My dad was a 104 IP in the mid-late 60's. Sadly, dad passed in '21. I proudly display his dinged up flight helmet, threadbare flight suit and his chrome plated spurs. Those Zipper pilots had big brass ones.
That’s really cool you got all those mementos! My grandfather fought in WW2. I had no idea until a few years ago that my grandfather brought a P08 Luger home with him… Needless to say me and my other family members may be ready to start WW3 over the thing!!! I sure wouldn’t mind it!!!
My dad had a total of 800 hrs on the 104. Hé loved that thing. Due to a stupid accident hé couldn’t fly anymore. Lost his flight suit. We still have his emergency belt
This was fantastic, scientific, and historic. Really learned more than I was bargaining for. Nicely done. 👍 The comments were rich in true and valuable stories.
My brother, a former RAF fighter pilot (his first operational aircraft was a Spitfire) worked for Martin Baker for about 20 years or so. He was involved in the Luftwaffe Starfighter change of ejector seat to Martin Baker in order to reduce the fatalities of its pilots. I believe it made a difference. He was also one of the people early on experimenting with cartridge-powered ejection from a ground-based ramp who fractured a vertebrae. I wondered why he asked me to pick him up one Christmas. He was in a full-body cast and couldn't drive. He led a very adventurous life including a stint with the U.S. Navy Pacific fleet as an advisor representing Martin Baker. He joined the RAF in 1943 when he turned eighteen and died at age 76. He was the person I looked up to more than anyone else. Thanks for the very instructive video.
The death of goose was a realistic, feasible situation. As you pointed out, there is a lanyard that interlocks the firing sequence for the seats if the canopy isn't released. But that is to prevent the seats from firing if the explosive bolts for the canopy fail to fire, or fail to fire correctly and the canopy stays in place. As the polycarbonate (not plexiglass) F14 canopy didn't have a line charge in it (like the AV8 had) to allow ejection through an intact canopy, nor do the seats have an egg tooth on them... polycarbonate is far more impact resistant than the plexiglass canopy on the A6 and other aircraft with the egg tooth designed to punch through an intact canopy. If the bolts fire correctly, there is enough kinetic energy to pull that interlock lanyard, even if the canopy isn't swept completely clear of the ejection path. The issue is, again as you pointed out - in a vertical fall, in a flat spin the separated canopy won't be blown clear by the slipstream of the airplane, and will tend to hover above the cockpit for a bit. It WILL eventually clear, but not before the seats fire (the sequence is very fast) so a special procedure involving flat spins was developed: the crew was trained to jettison the canopy first (there is a control for this, that DOES NOT initiate the full ejection sequence) and wait. Once the canopy drifts clear, the crew initiates the full ejection sequence. It appears that neither maverick nor goose release the canopy. - maverick does call out to "watch" the canopy when he tells goose to punch them out (as he says he's un able to reach the controls to do so himself) but it appears that goose fails to use the correct flat spin egress procedure. Either that... or he does jettison the canopy... but fails to "watch" the canopy and initiates the full sequence before it was safe. There was a real "Goose" who died in an ejection accident in an F14. He didn't get killed exactly the same though. Lt. David J. “Goose” Lortscher. He served in Vietnam in F4s as a RIO, and had ejected 3 times in his career, later when he transitioned to the F14, on a 4th ejection... he was killed. They named Nick Bradshaw in the movie "Goose" to pay homage to this RIO.
Very true! An F-14 RIO by the name of Ward Carroll goes through this on his youtube channel as well. The procedure that you mention was included in the "boldface" (procedures which must be memorized by the aircrew) in the early 80s, because such an incident(s) did indeed happen (I'm unsure if they resulted in the death of the Pilot/RIO, but I know for sure that at least one has struck the canopy on his way out). If I remember correctly, Maverick says something like "Eject, Eject, Eject The Canopy" just before Goose initiates the ejection. I think Mr. Carroll's conclusion was that Goose simply panicked (which is understandable) and thus forgot the boldface procedures which were in effect at the time, and thus unfortunately killed himself.
I was Army EOD (Bomb squad) and during our training we had to learn how to safe the Martin Baker ejection seat. There are several pins you emplace to de activate the firing. You wouldn’t want to be recovering a pilot from wreckage and learning over them and have that thing fire off.
None of the original ME262 are still flying. Whittle designed an incredible engine. My understanding is that they are still using the original engine in the Meteor
@@ryanhampson673 No, the F-16 and most USAF aircraft uses ACES ejection seats. It's the US Navy and US Marine Corps that prefer Martin Baker ejection seats. In some cases, when one service leads an aircraft program (such as the Navy for the F-4 Phantom II), the other service will defer on hardware choices because it's a massive bureaucratic pain to make changes in design and vendors! When you change vital hardware like engines and ejection seats, they have to re-qualify the aircraft with the new hardware before the new models can enter service. It can cost a minimum of $20million and a year or more in flight testing to do this! The later F-4 D and E- models were tailored to USAF requirements (different radar from the Navy models and the internal cannon and revised wing of the E-model). The F-4 sold well enough that the costs for hardware changes in later F-4 models were absorbed. The initial C-model the USAF bought had minimal changes from the B-model the Navy and Marine Corps began using 2 years before the F-4C entered USAF squadron service (1963); the biggest change in the F-4C that I recall reading about were larger tires for the landing gear. If the F-4 had not sold well enough and performed well in Vietnam and the Middle East, the USAF would not have gotten the changes it wanted especially in the E-model. The D-model addressed the basic lack of ground attack capability in the C-model with avionics upgrades for the D. The C-model was biased towards counter-air missions in Vietnam.
A great piece of history. When I was growing up my best friend Bernie Moore's dad was Lt.Col Vic Moore, former F-104 pilot. He shows up at our house, riding his horse and wearing his F-104 spurs as "spurs". The 1960's were a fun time.
Okay Gilles, I am totally impressed! You covered in 22 minutes, numerous ejection system challenges and the solutions developed, from the beginning of their use to today. Very well done, thank you!
Dale Brown in his novel Chains of Command details really well the operation of the F-111 escape capsule. In particular the dual purpose of some of the cockpit equipment including the control column that becomes a bailing pump if the capsule lands in water and starts to leak.
Yes, I'd read about that in my research, though if I touched on every little detail of every single escape system the video would be three hours long :P
@@CanadianMacGyver Haha, so? I’d just have to clear more time on my schedule and prepare a larger supply of popcorn! Keep the videos coming mate. Thoroughly enjoying them.
Great Video ! The best ejection seat video I saw was of the Paris Air Show ! The Russian pilot was inverted and the plane at safe crash area... The pilot ejected towards the ground and the seat made a U-turn and took him to a hi;gher altitude for his parachute to open ! T. Lipinski
My understanding is that if you survive your ejection with a Martin-Baker seat system they give you a plaque that has your ejection number, date, and location on it. They also do regular aircraft seats, I sat on Martin-Baker seats in UH-60Ms for about four years.
