Write your own Daily Mail aviation incident drama

[Boac]

one could hardly call it successful

Did someone post that or did you make it up?

[John Hill]

Talking of Dinky Toys, I had the Dinky 60c Percival Gull,... silly little bugger that I was,

We have its big brother the Proctor..

..it did require a bit of a wipe over and of course a pair of wings.

[John Hill]

one could hardly call it successful

Did someone post that or did you make it up?

I have had experience with Pommie made cars so I can understand why you might have been satisfied with an aircraft which had a tendency towards sudden discombobulation.

[Boac]

No, actually we we were far from 'satisfied' with the Comet's problems, but most proud to be years ahead on the concept and then copied. I appreciate that concept is difficult to grasp for a New Zealander..............

[John Hill]

We found some wings...

[John Hill]

No, actually we we were far from 'satisfied' with the Comet's problems, but most proud to be years ahead on the concept and then copied.

Except you were not years ahead of the Russians.

The TU-104 could carry more passengers, engines had more than twice the thrust and even just two were more total thrust than Comet's 4. Faster too.

[TheGreenGoblin]

The Comet was remarkably successful until its inherent design flaw resulted in those accidents. After the issues were rectified, it had been surpassed by the Boeing 707, the US having learned from de Havilland's mistake(s). The Comet continued, successfully in service, albeit outmoded and less economic than the Boeings, and its successor the Nimrod flew on for decades.

The Russians certainly followed hard on the heels of the Comet with the Tu-104, but it too was not without its flaws..

Whilst the Tu-104 continued to be used by Aeroflot throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the safety record of the aircraft was poor in comparison to subsequent jet airliners (16 of 96 aircraft were lost in accidents). The Tu-104 was unreliable, heavy, very unstable with poor control response, with an inclination to Dutch roll. Poor design aerodynamics of the wings resulted in a propensity to stall with little or no warning and a dangerous tendency to pitch-up violently before stalling and entering an irrecoverable dive. Due to the fear of inadvertent stalls aircrew would fly approaches above the recommended approach speed, landing at 270–300 km/h (170–190 mph), nearly 50 km/h (31 mph) faster. At least two accidents were attributed to the pitch-up phenomenon, prompting changes to the design of the aircraft and operating procedures, but the problem remained. Aeroflot retired the Tu-104 from civil service in March 1979 following a fatal accident at Moscow, but several aircraft were transferred to the Soviet military, which used them as staff transports and to train cosmonauts in zero gravity. After a military Tu-104 crash in February 1981 killed 52 people (17 were senior army and naval staff), the type was permanently removed from service. The last flight of the Tu-104 was a ferry flight to Ulyanovsk Aircraft Museum in 1986.

- From Wikipedia.

https://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/research/a ... t-retires/

[Boac]

As I said, a difficult concept.

[John Hill]

Whilst the Tu-104 continued to be used by Aeroflot throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the safety record of the aircraft was poor in comparison to subsequent jet airliners (16 of 96 aircraft were lost in accidents).

Compared to the Comet where only 26 were lost in accidents.

[John Hill]

The Comet was remarkably successful until its inherent design flaw resulted in those accidents.

"The Professor's parachute invention was remarkably successful until he hit the ground."

[TheGreenGoblin]

Whilst the Tu-104 continued to be used by Aeroflot throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the safety record of the aircraft was poor in comparison to subsequent jet airliners (16 of 96 aircraft were lost in accidents).

Compared to the Comet where only 26 were lost in accidents.

One would have to analyse the number of hours flown and various other statistical factors, such as mode of operation etc. to make any meaningful safety comparison between the two aircraft.

The Comet was remarkably successful until its inherent design flaw resulted in those accidents.

"The Professor's parachute invention was remarkably successful until he hit the ground."

You are in an obdurate mood today John!

[John Hill]

One would have to analyse the number of hours flown and various other statistical factors, such as mode of operation etc. to make any meaningful safety comparison between the two aircraft.

That did not stop you saying the Tu-104 safety record was poor.

[TheGreenGoblin]

One would have to analyse the number of hours flown and various other statistical factors, such as mode of operation etc. to make any meaningful safety comparison between the two aircraft.

That did not stop you saying the Tu-104 safety record was poor.

Nope, I said...

but it too was not without its flaws..

[Woody]

Actually a very interesting article for a change, with some great pics

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... newcomment

[Ex-Ascot]

A bloody classic: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -feet.html

Aircraft went into 'free fall'!

[Woody]

Looks like a lively day at EMA

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -bang.html

[Woody]

Two in one day, they’re spoiling us

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... l#comments

[Boac]

Don't tell me they forgot to load the flight deck cheeseboard AGAIN!

[PHXPhlyer]

Here's a twofer from over here.

Passenger Leaves AA Boeing 737 MAX Through Overwing Exit
https://simpleflying.com/aa-737-max-ove ... it-escape/

AAmateur Hour: American Airlines Delays FLL Flight Due To Erroneous Emergency Cards
https://bocanewsnow.com/2021/09/30/aama ... ncy-cards/

PP

[llondel]

Looks like a lively day at EMA

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -bang.html

The flight operated safely into EMA and no action was required from airport staff.'

I would have thought that the presence of flames was enough of an excuse to wake up the fire department just in case.