Not heard of Hisso’s being used in ground role, only 20mm Oerlikons and 20mm Polsten – in any event air spec Hissos were designed to be fired pneumatically no?

ATB

TT

“Later” aircraft (Meteor, Canberra etc) had an electrical firing system that had glorified solenoid called a Maxiflux Unit fitted.

Definitely NOT RP3 rockets. They are 4.5″ photoflash flare casings. 100%

We have one on display.

TT

Deployed down flare chute – used until late 50’s, very sensitive, unfortunately some exploded in the aircraft chute with enough force to bring down the aircraft,

More accurately known as Flare Ground Illuminating (or “Reconnaissance”) 4.5″. I recall that they were still being taught in the 60’s and were part of a Shack bomb bay load. Usually fuzed with an M111A2* fuze.

G’day, I am fortunate in that the Mk 9 seat in my Jaguar cockpit is semi functional and the electric raise/lower mechanism works. I am just wondering what part of the seat, if any, requires lubrication and what I should use. At the moment I put the occasional couple of drops of light oil on the silver runners between the headbox and seat pan but is there anything else?

Over to the ejection seat experts.

Paul

Moving parts such as those (eg seat raise/lower guides and ejection gun rails) would generally be greased but only during scheduled seat maintenance, or fitting, as applicable – it’s not a frequent maintenance task. Other components would have their own lubrication requirements but, again, only during scheduled maintenance.
😎

The deliberate and controlled force of black powder has other aviation uses,

But not in engine starter carts – usually a solid piece of cordite (or similar) to provide a progressive and controlled burn pattern.

Page 19 section 1.6.27 of the report says that

“According to Flight Reference Card, if the canopy fails to jettison, operate
emergency canopy jack release lever and pull up normal canopy unlocking
handle. In the event of a failure in the automatic ejection sequence, the canopy has to be jettison manually, neither seat will eject until its firing handles has been pulled again.”

Are we saying thats incorrect?

I would not pass comment on FRC’s; I do not have access to them. However, it should be remembered that A&AEE were the authors (not the engineers) and this particular procedure is a “last-ditch” situation and it may well be that the FRC’s were written that way to ensure that a max pull is exerted. It could also overcome the extremely rare possibility of a sear remaining in a “half-cock” position. FYI, my comments are based on relevant personal experiences on F2/2A/3 and T4/5 first/second line; seat bay maintenance; schedule authoring and aircrew ejection seat safety briefings.

[ATTACH]207832[/ATTACH]

MJR
Thanks for your timely input.

Much as I, after all these years would have surmised. The course notes are still in the attic.

One point though, if Dave had been lucky enough to release the jammed canopy (adrenalin can do wonderful things) he would have had to pull one of the handles again to ensure the main sear was removed to eject the seat! The canopy cable had a ring to prevent the main sear being pulled until the canopy left the aircraft hence the second pull. Always drummed into us at ejection seat lectures and prior to anyone lucky enough to get airborne.

Under normal circumstances as you pulled either handle, (face blind or seat pan) the canopy disappeared and as you pulled through the seat would fire and you hopefully became a member of the Caterpillar Club.

Bob

Not quite like that! Only one pull was required. The canopy restrictor prevented the BTTDFU from operating but did not prevent withdrawal of the sear. For that reason, crash crews were warned to check that the sear was correctly in place before opening/jettisoning the canopy. If there was any doubt, they had to gain access through the perspex to sever the restrictor cable first. See pic below:

WOW that’s fast!

Not really but still a great demo! In real time, drip trays needed to be moved, Houchin started and brought on-line, etc. Ground crew were up the ladder first to assist the pilot with straps during start-up and we could still get the jet airborne within 2 mins rather than 2.30 to just around the corner!

19 &111 Sqns

😀

Well aesthetics is subjective, and personally speaking I think the Wyvern is a handsome and purposeful looking beast.
Aerodynamics, it could move through the air quite well, and quickly for a large turbo-prop aircraft, so it must have been ok in that regard.

wot, with 24 cylinders?
😮