Great video and worked on ejection seat capable aircraft for many years.... Back in the 80s was at a base were a bird strike hit the front pilot in the face. He was hurt badly but they were able to safely land the aircraft It was reported that a bird bone was lodged into the ejection system banana clip (used by rescuers to pin and safe the seat) that even had they initiated the ejection the seat had been "safed" by the bone. Crazy lucky for the crewmembers!
Shout out to Martin-Baker, 7 500 lives are worth a lot, in my book 👍❤ And also shout out to the other providers, since they surely saved lives as well 👍❤ Great episode on a really life-saving device ❤👍🖖
Your mention of low altitude ejection brought to mind two examples from the modern RCAF. First is the CF 18 that experienced trouble just off the ground. The pilot ejected and his parachute deployed and he was saved despite practically being at ground level. Second, and more tragic, is the Snowbird Tudor crash in Kamloops that killed the team's PAO. She and the pilot ejected but the Tudor doesn't have the same ejection system that the Hornet had. The pilot hit the ground with a deployed (mostly) parachute. The PAO hit the roof of a house before the chute was able to fully deploy. Very sad.
In many Air Forces - (I know this is policy in the RCAF), pilots are only allowed to eject 3 times in their life. After the 3rd ejection, the pilot is either grounded or transferred to NON-fighter aircraft. This is due to spinal compression - yes it is still a concern. I knew a pilot who ejected from a CF-18, and he was markedly shorter after his ejection. He also had a couple other injuries from the event, but he recovered from those, happily. And the aircraft was recovered.
Initial qual in the B-52: Boldface for (my position) ejection... Ejection levers: Rotate Trigger: Squeeze Instructor says... "Additional steps. Pray, Think Thin, kiss an inch of height goodby, and find a chiropractor for the rest of your life" He was a Vietnam Vet who had taken the "Silk Elevator " twice. B-52 and F-4. RIP, Cowboy.
Probably after 3 bang outs the driver has demonstrated he (she) is inclined to push the envelope a bit far so putting them on a desk is going to be best for inventory.
This makes me think of something mentioned in the book “The Right Stuff,” where a pilot describes using one of the early ejection seats as “committing suicide to keep from getting killed.”
When it came time for Chuck to eject from the NF-104 plane he wrecked in an ill-conceived stunt, he used an upward-ejecting seat ( possibly the Stencel, I am willing to be corrected here ), even though a downward-ejecting one would have worked at that height. He still was nearly blinded by it.
@@stevetheduck1425 It was not an "ill-conceived stunt" like the movie portrays, it was a controlled mission, and he was horribly burned by the seat's rocket motors, putting him in a burn ward for many weeks of agonizing pain. Unlike the film, where he walks away from the wreck like a badass. That is a great movie, but it plays pretty loose with the facts.
More like taking a very high risk of death in lieu of certain death. Plenty of people survived elections, usually with more or less injuries as a result. And it depends on what situation you were trying to eject from. Low level or in uncontrolled flight was far more dangerous, as was high speed ejection. But used as they were designed, to bake out of a plane in level flight at cruising speed, they weren't that deadly (very uncomfortable and likely to injure you though). They didn't really plan on using them to escape in all conditions originally, it was too be used in situations where normally you would have baled out. That required you to keep the aircraft in relatively stable flight at a safe altitude and speed, otherwise it was hopeless. The ejection seat was just to make the same thing possible in the new fast jets, they didn't really think it was feasible to make all-conditions escape possible. But of course pilots tried anyway when the alternative was certain death. And so a lot of them died.
If I had teachers like you in high school, I would have actually enjoyed being there...and paid more attention. I got straight A's, but I was bored to death because nothing seemed interesting. You inspire interest...which is what teachers are supposed to do.
You likely had more than one teacher that was as good or better than this channel’s host, you were just too young and dumb to appreciate them at the time.
LOL. I had a retired fighter pilot in my high school who taught Geography. He would occasionally tell us stories of his flying days. I really enjoyed his classes. @@BlastinRope
I learned things I didn't know I didn't know. Questions I never even thought of were answered. That's the sign of a great lesson and an excellent communicator.
A high school teacher that I had was a naval officer during the Vietnam war aboard a US submarine. It was an old diesel electric submarine. I was surprised, and ask him what diesel electric boats were doing during the Vietnam war, and that we even had them still. He said they did lifeguard duty, just like submarines during World War II, recovering pilots who had to eject or ditch. He told me the Grimm story of recovering a dead pilot whose legs had been lost from just above the knees following a failure of the devices mentioned in the video. That was the first time I had ever heard of those.
Interestingly diesel electric boats are still very much a thing. Most notably with the Swedish Gotland class subs being built in the 1990's and still in service.
Our aircraft in the late 70's got zero-zero seats that used a spreader gun to open the parachute at low elevations. Basically 8(?) barrels arranged in a star pattern with weights that were attached to the parachute lanyards and a charge in the middle. The canopy would literally get blown open once the pilot cleared the seat.
I remember hearing a Starfighter for the first and only time in the early 90’s. I was cruising around in my red Trans Am with the T-tops out, an air show was going on at Dobbins in Cobb County Georgia. I could not figure out what was going on, until I seen that jet. I’ll never forget it.
I was in the Navy in the 1960s. We had A-4 Skyhawks. One day four of our pilots were flying & enchanted very bad thunderstorm, & two pilots died. One never got out of his A-4 & the other pilot ejected but his seat hit his head (With his helmet on & Ox mask connected) causing blood from a wound to fill his mask with blood & he drowned before hitting the ground. A freak accident & the loss of a great person. Pilots know that ejecting is not a free, safe ride!
The B58 capsule you mentioned didn't have spurs but instead the pilot had loops going round his legs. Prior to closing and ejecting the capsule those loops tightened like pretensioning seat belts to keep the legs away from the capsule wall and to reduce movement.
Got what I was interested in within the first few seconds. But you kept sharing interesting & relevant info. I just spent the last 22:23 riveted to UA-cam. Fantastic presentation!
A cousin in law has flown both the U-2 and SR-71. He has shared many stories, especially one about bailing during the Vietnam war. Fortunately, it was over a friendly area. Maybe I'll have time to share more.
An interesting design is the ejection systems on the early MiG-21s, pre the PFM model. During an ejection, the canopy is joined to the seat acts as a shield and protects the pilot. After some time it is released. They eventually gaves up on the idea because, at lower altitudes, it takes too much time for the canopy to release.
What a marvelous video! I learned much (I have often thought about the dangers of ejections, and the obvious reluctance of pilots to use them) and answered many questions that I had not even thought of. Thank you!
