Hacker News Reader

Comment by Waterluvian | Hacker News Reader

I don’t know anything about anything but it feels kind of amazing that all four ejected with good looking parachutes given the orientation of the conglomerated plane.

View on HN

Thanks to the great engineering at martin baker, if you check out the instagram page they have a running count of how many pilots have been saved by the seats. Was interesting to see a +4 today for a rolling total of 7820

Yeah it's pretty incredible, the way they came together the plane on top came pretty close to blocking the canopy of the bottom one, if it had gone a bit differently those pilots could have had nowhere to go but into the bottom of the other aircraft!

Something that seems interesting to me is that they all ejected at nearly the identical time. I'm curious if those systems are automated in case of scenarios like an unconscious pilot. If so, there may be automated clearance/angle systems, but that's speculation on top of speculation.

I'm guessing they coordinated by voice so that they didn't hit each other (again). If one ejects, then the plane rolls, the next person to eject could launch into someone else.

It stuck me as well.

My uninformed guess is that it took both pilots roughly the same amount of time to run through their OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) loop and conclude their plane was not recoverable and eject.

And for both crew members of the same plane ejecting at the same time, I think the ejection of the second personnel is automated should the first one eject. (Not familiar with the F-18 fighter at all but I know it's like that in other fighters with two crew members).

Off topic but ...

"What is the Boyd Theory? To many it is simply the OODA loop depicting the human behavioral cycle of decision-making. To others it is a description of command and control. To true believers, it is a profound theory of warfare."

-- Some other Military Dude

It looks like there is a switch with "both"/solo"/"forward" option and the "both" option automates that tiny delay between both ejections. On the other hand ejections from both planes at same time is just pilots reaction speed.

That makes me wonder what happen if only the back seat eject, turns out there's a nice picture about that https://theaviationgeekclub.com/story-f-14-pilot-able-land-t...

This is how you get a callsign like “Jumper” or “Rocket”.

Reminds me of this story that happened few years ago in France: https://www.laprovence.com/article/papier/5956505/le-passage...

100% guessing, but odds are the timing was exactly how long it took 1 of each crew to decide ejection was the only way out (1 of each, because the seats are frequently coupled to ensure there's a small time gap between pilot and weapons officer).

The initiation of the ejection wasn't automated, but it was very clear to both pilots that it was unrecoverable. It was less than 4 seconds after ejection that the jets struck the ground, so there wasn't a lot of time.

By the timing seen in the video, the front seater -- the pilot -- ejected in both jets at close to the same time. That automatically ejects the electronics officer first then the pilot momentarily after, as otherwise the front-seat ejection would wash the rear-seater with the launch exhaust from the front seat ejection.

And I counted about 5 seconds between impact and the ejectors seeming to go off so there wasn't much scope to do it differently.

Apart from the command ejection in two seaters like this one, where depending on the configuration when one person ejects it triggers the other seat, I can only think of one automatic ejection and that is on the F35B as used by the Royal Navy.

If it looses either the lift or main engine the resulting pitch change would be too rapid for a human to react to so the system triggers ejection.

75% of out-of-envelope ejections are fatal. A spinning aircraft that just started making out with another plane is definitely OOE. Those 4 pilots are incredibly lucky, assuming they all survived (looks like it?)

I think these ejection seats work in more or less any orientation.

I am more surprised that they didn't immediately blow up or lose control after colliding. Or even that the crew took that long to eject.

The aircraft appear to have become "stuck" to each other perhaps due to aerodynamic forces similar to how a piece of paper gets stuck to a car windshield (probably something to do with one of the Bernoullis). There wasn't much of an impact to cause a destructive event such as compressor stall. Perhaps the pilots were waiting to see if the aircraft would become un-stuck, or to get clear airspace into which they could eject?

That’s my read as well, but I’m looking forward for an official analysis as things often aren’t as they appear.

I actually looks like the vertical stabilizer of the lower plane got lodged into the fuselage of the other.

The ejection seat is going to do its thing regardless of orientation, but if that orientation is pointed at the ground you better hope you have enough altitude. There was one plane where the ejection seats ejected down and away from the plane that was known for low altitude missions. These seats were affectionately known as lawn darts.

