jetfueldrinker
23rd May 2008, 19:37
There is a very interesting web site, www.ejection-history.org.uk which lists military air accidents and incidents related to aircraft fitted with ejection seats. There may be a few inaccuracies on the site. For example, according to the site XV800 crashed and was written off twice and I know for a fact that it bit the dust on RAF Wildenrath’s runway on May 16th 1975, the day after a pilot banged out of a Harrier T4 and landed in the grounds of The Pony Hof. Funnily enough, the shock of the seat going released the control restriction, the reason for the instructor pilot ejecting in the first place, and the front seat guy landed the aircraft safely.
When I served in the 1970’s and 1980’s it was accepted that there would be a loss rate of about 20 aircraft a year due to all manner of factors ranging from pilot error to technical malfunction and servicing error. It was bad luck when it happened, but that was the way it was. The thinking was that if the pilot ejected, then he lived to fly another day. And let’s face it, nobody likes funerals. So the lucky ejectee would buy the armourer who fitted the seat a beer, have a tour of the Martin Baker factory and be presented with the ejection seat handle mounted on a plinth. Every serving squadron member knew at least one pilot who had needed to use his seat to save his life.
Looking at the site, the Americans are still loosing planes like there was no tomorrow. Most other nations keep loosing planes at a steady rate, except the British. I am asking myself why this should be. By my reckoning the last time a British pilot ejected was over 12 months ago. Surely with all the conflict, operations and intensive training that the RAF and Fleet Air Arm pilots are expected to partake in, statistically there should be more operational mishaps. Yet, remarkably, there appear to be fewer.
I accept that there are fewer aircraft, fewer serving people and fewer stations than when I served. But the demands seem greater. This must apply world wide and most nations still loose aircraft at an alarming rate except the British.
I’d love to hear any theories as to why this should be. Most people in the time I served thought that the British forces were reasonable. The Falklands War proved that we were the best and it made the world sit up, listen and take notice. No doubt better training has a large part to play, but this does not count for things like bird strikes, technical cock ups and mechanical failure, all of which have, historically been causes of aircraft crashing.
So come on guys, why do you think that there are fewer crashes involving British planes and aircrew? What do you attribute this to? What are we doing so right that the rest of the world has not cottoned onto?
When I served in the 1970’s and 1980’s it was accepted that there would be a loss rate of about 20 aircraft a year due to all manner of factors ranging from pilot error to technical malfunction and servicing error. It was bad luck when it happened, but that was the way it was. The thinking was that if the pilot ejected, then he lived to fly another day. And let’s face it, nobody likes funerals. So the lucky ejectee would buy the armourer who fitted the seat a beer, have a tour of the Martin Baker factory and be presented with the ejection seat handle mounted on a plinth. Every serving squadron member knew at least one pilot who had needed to use his seat to save his life.
Looking at the site, the Americans are still loosing planes like there was no tomorrow. Most other nations keep loosing planes at a steady rate, except the British. I am asking myself why this should be. By my reckoning the last time a British pilot ejected was over 12 months ago. Surely with all the conflict, operations and intensive training that the RAF and Fleet Air Arm pilots are expected to partake in, statistically there should be more operational mishaps. Yet, remarkably, there appear to be fewer.
I accept that there are fewer aircraft, fewer serving people and fewer stations than when I served. But the demands seem greater. This must apply world wide and most nations still loose aircraft at an alarming rate except the British.
I’d love to hear any theories as to why this should be. Most people in the time I served thought that the British forces were reasonable. The Falklands War proved that we were the best and it made the world sit up, listen and take notice. No doubt better training has a large part to play, but this does not count for things like bird strikes, technical cock ups and mechanical failure, all of which have, historically been causes of aircraft crashing.
So come on guys, why do you think that there are fewer crashes involving British planes and aircrew? What do you attribute this to? What are we doing so right that the rest of the world has not cottoned onto?