Oh nothing really just wanted to share

This ejection was not like most ejections...

The aircraft was in a flat spin, giving it zero forward momentum - In 99% of ejections, the aircraft has forward airspeed, so that the canopy is left far behind.

Further, in a flat spin, a vacuum forms as the aircraft falls, thus keeping the canopy closure to the aircraft than normal.

So, yes, Goose's death is very possible, given the circumstances.

 

Whilst i agree with a good explanation from Takao, I remember the first time i saw this and, wondered about the veracity of it...I thought that the canopy was blasted/blown off (usually with shotgun shells)...Even if this isn't true my thinking was that the top of the seat would be higher than the pilots head and that should be what hits the canopy...
This picture as an example...


But some backseat shots suggest its not as high...



So i'm buggered if i know...

Found this:

"Blowing off the canopy is not the only way to avoid canopy collision during ejection sequence.

Ejection sequence on any fighter jet is designed with one basic aim: Egress of pilot in “minimum” time with “maximum” chance of survival. When it comes to safe egress from a fighter aircraft, canopies are the biggest obstacle. Due to high ‘g values during ejection process, any collision between pilot and canopy frame / glass is lethal and can cause severe / fatal injuries. For ensuring pilot’s safety during ejection, collision avoidance with canopy is handled in multiple ways. These mechanisms vary from platform to platform and it is very important that they are part of the ejection sequence i.e. whatever happens to the canopy, it must be after the pilot pulls ejection handle / lever. This will ensure that timing of each event in the sequence is calculated and would not adversely effect the subsequent process. The following mechanisms are adopted to minimize the risks related to canopy collision.

(a) In Canopy Ejection mechanism, canopy is blown off before ejection and is part of ejection sequence such as on F-16, MiG-29 and F-18 etc. As pilot initiates ejection, canopy is blown off first using explosives charges installed at or near canopy attachment hinges. The sequence of these explosives is such that it blows off the canopy in a particular direction, mostly to the rear. Milliseconds after that ejections seat starts to move upwards to complete the remaining ejection sequence.


(b) Canopy glass is shattered using detonating cords embedded in or glued to the canopy glass. This is generally called Canopy Severance System (CSS) and is initiated as part of ejection sequence. The main idea is to break the glass before ejection to avoid any injury to pilot during ejection. This mechanism is used on aircraft that does not have canopy ejection system as part of egress system i.e. F-35, JF-17 etc. As ejection is initiated, the detonating cord shatters the acrylic glass outwards into small pieces and then the ejection seat starts to move upward. This ensures that canopy glass doesn’t injure the pilot during ejection. Ejection seat is installed with “Penetrators” that breaks and removes any piece of canopy glass in the way.


(c) Another way to shatter the canopy glass is through “Thruster & Penetrator” mechanism, installed on ejection seats. These were used by Martin-Baker on Chinese origin fighters but is not commonly used anymore due to being more risky. This mechanism is also used on aircraft that does not have canopy ejection system or CSS like J-7, Q-5 etc. Thrusters are like spikes installed on the top of ejection seat. On initiating ejection, these Thrusters would be fired upwards to break the acrylic canopy glass and as the seat moves upwards, the Penetrators remove remaining glass.


Canopy ejection and CSS, both mechanisms are equally effective, have been extensively tested and are in use on various aircraft around the world. In “Thruster & Penetrator” mechanism only ejection seat is part of egress system while in others, both canopy and ejection seat are part of egress system as detonators are installed on canopy as well and require same level of maintenance."


F-14A Tomcat Pilot tells the story of the real life Goose and explains how Nick Bradshaw could have survived the flat spin featured in Top Gun Movie - The Aviation Geek Club

.
.

 

Found this...
"The actor Tom Cruise almost had his arm broken by an irate drinker in an Irish pub who accused him of trying to steal the barman’s cigarettes, a Kerry politician has revealed."

 

Tom Cruise is all head.
Ive never seen a Cruise film yet where he isn't given the opportunity to show us all what a big ego he truly has. I think I know why our Nicole divorced the Dick.