I think that plane is the Lockheed Starfighter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-104_Starfighter#Eje...). Fortunately they were eventually replaced with upward-firing ejection seats. And the "lawn dart" moniker refers to the airplane itself - probably because of the absurdly short wings, which are also placed pretty far back.

"We need a plane for bombing, straffing, assault and battery, interception, ground support and reconnaissance. Not just a *fair weather fighter*!"

RIP Bob Calvert.

Putting on my Internet Guy hat: isn’t that the A-10?

Yes, but that wouldn't come along for another 19 years.

G for... G for *Germany*, Herr Minister.

The Starfighter was designed as a light and fast high speed high altitude interceptor, but eventually used as a relatively heavy low level fighter-bomber. It's part of the reason why they killed so many pilots.

I had the same thought, but those cockpit modules are really designed to maximize the odds of safe ejection, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they consider the possibility of failure and escape as part of the stunt design. Still, it’s amazing everything worked out, especially at that low of an altitude.

Do we know if the pilots are OK? Yes, ejection can save your life, but even in a best-case scenario the forces on the human body are incredibly ugly. I know a former combat-rated RAF pilot that had to eject from a Harrier because of a low-altitude bird strike. After 6 months in the infirmary, he emerged 2cm shorter, combat rating gone forever.

Arms and legs can take a serious beating too. Airplane cockpits are pretty tight spaces, and to be explosively shot out of one with little notice is.. yikes.

The pilots themselves initiated their ejections.

Admittedly I have nowhere near the flight hours, training, or expertise of these pilots, but having flown airplanes myself I can totally imagine in an off-nominal situation (which I have been in before) conscious focus is fully on flying the airplane even if your rote lizard brain is procedurally going through the motions of pulling the ejection handles or otherwise responding to the emergency. My instructor's words--he was a helicopter pilot (Hueys and Chinooks) in the Vietnam war with some 20k hrs logged in complex aircraft, jets, etc. since so I know for certain he knew wtf he was talking about--going through my head "do not ever stop flying the airplane". In this case, my conscious focus would be to stomp one of those rudder pedals as hard as I could to try to recover from the spin, even if I was also simultaneously yelling "eject" or whatever you're told to into the intercom and pulling the handles. But I haven't ever been trained to eject from an aircraft, or maybe my instinctive predilections would select me out of the training regimen these pilots go through.. who knows

Also, these are aircraft with two crew. Either can initiate the ejection sequence, at which point both crew will be ejected regardless of who initiated if I’m not mistaken.

I’ve never trained to eject, but I have trained in situations with parachutes, and the advice is to deploy early. If the thought crosses your mind, the answer is yes.

Yes, that too

Sufficient training overrides your lizard brain.

But yes, pilots still trying to fix stuff when they should have ejected is a common problem.

I would think that when the two planes struck each other both of the pilots would have realized that something had gone seriously wrong and things were not going to be recoverable with a checklist. But yea, in other situations where it isn’t as clear cut, I can definitely imagine a pilot trying to work the problem all the way into the ground.

Ejection is often a career-ending event, unfortunately. Better than dying though.

How so, because of the damage to the body?

They impart significant g forces (~15g) in line with the spine. Compression fractures are common, and most people permanently lose height as a result of the event. The goal is to provide a result better than death.

You're generally limited to two ejections barring any disqualifying health issues. The military doesn't like to throw away its personnel investments when they've gained some hard won experience.

Needless to say, crashing jets at an air show is not going to help anyone’s career.

To my eye, only the pilot of the rearmost plane is in trouble. The one in front was (more or less) flying straight ahead.

It’ll be interesting to see the official findings.

Agreed. It only takes one of them to have an issue or be out of position. Like you say, it’ll be interesting to see what they come back with after a thorough investigation.

I mean, there’s “OK”, and then there’s “not in that flaming heap of exploding shrapnel” OK, so I guess it’s on a spectrum. But I guess they’re “OK-ish”, based on the fact that the seats seemingly cleared the wreck and the parachutes deployed. But yeah, I guess someone definitely could have gotten injured or worse in the tangle. I would imagine that would probably have also resulted in visible damage to the ejection module, though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com