Quick Description: Site of a fatal crash involving a Trident 1C near Heathrow Airport in 1972. |page_number=5 I've changed the callsign from "Papa India" to "Bealine 548" as this would have been the callsign used in communication with ATC.
in Plane Crash Sites. While this is true for the inboard leading edge devices, the outer two sections which comprise the majority of the L/E are true droops, they hinge from the underside and the entire wing L/E angles downwards with a moveable sealing plate (stored within the wing structure) being used to seal the resulting gap on the upper surface. British European Airways Flight 548 was a Trident airliner (registration: G-ARPI) that crashed less than three minutes after departing from London Heathrow Airport, killing all 118 aboard. This case was confusing because BEA didn't follow this format. Does anyone else have an opinion on this?
One aspect of the text bothers me, it mentions that the Trident 1 leading edge devices are Krueger flaps.
I was calling it the Nicosia incident for clarity's sake.I see what you did there with that Churchill paraphrase.I'm legitimately confused, what are you referring to exactly?Videos, gifs, or aftermath photos of machinery, structures, or devices that have failed catastrophically during operation.Press J to jump to the feed. ? Start-up clearance was given at 15:39 for a scheduled departure time of 15:45. . In any case the aircraft went into a second stall, a deep stall, and impacted in a level attitude at a vertical speed of about 100 knots. G-ARPI lost its tailfin and part of its number two engine, but it was repaired over a period of several months (no doubt at great expense) and returned to service, only to crash again as BEA flight 548. I see that, when this article was created in October 2003, the expression Answer from former Trident pilot (who, confused why this article is being "used as a chat forum", adds "exhaustive manufacturers' information is still available on all three marks of Trident if anyone wishes to come in with a worthwhile point about the sequence of events leading up to impact and how the aircraft systems came into play"): the Trident had both a stick-shaker and a stick-pusher system. {{Cite newspaper The Times You could check there to make sure I got it right (I don't have time right now). |day_of_week=Thursday As one consequence of this accident, confidential aviation incident reporting programs got a boost. {{reflist|3|refs= This whole section needs more detail and explainable, there are too many 'WTF moments' to the average layman.
At 16:06:53 the crew reported ready for takeoff. JET Contract First Delivery Of Dh 121 In 1963 However, this captain had a reputation for reporting problems constantly — like the boy who cried wolf, when he finally pointed out a real problem, he was ignored.Admiral - thank you so much for this write up and the other 129 ones too. Push-back was not requested until 16:00 due to load re-adjustment. The best way to remedy this is probably to expand the sections on the accident and the inquiry, rather than shrink the background as its clear the background is important. (2) The Trident involved in this crash (registration G-ARPI) had previously been involved in a crash at Heathrow in 1968. Anybody know why the latest featured article nomination was closed after all the hard work put in by Nimbus which was still ongoing when the nomination was closed ? ": public inquiry? Oh, you mean This article includes the sentence “The condition was not rectified by the pilots despite the operation of the Thanks very much BuzzWoof. If you then bung on full power on all engines and remedy any configuration mistake, eg too little flap or retracted droop leading edge, you will safely emerge from the stall - but only if you have sufficient height to absorb the inevitable lift decay/pitch down height loss. Nobody except those with a keen knowledge of the crash already will know that it was BEA flight 548, so the article naming does not make the article easy to find, or recognise for what it is really referring to. Feel free to point out any mistakes or misleading statements (for typos please shoot me a PM).A couple of interesting facts that didn't make it into the article:(1) When the flight engineer's body was found, he was still clutching a can of air freshener. Takeoff clearance … I beleieve the origibal title is more appropriate, and is in line with other similar articles where a particularly notable accident is referred to by its location rather than the details of the flight. I don't know if there was any consultation about this - apparently not - but I disagree with it.
"...16:10:32 (122 seconds)"...."The speed was 177 knots (328 km/h) and height above the ground was 1,560 feet (480 m)" G-ARPT was ripped right in half behind the wings and had to be scrapped. I have worked on improving this article and will now assess it informally using the I have actioned most of the points from the archived review now, there are some metric conversions that could be added.