Spehro,

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 11:40:02 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:

> At 04:11 PM 8/19/2005 +0100, you wrote:
> >Russell,
> >
> >On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 22:59:37 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:
> >
> > > One of a very few aircraft with a downward firing ejector seat.
> >
> >Yes, hands up those who think that was a Good Idea?  :-)
> 
> If the design choice gave enough improved performance to outmaneuver
> a missile, maybe. I'm pretty sure it wasn't their first choice. ;-)

I fon't think it did anything to the performance - I believe they were worried that the seat wouldn't clear 
the tail if it went upwards.  The next model did so, so I'm not sure why they couldn't have worked on that 
problem with the first one instead of going for the self-burying option...
 
> IIRC, the pilot had to be able to flip the plane over (or at least on its
> side) if it was right-side-up and near the ground, in order to have a
> chance of survival.

Quite!  So anything which gave roll-control problems (damaged wing, damaged or jammed ailerons or flaps, 
jammed rudder, etc) made it impossible to bang out safely.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist