Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Tom; Also not the first time it would have happened either. Again ejection seats are amazingly dangerous devices and have killed or injured pilots in a variety of craft at a variety of speeds.
Who watches the watchmen?
^ It's the kind of problem where the first time it showed up in testing long ago when they were inventing the damn things should have been the last time it ever showed up.
The first ejection seats date back 70 years, you mean to tell me under the JSF program we've forgotten 40-50-60 years of knowledge and experience on the matter?
If so, the program is even more of a cock up than ever reported on.
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Its the same kind of problem that is persistent across the decades and not strictly limited to a single era and across multiple platforms and not limited to just early ejection seats and early airplanes. Ejector seats even modern ones have a good chance of causing some form of injury to the user from low to high speed ejection.
Who watches the watchmen?
The law in the night
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Stop exaggerating, every single fighter has or had ejection seat issues at one point or another.
It isn't them forgetting physics or ejection seat designs, it is the human body no longer being able to keep up with newer tech.
Their account claims the danger of ejection in the F-35 is caused by the newer and heavier helmet but it is only dangerous if you have a small body.
Besides do I need to remember you that even the F-15 doesn't have a spotless track record when it comes to ejection
, nor has the F-18 which has killed pilots during ejection sequences.
They found the flaw, they addressed the flaw and by the looks of it they are proceeding to fix it or make it safer, it isn't like they needed a dead pilot to figure that out.
edited 5th Oct '15 4:11:09 PM by AngelusNox
Inter arma enim silent leges
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Like Flanker pointed out the most common side effect of ejection is spinal compression. Spinal injuries from ejection are very common. It also weakens the vertebrae which is partly why they ground you permanently after so many ejections in most cases.
Who watches the watchmen?
Mind, in the situations which the ejection seat is intended to be used in, ejecting, however dangerous, is still less dangerous than not ejecting.
It's like worrying about your seat belt giving you whiplash, when the alternative is full depth road rash and fifty fractures.
V
The F-35's ejector seat isn't a new design — it's a version of the Martin-Baker Mk16 seat already fitted to the Rafale, the Eurofighter, the T-6, and the T-38/F-5.
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
True enough and according to several pilots is preferable. However they say it is distinctly unpleasant to experience because of the forces involved.
Who watches the watchmen?
V
Here we are:
Night Clerk of the Apacalypse.
Ouchy compression fractures are nasty.
Who watches the watchmen?
Meanwhile, back to proper combat aircraft. Here's a Muppets/A-10 Warthog crossover.
...THAT PUN IS BAD AND YOU SHOULD FEEL BAD.
"Yup. That tasted purple."
^ No, that pun is awesome and you should feel awesome! Only the enemies of the A-10 should feel bad. Are you its enemy?
HGW XX/7
Heh, that A-10 is from the 51st Fighter Wing out of Osan. Always thought it was funny they had two sets of tail art (the checkerboard and the pony)
So when Best Korea invades it's the only thing left to survive from that base?
Pretty sure the Nork Nukes are more of a threat to them than to their neighbours.
Plus I get the feeling in a few years political executions will involve being at ground zero of the next nuclear test.
"Yup. That tasted purple."
The law in the night
If Best Korea invades that thing is the only one they need to use to curbstomp the Best Koreans.
Came across this example which clearly can't be right on Beware My Stinger Tail, and figured this was the thread to take the question to. Bolding mine.
- Thematically similar are aircraft tail gunners, much more common in WWII bombers but still extant in modern Soviet bombers, to fight off chasing fighters. Descriptions of them often reference them as the "stinger in the tail".
Should this be corrected to Cold War-era Soviet or modern Russian bombers?
Some googling produced a photo of an F-22 Raptor escorting a Tu-95 Bear fitted with what certainly looks like a tail gun. The Russian bomber had swung by to wish the US a happy birthday probably.
Cross-posted from the Military thread: Unconfirmed reports that a Russian jet was shot down by Turkish aircraft.
Well, we're all going to die now.
"Yup. That tasted purple."
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
Maybe if we boot Turkey out of NATO it'll be ok.
Oh really when?
I recall one airshow pilot finding himself unexpectedly having to look up at his wife because the ejection compressed his spine (apparently this isn't an uncommon result of ejections). Over time he returned to his original height, though.
Locking you up on radar since '09