The F-35’s Martin-Baker Ejection Seat

Design and construction
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1347
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post22 Oct 2015, 20:47

spazsinbad wrote:Thanks for the exact links 'Dragon029'.

Geez those guys are interested eh. The CHAIRperson cut off Gen. Bogdan explanation - wow. I'm impressed and so was that dead-eyed dickhead. For f'sake - why ask the question if answer is not of interest? Amazing lack of cred on display.


At least he wasn't as bad as McSally or Moulton; she spent most of her time not even asking questions, but just emphasising the "unique" capabilities of the A-10; while Moulton's 'questions' were essentially "I'm pretty sure we can all agree this program has been a waste, blah blah blah, do you agree with that General?".
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post22 Oct 2015, 20:57

Yep I'm getting harsh in me old age and less willing to whatever. Anyway the story is interesting to know the details because of pilot safety. And to be clear I would trust the BoggieGenerale and BakedMartin to follow their recommendations so far. However knowing as many details as possible in a public forum is important - I'm pissed (not drunk as in OzSpeak) that the chairbound dork did not allow the bogman to explain. Sure boggeddown may seem like a windbag to some but he IS trying to explain some complicated stuff. Meanwhile back at the Seligman 'I found the story of a lifetime'....

Again this article best read at source to see how an 'internal memo' is not the real deal. [Don't mention 'dogfightin']
Bogdan Denies Excessive Risk To Most F-35 Pilots
22 Oct 2015 Lara Seligman

"WASHINGTON -- Despite concerns over the safety of lightweight pilots flying the F-35, the vast majority of pilots do not face excessive risk of neck damage during an ejection, the chief of the Pentagon’s Joint Program Office (JPO) argued in front of Congress this week.

In response to questioning from Rep. Jackie Speier, D-CA, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, JPO chief Lt. Gen. Christopher C. Bogdan said there is no elevated risk of injury for F-35 pilots “in the heart” of the weight envelope during an ejection.

“We have done the risk analysis on the test points that we have had on the ejection seat, and what we have found is the only area where we have a problem today is with the lightweight pilot below 136 pounds,” Bogdan said during an Oct. 21 hearing of the House Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces. “But the areas that we have tested indicate that, in the heart of the envelope, for the heart of the pilot population, there is not any increased risk of injury at all.”...

...During the hearing, Speier referred to reports that an internal Pentagon assessment found a 23 percent chance of major injury or death for F-35 pilots between 136 and 165 pounds during ejection. Bogdan refuted those reports before the panel.

“Ma'am, that is incorrect. The data that you have came from a reporter who got a copy of an official-use-only internal DOD document that my team put together to assess the risks of a lightweight pilot and a pilot between 136 and 165 pounds. That document should have never been publicly released,” Bogdan said, referring to a recent Congressional Quarterly article. He indicated that CQ misinterpreted the document.

Bogdan went on to lay out the probability of neck injury for F-35 pilots in different weight classes. A pilot who weighs less than 136 pounds has a one in 50,000 chance of neck injury from an ejection, whereas one between 136 and 165 pounds has a one in 200,000 chance of incurring the same damage, he told the House panel.

But after the hearing, Bogdan told a group of reporters that these figures account for the low probability that a pilot will have to eject at all and that they don’t reflect the likelihood of injury in the event of an ejection.

That 23 percent chance of injury does exist in the event of an ejection, Bogdan told them.

“So the 23 percent is when he ejects, but the probability of that [pilot ejecting] is one in 200,000,” Bogdan said, adding that the latter figure “is no different than the risk that we see in legacy airplanes today.”

Bogdan told the panel that the JPO has tested the ejection seat at low speeds using lightweight mannequins (136 pounds and under) and with heavyweight pilots above 245 pounds. But the program has not tested the seat using a middleweight mannequin, representing most pilots, between 135 and 245 pounds. The JPO is planning tests in that weight envelope down the road, Bogdan said...."

