Talk:Ejection seat

message: Sukhoi 31M is equipped with ejection seat Zvezda SKS-94 for several years already. So far it is the only civil aircraft with factory-installed ejection seat. Can somebody add information about SKS-94? Here is more info about the seat  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.239.158.86 (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't Zvezda SKS-94 be added to "Ejection seats in other aircraft" section? 

message: The article mentions leg straps that pull the legs towards the chair as if they are something unique to the F-104. That is simply not true. --J-Star 15:52, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)
:Leg restraints are also used on the B-1B Bomber and F-22 also. Lucky Foot (talk) 17:29, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Spurs" are common 

message: The article Martin-Baker states;
Martin-Baker started to investigate ejection seats from 1934 onward, several years before Germany (1938) and Sweden.
Is this a date of invention? Or should the article be reworded to "the first working ejection seat was produced in Germany in 1938", or something similar. Emoscopes Talk 09:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: M-B don't claim to have had a working ejector seat until after the War.  Since the Germans were actually mass-producing them, I think it's fair enough as it is.  I've removed the tag, btw, since this doesn't seem to be a red-hot debate (2.5 months without comment) and it was uglying up the article. FiggyBee 02:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute tag 

message: :After World War II, the need for such systems became pressing, as aircraft speeds were getting ever higher, and it was not long before the sound barrier was broken. Manual escape at such speeds would be impossible.
Supersonic aircraft were not the driving force for ejector seats, were they?  How many pilots were able to manually escape from fighter aircraft in WWII?  (That would be a great stat for the article if anyone can look it up regardless.)  Rather than supersonic speeds, I thought the driving force was merely the improvement of the technology.  Tempshill 22:20, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was the increasing speeds. At 400mph+ the slipstream is so great that a pilot often lacks the physical strength to climb out of the cockpit. Ian Dunster (talk) 10:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was supersonic speed really a driving factor? 

message: Can anyone please supply a reference for the bungee assisted escape of 1910? Thank you. Nick1961 (talk) 11:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bungee assisted escape? 

message: The article states that, "Some models of the F-104 were equipped with upward-ejecting seats, which led to several fatal accidents when pilots trained on the downward-firing seats rolled inverted at low altitude and ejected."
I've heard this claim, I've searched for instances of it happening, but I have never seen it verified.  I've added a 'citation needed' tag.
Rpstrong (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The early ejection seats were only intended to get the pilot or crewmember out of the aircraft, and so the seat was only ejected a relatively short way, and in T-tailed aircraft like the F-104 an upward ejecting seat could have lead to the seat and occupant striking the tail. So a downward-ejecting seat was chosen. At the time zero/zero-capability seats were some way-off and as the most likely source of aircraft loss for a combat aeroplane was enemy action, which would almost certainly have taken place at medium to high altitudes, the fact that the seat ejected downwards was of no real consequence. It was only later when the zero/zero seat became available that pilots started to survive in situations that they couldn't have survived before, ejection seat or no ejection seat, such as abandoning the aircraft at low levels, that the disadvantages of downwards ejecting seats became apparent. The capabilities of the newer seats grew so much that they removed all the previous limitations that had been present, such as a minimum height to allow the parachute time to open, since the parachute had been introduced.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 16:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  F-104 inverted fatalities 

message: This is an awesome article about the historical designs of both pre and post coldwar era aircrew ejection systems. However it is a common misconception that a seat merely leaves the aircraft when the handle is pulled and this is what I wish to clarify for some.
The ACES II ejection seat is catapulted out of the aircraft by a 2-stage rocket assembly lovingly referred to as the "Rocket Catapult". Upon exiting the aircraft the systems enviromental sensing unit takes in static and dynamic pressures allowing for one of the three modes of ejection to be determined. This information is in turn sent to the seats sequencing unit which in turn sends a signal out to the internally loaded munitions which both correct the trajectory of the pilots seat and allow for pilot - seat disconnection. 
Upon ejection a "drag" chute is released to allow for the seat to reach the proper airspeed determined safe by the sequencing unit. It is only as this point that the actual pilot chute is released not before.
Again this is a brilliant article and I personally enjoyed reading it great job.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sephios (talk • contribs) 01:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ACES II Ejection seats 

