Originally Posted by
CAEBr
ASRAAMTOO, you’re quite right about the TMk1 seat set up. The same system - which is the responsibility of MBA - is fitted to all Hawks built over the years, with the exception of the 200 series which only have the rear seat position, the front having been used for the avionics bay behind the radar, and as a single seat aircraft have no need for it.
It is not however just a simple modification. With command ejection selected, the rear seat instructor is able to operate their seat, which in turn sequences and subsequently operates the front seat. With a modified system selected to front command, the front seat occupant would pull their handle after which the system would pause the front seat while the rear seat is then signalled and operated, after which the front seat would then fire, thus preserving the need for the rear seat to leave the aircraft first. The pause in front seat sequencing and the need to prove its operation would make the qualification and certification of what would be a major modification a more challenging process than simply adding a couple of pipes and wires..
Whilst I completely agree that the system you describe is the ideal solution it is as you say not straightforward. My recollection albeit very hazy is that the Hawk front and rear seat trajectories are divergent. Its therefore worth looking at how sequencing currently works in an unplanned ejection with the captain in the front and a pax in the back.
Front seater says 'eject, eject' and pulls the handle, rear seater hears call and pulls handle. Probability is therefore that no planned sequencing exists and we are reliant on divergence to prevent seat collision..
I think its therefore safe to say that a solution that involves the front seat gasses firing the rear set WITHOUT any sequencing offers an improvement on current arrangements and is not quite as complicated. The problem with this of course is that is no longer the individuals fault if the seats collide!