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /74406950/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post23 Oct 2015, 22:35

I'm not making light of this sad event however it will be interesting to know more details about why this USMC Hornet pilot died ejecting apparently just after takeoff from Lakenheath UK. I'm not going to speculate on the circumstances however I just make the point that ejecting is not always guaranteed to be safe (then there is the proviso that the pilot must eject within the limitations of the aircraft ejection seat) and I say again our motto was this: " IF IN DOUBT - PUNCH OUT ".
Marine Pilot Killed in Crash in England is Identified
22 Oct 2015 Stars & Stripes

"...[Maj. Taj] Sareen became a Marine Corps fighter pilot in 2005, according to his LinkedIn page, and was educated at the University of San Francisco and University of Auburn.

At the time of the crash he was assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 232, based at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego.

Sareen's aircraft went down soon after takeoff from RAF Lakenheath about 10:30 a.m. Wednesday, crashing in a farm field in the nearby town of Redmere. One witness described a loud noise followed by a large fireball.

The pilot ejected from the aircraft, said Gunnery Sgt. Donald Bohanner, a spokesman for Marine Corps Air Station Miramar...."

Source: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015 ... ified.html

MAP is from another story about same crash: http://news.usni.org/2015/10/22/marines ... rnet-crash
Attachments
LakenheathUSMChornetCrashOct2015.jpg
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

smsgtmac

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 861
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2013, 04:22
  • Location: Texas

Unread post25 Oct 2015, 08:41

The Scary F-35 M-B Ejection Seat Story, and 'Serious Risk' in Perspective. I'll be tagging it as #SmellsLikePogo tomorrow and possibly cleaning it up some. (Blogger was a royal pain today)
--The ultimate weapon is the mind of man.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post25 Oct 2015, 09:43

Yep - nobody is going to do it for fun - some do not do it and die. I did not do it and lived to tell the tale but it was a split second thing and I was going up on a good engine and still flying....
'smsgtmac': ...IF you are ejecting, you are already facing “all but certain death”...."
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

oldiaf

Banned

  • Posts: 1434
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2015, 23:28

Unread post25 Oct 2015, 10:20

spazsinbad wrote:I'm not making light of this sad event however it will be interesting to know more details about why this USMC Hornet pilot died ejecting apparently just after takeoff from Lakenheath UK. I'm not going to speculate on the circumstances however I just make the point that ejecting is not always guaranteed to be safe (then there is the proviso that the pilot must eject within the limitations of the aircraft ejection seat) and I say again our motto was this: " IF IN DOUBT - PUNCH OUT ".
Marine Pilot Killed in Crash in England is Identified
22 Oct 2015 Stars & Stripes

"...[Maj. Taj] Sareen became a Marine Corps fighter pilot in 2005, according to his LinkedIn page, and was educated at the University of San Francisco and University of Auburn.

At the time of the crash he was assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 232, based at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego.

Sareen's aircraft went down soon after takeoff from RAF Lakenheath about 10:30 a.m. Wednesday, crashing in a farm field in the nearby town of Redmere. One witness described a loud noise followed by a large fireball.

The pilot ejected from the aircraft, said Gunnery Sgt. Donald Bohanner, a spokesman for Marine Corps Air Station Miramar...."

Source: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015 ... ified.html

MAP is from another story about same crash: http://news.usni.org/2015/10/22/marines ... rnet-crash

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=28237
You should use search engine
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post25 Oct 2015, 10:58

No kidding. 'oldiaf' you really do not understand English meaning of posts at all. My reference to what you had referenced earlier was not for the sake of reporting that particular accident - to a Hornet - but to use it as a recent illustration of the hazards of ejecting from an aircraft. I could have used other examples however I knew that the ejection was not successful and that is why it was used. Learn to read and understand English - thanks.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

oldiaf

Banned

  • Posts: 1434
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2015, 23:28

Unread post25 Oct 2015, 11:06

spazsinbad wrote:No kidding. 'oldiaf' you really do not understand English meaning of posts at all. My reference to what you had referenced earlier was not for the sake of reporting that particular accident - to a Hornet - but to use it as a recent illustration of the hazards of ejecting from an aircraft. I could have used other examples however I knew that the ejection was not successful and that is why it was used. Learn to read and understand English - thanks.