It was too small and he was too short to give it to her

 

There's always an exception to a rule.
Tom Cruise in "Vanilla Sky" was perfect for the role of a rich bighead finding out that disfigurement would ruin everything no matter how much money he had.

 

I thought he was great in Top Gun and War of the Worlds…

 

I thought Takao gave a very good explanation. Here is a video by Ward Carroll that specifically addresses the subject. Carroll was an F-14 RIO for most of his Navy career so he is an SME (subject matter expert).



It's relatively short, a little over 12 minutes, but chock full of interesting info. If you don't have the time I'll give you the "Cliff" notes, the flat spin as depicted in the movie was inaccurate (Takao's description was correct). The accident with the ejection could happen as depicted (in fact it was based upon a real incident) and modifications were made to the F-14 A's ejection sequence to address this possibility.

 

Apologies to Takao, I posted my previous post before I saw his post #2205 . It's also a Ward Carroll video, and a good one.

 

I'm told that in Top Gun, they had to put an orange crate on the seat so that Cruise could actually see out the cockpit.

 

I'm still not convinced with the angled ejection set to avoid such situations plus the f14 ejection seats had a crash bar capable of smashing thru the canopy in case the canopy blow off failed

 

Hey CSC you mentioned before enjoying those vids of those tank knock outs. Did you like those vids of a flight of ka-50 or 52s get shot out of the skies. It was crazy I will give the Russians their not cowards those guys kept going in getting shot at multiple times. I really thought when the third one went down the last two would break off but they kept attacking till they got shot down as well. I really can't say if the Russians are just stupidly brave or plain crazy. It was really wild seeing those helicopters drop burning to the ground.

 

The F-14 was in a flat spin, a vacuum is created as the F-14 drops straight down, that can keep the canopy much closer to the aircraft than would be expected under normal conditions - negating the angle of ejection.

What crash bar on an F-14 ejection seat?

 

Theres been quite a few versions...i watched one (episode) not long ago made by BBC which seemed pretty faithful to the book...You know Britain does period drama really well.


I thought Cruise's version was a today version that hit all the correct points - Under the house visit by aliens - ship being attacked in harbour - train attack etc etc...You knew Cruise's character wanted to be by himself but was weighed down by his kids...Reminded me of my own Dad when he was that age...Again well acted by Cruise IMO. You don't get to see Cruise lose his shit in other movies...but he's "just" keeping it together for his kids...

I remember a great WotW computer game about 20 years ago that was based on the original...very fun to play.

If you haven't already, give WotW Jeff Wayne's musical version - Narrated by Richard Burton (what a voice) -



So good...

 

More Rock Opera or Concept Album than Musical.

Always my favorite.

 

Liam Neeson or Richard Burton?

I think Liam speaks too quickly...Burton is the voice...

No one would have believed, in the last years of the nineteenth century, that human affairs were being watched from the timeless worlds of space. No one could have dreamed we were being scrutinized, as someone with a microscope studies creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water. Few men even considered the possibility of life on other planets and yet, across the gulf of space, minds immeasurably superior to ours regarded this Earth with envious eyes, and slowly and surely, they drew their plans against us.



ULLA!


.

 

Actually, it's more like "Oooolahhh!!"

Burton's narrative voice added volumes of dramatic background. And tracks like "Thunderchild", "Forever Autumn", and the other Moody Blues track whose name I can never remember. And for action in musical form, nothing beat "The Artilleryman and The Fighting Machine". And for sheer evil in musical form "Horsel Common and the Heat Ray" was and always will be DANGER in music description.

I don't care what people think of that album. It was one of my childhood favorites that had enough variety to be listened to over and over again. I don't know how many copies it sold worldwide, but it's still worth a listen all these years later. I think, from memory, wasn't Julie Covington on a couple of the tracks, of "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" fame? And of course the voice of David Essex as the Artilleryman.

Such beautiful musical memories.

 

Agree...Moody Blues "owned" this album...I listened to the whole thing last week whilst working...So good.

.