“ That’s funny, I fly the 767 and that cockpit looks very Green to me. $$$$$$$$$$$$”. 😁

If you not in control of nthe plane, it’s going where physics takes it, not ejecting only adds you to the death toll. It’s not a decision, it’s a requirement to get out.

“And that’s at this moment, the aircraft becomes a Municipality problem”
(Not my quote :p)


Disclaimer: Yes, yes, yes….Of course there is more to it if you are on the receiving end.

That "requirement" is only that of self-preservation. It's still a decision. Unlike most civil air accidents, you just have the option of making it. If you have that option, maybe you don't try so hard to mitigate what will happen next.

From what was said at the time (iirc) they used to fly with 5 crew during busy shows, two pilots, a flight engineer and port/starboard look outs. BBMF usually operated the Lancaster with 4-5 aircrew. Two pilots, flight Eng, Nav and occasionally second Nav for state occasions.

BBMF are military and don't conform to same regs as civil although they may choose to do so. Firefly crash being a classic example being flown by RN.

What Firefly crash ? A few Seafire and Fury crashes. Can’t recall a firefly crash however ?

Firefly WB271 crashed at Duxford in July 2003, both crew killed.

Having actually ejected after a mid-air and knowing probably a dozen other pilots who’ve ejected there is NO mitigation of what happens next. No one pulls the handles if there’s another option. In fact, many have been killed not ejecting trying to save the inevitable.

The military does have safe locations in those few cases where ejection is necessary as the plane cannot be safely landed—well away from populations. A OEI, no hydraulics situation was one of these cases in the A-10. Sure enough, in Desert Storm, a pilot tried it and was killed.

Now, if you want to argue, the authority should not permit these ex-military jets to be operated, no argument from me.

I stand corrected. That was the Historic Flight I believe still under RN control.

Blimey, 20th anniversary just passed...:sad:

It impacted about 200 yards away from where I was standing.

Blimey you must be even older than me! 🙂

Mog

:}
I must get my peepers retested......I might be able to see the keyboard better an what I'm typing......not even had a tot of rum yet this evening either :ugh:

Some interesting pictures of the ejection. I guess those seats are hot. They appear to have set light to the cockpit!
Facebook

Yup. Effin great rockets do get hot!

Mog

The fact that they had working ejection seats indicates to me generally good maintenenance - or at least that enough money was available, as it is expensive to keep those in working and certified condition. Most older military jets in private hands seem to do away with the ejection seats, just too much hassle and money to keep them going.

KE,under UK regs,you can fly ex-mil jets without `live` seats,but have `live` canopy jettison capability and the original seat `chute`,so you don`t just `do away` with the whole system.Also the aircraft must be `straight -wing`,not `swept,and usually have a stall speed less than 100kts,or thereabouts...Legacy early jets such as the Meteor,Vampires/Venom,Magister,Galeb,L29,L39 ,T-33 `fit` that...Similar stall characteristics to some of the `heavy `piston fighters...

As someone who for a while flew ex military jets in the UK, initially with live seats and then without I was always disappointed by the attitude of the regulator.

They required seats with time expired cartridges to be deactivated. I always thought it would be a MUCH better option to pull the handle, and if the time expired cartridge failed to work you were then in the EXACT same position you would be in once the seat was deactivated!

Rather a bizarre view, I think. Apart from which, I think (ex squippers can comment) that the longer the cartridge has passed its expiration date, the greater the risks it poses as the chemical composition changes. These risks can include, but are not limited to, uncommanded ejection!

Not probable - the characteristics of solid rocket propellant make it that it becomes 'more' stable and less energetic (and harder to ignite) as it ages - not less stable.