Don't be harsh ... I know exactly what you mean by that post ... I just quoted for humor
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post25 Oct 2015, 11:07

Now you are just being sad. Stop.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post29 Oct 2015, 00:56

USAF PR is quick off the mark I must opine. Probably had to go through a million clearances for correctness....
AF leaders testify on F-35 progress
28 Oct 2015 Senior Airman Hailey Haux, Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs Command Information

"WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Leaders in the F-35 Lightning II Joint Program Office and the Air Force F-35 Integration Office testified on the fifth-generation aircraft’s development before a House Armed Services subcommittee Oct. 21 on Capitol Hill.

Fielding a number of questions from Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee representatives, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the F-35 program executive officer, and Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Harrigian, the F-35 Integration Office director, Headquarters Air Force, assured them the program is making progress.

“The F-35 program today is executing well across the entire spectrum of acquisition, to include development and design, flight test, production … and building a global sustainment enterprise,” Bogdan said. “The program is at a pivot point today, where we are moving from slow and steady progress to what I call a rapidly growing and accelerating program.”

Overall, the program has flown more than 42,000 hours, to include the international jets and the U.S. service-specific variations.

The F-35 is a complex program made more challenging by the fact that it’s still in development, even as we are flying it in the field. Recent tests on the safe-escape system [QUE?] revealed a problem that would result in lighter-weight pilots possibly suffering major neck injury upon ejection.

“The program is working with our industry partners on three specific improvements that will provide lightweight pilots that same level of protection and safety as all other F-35 pilots,” Bogdan said in his written testimony. “These three improvements are: one, a reduced weight helmet that weighs 6 ounces less than the current helmet … two, a pilot ‘weight switch’ on the ejection seat that reduces the opening shock of the parachute by slightly delaying the parachute’s opening for lightweight pilots; and three, a head support that will be sewn into the parachute risers that will reduce the rearward head movement of the pilot when the main chute of the ejection seat opens, reducing the pilot’s neck loads.”

Comparing the F-35 with the F-16 Fighting Falcon’s maneuverability was another concern; however, both generals were confident in the F-35 program and its capabilities.

“The F-35’s technology is designed to engage, shoot and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual ‘dogfighting’ situations,” Harrigian said in his testimony. “There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios, and the F-35s had a clear operational advantage because of the sensors, weapons and stealth technology. The F-35 has been optimized for the current trends of warfare, where the enemy is engaged and defeated from long distances, but it will still be able to maneuver aggressively when required to defeat and kill threats.”

Overall, the F-35 program is on track to be delivered on time and on cost, and Bogdan and Harrigian agree it’s a capability needed for the joint force to be successful...."

Source: http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/t ... gress.aspx
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post11 Nov 2015, 08:11

I keep forgetting to check AINonline because they do have some great articles sometimes - here is one that is now a few months old with info I have not seen - YMMV - before the KERFUFFLE. This is a LONG article with only F-35 bits below.
Martin-Baker: Saving Lives in the Family Way [NO THEY ARE NOT REFERENCING BEING PREGNANT "in the family way"]
15 Jun 2015 Chris Pocock

"...As things stand, Martin-Baker has a 53-percent share of the worldwide ejection seat market. UTC Aerospace Systems (formerly Goodrich) has 15 percent, and Russia’s Zvezda has 14 percent, according to the British company’s calculations. No other company has more than 5-percent market share.

