ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
What happened to Goose in Top Gun?Doesn't the canopy have to detach first, to avoid what happened to Goose in Top Gun?
What happened to Goose in Top Gun?Doesn't the canopy have to detach first, to avoid what happened to Goose in Top Gun?
Have a guess.What happened to Goose in Top Gun?
A former colleague of mine had been a pilot in the RAF and ejected twice. Apparently it is not a pleasant experience.
Have you never seen Top Gun???What happened to Goose in Top Gun?
What happened to Goose in Top Gun?
Sorry.That's a well disappointing story Dess. When I saw your name on new posts against this thread I clicked with relish and in great anticipation of a truly spectacular personal disaster story.
What happened to Goose in Top Gun?
Cooked.
Same colour straps?
A former colleague of mine had been a pilot in the RAF and ejected twice. Apparently it is not a pleasant experience.
Bit surprised to read that it was only due to a mechanical fault that the 64 yr old passenger didn't eject both himself and the pilot as well? That suggests that he could have pulled the lever and stayed where he was whilst ejecting the pilot.Safe bet that, in that eventuality, he would have definitely shat himself!!i wouldn't be surprised if he evacuated as he left the jet
In many jets, there's a selector switch that controls what happens when the rear seat ejector handle is pulled, whether it ejects both seats in sequence or just the rear. I know the article claims there was a malfunction but it may not necessarily be true.Bit surprised to read that it was only due to a mechanical fault that the 64 yr old passenger didn't eject both himself and the pilot as well? That suggests that he could have pulled the lever and stayed where he was whilst ejecting the pilot.Safe bet that, in that eventuality, he would have definitely shat himself!!
There's a stool underneath it.That chair appears to be "floating"
Doesn't the canopy have to detach first, to avoid what happened to Goose in Top Gun?
Bit surprised to read that it was only due to a mechanical fault that the 64 yr old passenger didn't eject both himself and the pilot as well? That suggests that he could have pulled the lever and stayed where he was whilst ejecting the pilot.Safe bet that, in that eventuality, he would have definitely shat himself!!
I've read the BEA report now. This switch exists, and was set to eject both, but didn't work. It seems like not only a fuckup that it mechanically/electronically failed, but that it was set this way in the first place such that an untrained civilian could eject both seats.In many jets, there's a selector switch that controls what happens when the rear seat ejector handle is pulled, whether it ejects both seats in sequence or just the rear. I know the article claims there was a malfunction but it may not necessarily be true.
I was wondering earlier why would any fighter jet frame that was being used for commercial purposes with civilians not have been modified to ensure such accidents did not happen, in particular with any components that the passenger had direct access to.I've read the BEA report now. This switch exists, and was set to eject both, but didn't work. It seems like not only a fuckup that it mechanically/electronically failed, but that it was set this way in the first place such that an untrained civilian could eject both seats.