b-52 belly ejection

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Sun Apr 12, 2009 8:26 pm

can anybody relate any experiences of having to use the downward belly fired ejection seat of the b-52??? that way out must have really stirred up the giblets!!

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Sun Apr 12, 2009 8:33 pm

Also downward ejecting on the early F-104 and Bomb/Nav on the B-47.

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:07 pm

about 10 years back at the cleveland airshow a guy was selling a few downward firing b-52 seats. he supposedly had a warehouse full of goodies in cleveland's flats district. he also displayed a foldable full scale f-16 decoy at the show, price........ $$15000.00. he also loaned some stuff to the maps museum in akron ohio. what's the current status of that stuff??

Stratofortressflyer · **Posted:** Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:30 pm

Being a navigator in the B-52 I have used them everytime I fly, but only to sit in it, obviously I have not had to use it for its intended purpose. But I can answer any questions you might have.

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:38 pm

thank god you only sit in it!!!

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Sun Apr 12, 2009 10:53 pm

i can't imagine the physical effects of any ejection, let alone a downward fired 1, which has to be hardly experienced over all in the scope of aviation history. i know limbs, backs, etc, have been broken, long term recoveries etc.

Tom Moungovan · **Posted:** Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:18 am

Stratofortressflyer wrote:

Being a navigator in the B-52 I have used them everytime I fly, but only to sit in it, obviously I have not had to use it for its intended purpose. But I can answer any questions you might have.

I worked on 003 and 008 while stationed @ Edwards in the mid 60's. If
memory still serves, didn't they also have a pair of seats that faced aft?
We did not have to work on these but once or twice a year which is why
the recollection is not that vivid.
As to the F-104, yes the early ones had downward firing seats, but that
was changed after a few pilots were catapulted into the runway on low
level ejections..
Although later upward ejection, removal was still via the bottom of the
aircraft after the crewchief removed a panel. They were a complex
but good seat. I worked on them daily as the test pilot school had
maybe a dozen and they flew regualrly.

bluehawk15 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:56 am

I've heard that people who eject upward lose an inch in height. Do people who eject downward grow an inch?

sdennison · **Posted:** Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:53 am

What are the G forces experienced in a "normal" vertical ejection? Would they be equivalent in a downward ejection? Seems a downward would put all the forces on the harness components or did those seats have some other over the shoulder device to help restrain the crew member?

I just relate to many photos of race car drivers who are subjected to "negative" G's while flipping a sprint car for instance and how much they stick out of the roll cage from the belt stretch as well as their own body stretching. What looked good on the ground for cage height, manytimes left the driver a few inches out of the top of the cage and if the car came down on the cage for the next hit, the driver was completely exposed.

Stratofortressflyer · **Posted:** Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:25 pm

Quote:

worked on 003 and 008 while stationed @ Edwards in the mid 60's. If
memory still serves, didn't they also have a pair of seats that faced aft?
We did not have to work on these but once or twice a year which is why
the recollection is not that vivid.
As to the F-104, yes the early ones had downward firing seats, but that
was changed after a few pilots were catapulted into the runway on low
level ejections..
Although later upward ejection, removal was still via the bottom of the
aircraft after the crewchief removed a panel. They were a complex
but good seat. I worked on them daily as the test pilot school had
maybe a dozen and they flew regualrly.

They do have backward facing seats, they are upstairs and are for the electronic warfare officer and for the gunner, when we used to have the tail gun. Now it is just an extra ejection seat.

I have asked the same question about if you eject down do you get taller and I have been told no, but I forget the reason why. But for upward ejection your spine does compress about an inch so you do indeed get shorter.

Glyn · **Joined:** Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:23 am **Posts:** 321

The early cartridge fired ejector seats often caused some spinal compression but the effects on the fit young men who used them didn't last very long - days or a week or two usually. There were cases of so-called 'hard ejections' where the escapees were more seriously injured. Modern rocket propelled seats where the users weight is dialled in give a much smoother ride with far less chance of injury.

jet1 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 13, 2009 3:47 pm

tom d. friedman wrote:

i can't imagine the physical effects of any ejection, let alone a downward fired 1, which has to be hardly experienced over all in the scope of aviation history. i know limbs, backs, etc, have been broken, long term recoveries etc.

because of an 'aircraft jettison" (conventional) I wonder if a downward firing seat would stretch me out??!!

Warbird Information Exchange

b-52 belly ejection

Who is online