F-35 Seat
Martin-Baker is providing the ejection seat for all three variants of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II. The US16E seat for the stealth fighter is a development of the Mk16 that MBA provides for the Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, Beechcraft T-6 Texan II and other aircraft.

In its US16T guise, the Mk16 was also retrofitted to the U.S. Air Force Northrop T-38C Talon fleet when it was upgraded, another American major contract for the British company. In India, the Mk16 has displaced the Zvezda K-36 ejection seat that was fitted to the prototypes of the HAL Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and HAL Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer (IJT).

A unique feature of the US16E is the trio of airbags that inflate in a two-stage process to protect the head and neck of the F-35 pilot, wearing the large helmet-mounted display, upon ejection. Also of note, the F-35B version of the Lightning II has an auto-eject mode. This is designed to function in the specific instance where the STOVL aircraft is in the hover, and the shaft-driven lift fan fails.

In that case, the jet is likely to pitch down sharply, quicker than the pilot can react to fire the seat manually. It will therefore fire automatically while the possibility of escape remains.

Earlier this month, the US16E achieved a significant milestone, when it received the Release Authorization Notice (RAN) Level VI flight clearance from Lockheed Martin. Thus, the F-35 seat is now fully qualified for unrestricted flight operations.
[Remember this is BEFORE THE PROBLEM]

“We have been testing this seat and all its components progressively from 2004, with over 100 ejection tests to demonstrate the exacting F-35 physiological, accommodation, mass, environmental, integration, schedule and cost requirements,” Steve Roberts, the F-35 Lead for MBA, told AIN.

For the moment, US16E seats are still assembled at Higher Denham, but the work will eventually move across the Atlantic to Johnstown. The US16T seats for the T-38 retrofit were assembled at MBA’s 38,000-sq-ft American facility...."

Source: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... family-way
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post24 Nov 2015, 23:42

Another example of the dictum "IF IN DOUBT - PUNCH OUT". As indicated in the sad report below it can be speculation only at this early stage - however the accident has the ingredients under discussion earlier for the F-35 seat: M-B, female aircrew, low speed & low altitude ejection. In this instance the speculation is that the event took place outside the safe seat ejection envelope. I won't add my speculation and just add the relevant parts below.
Pakistan's First Female Fighter Pilot Killed in Trainer Crash
24 Nov 2015 Usman Ansari

"ISLAMABAD — Pakistan's first female fighter pilot died today when a twin-seat fighter aircraft crashed in Punjab province on a training mission.

A statement from the Pakistan Air Force soon after the crash said "an FT-7PG aircraft, while on a routine operational training mission, crashed near Kundian (Mianwali). Both the pilots of the aircraft ejected safely and [have] been rescued. No loss of civilian life and property has been reported on ground. A board of inquiry has been ordered by Air Headquarters to determine the cause of accident."

However, it was later reported that Flying Officer Marium Mukhtiar died of injuries sustained on ejection....

...He said he understands whatever happened hampered the ability of the pilots to eject safely.

"I have no idea what might have gone wrong, but word has it that since the ejection took place at very low altitude on final approach, the fatality might have been due to a delayed ejection," he said. "Under such flight conditions involving a rate of descent, there is not giving enough time for the chute to blossom fully."

He said without further details however this is presently speculative.

Pakistan's F-7 series of fighters are fitted with Martin Baker Mk10 zero-zero ejection seats in which it places a high degree of faith. The seat is also fitted to its Mirage-III/5s, and prior to their retirement from Pakistani service was fitted to the Nanchang A-5, Shenyang FT-5 and F-6/FT-6 jets.

Though it is a very good seat, Tufail said under certain circumstances it may not perform as well as it could.

"It is a zero-zero seat, but these have to be activated in level flight at zero level (ground). If there is a rate of descent, the minimum ejection height goes up, proportionately. In this case, the aircraft was low, on final approach, and the rate of descent apparently did not allow enough time for the parachute to blossom fully," he said.