The Gemini spacecraft also had ejection seat and early prototypes were equipped with a inflatable? wing that was supposed to let it glide after reentry to a runway so it could land. The first few space shuttle missions with the shuttle Columbia was also equipped with ejection seats for the commander and pilot. These were later removed. I think after the challenger disaster they had a pole that would deploy out side the crew access hatch so the astronauts could bail out that way over the ocean if they were unable to glide to a contingency runway. Great video by the way.
Unlike Mercury and Apollo where weight was critical and the spacecraft were designed as highly integrated designs, Gemini was designed as an operational spacecraft with equipment bays and cannon plugs that allowed for quick check out and replacement of systems. It was also designed with the intent to use an inflatable Rogallo wing to allow the space craft to be recovered on land (not necessarily a runway). This would avoid submersion in salt water and make it practical to quickly service the aircraft for a subsequent mission. However, the wing took longer to develop than planned and speed of development was an issue for Gemini as the program began after both Mercury and Apollo when it was realized that the Lunar orbit rendezvous method chosen for Apollo would require a bridge program to acquire the orbital maneuvering and docking skills required. The Gemini spacecraft itself was capable of a lunar orbital flight and it was considered as a means to do it well before the Soviets. However the Soviet space threat didn’t develop and it was then thought that a lunar orbital flight by Gemini would bring into question the need for the Apollo command module. There was also a proposed Gemini applications program that would have used variants of the Gemini spacecraft as a crew and cargo shuttle to proposed space stations. These would have utilized the equipment bay as cargo and crew quarters, with a hatch in the heat shield, a concept that was actually tested successfully. Unfortunately it was never funded in part due to the cost of the Apollo program and in part because after Apollo NASA chose the space shuttle concept. It was ultimately a poor choice as launching a spacecraft the size of a DC-9 into space as dead weight on every launch was never going to be efficient, and NASA knew from the start the advertised 2 week turnaround time between flights was never going to be achievable. In contrast an operational design like Gemini would have allowed for comparatively inexpensive space flights as the USAF had over 170 soon to be surplus Titan II boosters that could have been affordably man rated to support 170 future launches of a number of comparatively low cost reusable Gemini spacecraft. And that’s effectively what the Soviets did with their Soyuz spacecraft, the same basic spacecraft we are still hitching rides to orbit on today after the shuttles had to be retired due to excessive flight risk. The space shuttle made for great PR, but it ultimately cost us over 40 years of meaningful progress in low earth orbit.
The ragallo (spelliing?) wing. NASA looked at using that to recover the Gemini spacecraft, since it was controllable. Something similar is used by some hand gliders
Glad those Meteors are still in service. I grew up with stories and books of the Mosquito. My Grandfather was in Bomber Command DFC. He was in a MKXVI high altitude bomber. All the WW2 warbirds are amazing feats of human brilliance and as many as possibe deserve to still be operating. And every one that still flies brought some young man back to his family.
I've seen models of the capule ejection system, to see them in action is quite amazing, along with the other ejection systems. Thanks again for another great video..!!!
In the book "Phantom Over Vietnam" by John Trotti, is a rather detailed sequence description of the M-B seat used in the F-4 C ( if I remember correctly ). Good read BTW...
On the B-52, it had a couple of downward ejection seats. To keep the pilot from losing their legs during use, they required the operators to bring their feet back against the seat, where a device would prevent the legs from moving during ejection. During aircraft maintenance training, the 52 was used, but all the ejection devices were removed. The downward seats leg retraining device was spring loaded and still functional. During training, we would cock the seats, and eventually a student would bring the feet back against the seat, and the device would deploy, trapping their legs. Based on the screams, the students thought they were about to be ejected onto the hanger floor.
My Uncle was a Starfighter pilot ,as the kids say back in the day and he still has his spurs and proudly displays the. He claims it's proof he survived that beast. It was one of the few aircraft that where more dangerous to the crew than the enemy every was. West Germany found this out by digging holes with pilots in them in random feilds and Forrest
Not only were the spurs distinctive, but your attire is as well. I was thinking it may be intentional to give yourself additional character, but I like it nonetheless. The pantlegs in need of hemming and the slightly small vest exposing the shirt at the waist kind of reminds me of that slightly disheveled Professor who has things way more together upstairs than it appears from the outside. A character who, in the end, ends up leaving you pleased he is on your team. Well done!
I once heard, that everyone, who survives ejecting with a Martin Baker seat gets a special tie afterwards. Is that true? Very cool video; I learned something today.
I was blessed to have flown backseat in a TF104G in the mid 80s, sadly I don’t remember wearing the spurs…when that J79’s AB lit it was impressive! Such a beautiful airplane, but a bit of a pain to work on. I also flew many times in two versions of seats in a very early B52, and also the downward one in the bombardier crew position…ah the good old days…I think my butt just might still hurt a bit from the very skimpy seat pad that sat on top of the B52 seat’s survival kit 😎 Nice video, thanks!
Most terrifying instance I had in the USAF was in a B52 RN seat, while on the ground. Performing a system check, my coat (Northern Tier, so we always had one coat or another on when boarding the aircraft) sleeve snagged the ejection handle... and the "ankle claws" came out and grabbed my feet. I thought I was going to be rocketed 10' down into the asphalt of the flight line... but the safety pins did their job and kept the charge from going off. But I had to take a moment to settle down... 😋
This is the best explanation of eject systems ever. This is a very 'healthy' and informative video !! It's a shame that most of the stuff on UA-cam is stupid and completely unnecessary :(
TO GILLES: Very interesting videos (I have watched about 6 from you). I enjoy your good presentations about these interesting and sometimes odd pieces of technology. This video about the ejection seats was especially good, because of how you told the story and illustrated it. Very good. Will subscribe and will share your videos to my contacts. Keep up the good work!
The Tweet has a 40mm mortar shell under the seat. Just got you over the tail. The T-38 had a much improved rocket motor but it was still limited in it's use. You had to have a certain altitude and airpspeed before it would guarantee success. The newest zero-zero seats are brilliant and have saved so many lives.
Not a shell, a cartridge. You don't use high explosives to propel an object. The propellant normally used to accelerate the mortar is used instead to accelerate the seat. It will seem very violent but nowhere near like actually being blown out by a detonation. Propellants burn rapidly, almost instantly, they are gas generators. High explosives detonate instantly and create destructive shock fronts.
Great video - I am not sure how this vid popped into my feed after so long, but glad it did, and I hope you are still making content as this was masterful. I had not heard that Israeli anecdote about the murderous bird that had a last minute change of mind.
The yankee system, or something very like it, was a contender for the Space Shuttle Crew Escape System, but, while it worked, it was as heavy as two astronauts, while the competing telescoping curved rod was lighter, and got the escapees away from the Shuttle's low-set wing. It could only be used in a small envelope on launch before max-q and before the 'abort to launching or landing site' option, and a longer window at a normal landing, and so was, I believe, not used after a lot of good publicity was generated.
