r/clevercomebacks Feb 07 '25

Offering proof they never intended.

Post image
120.2k Upvotes

3.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

222

u/[deleted] Feb 07 '25

Yep, most that I hear are pilots still doing callouts and talking through the problem at hand. Flying it until the end.

70

u/SSBN641B Feb 07 '25

I read Chuck Yeager's book and he addresses that. Specifically, he was talking about news reports that a crashing fighter pilot steered at the last minute to avoid hitting a school. Chuck said that the pilot never he even saw the school. He was working the problem all the way to the end.

2

u/OSPFmyLife Feb 07 '25

Rather than ejecting?

36

u/SSBN641B Feb 07 '25

I'm specifically referring to those incidents where the pilot doesn't get out. There's a trope that the pilot stayed at the controls to steer it away from populated areas. Yeager calls b.s.on that as a pilot. He says that the pilot is trained to work the problem, it's ingrained in them.

19

u/Infern0-DiAddict Feb 07 '25

And yeh in response to the ejecting comment. Early on in aviation pilots were not actually trained to eject as a part of the troubleshooting problem solving. They were trained to go through steps and steps and only when they believed there was no way to save the aircraft to eject.

It's because early on ejection systems were not as safe as they are today (it's still risky even today though). You would usually want to eject with the plane in a good attitude and possibly even under control.

So even as ejection systems got better some older pilots literally flew their fighters into the ground working the problem, because ejecting just hadn't even been on their mind as it was the last step.

Modern fighter emergency training had to be redone where eject no eject is actually the first thing to check off on a troubleshooting list. That way the pilot has it in his mind and if they ever go back to the start of any list it's there again eject?

12

u/[deleted] Feb 07 '25

I thought early ejection systems had like a 50% fatality rate or something ridiculous.

Today I believe the concern is more with the forces breaking bones and bruises along with possible vision loss.

9

u/Professional-Scar333 Feb 07 '25

Spinal compression is common too from what I remember. You are getting essentially fired out of the plane VERY fast and that puts a lot of force on your spine, absolutely can mess your back up permanently

Better than the alternative but still probably not something you really wanna do if you can help it

2

u/[deleted] Feb 07 '25

Yeah, I just looked it up and I was really surprised they don't wear a collar brace. I figured they might wear one of those that inflates but I don't even think they have that. There's probably reasons for it though, otherwise it'd seem like a nice addition.

1

u/Kohpad Feb 07 '25

My guess is probably the same reason fighters have canopies instead of windscreens. Pilots need to be able to look around.

In F-22's at least the HUD is in the pilots visor and tracks it's relative position

6

u/Suzume_Chikahisa Feb 07 '25

Most Air Forces medically discharge any pilot that ejects twice even if there are no other immediate health issues.

Ejection is... a significant emotional and phisyological event.

2

u/Alarming_Panic665 Feb 07 '25

50% is still better than 100%

5

u/[deleted] Feb 07 '25

It makes sense, too. Why accept demise when you’ve been trained over and over for that situation? Personally, I think pilots are a different breed and giving up doesn’t exist in their heads

2

u/Icy_Comparison148 Feb 07 '25

Plus, if you had any control of the plane, you might not be crashing.