Tufail said he believes for Mukhtiar these circumstances may have been compounded by the type of training mission she may have been flying as usually the instructor occupies the rear seat. However, if it was an instrument flying mission, then the student would have sat in the rear seat and been under a 'hood' to restrict external vision.

Though he said he did not know her personally, Tufail paid tribute to Mukhtiar.

"I am told she was a very fine officer.""

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /76325592/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23159
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 Dec 2015, 01:31

Bit of a POT POURRI of F-35 Info with my TAKEDthatAWAY is the ejection seat news - short & sweet anyways and REJOICE?
F-35 Christmas Presents: 45 Planes (And More?)
08 Dec 2015 Colin Clark

"WASHINGTON: After years and years of busted schedules, cost overruns and technical challenges, the F-35 program is expected to end 2015 on a high note, with all production goals met and solid progress resolving the ejection seat issues that threaten lighter pilots.

I understand from industry and program sources that, after getting stalled, there is a good chance that the so-called handshake agreement on LRIP 9 is also likely to be announced. Of course, those negotiations are always fraught, so we’ll take that one with a grain of salt.

Lockheed Martin has completed 43 of the 45 planes planned to be built this year, including the first foreign-built plane that was recently rolled out in Italy. There appears little doubt the other two will be done on time.

Also, engineers believe they’ve come up with a solution for the troubled ejection seat, which could kill pilots who weigh less than 136 pounds. Some sled tests have been done with a new head panel and a delayed parachute release, but the data is still being crunched, so we’re not sure yet if the solution has been confirmed. We may not know until around the time of the Farnborough Air Show.

Also, it’s awfully early to say much, but work is already underway to get F-35Bs, which will fly from the Royal Navy’s new Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers, to Britain for the early July Royal International Air Tattoo (RIAT) and then to Farnborough. Breaking D readers will remember, of course, the F-35A engine fire meant no F-35Bs at the last British air shows."

Source: http://breakingdefense.com/2015/12/f-35 ... -and-more/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post09 Dec 2015, 04:20

spazsinbad wrote:.... We may not know until around the time of the Farnborough Air Show. Also, it’s awfully early to say much, but work is already underway to get F-35Bs, which will fly from the Royal Navy’s new Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers, to Britain for the early July Royal International Air Tattoo (RIAT) and then to Farnborough. Breaking D readers will remember, of course, the F-35A engine fire meant no F-35Bs at the last British air shows."...]


Gee, you'd think the Brits could swap a loaner with the Iti's and save a bit of gas money!!.....Oh!!, forgot the A and B thingees. :D
Offline

maus92

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2052
  • Joined: 21 May 2010, 17:50
  • Location: Annapolis, MD

Unread post08 Jan 2016, 23:32

Looks like the MB ejection seat fix will be delayed to 2018:

F-35 Ejection Seat Fix Delayed to 2018; Pilot Restrictions Continue
By Lara Seligman | Jan 8 2016 | Defense News

"WASHINGTON — The US Air Force won’t lift weight restrictions on F-35 pilots until 2018 — at the earliest — as more testing needs to be done to address safety issues with the jet’s ejection seat, Defense News has learned...."

"Testing of the seat, built by UK company Martin-Baker, last August showed an “elevated” risk of injury for F-35 pilots weighing under 165 pounds, and an “unacceptable” risk for those under 136 pounds, according to the Air Force."


"The Joint Program Office told Defense News in October that all three fixes would be fully implemented by summer 2017, allowing the services to look at lifting the weight restrictions. But in a Jan. 8 email, the Air Force acknowledged that the date had been pushed back, to early 2018 at the earliest...."

"Part of the delay is the increased testing required for the head support panel, and mating it with the lightweight switch, Jeter wrote in a follow-up email. Once all three fixes are implemented, the Air Force will begin to “relook” at lifting the weight restriction, she said...."

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /78519892/
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Design & Construction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest