Not sure if this is a factual question, but I imagine there are hard-and-fast protocols for this. Anyway, a video clip of military jet crash-landing on the runway has been playing very often on the news yesterday and today (link to clip below). The jet comes down vertically, bounces on its landing gear, for a second it looks like it will be a rough but not too damaging landing. Then the jet tips forward hard on its nose and spins around several times.
The pilot ejects toward the end of all that, when the momentum of the jet seems to be coming to a stop. It made me wonder, was it a good idea for the pilot to eject in that situation? I know there are dangers inherent in ejecting at any height (RIP, Goose from Top Gun I), and I thought ejecting from the ground doesn’t give the chute enough height to safely land (though it looks like he came down slowly enough-- hope he’s ok).
Was the pilot concerned with a fuel explosion? Is the ejection automatic with a certain degree of impact, like an air bag? I’m not judging or knocking the pilot’s judgement at all because I have no idea what the proper thing to do is in a situation like that, but it seems like he would have been safer just staying with the plane.
Zero-zero ejection seats have been around for a while now, with the zero-zero meaning they can give you high probability of a safe landing when ejecting from zero altitude with zero velocity.
A safe landing in this situation is certainly not guaranteed. In this case the pilot was swaying to and fro under his canopy as he descended; he happened to touch down at a good moment this time, but he could just as easily have touched down at a moment when he was swinging downward, causing a bonebreaker of a touchdown.
As for what the pilot was thinking at the time and whether ejection in this particular situation was a good idea or not, it remains to be seen. The incident just happened yesterday, and there’s not a lot of detail just yet about what caused the accident or what led to the pilot’s decision to eject.
Anyone know what the smoke/fog is that’s coming from the back end of the plane? Here’s an uninterrupted video showing that the smoke is happening for at least twelve seconds prior to the initial touchdown of the plane:
Is that a normal thing for an F-35 in hover mode, or is there clearly a mechanical problem with this plane? If it was a particularly humid day then I could imagine some weird air flow pattern that results in a low-pressure zone and condensation.
For comparison, here’s an F-35 hovering without any smoke/fog coming from it:
It’s possible that something in the hydraulics ruptured, spraying something that smokes into the jet stream. The way the tail end moves up so abruptly makes it look like there was a failure of the ducting system that controls the thrust vectoring.
The initial set-down was quicker than normal (some disagreement). Impact caused the front lift fan to disengage, either from a shock sensor or the driveshaft broke/uncoupled. The throttle and thrust continued from aft exhaust where the nozzle had pivoted down (normal for a hover/landing) driving the nose wheel/gear into the ground.
I haven’t a clue as to the smoke prior to impact. Have to wait for the final report. So supposition on another board is that the throttle jammed or a logic failure.
The zero-zero ejection seat worked great. Still gives the pilot a big whack. There’s a limit on how many times a pilot can be ejected before he gets a desk job.
As a total aside, I was always curious about the commonality of Deniz and Kilmer’s Iceman call sign.
Being a total rabid Radio Birdman fan I notice these things.
Deniz was a member of Radio Birdman which was one of the most influential Oz bands of the 70’s. Although they took a lot from Iggy and the Stooges, and the MC5, they tore their own furrow, and were a big part of Oz pub rock. They cast a long shadow. I last saw them a couple of years ago. It never gets old.
For the curious, a TV gig from 1977. Homage to Iggy and MC5, then a classic of their own. Deniz is the dark haired one with the white Epiphone Crestwood guitar.
I do know that in the F-16 it was written procedure to eject on the ground if the airplane was about to run off the side of a runway into the dirt or grass or whatever. The risk of the airplane ending up upside down on fire with you in it was considered greater than the risk of ejecting. If the airplane happened to stop upright it could be repaired whether you’d ejected or not.
FWIW, here’s a post in the General Aviation thread w an ensuring discussion about this accident including the pilot’s decision to eject:
Is that because of accumulated body stress, or because the superiors conclude: « You know, how many times has Bob had to eject, again? Maybe we shouldn’t be trusting him with those planes anymore… »
I remember during Gulf War 1 the Iraqis had captured a pilot who’d ejected and there was an interview with him. The US press had a hullabaloo over bruises on his face and I was thinking, “Those are entirely consistent with the rough handling you get ejecting an aircraft.”
Compression fractures of the spine, prematurely damaged or bulging spinal discs, and shoulder, wrist and ankle dislocations are all common injuries from the ejection and seat separation. The faster you’re going, the worse the flail injuries to extremities, and yes, facial bruising, eye damage, etc. For our F-35 pilot these issues are minimal, but the spinal concerns are the same.
Then comes the parachute ride down and landing. Which best case is much faster / harder than a modern sport parachute. So broken limbs or fractured pelvis are not exactly rare.
Beats the heck out of being dead, but of the very few people I’ve met who’ve done it, nobody was looking forward to taking that ride again.
