one thing to bear in mind re ejection seats - stats show that military pilots have a far better rate of successful ejection than civi pilots. To the extent I believe that if you are a civi pilot, the seat is equally likely to kill you as save your life
I have heard this quoted before, but cannot see any basis for it?
I am unaware of
any 'unsuccessful' ejection by 'civi pilots' in the CAP632 type arena that should have been successful i.e. made in seat limits. I am aware of fatalities, but either outside seat limits (which tended to kill military pilots as well), but the quoter of the above phrase also seemed to include inadequate flying clothing e.g. no LSJ/immersion suit into water in December and drowning / hypothermia, and called that a "failed ejection". In fact, in one fatal accident, 1 occupant survived despite ejecting outside limits, the other di not survive but was even further outside the limits, IIRC.
when i was flying a JP5 - with live seats - it would have had to be a situation which pretty much guaranteed death or serious injury before i would have used the seat. so serious structural failure? fire coming from the engine into the cockpit? loss of control from a spin and less than 5000 ft on the altimeter? ok - pull the handle.
Glad you listened to what I told you, even if you then intended to ignore it
but if you fly these things, it comes down to pilot choice at the end of the day
I can only agree. My main point is that this "choice" should largely be determined by consideration and debate prior flying - not ignored and then considered only after the engine stops. Remember it is not just the instructor who might "follow the party line due litigation" - the idea is that the instructor trains these pilots to take passengers, and these passengers do not usually have the ability to make an informed choice. So going against the CAA / AAIB / OCM advice with a Pax carries quite a responsibility
NoD