Another Cirrus BRS deployment:

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...

I don't understand this. We're talking about a life-saving device, people
start using it and some here actually suggest those pilots weren't macho
enough to try to get out of their emergency without being a sissy and
pulling
the chute? This is unbelievable. "Real men don't use chutes"? What BS!

Why do you suppose ejection seats are not permitted on civilian airplanes?
They would be life-saving, too.

The problem is coming to a happy medium. If the chute were to be pulled in
ANY emergency then the airplane would become impractical because there would
be too many damaged airframes, albeit no injuries. The question is WHERE
does one draw the line at when to pull the chute? There are some agreed-upon
situations but also some grey areas.


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

It's my understanding that ejection seats aren't allowed on civil aircraft
because the pyrotechnics used are illegal for civillians to own. They're
considered controlled military munitions.

Dave Reinhart


Richard Kaplan wrote:

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...

I don't understand this. We're talking about a life-saving device, people
start using it and some here actually suggest those pilots weren't macho
enough to try to get out of their emergency without being a sissy and
pulling
the chute? This is unbelievable. "Real men don't use chutes"? What BS!

Why do you suppose ejection seats are not permitted on civilian airplanes?
They would be life-saving, too.

The problem is coming to a happy medium. If the chute were to be pulled in
ANY emergency then the airplane would become impractical because there would
be too many damaged airframes, albeit no injuries. The question is WHERE
does one draw the line at when to pull the chute? There are some agreed-upon
situations but also some grey areas.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 22:08:04 GMT, David Reinhart
wrote:

It's my understanding that ejection seats aren't allowed on civil aircraft
because the pyrotechnics used are illegal for civillians to own. They're
considered controlled military munitions.

Can the fact that ejection seats weigh something like 600 lb each have
anything to do with their not being used in GA aircraft?

Privately owned aircraft can have working ejection seats, though.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

Mary

Short answer. My sources tell me that it is the FAA and having
explosives in/on the aircraft.

Big John

Big John

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 22:27:56 -0700, Mary Shafer
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 22:08:04 GMT, David Reinhart
wrote:

It's my understanding that ejection seats aren't allowed on civil aircraft
because the pyrotechnics used are illegal for civillians to own. They're
considered controlled military munitions.

Can the fact that ejection seats weigh something like 600 lb each have
anything to do with their not being used in GA aircraft?

Privately owned aircraft can have working ejection seats, though.

Mary

David

The seat I ejected in was powered by a 37 mm artillery shell (

Used to keep one on my desk as a curio )


Big John


On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 22:08:04 GMT, David Reinhart
wrote:

It's my understanding that ejection seats aren't allowed on civil aircraft
because the pyrotechnics used are illegal for civillians to own. They're
considered controlled military munitions.

Dave Reinhart


Richard Kaplan wrote:

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...

I don't understand this. We're talking about a life-saving device, people
start using it and some here actually suggest those pilots weren't macho
enough to try to get out of their emergency without being a sissy and
pulling
the chute? This is unbelievable. "Real men don't use chutes"? What BS!

Why do you suppose ejection seats are not permitted on civilian airplanes?
They would be life-saving, too.

----clip----

David

The seat I ejected in was powered by a 37 mm artillery shell (

Used to keep one on my desk as a curio )


Big John

So you literally were shot in the ass by a 37 mm artillery shell !

Now thats a distinction that carries some real bragging rights down at the
local pub!

take care

Blll

Why do you suppose ejection seats are not permitted on civilian airplanes?
They would be life-saving, too.

I think I read somewhere that the entire ejection seat assembly
including supports, rails, explosive hatch,
ect weighs about 1,000lb each. Do you want to be a passenger in a
non-ejection seat when the
PIC has one? We would need 4 ejection seats in a 172. Let's see now, 172
usable weight limit
minus 4,000lb is ....

Kind of eats into the gross weight limits of small GA aircraft...

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:23:20 -0400, Buff5200 wrote:






Why do you suppose ejection seats are not permitted on civilian airplanes?
They would be life-saving, too.

I think I read somewhere that the entire ejection seat assembly
including supports, rails, explosive hatch,
ect weighs about 1,000lb each. Do you want to be a passenger in a
non-ejection seat when the
PIC has one? We would need 4 ejection seats in a 172. Let's see now, 172
usable weight limit
minus 4,000lb is ....

Kind of eats into the gross weight limits of small GA aircraft...

Not to mention that ejection seats are used in jets because of their high
speed and design, which often make manual ejection impossible. If WWII
pilots can manually jump, while shot and being shot at, from a 400+MPH
plane, I think people could do it at a more common 120-300mph range, while
uninjured.

Of course, I think you'll have a hard time convincing your passengers that
you're a good pilot while you're wearing that chute on your back.
"No...seriously...it's just a fashion statement."

"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news

Not to mention that ejection seats are used in jets because of their high
speed and design, which often make manual ejection impossible. If WWII
pilots can manually jump, while shot and being shot at, from a 400+MPH
plane, I think people could do it at a more common 120-300mph range, while
uninjured.

It's all a matter of odds, and increasing the odds for the pilot. Remember
that plenty of jump planes have gone down and the jumpers were unable or
unwilling to exit through the open door.

Of course, I think you'll have a hard time convincing your passengers that
you're a good pilot while you're wearing that chute on your back.
"No...seriously...it's just a fashion statement."

Reminds me of the joke which ends with the stewardess announcing: "...and
don't worry, the pilot has gone for help."

The only aircraft I had in mind were ex-warbirds and maybe the new Javelin. I
distinctly remember a couple warbird crashes in the SoCal area when I was young
where the pilot could have been saved by the ejection seat but the press reported
it as deactivated. Obviously a Martin-Baker zero-zero ejection seat is not
feasible for GA aircraft.

Dave Reinhart


Buff5200 wrote:



Why do you suppose ejection seats are not permitted on civilian airplanes?
They would be life-saving, too.

I think I read somewhere that the entire ejection seat assembly
including supports, rails, explosive hatch,
ect weighs about 1,000lb each. Do you want to be a passenger in a
non-ejection seat when the
PIC has one? We would need 4 ejection seats in a 172. Let's see now, 172
usable weight limit
minus 4,000lb is ....

Kind of eats into the gross weight limits of small GA aircraft...