This was an awesome video... I'd suggest changing the name of the video to include something about a brief overview of how we got to the modern ejection system... Or something like that. Because as of right now, it completely misses what this video is really about. I believe more people would watch this video if it's title was changed, because I think there's a lot of people that would enjoy this mini documentary about the history of ejection seats. It's my two cents, anyways great video, really informative. 👍
One more addition to the pilot has left the chat story is the method that crew of Douglas's A3D/A-3 Skywarrior and F3D/F-10 Skyknight were supposed to try. They had a hatch in the cockpit that led into a chute that they were to slide down and out a hatch in the bottom of the aircraft. Not ideal for low-level escape, but I guess they figured these weren't high performance fighters.
I was a non-pilot RCAF member from 1996 to 2001 and there were problems with the fact that since pilot's were getting larger and heavier the CF-118 ejection seat's were struggling to get the ejecting pilot sufficiently high enough for the parachute to open safely during landing and take-off rolls. They were supposed to be but failed as Zero-Zero ejection seats if the pilot was at the heavier end of the spectrum. I remember seeing a CF118 cockpit mock-up being towed down the runway at CFB Cold Lake at various speeds with a dummy in the ejection seat. The RCAF resolved the pilot weight issue but just a few years later loose stitching in a shoulder strap led to a series of events that led to the death of Captain Kevin Naismith during a Maple Flag exercise.
To get a fuller insight into the history of the ejection seat through to modern day I'd recommend John Nichol's book Eject! Eject! Published by Simon and as hustler Ltd London 2023
I don't remember all the specifics (I flew the slow and comfortable EC-121), but an F-4 was getting ready for a training mission out of Homestead AFB in the mid 70's, when there was an electrical short in the seat pack. The pilot managed to egress the aircraft, but before the WSO got clear of the aircraft, the rear seat ignited... they cleaned him up off the tarmac with a bottle of bleach and a sponge.
One of my professors at Georgia Tech, Dr. Chambers, came to us from NASA. Before that he had been involved in the bear ejection test and told our class about it. That would have been around 1975. It's probably a mere coincidence, but the man on the left in test photo at 19:33 looks similar to Dr. Chambers.
So many devices and procedures that can go wrong, only for the pilot ejection feature! I can (somewhat) imagine how mind boggling-complicated an aircraft can be. That was very interesting, I was curious what on earth can be said about a couple of spurs for 20 minutes. Curiosity satisfied and then some. BTW, did they ever used a Blackbear to test the Blackbird?
As far as I am aware, bears were only used to test the B58 escape capsule; most other ejection seat development efforts used instrumented dummies. However, there was a 1954 program called 'Project Whoosh' (yes, really) that used chimpanzees, which were ejected from a specially-built air-launched rocket called the Cherokee. Though none of the chimps survived due to parachute malfunctions, biometric sensors revealed that they did survive the initial ejection, indicating that supersonic ejection was safer than initially assumed.
at 2:50 Bailout procedure for Fighteraircraft (Spitfire, Bf109, Fw190) was not to climb out and jump, it was roll your Plane Head down , release Canopy/Hood , release your straps and simply fall out of the Plane.
Bailing out of the space shuttle could be done using a pole. According to a web site on the subject by mfwright, "A long escape pole is quickly deployed out the hatch. One by one, each crew member attaches a lanyard hook which is connected to his or her parachute harness to the escape pole and jumps out the door." It was called the crew escape system.
It was a lame attempt to come up with something that might of worked in limited situations after the Challenger explosion on launch. It would of not worked on the Challenger as the failure was catastrophic on launch nor would it of worked on the Columbia as an ejection would of been at something like Mach 20 and any escaping crew would of just been flaming meteors (some of the recovered remains were essentially that). The one Space Shuttle system that existed for the first few launches was a conventional ejection seat for the commander and pilot that would of ejected them up, through the roof. If it had been further developed it could of even worked on the mission specialists sitting behind the commander and pilot on the top deck. The mission specialists below decks... Sorry, you aren't getting out.
@@Tishers He's not talking about the ejection seats, which were only active on the first two missions and removed shortly after. He's talking about the escape pole slide system that was installed after the Challenger accident. The Mission Specialists on the lower deck would've been the first ones out the hatch since it was right where they were sitting. The Commander would've been the last one to abandon his ship. This system only useful if the spacecraft were in a subsonic glide, though, so just as useless during launch and the early part of reentry.
My dad was a 104 IP in the mid-late 60's. Sadly, dad passed in '21. I proudly display his dinged up flight helmet, threadbare flight suit and his chrome plated spurs. Those Zipper pilots had big brass ones.
Are you a good inheritor of his talents? Or another lazy fat boomer ?
Absolute chad.
That’s really cool you got all those mementos! My grandfather fought in WW2. I had no idea until a few years ago that my grandfather brought a P08 Luger home with him… Needless to say me and my other family members may be ready to start WW3 over the thing!!! I sure wouldn’t mind it!!!
My dad had a total of 800 hrs on the 104. Hé loved that thing.
Due to a stupid accident hé couldn’t fly anymore. Lost his flight suit. We still have his emergency belt
My Uncle John Swallow took a fast exit from a 104. He past this year. I bet they knew each other.
This was fantastic, scientific, and historic. Really learned more than I was bargaining for. Nicely done. 👍 The comments were rich in true and valuable stories.
My brother, a former RAF fighter pilot (his first operational aircraft was a Spitfire) worked for Martin Baker for about 20 years or so. He was involved in the Luftwaffe Starfighter change of ejector seat to Martin Baker in order to reduce the fatalities of its pilots. I believe it made a difference. He was also one of the people early on experimenting with cartridge-powered ejection from a ground-based ramp who fractured a vertebrae. I wondered why he asked me to pick him up one Christmas. He was in a full-body cast and couldn't drive. He led a very adventurous life including a stint with the U.S. Navy Pacific fleet as an advisor representing Martin Baker. He joined the RAF in 1943 when he turned eighteen and died at age 76. He was the person I looked up to more than anyone else. Thanks for the very instructive video.
The death of goose was a realistic, feasible situation.
As you pointed out, there is a lanyard that interlocks the firing sequence for the seats if the canopy isn't released.
But that is to prevent the seats from firing if the explosive bolts for the canopy fail to fire, or fail to fire correctly and the canopy stays in place. As the polycarbonate (not plexiglass) F14 canopy didn't have a line charge in it (like the AV8 had) to allow ejection through an intact canopy, nor do the seats have an egg tooth on them... polycarbonate is far more impact resistant than the plexiglass canopy on the A6 and other aircraft with the egg tooth designed to punch through an intact canopy.
If the bolts fire correctly, there is enough kinetic energy to pull that interlock lanyard, even if the canopy isn't swept completely clear of the ejection path.
The issue is, again as you pointed out - in a vertical fall, in a flat spin the separated canopy won't be blown clear by the slipstream of the airplane, and will tend to hover above the cockpit for a bit.