message: No mention is made about pilots who, after ejecting, report a permanent loss of height of about 1" due to spinal compression. Chris Stricklin (sp?) of the F-16 airshow crash is a good example. Also, nothing is mentioned about pilots that are permanently grounded after an ejection. Not sure if its just the Americans who do this. 68.144.38.146 (talk) 02:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like you'd have ruptured disks in order to achieve such a permanent change from an ejection. Take a look at these sources.
Brinkley
Air Force report
--THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE  01:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pilot Safety 

message: Pilots generally lose on average one inch in total height due to spinal compression after an Ejection. Pilots are generally not grounded because of a single ejection, however after three total ejections a pilot is grounded but not removed from service. In regards to pilot safety the fact that the seat is designed for maximum survivability and not comfort is a testament to how many pilots have been brought back because it worked without a malfunction. Chris Stricklin unfortunately is not a good example to use since his faulty and wreckless piloting brough down his aircraft and endangered the lives of spectators and that of his ground crew alike.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.9.127.6 (talk) 00:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It was generally (even on old seats) less than an inch. That much compression is besides likely to cause enough spinal cord damage that there could be serious injury. Really though, the persistent height loss owing to compression was much reduced by the rocket seat (i.e. zero-zero seats). The seat was now lofted clear by the long duration but relatively low force of the rocket, rather than having to be thrown clear entirely by the force of the initial cannon (which can only be a few metres long). It was this need in the early seats to apply a huge force so quickly that caused the spinal trauma. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

text: (An aside from the spinal compression for those fortunate to survive an ejection): it is very rare (previously unknown?) for the harness system to be compromised. But this was the cause of the first fatality on the Eurofighter Typhoon project, in Spain, earlier this year. The system for the MB MK 16A has now been very rapidly re-designed and re-delpoyed, to prevent this from ever happening again. Worthy of mention in the article somewhere? Wittlessgenstein (talk) 19:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

text: That sort of harness is likely to pull the pilot's arms off, or else to break his collarbones. Pilots are stronger in compression, even their spines, than they are as beams in shear. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:21, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Lifting the pilot off the seat would only serve to allow the seat to attain a higher velocity (relative to the occupant) prior to contact with the occupant, which will increase the dynamic overshoot and increase the likelihood of a spinal injury. It would be better to precompress the spine prior to ejection, which is likely what the current haul-back reels do. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE  01:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding Pilot Safety 

message: There's an interesting  1981 Flight International article on ejection seats here;   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.68.219 (talk) 17:57, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  1981Flight article 

message: These don't make any sense at all. How come 0-Deg Pitch, 60-Deg Roll requires 0ft altitude whereas 0-Deg Pitch, 0-Deg Roll requires 116 feet? How can this be more? Furthermore, if a "light-weight crewman would reach an apogee of close to 200 feet if they ejected at ground level with zero airspeed" how can it only require 150 feet altitude to eject from inverted? Something doesn't seem right... Turkeyphant 22:10, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ACES II stats 

message: I seem to remember reading about an aircraft that was designed to blow the tail free when the ejection system fired, to ensure the pilot didn't get clipped by it on the way up. However, I don't seem to see it in the article, and I'm %$^&*( if I can remember where else I might have seen it.
Or did I hallucinate it?
*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 03:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tail 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ejection seat. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.zvezda-npp.ru/english/05.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ejection seat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Replaced archive link http://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/?url=http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/History/1970s/Pasricha.html with https://web.archive.org/web/20140923072428/http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/History/1970s/Pasricha.html on http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/History/1970s/Pasricha.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:04, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ejection seat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.martin-baker.com/_pdfs/history_development_mk1-mk10_ejection_seats.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071007024640/http://www.martin-baker.com/Products/Ejection-Seats/Mk--10.aspx to http://www.martin-baker.com/Products/Ejection-Seats/Mk--10.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't see such things as: How high does zero-zero ejection seat travel, for how long are the 12-14g's applied, etc.
2600:1700:4CA1:3C80:4D91:A5B2:7047:B1CE (talk) 03:48, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can you add some facts? 

message: The article states that "No real life land vehicle has ever been fitted with an ejection seat." MythBusters built a successful ejection seat, which passengers did not detect when sitting in the car. Parkerea (talk) 14:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Land vehicle ejection seat 

message: My father Chris T. Koochembere designed the ejection seat along with the catapult seat obsorbtion seat and the face shield that you pulled down over your face. He was mentioned in a biography named escape I have the original catapult prototype along with a picture , one of many of him kneeling down at the right side of the ejection seat with the catapult mounted on the wall behind him. 174.252.131.42 (talk) 19:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ejection seat