• Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.

Red arrow incident

Is it really only 200ft, would have thought you would off needed more for parachute.

RIP

It's not going to be a soft landing but I imagine 200ft is sufficient to scrub off enough of the effect gravity wants to have on you? I doubt you can get anywhere near to terminal velocity within that distance so it's not comparable to a sky dive requirement.

I am no physics bod but I am sure someone will have the exact physics and maths to talk authoritatively on the 200ft subject :D
 
Last edited:
It's not going to be a soft landing but I imagine 200ft is sufficient to scrub off enough of the effect gravity wants to have on you? I doubt you can get to terminal velocity within that distance so it's not comparable to a sky dive requirement.

Is there any additional weight added to this set-up, rather than a normal parachute set-up? part of the seat ?

Excuse my lack of knowledge in this area
 
Is there any additional weight added to this set-up, rather than a normal parachute set-up? part of the seat ?

Excuse my lack of knowledge in this area

Pretty sure the seat comes out with you attached to it + parachute(s).

The physics hurts my head and I've been up far too long :D The mass will not increase acceleration but does decrease time of flight as it reaches a higher terminal velocity (more drag from greater speed required to counteract the increase gravitational force on a more massive object)....or something like that.....I think. Whether any of this plays a role at 200ft and down is another question? Physics is not my strong point :(
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure the seat comes out with you attached to it + parachute(s).

The physics hurts my head and I've been up far too long :D The mass will not increase acceleration but does decrease time of flight as it reaches a higher terminal velocity (more drag from greater speed required to counteract the increase gravitational force on a more massive object)....or something like that.....I think. Physics is not my strong point :(

Not time spent in the air, but the force with which it impacts the ground, surely?
 
In case anyone else wants to know more about ejector seats. Can't say I've given them too much thought but they are amazing and seemingly very complex:

- Low altitude/High speed -
- Seat descends stabilised by drogues
- Barostatic time-release unit completes run and fire

- High speed/high altitude -
- Barostatic capsule operates to prevent parachute deployment above pre-determined altitude
- Barostatic controlled g-switch delays parachute deployment above 7000 ft until speed and g-force are reduced
- Barostatic time release unit operates below pre-determined altitude, completes run and fires

- Manual separation (override) used if automatic system fails
- Gas from cartridge used to
- Free drogue shackle link
- Release parachute mechanical lock
- Operate upper harness locks and lower harness release mechanism to free lower harness lugs, negative-g straps, leg restraint lines and personal equipment connector man portion
- Drogues withdraw parachute from container
- Sticker straps momentarily hold aircrew in seat
- Parachute develops, lifts aircrew and survival pack from seat and pulls sticker clips from clips causing aircrew and seat to diverge
- Normal parachute descent follows
- Aircrew releases either of two quick-release connectors to lower survival pack to end of line
- Survival pack opened manually when necessary
 
^

I remember once a pilot had problems in his harrier, landing gear failure IIRC. He flew it into KAF and put it down on the runway despite shot landing gear, it crash landed "safely" on the tarmac and he ejected as soon as he knew he had put it down.

EDIT: Seems the vid is available on the tube!


Looks like it wasn;t gear but perhaps landing instruments (I'm not a techie/fairy :p )
 
Last edited:
Wow they really don't eject very high. I suppose it's a rocket/explosive deployed parachute, so open up in far less time than a conventional one.
 
What on earth are you on about, do you really know? Or do you just like to troll crap to try and aggravate people? Give up, it doesn't work.
 
K
He could have pointed it east or north west then ejected. The reason was blatantly so as not to scrap millions of pounds of aircraft, even though it surely ended up being a write off anyway.

yeh god damn it why didnt he land in the desert! what a stupid pilot, clearly Robbie has all that flying experience behind him to know what he really should have done..im gonna launch a complaint right this second.
 
That's great, I'm glad we could have a sensible discussion on the matter.

:rolleyes:

You statement isnt remotely sensible.

Bringing an aircraft down in the most controlled manner possible is very important.

If you bang out at altitude and just let the jet go randomly the consequences could be far worse.

It probably wasnt full, but if anything like the tornado it holds over 7 tons of fuel.

You think he would choose to bring it down nicely just to save money with the risk of that amount of fuel exploding and taking him out?

Shut up.
 
He landed it at the airfield because there are emergency services available if the worst happens. Also a nice smooth runway is always a better option over a rough desert.
 
Back
Top Bottom