It WILL eventually clear, but not before the seats fire (the sequence is very fast) so a special procedure involving flat spins was developed: the crew was trained to jettison the canopy first (there is a control for this, that DOES NOT initiate the full ejection sequence) and wait. Once the canopy drifts clear, the crew initiates the full ejection sequence.
It appears that neither maverick nor goose release the canopy. - maverick does call out to "watch" the canopy when he tells goose to punch them out (as he says he's un able to reach the controls to do so himself) but it appears that goose fails to use the correct flat spin egress procedure. Either that... or he does jettison the canopy... but fails to "watch" the canopy and initiates the full sequence before it was safe.
There was a real "Goose" who died in an ejection accident in an F14. He didn't get killed exactly the same though.
Lt. David J. “Goose” Lortscher. He served in Vietnam in F4s as a RIO, and had ejected 3 times in his career, later when he transitioned to the F14, on a 4th ejection... he was killed.
They named Nick Bradshaw in the movie "Goose" to pay homage to this RIO.
Awesome insight, thanks! I always love learning these deeper details from my viewers :)
Very true! An F-14 RIO by the name of Ward Carroll goes through this on his youtube channel as well. The procedure that you mention was included in the "boldface" (procedures which must be memorized by the aircrew) in the early 80s, because such an incident(s) did indeed happen (I'm unsure if they resulted in the death of the Pilot/RIO, but I know for sure that at least one has struck the canopy on his way out).
If I remember correctly, Maverick says something like "Eject, Eject, Eject The Canopy" just before Goose initiates the ejection. I think Mr. Carroll's conclusion was that Goose simply panicked (which is understandable) and thus forgot the boldface procedures which were in effect at the time, and thus unfortunately killed himself.
I was Army EOD (Bomb squad) and during our training we had to learn how to safe the Martin Baker ejection seat. There are several pins you emplace to de activate the firing. You wouldn’t want to be recovering a pilot from wreckage and learning over them and have that thing fire off.
The fact that Martin Baker is still flying Meteors is absolutely amazing and very cool. learn something everyday. Great episode
I'm astonished.
None of the original ME262 are still flying. Whittle designed an incredible engine. My understanding is that they are still using the original engine in the Meteor
Martin bakers are still in F-16’s and a lot of US aircraft, well the company I’m sure it’s an upgraded seat.
@@ryanhampson673 No, the F-16 and most USAF aircraft uses ACES ejection seats.
It's the US Navy and US Marine Corps that prefer Martin Baker ejection seats.
In some cases, when one service leads an aircraft program (such as the Navy for the F-4 Phantom II), the other service will defer on hardware choices because it's a massive bureaucratic pain to make changes in design and vendors! When you change vital hardware like engines and ejection seats, they have to re-qualify the aircraft with the new hardware before the new models can enter service. It can cost a minimum of $20million and a year or more in flight testing to do this!
The later F-4 D and E- models were tailored to USAF requirements (different radar from the Navy models and the internal cannon and revised wing of the E-model). The F-4 sold well enough that the costs for hardware changes in later F-4 models were absorbed.
The initial C-model the USAF bought had minimal changes from the B-model the Navy and Marine Corps began using 2 years before the F-4C entered USAF squadron service (1963); the biggest change in the F-4C that I recall reading about were larger tires for the landing gear. If the F-4 had not sold well enough and performed well in Vietnam and the Middle East, the USAF would not have gotten the changes it wanted especially in the E-model.
The D-model addressed the basic lack of ground attack capability in the C-model with avionics upgrades for the D. The C-model was biased towards counter-air missions in Vietnam.
A great piece of history. When I was growing up my best friend Bernie Moore's dad was Lt.Col Vic Moore, former F-104 pilot. He shows up at our house, riding his horse and wearing his F-104 spurs as "spurs". The 1960's were a fun time.
Except for Vietnam.
@@alext8828good thing f104s werent used in vietnam
Actully they were, Tactical Air Command flew F 104C's for a short while.@@nikolaideianov5092
@@nikolaideianov5092
The USAF did send F-104s to Vietnam
The engineering for these ejection systems are totally awesome!
Okay Gilles, I am totally impressed! You covered in 22 minutes, numerous ejection system challenges and the solutions developed, from the beginning of their use to today. Very well done, thank you!
This was instruction… not some UA-camr looking for followers.
David, you a plumber?
Dale Brown in his novel Chains of Command details really well the operation of the F-111 escape capsule. In particular the dual purpose of some of the cockpit equipment including the control column that becomes a bailing pump if the capsule lands in water and starts to leak.
Yes, I'd read about that in my research, though if I touched on every little detail of every single escape system the video would be three hours long :P
@@CanadianMacGyver Haha, so? I’d just have to clear more time on my schedule and prepare a larger supply of popcorn!
Keep the videos coming mate. Thoroughly enjoying them.
I'm no longer sure where I read a longer account, perhaps "The Right Stuff"
Worst sight in an F-111 accident report, 'un-commanded partial ejection'
@@CanadianMacGyver - You say that likes it's a bad thing...
Great Video ! The best ejection seat video I saw was of the Paris Air Show ! The Russian pilot was inverted and the plane at safe crash area... The pilot ejected towards the ground and the seat made a U-turn and took him to a hi;gher altitude for his parachute to open ! T. Lipinski
My understanding is that if you survive your ejection with a Martin-Baker seat system they give you a plaque that has your ejection number, date, and location on it. They also do regular aircraft seats, I sat on Martin-Baker seats in UH-60Ms for about four years.
Great video and worked on ejection seat capable aircraft for many years....
Back in the 80s was at a base were a bird strike hit the front pilot in the face. He was hurt badly but they were able to safely land the aircraft
It was reported that a bird bone was lodged into the ejection system banana clip (used by rescuers to pin and safe the seat) that even had they initiated the ejection the seat had been "safed" by the bone.
Crazy lucky for the crewmembers!
Shout out to Martin-Baker, 7 500 lives are worth a lot, in my book 👍❤ And also shout out to the other providers, since they surely saved lives as well 👍❤
Great episode on a really life-saving device ❤👍🖖
Martin-BAKER
@@Lozzie74 my bad, sorry 😅🙏🖖
Your mention of low altitude ejection brought to mind two examples from the modern RCAF. First is the CF 18 that experienced trouble just off the ground. The pilot ejected and his parachute deployed and he was saved despite practically being at ground level. Second, and more tragic, is the Snowbird Tudor crash in Kamloops that killed the team's PAO. She and the pilot ejected but the Tudor doesn't have the same ejection system that the Hornet had. The pilot hit the ground with a deployed (mostly) parachute. The PAO hit the roof of a house before the chute was able to fully deploy. Very sad.
In many Air Forces - (I know this is policy in the RCAF), pilots are only allowed to eject 3 times in their life. After the 3rd ejection, the pilot is either grounded or transferred to NON-fighter aircraft. This is due to spinal compression - yes it is still a concern. I knew a pilot who ejected from a CF-18, and he was markedly shorter after his ejection. He also had a couple other injuries from the event, but he recovered from those, happily. And the aircraft was recovered.
