![]() ![]() That can be a useful skill if you are the type of pilot that likes to. HANS prevents you from reaching that limit, but it also prevents you from looking down. The reclined position starts you out closer to the limit of your safe range of motion. Without it, the inertia of a helmeted head would carry the head forward causing grave injury in a crash, and to a lesser extent during hard braking. But people are not accustomed to being dragged skyward by the feet.Ī very critical device in a F1 car that allows for that extremely reclined position is the HANS head and neck restraint system. It feels natural to move forward while seated upright.Įven climbing vertically is a similar G sensation pressing you into your seat. Probably not a great position for maintaining orientation and consciousness. It seems the wrap-up answer is that other positions are useful in the context of the specific mission of a given platform but for military aircraft it doesn't seem to offer an advantage.Ī pilot position as reclined as pictured would have the pilot upside down with blood rushing to the head whenever the plane is in a steep fast climb such as takeoff and many dogfight maneuvers. Spacecraft routinely have their pilots in the reclined position but their main objective is a fairly narrow scope compared to a fighter pilot. Vision, decrease of visual acuity, aggravation of claustrophobic tendencies,ĭiscomfort encountered in this abnormal position). (higher g-tolerance of the pilot, reduction of drag due to decrease of frontalĪrea, improved instrument visibility) and drawbacks (narrowing of field of The prone position of the pilot in high-speed airplanes has certain advantages ![]() As noted in the comments this in regards to the prone position and not a reclined position. 1193–1199.įrom this archived DTIC Article from 1962 it appears to confirm a lot of what the other answers said. Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine Issue 69, 1998, pp. "Prevention of Minor Neck Injuries in F-16 Pilots". fighters have adopted more modest tilt-back angles of 20°. The tilted seat can accommodate taller pilots and increases G-force tolerance however it has been associated with reports of neck ache, possibly caused by incorrect head-rest usage. The F-16's ACES II zero/zero ejection seat is reclined at an unusual tilt-back angle of 30° most fighters have a tilted seat at 13–15°. The F-16 in fact has a relatively large recline (compared to other fighters). NOTE: I have seen other posts on using the head first "prone" position, including this stack-exchange link but nothing on reclined.ĪDDITION: Found this image of a Foka-5 glider pilot position too. I do realize that the whole ejector-seat mechanism would need to be redesigned to eject the pilot differently, and that the pilot's ability to see behind himself would be compromised without technical aids, but surely the increased turn rates and lower profile cockpit would outweigh those issues. Why then are modern jets not designed with the pilot in a more reclined position? For example, the position used by Formula-1 race car drivers:ĭon't get me wrong, I understand F-1 drivers do not need to withstand the same kind of sustained vertical forces that a fighter pilot does, however the legs-up reclined position seems to be far more practical for a high-G environment. It is an established fact that the more vertical you are the harder it is to withstand G-forces. It seams rather obvious to me that much of the issue with high-G is caused by the seated position of the pilot. I realize pilots wear tight G-suits which have air pumped into them to restrict the amount of blood that can accumulate in their lower extremities, but that doesn't reduce the stress on the heart trying to pump blood up to the head. Indeed, I read somewhere once that one of the issues with auto-missile-avoidance systems is that the aircraft is limited to performing maneuvers that the pilot can withstand.Īs I understand it, the issue with high-G turns is that the blood is drained or driven from the body to the lower (and upper when undergoing high negative-G) extremities of the body resulting in starvation of the brain and consequent blackouts or even embolism in the negative-G case. Indeed, in most countries in the world would-be fighter pilots cannot qualify for jet-jockey status without first passing the dreaded centrifuge test.įurther, modern jets can in fact pull much higher G-forces than the pilot without damage to the aircraft. Pulling high G-forces is, I assume, the most physical challenge the pilot of a high performance fighter aircraft needs to be able to sustain without blacking out or worse.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |