Forum: Military Aircraft of the Cold War

Forum Veteran Joined: Dec 15, 2006 - 12:28 AM Posts: 760

I was wondering what the minimum altitude is for a B-52H.

I have a “couple” at YouTube that are claiming the B-52 ejection system is a zero ninety (Altitude/knots) ejection system. They “both” claim they were B-52 flight crewmen. I suspect the “couple” is a single stupid troll/poser. They claim the B-52 uses a Martin Baker ejection system. I thought the B-52 used a Weber ejection system? At first they overlooked the fact that some of the crew ejected downward, now they’re trying to claim the downward ejections seats are safe to use at 250 feet.

I don’t know that much about the B-52 ejection system but their claims seem laughable. I thought that most of the US (non-rocket) explosive pyrotechnic gas operated catapult ejection systems from that era had a minimum safe altitude of something like 250-500 feet. I thought the downward minimum safe altitude; was something like 500 or 1000 feet.

Apparently they “forgot” that using downward firing seats at zero altitude would essentially be suicide.

I was under the impression that ejecting up while on the ground with most older US explosive type of catapult system was a Hail Mary ( below minimums, but might offer some minimal chance of survival under extreme conditions).

So what are the real world (not laboratory/theoretical) minimums altitudes for safe ejection on a B-52?

So in your opinion do you think my commenters at YouTube are veterans or posers? I think it’s one poser pretending to be two veterans.

F-16.net Sponsor

There are 6 egress units built into the Stratofortress, two of which eject crew members from the lower section of the aircraft the other four from the "upper deck", making it one hell of a complex system. Check out this link Very Happy

[Link pending approval]

Unlike those two, I'm actually good friends with a couple of retired BUFF crewdogs. They say that if there was a situation where the crew needed to eject at low altitude, the pilot was supposed to pull back on the stick and give full power so the guys on the lower deck had enough air under their seats to make it. I also know of an instance where a lower-deck crewman mistakenly ejected at low altitude over Louisiana. He was fine, but finding another lower hatch wasn't easy Laughing

A pilot I fly with was a fmr. BUFF Radar Nav. He told me 1,000 AGL will give you one swing under a full chute. You might not like the landing, but you'll live. Laughing

TC wrote:

A pilot I fly with was a fmr. BUFF Radar Nav. He told me 1,000 AGL will give you one swing under a full chute. You might not like the landing, but you'll live. Laughing

Sudden (if slight) negative Gs have always hurt my balls for some reason; reading about a downward ejecting seat makes me want to grab my junk.

1st503rdsgt wrote:

TC wrote:

A pilot I fly with was a fmr. BUFF Radar Nav. He told me 1,000 AGL will give you one swing under a full chute. You might not like the landing, but you'll live. Laughing

Sudden (if slight) negative Gs have always hurt my balls for some reason; reading about a downward ejecting seat makes me want to grab my junk.

You outta get that checked! Wink

The best part about pulling handles, is usually when you do, the next thing you realize, is you're floating under canopy wondering "WTF just happened?!"

I had heard the stories about how time slowed down or people didn't remember the actual ejection, etc. Mine was different. I saw the canopy go, when I went up the rail my head was forced down and I clearly saw the jet going away...my feeling was that I was ejecting the jet, not vice versa. Before the chute fully opened, I saw the canopy go flying by as the seat and me decelerated. The chute opening and seat separation were pretty dramatic...I had a firm grip on the seat handles and my hands got beat up a little when the chute opening separated me from the seat. After collecting my thoughts, I remembered to look up to check the canopy. All was OK.

Only then did I start to wonder about WTF just happened.

As an Avionics guy for the Buff, we tried our best to avoid ever triggering the ejection systems as we crawled around the interior pulling LRUs and working the cabin wiring. One of the oddities of the upper ejection seats was that there were emergency escape methods. You could manually remove the upper hatches and then lashed up to the bulkhead wall under some thermal padding was a coil of rope so you could throw that out of the hatch, then climb down the side of the aircraft mountaineer style! Having been walking on top of the Buff many times, I can assure you all that it looks like a huge fall when you are up there -- so this form of rope repelling egress would have been adventurous as well.

(((Begin unrelated B-52 note:)))
I recall one view of the Buff that you don't often see in pictures. Viewed from the tip of tail (we were up working on one of the upper rudder radome blisters in a big cherry picker basket). From that view looking down on the aircraft with the fowler flaps fully extended the wings appear absolutely huge compared to the center fuselage - so much so that the aircraft almost resembles a flying wing with a tiny stick leading to small tail surfaces.

Forum: Military Aircraft of the Cold War

B-52 ejection altitude minimums