After three I'd begin to suspect that they actually enjoy it.
🤣@@markrainford1219 "You're not really here for the hunting, are you?"
Initial qual in the B-52:
Boldface for (my position) ejection...
Ejection levers: Rotate
Trigger: Squeeze
Instructor says...
"Additional steps. Pray, Think Thin, kiss an inch of height goodby, and find a chiropractor for the rest of your life"
He was a Vietnam Vet who had taken the "Silk Elevator " twice. B-52 and F-4.
RIP, Cowboy.
F111A and B dont have that problem, whole canopy ejects
Probably after 3 bang outs the driver has demonstrated he (she) is inclined to push the envelope a bit far so putting them on a desk is going to be best for inventory.
This makes me think of something mentioned in the book “The Right Stuff,” where a pilot describes using one of the early ejection seats as “committing suicide to keep from getting killed.”
When it came time for Chuck to eject from the NF-104 plane he wrecked in an ill-conceived stunt, he used an upward-ejecting seat ( possibly the Stencel, I am willing to be corrected here ), even though a downward-ejecting one would have worked at that height.
He still was nearly blinded by it.
@@stevetheduck1425 It was not an "ill-conceived stunt" like the movie portrays, it was a controlled mission, and he was horribly burned by the seat's rocket motors, putting him in a burn ward for many weeks of agonizing pain. Unlike the film, where he walks away from the wreck like a badass. That is a great movie, but it plays pretty loose with the facts.
More like taking a very high risk of death in lieu of certain death. Plenty of people survived elections, usually with more or less injuries as a result. And it depends on what situation you were trying to eject from. Low level or in uncontrolled flight was far more dangerous, as was high speed ejection. But used as they were designed, to bake out of a plane in level flight at cruising speed, they weren't that deadly (very uncomfortable and likely to injure you though). They didn't really plan on using them to escape in all conditions originally, it was too be used in situations where normally you would have baled out. That required you to keep the aircraft in relatively stable flight at a safe altitude and speed, otherwise it was hopeless. The ejection seat was just to make the same thing possible in the new fast jets, they didn't really think it was feasible to make all-conditions escape possible. But of course pilots tried anyway when the alternative was certain death. And so a lot of them died.
If I had teachers like you in high school, I would have actually enjoyed being there...and paid more attention. I got straight A's, but I was bored to death because nothing seemed interesting. You inspire interest...which is what teachers are supposed to do.
yeah if this guy taught in my high school I would have paid way more attention in fighter jet class
You likely had more than one teacher that was as good or better than this channel’s host, you were just too young and dumb to appreciate them at the time.
LOL. I had a retired fighter pilot in my high school who taught Geography. He would occasionally tell us stories of his flying days. I really enjoyed his classes. @@BlastinRope
Brief but concise. I thought that this was just about a pair of spurs and almost ignored this. Learned a lot from this short history.
I learned things I didn't know I didn't know. Questions I never even thought of were answered. That's the sign of a great lesson and an excellent communicator.
A high school teacher that I had was a naval officer during the Vietnam war aboard a US submarine. It was an old diesel electric submarine. I was surprised, and ask him what diesel electric boats were doing during the Vietnam war, and that we even had them still. He said they did lifeguard duty, just like submarines during World War II, recovering pilots who had to eject or ditch. He told me the Grimm story of recovering a dead pilot whose legs had been lost from just above the knees following a failure of the devices mentioned in the video. That was the first time I had ever heard of those.
Interestingly diesel electric boats are still very much a thing. Most notably with the Swedish Gotland class subs being built in the 1990's and still in service.
Mussorgsky pictures at an exhibition, my favorite to listen to growing up in South Jersey. Love it so much. ❤😊
Our aircraft in the late 70's got zero-zero seats that used a spreader gun to open the parachute at low elevations. Basically 8(?) barrels arranged in a star pattern with weights that were attached to the parachute lanyards and a charge in the middle. The canopy would literally get blown open once the pilot cleared the seat.
I remember hearing a Starfighter for the first and only time in the early 90’s. I was cruising around in my red Trans Am with the T-tops out, an air show was going on at Dobbins in Cobb County Georgia. I could not figure out what was going on, until I seen that jet. I’ll never forget it.
A mysterious subject to many of us civilians. Great report.
I was in the Navy in the 1960s. We had A-4 Skyhawks. One day four of our pilots were flying & enchanted very bad thunderstorm, & two pilots died. One never got out of his A-4 & the other pilot ejected but his seat hit his head (With his helmet on & Ox mask connected) causing blood from a wound to fill his mask with blood & he drowned before hitting the ground. A freak accident & the loss of a great person. Pilots know that ejecting is not a free, safe ride!
The B58 capsule you mentioned didn't have spurs but instead the pilot had loops going round his legs. Prior to closing and ejecting the capsule those loops tightened like pretensioning seat belts to keep the legs away from the capsule wall and to reduce movement.
Got what I was interested in within the first few seconds. But you kept sharing interesting & relevant info. I just spent the last 22:23 riveted to UA-cam. Fantastic presentation!
This was splendidly done. The photographs, videos, factual information, intriguing anecdotes, all superbly narrated!
My childhood is saved! Thank you excellent presentation…
A cousin in law has flown both the U-2 and SR-71. He has shared many stories, especially one about bailing during the Vietnam war. Fortunately, it was over a friendly area. Maybe I'll have time to share more.
Do.
An interesting design is the ejection systems on the early MiG-21s, pre the PFM model. During an ejection, the canopy is joined to the seat acts as a shield and protects the pilot. After some time it is released. They eventually gaves up on the idea because, at lower altitudes, it takes too much time for the canopy to release.
What a marvelous video! I learned much (I have often thought about the dangers of ejections, and the obvious reluctance of pilots to use them) and answered many questions that I had not even thought of. Thank you!
The Gemini spacecraft also had ejection seat and early prototypes were equipped with a inflatable? wing that was supposed to let it glide after reentry to a runway so it could land. The first few space shuttle missions with the shuttle Columbia was also equipped with ejection seats for the commander and pilot. These were later removed. I think after the challenger disaster they had a pole that would deploy out side the crew access hatch so the astronauts could bail out that way over the ocean if they were unable to glide to a contingency runway. Great video by the way.
I actually have an entire video on the history of spacecraft escape systems if you're interested! ua-cam.com/video/kfX59ST9imc/v-deo.html
Unlike Mercury and Apollo where weight was critical and the spacecraft were designed as highly integrated designs, Gemini was designed as an operational spacecraft with equipment bays and cannon plugs that allowed for quick check out and replacement of systems.
