A couple of points. I can see a lot of down elevator on the Il-28 – far more than would be expected of an aircraft in normal flight, in which a couple of degrees is usually a fair amount. Do compare the tip profile of the Il-28 tailplane in the #9 shot to the one below.To counter the seat ejection charge such a deflection would have had to have been very be fast and of short duration. -Indeed following ejection the a/c c of g of course is moved quickly forwards -thus producing a rapid and opposite pitching input in this rear ejection configuration.
The enclosed shot shows that the Il28LL – at least in this image,was, indeed no 10 – possibly 10 Blue.
The loads on the An-12 Red 43 was never raised as an issue or concern by me or ,with one exception, any of us.This is evident if the thread is actually read properly(esp #21 when the case was distanced from that of the Il-28 being then discussed.) Indeed that particular An-12 ( c/n 8345902) apparently undertook strenuous tasks of a different nature as well, including developing a Russian equivalent of the Fulton recovery system.The (detachable) barbette could be fitted at 30 deg increments and secured. Indeed, in addition, during inverted sequences the seat virtually fell out of the aircraft anyway I believe.
There are a range of K-36 variants developed by NPP Zveda in three basic families , some which have shown their capabilites in the west on several occasions and given us a lot of food for thought and development; especially following Anatoly Kvochur’s exit and survival from his Mig 29 at the ’89 Paris.
In contrast, for helicopter use such as the Ka-50 , there is the K-37 seat , which is a very different device and extracts the seat using a rocket on a cable, once the rotors have been jettisoned-;even by ejection standards, quite an exciting prospect.
Sign In
