4 ms·

Still, 35lb or so of pulling effort to activate the handle. It's like trying to drag a 4yo kid with both hands, except the handle is much thinner. It all does

Still, 35lb or so of pulling effort to activate the handle. It's like trying to drag a 4yo kid with both hands, except the handle is much thinner. It all does look like a bigger deal of the front seat misfire. Also from the investigation report (linked in reply by altgans) it seems that there was an issue with misinflation of the raft. The retiree turned to be like a true test pilot, hopefully making it better for others.

peeters 4y ago
> Still, 35lb or so of pulling effort to activate the handle. It's like trying to drag a 4yo kid with both hands, except the handle is much thinner. The negative g's are doing the pulling in this case though, all the passenger had to do is hang on. At -0.5 g a 160lb person will be "pulling" with 80lbs of force just by grabbing onto something.
- KennyBlanken 4y ago
  Yep. Apparently somewhere between "not strapped in well" and "not strapped in at all" and as he hit the canopy, likely grabbed for whatever he could out of instinct. https://youtu.be/-zIxqKwoHsM?t=427 https://youtu.be/-zIxqKwoHsM?t=427 Although one does wonder how much this is face-saving by him and/or the Air Force who don't want to blame a guy for what likely cost over half a million dollars, if not more. There's the cost of all the labor, the canopy, downtime for the jet, and then those seats cost roughly over $200k each and while I imagine they might get sent back to M-B for refurbishment rather than just being chucked, ehhh: https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/397m-for-172-martinbaker-ejection-seats-03345/ https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/397m-for-172-martinbake...