It was also designed with the intent to use an inflatable Rogallo wing to allow the space craft to be recovered on land (not necessarily a runway). This would avoid submersion in salt water and make it practical to quickly service the aircraft for a subsequent mission. However, the wing took longer to develop than planned and speed of development was an issue for Gemini as the program began after both Mercury and Apollo when it was realized that the Lunar orbit rendezvous method chosen for Apollo would require a bridge program to acquire the orbital maneuvering and docking skills required.
The Gemini spacecraft itself was capable of a lunar orbital flight and it was considered as a means to do it well before the Soviets. However the Soviet space threat didn’t develop and it was then thought that a lunar orbital flight by Gemini would bring into question the need for the Apollo command module.
There was also a proposed Gemini applications program that would have used variants of the Gemini spacecraft as a crew and cargo shuttle to proposed space stations. These would have utilized the equipment bay as cargo and crew quarters, with a hatch in the heat shield, a concept that was actually tested successfully.
Unfortunately it was never funded in part due to the cost of the Apollo program and in part because after Apollo NASA chose the space shuttle concept. It was ultimately a poor choice as launching a spacecraft the size of a DC-9 into space as dead weight on every launch was never going to be efficient, and NASA knew from the start the advertised 2 week turnaround time between flights was never going to be achievable.
In contrast an operational design like Gemini would have allowed for comparatively inexpensive space flights as the USAF had over 170 soon to be surplus Titan II boosters that could have been affordably man rated to support 170 future launches of a number of comparatively low cost reusable Gemini spacecraft.
And that’s effectively what the Soviets did with their Soyuz spacecraft, the same basic spacecraft we are still hitching rides to orbit on today after the shuttles had to be retired due to excessive flight risk.
The space shuttle made for great PR, but it ultimately cost us over 40 years of meaningful progress in low earth orbit.
The ragallo (spelliing?) wing. NASA looked at using that to recover the Gemini spacecraft, since it was controllable.
Something similar is used by some hand gliders
Glad those Meteors are still in service. I grew up with stories and books of the Mosquito. My Grandfather was in Bomber Command DFC. He was in a MKXVI high altitude bomber. All the WW2 warbirds are amazing feats of human brilliance and as many as possibe deserve to still be operating. And every one that still flies brought some young man back to his family.
21:13 I'm so glad you managed to find and show footage of that, it's even more hilarious than just the description.
I've seen models of the capule ejection system, to see them in action is quite amazing, along with the other ejection systems. Thanks again for another great video..!!!
A great Video, very informative and very very interesting!!!
Excellent presentation, thank you.
The early 104A;s had a problem with the spur cable cutters which kept the seat hooked to the pilot during chute deployment (Ouch!)
So much information delivered so speedily, yet easy to absorb. Great narration and storytelling sir. subscribed
Brings back good memories, remember tail 703 while posted to 417 Sqn at Cold Lake.
In the book "Phantom Over Vietnam" by John Trotti, is a rather detailed sequence description of the M-B seat used in the F-4 C ( if I remember correctly ). Good read BTW...
Very thoughtful and engaging material. Thanks for the info!
Remembering Ivan Kinchello, RIP. Low altitude ejection in an early 104,
On the B-52, it had a couple of downward ejection seats. To keep the pilot from losing their legs during use, they required the operators to bring their feet back against the seat, where a device would prevent the legs from moving during ejection. During aircraft maintenance training, the 52 was used, but all the ejection devices were removed. The downward seats leg retraining device was spring loaded and still functional. During training, we would cock the seats, and eventually a student would bring the feet back against the seat, and the device would deploy, trapping their legs. Based on the screams, the students thought they were about to be ejected onto the hanger floor.
Fascinating technology, well presented. Thank you!
My Uncle was a Starfighter pilot ,as the kids say back in the day and he still has his spurs and proudly displays the. He claims it's proof he survived that beast. It was one of the few aircraft that where more dangerous to the crew than the enemy every was. West Germany found this out by digging holes with pilots in them in random feilds and Forrest
Not only were the spurs distinctive, but your attire is as well. I was thinking it may be intentional to give yourself additional character, but I like it nonetheless. The pantlegs in need of hemming and the slightly small vest exposing the shirt at the waist kind of reminds me of that slightly disheveled Professor who has things way more together upstairs than it appears from the outside.
A character who, in the end, ends up leaving you pleased he is on your team. Well done!
I once heard, that everyone, who survives ejecting with a Martin Baker seat gets a special tie afterwards. Is that true? Very cool video; I learned something today.
Yup, and a plaque
What an interesting and very well presented! So glad I this popped up in my feed. Best 20 minutes I've spent on UA-cam in a long time. Subbed 🙂
I was blessed to have flown backseat in a TF104G in the mid 80s, sadly I don’t remember wearing the spurs…when that J79’s AB lit it was impressive! Such a beautiful airplane, but a bit of a pain to work on. I also flew many times in two versions of seats in a very early B52, and also the downward one in the bombardier crew position…ah the good old days…I think my butt just might still hurt a bit from the very skimpy seat pad that sat on top of the B52 seat’s survival kit 😎 Nice video, thanks!
Most terrifying instance I had in the USAF was in a B52 RN seat, while on the ground. Performing a system check, my coat (Northern Tier, so we always had one coat or another on when boarding the aircraft) sleeve snagged the ejection handle... and the "ankle claws" came out and grabbed my feet. I thought I was going to be rocketed 10' down into the asphalt of the flight line... but the safety pins did their job and kept the charge from going off. But I had to take a moment to settle down... 😋
@@MrJest2 yikes
This is the best explanation of eject systems ever. This is a very 'healthy' and informative video !!
It's a shame that most of the stuff on UA-cam is stupid and completely unnecessary :(
Very well done... good delivery and enunciation... Found this interesting...had little knowledge prior to your educational video.
Wow! What an excellent presentation!!
Great footage. I’m impressed with the Spitfire simulator.
Really excellent video, much appreciated. Thank you!
TO GILLES: Very interesting videos (I have watched about 6 from you). I enjoy your good presentations about these interesting and sometimes odd pieces of technology. This video about the ejection seats was especially good, because of how you told the story and illustrated it. Very good. Will subscribe and will share your videos to my contacts. Keep up the good work!
thank you for yet another fascinating thing
I didn't know I needed to know.
That Top Gun scene actually was made after Lt. David J. “Goose” Lortscher ejection failure death. So the exact scene in Top Gun actually happened
The Tweet has a 40mm mortar shell under the seat. Just got you over the tail. The T-38 had a much improved rocket motor but it was still limited in it's use. You had to have a certain altitude and airpspeed before it would guarantee success. The newest zero-zero seats are brilliant and have saved so many lives.
Not a shell, a cartridge. You don't use high explosives to propel an object. The propellant normally used to accelerate the mortar is used instead to accelerate the seat. It will seem very violent but nowhere near like actually being blown out by a detonation. Propellants burn rapidly, almost instantly, they are gas generators. High explosives detonate instantly and create destructive shock fronts.
