flight trials?:)
By: - 12th October 2012 at 20:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RC range restricted? well if you will have both transmit and receive antenna inside aircraft fuselages what can you expect?
My thought's too. Although with these programmes, it's not always a case of what you see is what you get.
They sometimes need some added drama ;)
Posts: 17
By: ClassicMan - 12th October 2012 at 01:23
Watched the Channel 4 programme on the Boeing 727 that was crashed into the desert.
Has anyone come up with the reg and construction number of it yet ??