I tell you what, the temperatures, explosive decompression, wind forces, and ~15 G seat forces make me feel like it'd be a life or death decision for me. Fighter jocks are lucky that seat technology is as advanced as it is, but even still I don't envy them when it comes to a bail-out situation.

This pilot who stepped out over south china sea did not like the ejection process. When he punched out after being hit over North Viet Nam made it feet wet and stepped out. All went as advertised seat ejection worked and bladders popped him out of seat, chute opened...all is well. On decent ejection seat came back and hit him breaking both legs. (What are the odds of that) When are helo arrived at his position for pick up he was barely conscious and chute was sinking pulling him down. PJ.. Sullivan jumped into water to help him remove chute. Diving under water several times cutting shroud lines, he was freed and put into horse collar. On hoisting he passed out and fell back into water. Sully still in water hooked both of them to harnesses and both were winched up together. A successful rescue he recovered from his injuries.
Not sure the number of injuries of various kinds during ejection by pilots but I think it was higher then you would guess. And by no means safe......only as a last resort.

I think we have one among us with an ejection story...

Actually more than one. I read a story about Henny punching out of an A-6, back in the day. I also met a guy at a BCP fly-in at Caveman who was a German AF pilot who went for a ride with the Dutch AF after a historic night of partying the evening before and ended up punching out and spending some time in the Atlantic as well (it was a hell of a story).

If memory serves, this gentleman is also part of the BCP clan. Much respect, Sir.
http://www.ejectionsite.com/insaddle/insaddle.htm

Here's a quick summary of my experience back in 2012...

http://tailhookdaily.typepad.com/tailhook_daily_briefing/2008/02/vaq-136-co-tell.html

Henny wrote:Here's a quick summary of my experience back in 2012...

http://tailhookdaily.typepad.com/tailhook_daily_briefing/2008/02/vaq-136-co-tell.html

Great story Henny. Glad you made it back to Earth in one piece after riding the rocketship!

Crzyivan13 wrote:

Henny wrote:Here's a quick summary of my experience back in 2012...

http://tailhookdaily.typepad.com/tailhook_daily_briefing/2008/02/vaq-136-co-tell.html

Great story Henny. Glad you made it back to Earth in one piece after riding the rocketship!

x2

When I had my airplane hangared at Fort Collins Downtown from 2004 through 2006, one of the ramp folks was a Viet Nam vet, F4s, who told me that the old saw about landings and take-offs have to be equal didn't apply to him, because he had punched out over the Gulf of Tonkin some time in the early 70s, so technically he didn't "land". When I first met him, I had trouble telling the difference between his joking and reality, but eventually I could tell fact from fiction, mostly.

So one day I asked him to describe that punch-out. He admitted that it scared the bejeebers out of him, but he had no choice--no way could he make it back to the carrier. He said that both he and his RIO had injuries from the ejection. In his case, it damaged several vertebrae, and shortened him from his former 6'4" to about 6'2 1/2". He said he still had back pain, more than 34 years later. I don't recall that he said what his RIO's injuries were. Both were rescued from the water very quickly. He said that he'd never want to go through a similar experience again. I don't recall now whether he continued to fly afterwards.

So for myself, I'm glad I was never in that sort of situation.

Cary

Henny wrote:Here's a quick summary of my experience back in 2012...

http://tailhookdaily.typepad.com/tailhook_daily_briefing/2008/02/vaq-136-co-tell.html

Great story! What ended up being the cause for the engine failures?

CamTom12 wrote:

Henny wrote:Here's a quick summary of my experience back in 2012...

http://tailhookdaily.typepad.com/tailhook_daily_briefing/2008/02/vaq-136-co-tell.html

Great story! What ended up being the cause for the engine failures?

Here's the technical explanation:

AN ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION WAS COMPLETED ON BOTH ENGINES.
THE STARBOARD ENGINE WAS OPERATING
NORMALLY AT THE TIME OF WATER IMPACT. THE PORT ENGINE WAS NOT
OPERATING AT THE TIME OF WATER IMPACT. THE PORT ENGINE WAS MISSING
ITS LOW POWER TURBINE DISK AND BLADES, AND HAD ITS LOW POWER TURBINE
SHAFT BROKEN IN TWO PLACES. THE PORT ENGINE ENGINEERING
INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT THE 4.5 BEARING CAGE FAILED DUE TO
CRACKING AT TWO CORNERS OF A SINGLE ROLLER POCKET CAUSED BY FATIGUE.
FAILURE OF THE BEARING CAGE CAUSED THE CAGE TO RUB ON THE BEARING
RINGS AND THE BEARING ROLLERS TO BEGIN TO SLIDE. THIS CAUSED A
TREMENDOUS BUILD UP OF HEAT IN THE BEARING THAT WAS TRANSMITTED TO
THE LOW POWER TURBINE SHAFT VIA THE INNER BEARING RING. THIS CAUSED
THE LOW POWER TURBINE SHAFT TO WEAKEN AND FAIL TORSIONALLY AT THE 4.5
BEARING. THIS SHAFT FAILURE MOST PROBABLY REPRESENTS THE FIRST LOUD
BANG HEARD BY THE MISHAP CREW. FAILURE OF THE LOW POWER TURBINE
SHAFT CREATED AN OVERSPEED CONDITION OF THE LOW POWER TURBINE DISK
RESULTING IN A SECOND TORSIONAL FAILURE OF THE LOW POWER TURBINE
SHAFT ADJACENT TO THE BELL HOUSING MOUNTING FLANGE, AND LIBERATION
OF THE LOW POWER TURBINE DISK. THIS SECOND FAILURE OF THE LOW POWER
TURBINE SHAFT AND LOSS OF THE LOW POWER TURBINE, MOST PROBABLY
REPRESENTS THE LARGER SECOND BANG ACCOMPANIED BY THE SHAKING AND
SHUDDERING NOTED BY THE MISHAP CREW. THE CATASTROPHIC FAILURE OF THE
PORT ENGINE RESULTED IN AN UNCONTROLLABLE FIRE AND LOSS OF FLIGHT
CONTROL AUTHORITY, WHICH ULTIMATELY LED TO DEPARTURE FROM CONTROLLED
FLIGHT AND LOSS OF THE MISHAP AIRCRAFT.

That's Navy-speak for "the engine s*** itself"