What’s that opening music? The trumpet or brass part sounds like something I may have heard from school band days.
Mussorgsky - Pictures in an Exhibition: Promenade
if anyone is curious on the history of the full history of the ejection seat i would highly recomend Eject! Eject! as a great read
Great video - I am not sure how this vid popped into my feed after so long, but glad it did, and I hope you are still making content as this was masterful. I had not heard that Israeli anecdote about the murderous bird that had a last minute change of mind.
Excellent video. Very well done. Thank you.
Great presentation. 👍
Nicely done. Learned something again.
The yankee system, or something very like it, was a contender for the Space Shuttle Crew Escape System, but, while it worked, it was as heavy as two astronauts, while the competing telescoping curved rod was lighter, and got the escapees away from the Shuttle's low-set wing.
It could only be used in a small envelope on launch before max-q and before the 'abort to launching or landing site' option, and a longer window at a normal landing, and so was, I believe, not used after a lot of good publicity was generated.
This was an awesome video... I'd suggest changing the name of the video to include something about a brief overview of how we got to the modern ejection system... Or something like that. Because as of right now, it completely misses what this video is really about. I believe more people would watch this video if it's title was changed, because I think there's a lot of people that would enjoy this mini documentary about the history of ejection seats. It's my two cents, anyways great video, really informative. 👍
Great videos! I’m glad to have run into your channel and I’ve definitely SUBBED!!!!!!
Thank you and I’m looking forward to more great content 👍👍👍
Extremely thorough and entertaining video.
Amazing, thank you for sharing. I learned a lot.
One more addition to the pilot has left the chat story is the method that crew of Douglas's A3D/A-3 Skywarrior and F3D/F-10 Skyknight were supposed to try. They had a hatch in the cockpit that led into a chute that they were to slide down and out a hatch in the bottom of the aircraft. Not ideal for low-level escape, but I guess they figured these weren't high performance fighters.
Great video. Thank you very much.
Fantastic video, Well Done good sir!
Excellent video! Thanks!
I learned a lot watching your video. Thanks.
Thanks, very interesting, details I haven't heard elsewhere.
Thanks for the video you are my favorite knowledgeable nerd and I always learn something So keep up the great work 👍
Excellent presentation. Thanks.
Great content here. I sat in but never "rode" a Martin Baker seat for 10 years. I would have liked the tie and watch.
Brilliant presentation, did not expect this level of expertise from a youtube video - its rare and very very welcome
Love the Bow Tie! Reminds me of The History Guy.
Gilles, you remind me so very much of the sadly missed Victor Buono. I mean that in the nicest possible way, he was a genius.
I was a non-pilot RCAF member from 1996 to 2001 and there were problems with the fact that since pilot's were getting larger and heavier the CF-118 ejection seat's were struggling to get the ejecting pilot sufficiently high enough for the parachute to open safely during landing and take-off rolls. They were supposed to be but failed as Zero-Zero ejection seats if the pilot was at the heavier end of the spectrum. I remember seeing a CF118 cockpit mock-up being towed down the runway at CFB Cold Lake at various speeds with a dummy in the ejection seat. The RCAF resolved the pilot weight issue but just a few years later loose stitching in a shoulder strap led to a series of events that led to the death of Captain Kevin Naismith during a Maple Flag exercise.
Absolutly loved the video! Keep up good work! 😉
To get a fuller insight into the history of the ejection seat through to modern day I'd recommend John Nichol's book Eject! Eject! Published by Simon and as hustler Ltd London 2023
I don't remember all the specifics (I flew the slow and comfortable EC-121), but an F-4 was getting ready for a training mission out of Homestead AFB in the mid 70's, when there was an electrical short in the seat pack. The pilot managed to egress the aircraft, but before the WSO got clear of the aircraft, the rear seat ignited... they cleaned him up off the tarmac with a bottle of bleach and a sponge.
One of my professors at Georgia Tech, Dr. Chambers, came to us from NASA. Before that he had been involved in the bear ejection test and told our class about it. That would have been around 1975. It's probably a mere coincidence, but the man on the left in test photo at 19:33 looks similar to Dr. Chambers.
Up to May 1940 Fokker Aircraft was working on a cartridge propelled seat for their D23 (the one with push/pull configuration).
So many devices and procedures that can go wrong, only for the pilot ejection feature! I can (somewhat) imagine how mind boggling-complicated an aircraft can be.
That was very interesting, I was curious what on earth can be said about a couple of spurs for 20 minutes. Curiosity satisfied and then some.
BTW, did they ever used a Blackbear to test the Blackbird?
As far as I am aware, bears were only used to test the B58 escape capsule; most other ejection seat development efforts used instrumented dummies. However, there was a 1954 program called 'Project Whoosh' (yes, really) that used chimpanzees, which were ejected from a specially-built air-launched rocket called the Cherokee. Though none of the chimps survived due to parachute malfunctions, biometric sensors revealed that they did survive the initial ejection, indicating that supersonic ejection was safer than initially assumed.
at 2:50 Bailout procedure for Fighteraircraft (Spitfire, Bf109, Fw190) was not to climb out and jump, it was roll your Plane Head down , release Canopy/Hood , release your straps and simply fall out of the Plane.
There is gun camera footage of a FW190 pilot doing exactly that
he is truly the Reviewbrah of technological devices!
Thanks for all your research.
Interesting and well presented. Thank you.
What a wonderful video! This deserves so much more likes :(
Outstanding factual presentation.
I flew in the Lockheed S-3B as a Naval Aircrewman. The one thing we always appreciated was our ejection seat. Thankfully I never had to use mine.
What a great channel.
Bailing out of the space shuttle could be done using a pole. According to a web site on the subject by mfwright,
"A long escape pole is quickly deployed out the hatch. One by one, each crew member attaches a lanyard hook which is connected to his or her parachute harness to the escape pole and jumps out the door." It was called the crew escape system.
It was a lame attempt to come up with something that might of worked in limited situations after the Challenger explosion on launch.
It would of not worked on the Challenger as the failure was catastrophic on launch nor would it of worked on the Columbia as an ejection would of been at something like Mach 20 and any escaping crew would of just been flaming meteors (some of the recovered remains were essentially that).
The one Space Shuttle system that existed for the first few launches was a conventional ejection seat for the commander and pilot that would of ejected them up, through the roof. If it had been further developed it could of even worked on the mission specialists sitting behind the commander and pilot on the top deck. The mission specialists below decks... Sorry, you aren't getting out.
@@Tishers He's not talking about the ejection seats, which were only active on the first two missions and removed shortly after. He's talking about the escape pole slide system that was installed after the Challenger accident. The Mission Specialists on the lower deck would've been the first ones out the hatch since it was right where they were sitting. The Commander would've been the last one to abandon his ship. This system only useful if the spacecraft were in a subsonic glide, though, so just as useless during launch and the early part of reentry.