"What ejection seat did the early F4Hs use?"
It seems that various authors have given credit either to Stanley Aviation Company or McDonnell for making the original seat. Well, actually both parties are right - somewhat. Here is what I have been able to come up with from my reading and researching.
In 1955 McDonnell did give Stanley Aviation Company a contract for an F4H ejection seat. But, according to what I have been able to find, this was not for a complete, turnkey ejection seat. The Naval Air Material Center was to provide the explosive seat catapult and McDonnell was providing the seat pan that held the survival equipment and all the connections for the pilot's pressure suit. These connections were vitally important upon ejection because the pilot would depend on the pressure suit immediately after an ejection at high altitude and there needed to be a good separation on ejection from the air-conditioning system. So there were some issues to be ironed out as the engineers at McDonnell tried to make the pan and all required connections fit the seat made by Stanley. But in 1956 the F4H mockup board approved the cockpit with the Stanley / McDonnell seat. And this was the seat that was used in the prototype and many of the pre-production aircraft.
So just how did the production aircraft end up with Martin-Baker seats?
In August 1957 the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) directed BuAer to use only "zero-zero" ejection seats in all future (and existing) aircraft projects. This was because of the 265 Naval pilots that died in 1957, 172 died following aircraft problems at low altitude / low airspeed. BuAer cobbled together a quick design competition and in May 1958 selected the Martin-Baker Mk.5 seat as their choice to be the standard seat in Naval combat aircraft. All the airframe manufacturers were then notified to negotiate a contract with Martin-Baker to modify the seat to fit their aircraft.
So then, why do we see the Stanley / McDonnell seat installed in F4H aircraft after that date?
Well, both McDonnell and Stanley had a lot of work and money tied up into their seat in design hours, manufacturing startup, and many, many hours testing and refining their seat. To make matters worse, all that work and testing would have to be redone with a Martin-Baker seat installation. Everything from fitting the seat into the airframe, controlling ejection sequences, ensuring that an ejection through the canopy was survivable, and a host of other engineering puzzles would have to be designed and thoroughly tested before putting a new seat into the aircraft. And this came at a very inconvenient time for the F4H project as it would have delayed the first flight and some of the initial testing of the F4H. In addition, the Martin-Baker seat added 103 lbs. to the weight and $600,000.00 to the price tag of the Phantom. So simply stated, McDonnell was very, very slow in making the changeover. And there really was no incentive to move quickly because BuAer was paying the bills for continuing development of the Stanley / McDonnell seat as a hedge against the possibility of a protracted development of the Martin-Baker seat for the F4H. So it wasn't until December of 1960 that McDonnell finally canceled the contract with Stanley (although Stanley received a nice buy-out from BuAer since it was their directive that was forcing the change).
An interesting side note is that even though McDonnell had canceled the contract, they still were not done with Stanley Aviation Company ejection seats completely. It seems that at some point there must have been thought given to using a Stanley escape capsule/seat on proposed high-performance models of the Phantom (possibly advanced interceptor proposals like the Model 98AL or 98CN). Here are some pictures of the capsule in a mock-up of the forward fuselage of the F-4.
Sources:
- Engineering the F-4 Phantom II - Parts Into Systems, by Glenn E Bugos
- http://www.ejectionsite.com
Revision History:
10/25/2013 - Original Post
10/26/2013 - Added information about Ejection Capsule
I was an AME at VX-4 from 1961 to 1963 and if I remember right our MB seats were 0 alt & 100 kts. Also in 1962 we changed the drogue guns firing time from 0.75 seconds to 0.50 seconds which may have then given us 0-0 seats.
ReplyDeleteThe Stanley seat was very close in design to the Vought seat as fitted to the initial F-8's. I photographed the only surviving example when I visited the Stanley factory in 1980. The seat is now at the Wings over the Rockies museum on the old Lowery AFB property. While they tested it, none were ever flown in the F4H. The McDonnell seat was a catapult design. The F-4's didn't get rocket seats until the early to mid 68 time frame. The MWO TO I have lists an April of 68 time frame.
ReplyDeleteIn the 50's and 60's the Navy was interested in capsules, the AF in open seats. An F-8 nose capsule was tested, but never fitted to the aircraft. Instead, they decided to tie it to a program still in the design phase, and chose the F-111. The AF guys were sold when the Navy Seat manager showed them a picture of a Navy pilot - that had been bitten by a shark. that image sold the capsule and the rest is history. The Stanley capsules weight just a shade over 800 lb's and would significantly impacted the F-4 program.
Bryan Wilburn
The Stanley seat was very close in design to the Vought seat as fitted to the initial F-8's. I photographed the only surviving example when I visited the Stanley factory in 1980. The seat is now at the Wings over the Rockies museum on the old Lowery AFB property. While they tested it, none were ever flown in the F4H. The McDonnell seat was a catapult design. The F-4's didn't get rocket seats until the early to mid 68 time frame. The MWO TO I have lists an April of 68 time frame.
ReplyDeleteIn the 50's and 60's the Navy was interested in capsules, the AF in open seats. An F-8 nose capsule was tested, but never fitted to the aircraft. Instead, they decided to tie it to a program still in the design phase, and chose the F-111. The AF guys were sold when the Navy Seat manager showed them a picture of a Navy pilot - that had been bitten by a shark. that image sold the capsule and the rest is history. The Stanley capsules weight just a shade over 800 lb's and would significantly impacted the F-4 program.
Which Sports To Bet On in December 2021? (Sportsbooks & Apps)
ReplyDeleteSports Betting Odds · 카지노 검증 사이트 The Best 카지노 Betting 온카지노 주소 Sites · DraftKings · BetMGM sporting100.com · 인터넷 바카라 사이트 BetMGM · 888 Sports · Unibet · PointsBet.