Light aircraft Ejector seat

Joshwa said:
Just when you thought the Cirrus debate was bad enough:

http://rt.com/news/226095-russia-unique-ejector-seat/



Pretty cool, though I guess it would have a weight limit for those of us who like our pies, and wouldn't work in anything without a bubble canopy. I could imagine a lot of RVs and aerobatic types starting to sprout them though.
Click to expand...


Wouldn't work in an RV, the seat is part of the fuselage, and RV builders would rather spend their time, effort and money on avionics and going faster/farther.
 
ejecto-seato-cuz.jpg
 
Thats not an ejector seat it a system similar to what was in the A1 Skyrader (Yankee), but with out the rocket assist.
 
queeno said:
Thats not an ejector seat it a system similar to what was in the A1 Skyrader (Yankee), but with out the rocket assist.
Click to expand...

So I assume it would not be AS violent or crippling as ejecting from a fighter. Still for some reason I can see a ton of injury law suits come up if there was an ejection seat put in a GA aircraft.
 
Whatusername said:
So I assume it would not be AS violent or crippling as ejecting from a fighter. Still for some reason I can see a ton of injury law suits come up if there was an ejection seat put in a GA aircraft.
Click to expand...

That and pilots ejecting when they shouldn't have and the plane hitting houses on the ground. There is a reason a lot of the warbird restoration companies disable ejection seats fro non-military or those they feel are not properly trained or responsible for the ejection system.
 
I've only worked on a few civilian jets with ejection seats (I can count them on one hand). There were alot of regulations that had to be abided by to even keep any sorts of spares, explosives lockers and so on. To be honest I didn't mind working around those seats but I also didn't do it for that long. I can't imagine an ejection seat would be practical for anything other than a combat aircraft.
 
Bandit_Driver said:
That and pilots ejecting when they shouldn't have and the plane hitting houses on the ground. There is a reason a lot of the warbird restoration companies disable ejection seats fro non-military or those they feel are not properly trained or responsible for the ejection system.
Click to expand...
The primary issue is a lack of manufacturer support. Without that, the owner has to sell a maintenance plan - a tough sell. I've never heard that concerns over pilot judgement was an issue.
 
Didn't see the seat come out, just the guy...it's something. Training is everything and I suspect your stand GA training isn't exactly up to par with those programs that require an ejection seat. I flew T-2C's and T-45A/C which had excellent Martin Baker Mk14 ejection seats. The T-2C seat was a career ending injury waiting to happen if used. Better than being dead I suppose.

Actually, nobody has died in an ejection from a T-45 Goshawk...have died post ejection due to other things.
 
bunk22 said:
Didn't see the seat come out, just the guy...it's something. Training is everything and I suspect your stand GA training isn't exactly up to par with those programs that require an ejection seat. I flew T-2C's and T-45A/C which had excellent Martin Baker Mk14 ejection seats. The T-2C seat was a career ending injury waiting to happen if used. Better than being dead I suppose.

Actually, nobody has died in an ejection from a T-45 Goshawk...have died post ejection due to other things.
Click to expand...
AF Spads had a similar system.
http://ejectionsite.com/yankee.htm
 
I don't think the clearance was that different from military spec systems. In the NACES seat (in the F/A-18A-G, T-45, and IIRC AV-8B) there are some weight limitations.......ie if you are mid 200's, the engineers say you might not clear the vertical stabs on a Hornet. Which leads me to believe that the clearance for a guy/gal w/n the manufacturer's average body weight spec is probably not that great.
 
bunk22 said:
Didn't see the seat come out, just the guy...it's something. Training is everything and I suspect your stand GA training isn't exactly up to par with those programs that require an ejection seat. I flew T-2C's and T-45A/C which had excellent Martin Baker Mk14 ejection seats. The T-2C seat was a career ending injury waiting to happen if used. Better than being dead I suppose.

Actually, nobody has died in an ejection from a T-45 Goshawk...have died post ejection due to other things.
Click to expand...

Jesus. From what?
 
Bandit_Driver said:
just going by what the guys said that importing and restoring L39's
Click to expand...
There was a period in which there was a de facto ban by the FAA, nobody could produce a maintenance plan that satisfied the FAA.

Eventually, some L-39 guys satisfied the FAA and there are L-39's now flying with hot seats.

I think the turning point was the approval of seats for a couple of military contractors. After that, some warbird operators submitted plans identical to the military contractors and were subsequently approved. I'm aware that these contractors operated under Exp-Special Purpose and Exp- Research and Development.

If there was a hidden agenda, it wasn't official.
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of a technology-fail from the early Vietnam era. Happened to an Air Force fighter pilot. He was toodling along and felt the need. His Pilot Relief Tube sprung a leak and blew his canopy and ejection seat.

Would have loved to see the carpet dance!
 
killbilly said:
Jesus. From what?
Click to expand...

All kinds of things can happen post-ejection. Failure of seat-man separation, chute problems, area you land problems, your actual landing injuring you, failing to release chute afte a water landing and being dragged down and drowned by it.

My squadron had a midair collision of 2 A-10s way back in the day. Both pilots ejected. However one was killed when the leg straps of his parachute harness weren't connected, and when the chute fully inflated, he slid out of the harness and fell 8000' to his death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top