Trident 1 G-ARPI

Post by **Garry Russell** » 03 Aug 2007, 20:43

A pic with a difference has turned up on auction of G-ARPI probably after she was repaired following the Ambassador crash.

http://www.airlinehobby.com/listings/de ... /index.cfm

Garry

VEGAS · Post by **VEGAS** » 03 Aug 2007, 21:00

Interesting picture Garry. Cheers for that. I think she looks rather beautiful even with no clothes on...

TobyV · Post by **TobyV** » 04 Aug 2007, 01:34

Very interesting find... have passed this on to "Trident Man" (Neil)!

Post by **Garry Russell** » 04 Aug 2007, 02:16

Funny how the registration is properly applied.

If it were just for labelling purposes any scrawl would do

It's almost as if it may have made a test flight before painting.

I recently came across a pic of Viscount 701 G-AMOE taxiing completely devoid of paint apart from the reg........That was a new one on me but it does show these thing do happen.

Garry

cstorey · Post by **cstorey** » 04 Aug 2007, 14:16

I think it is reasonably common for an airtest to be done before painting after major repairs. The reason for this is that painting alters ( albeit only slightly if it's done properly ) the balance of controls such as elevators and ailerons , and thus to be sure the a/c is fit after repair, the airtest is done first. IIRC the tail was cut off in this accident and thus the repair was very major indeed

Post by **Garry Russell** » 04 Aug 2007, 15:20

The damage was severe

It was said at the time that both were written off but BEA used the money from the two to rebuild the least damaged.

I don't know it that was true but RPI was badly damaged with the tail and engine area destroyed, a major part of such a design.

If it is true then G-ARPI has the dubious distinction of being written off twice.

As to the paint/test flight bit that does make a lot of sense.

So at least flown like this it would be a true a test as it could be.

Thanks for that expanation CS

Garry

VC10 · Post by **VC10** » 04 Aug 2007, 15:34

cstorey wrote: The reason for this is that painting alters ( albeit only slightly if it's done properly ) the balance of controls such as elevators and ailerons , and thus to be sure the a/c is fit after repair, the airtest is done first.

This is an argument for doing the airtest after painting.

petermcleland · Post by **petermcleland** » 04 Aug 2007, 15:44

I think the naked aeroplane is easier to thoroughly check for cracking, weeping or pulling rivets etc. after the airtest...These things can be a bit disguised if it is painted first.

Post by **Garry Russell** » 04 Aug 2007, 16:05

Looks like the rudder is painted :think:

Garry

cstorey · Post by **cstorey** » 05 Aug 2007, 08:56

vc10 : the test before painting is so that any problem such as flutter can be determined as attributable to the repair and not to painting problems - it is one less thing to eliminate, and as Peter says, any physical problems can also be seen from skin rippling etc