The aircraft involved in this incident, 5N-MJJ, was actually ferried on 8 April to SEN for the repairs to be carried out, according to the SEN spotters forum. Apparently it is due a ‘C’ Check in the near future so presumably the two jobs will be combined.

Perhaps it’s time for a bit of an update on the developments at SEN.
The train station passenger footbridge was installed last weekend so it’s starting to look something like a station at last, with completion anticipated for late summer.
The new 90ft control tower steel structure has also gone up in the past couple of weeks and it should be structurally complete by the autumn.
As far as the runway extension is concerned I believe SAEN are looking at the possibility of seeking Judicial Review of the SBC planing consent, based upon the recent LHR 3rd Runway Judgement. I’m doubtful that the LHR Judgement can be carried across to affect the SEN decision as the Judgement was largely as a result of the fact that the Government specifically excluded consideration of the 2008 Climate Change Act in its LHR consultation process. The SEN decision specifically included that Act as being ‘a material consideration’ in their deliberations. Whatever is the legal position it’s a pity that the LHR Judgement has had the effect of encouraging SAEN to take Court action.
My view on the chances of SEN attracting a number of scheduled and charter airlines is somewhat more optimistic that that of rdc1000 and I should be interested to know who is the “we” he refers to in his post of 19th January 2010, in which he dismisses the prospect. The fact that RYR will not be in the running, due to the declared distances making 738 operations impracticable, is a plus for the new Head of Business Development, Jonny Rayner in his efforts to attract airlines. If the offering is right in terms of fees and charges and the infrastructure is in place to permit viable commercial operation of aircraft up to A319 and E195, plus the smaller 737 variants, I believe a number of airlines will be interested – indeed I know that a number are seriously so at the moment. Whether or not we shall have to wait for the runway extension and new terminal to be in operation before much of that interest is transformed into actual routes is another matter.

I cannot really add very much to what has already been written regarding the accident to ‘JZ.

Like Transportraits I too worked for AT(E)L at the time and vividly remember being in the flight shed crew room drinking my customary afternoon pint of milk when the accident happened. We all rushed outside in time to see SEN’s firetenders roaring past the hangar with ‘JZ well ablaze across the runway. We didn’t know at the time that it was on airtest and thought the worst in terms of casualties, although we were very shocked once the news of the deaths of two of our work colleagues reached us. I recall that Roy Fields rushed around trying to find out if anyone from the hangar was over there – the apprentices were building a stock car in that area at the time for example.

The story I heard regarding the cause of the accident was that No.4 engine power was pulled back but it was No.3 prop that the crew feathered instead. I haven’t been able to find the accident report so I don’t know if this is correct, but certainly No.4 was not feathered and was in flight fine pitch so caused severe amounts of drag which induced a strong turning moment on the starboard wing.

My future wife was a schoolfriend of Chris Mundy’s daughter at the time – presumably Charlie Mundy’s aunt – and we were all very saddened by Chris’s death and he has certainly not been forgotten, having been killed in such a tragic way.

Just a small postscript, I believe the first officer on ‘JZ was also a crew member when the second Viscount aquaplaned and overran 06 a year later.

One final thing, there was a Channel 748 waiting to depart 24 at the time of ‘JZ’s accident and after holding for a time he took off – not something that would happen now I think as no fire cover would have been available. But then it was 42 years ago…..

In fact, rather than ‘raw’ runway length, it is TODA which is the more relevant figure (plus ASDA being sufficient at any given weight of course):

14 a whopping 10,390 ft
32 7,840 ft

I would have thought the direct Wardair departure to Canada would have been off 14 rather than 32.

The oldest ‘airliner’ I’ve flown in was a DH84 Dragon (about 1934 vintage I think), although that was to an Airways Association fly-in at Booker in the early 70s.

I used to fly LHR-CDG and LHR-FRA at lot in the late 70s – hated the Tristar so flew AF A300 when possible. Also didn’t like the Trident (noisy and horrible catering) so flew LH whenever I could.

Flew LHR-AMS on a KLM DC-8-63 and remember the smell of ground coffee and leather crew seats as you boarded via the forward door.

Most enjoyable aircraft? Perhaps the Viscount because of the large windows, or the DC-3 which is such an atmospheric aircraft.

Least enjoyable? Probably the 747 or Tristar which are just too large to enjoy real flying aren’t they?

Never flew on a DC-4, although nearly did as flight test observer on an African reg example following C. of A. renewal. Had to cry off at the last minute with flu so my then boss took my place. On return to SEN the gear would come down and it was discovered there was no nitrogen blow-down emergency system on the aircraft. Result was the aircraft landed wheels-up on a foam carpet at MSE. My boss was not best pleased and funnily enough neither was I as I missed the experience of a true emergency landing (probably not much fun at the time though).

Totting it up I reckon I have flown on about 40 airliners and another 40 or so light types. Amazing how it adds up over the years (too many years!). Must write the book some day.