GENERAL DYNAMICS F-111 AARDVARK CREW MODULE ESCAPE SYSTEM EJECTION SYSTEM 80044

Want to support this channel and help us preserve old films? Visit / periscopefilm
Visit our website www.PeriscopeFilm.com
In this U.S. Air Force training film (TF-6164b) from 1968, viewers learn about the ejection, recovery, and landing of the General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark Crew Module Escape System, an “escape crew capsule system that allows one or more occupants of an aircraft or spacecraft to escape from the craft while it is subjected to extreme conditions, such as high speed or altitude.” The film opens with a shot of a test F-111 Crew Module taking off and the crew escape capsule parachuting to the ground. A test ejection from a simulated F-111 sled cockpit on a ground track is conducted (01:30), with crewmen being ejected individually at 300 knots. The men parachute to the ground, lacking clear stability. The crew module is ejected at this point, demonstrating a more stable ejection than the previous test. An officer speaks to the camera about the automated ejection system of the F-111 crew escape module (02:30). A crew prepares a 3,000-pound static module for a test run (03:00). The module is ejected, and the recovery chute is quickly deployed. A sled ejection system flies down the track and the crew module is ejected (03:44), peaking at about 1,200 feet. The module safely parachutes to the ground. The officer stands in front of a crew module in a hanger (04:34), and he shows off aspects of the module, including the rocket nozzles for boosting the ejection (05:22), the stabilization glove of the module (05:50), and the pitch flaps and stabilization flaps (06:15). He then shows where the recovery chute is stored and deployed from (06:58). Animation is used to show the full eject system of the F-111 (07:40): how the rocket motor is initiated, tightening of the crew’s harnesses, the severance of recovery gear, the deployment of the stabilization break chute, the stabilization of the module, the deployment of the recovery chute (14:25), and the inflation of impact attenuation bags. The crew module safely lands on the ground. The officer holds a small model of the crew module and speaks to the camera about the manual method to sever the recovery chute once the module has landed and how to initiate a manual ejection without the rocket severance system. An F-111 taxis on the ground (18:28), and the film ends with the aircraft taking off and flying off into the distance.
We encourage viewers to add comments and, especially, to provide additional information about our videos by adding a comment! See something interesting? Tell people what it is and what they can see by writing something for example: "01:00:12:00 -- President Roosevelt is seen meeting with Winston Churchill at the Quebec Conference."
This film is part of the Periscope Film LLC archive, one of the largest historic military, transportation, and aviation stock footage collections in the USA. Entirely film backed, this material is available for licensing in 24p HD, 2k and 4k. For more information visit www.PeriscopeFi...

[@patton303]

These old training films really put in the hard work on the music scoring. Respect.

[@JuanAdam12]

This man's highly-descriptive hand gestures in the presentation make me think he was intimately involved in the development of this escape module as an Air Force representative. Extremely interesting film.

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Glad you enjoyed it! Subscribe and consider becoming a channel member kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXWliGami8abi6c

[@Lt_Tragg]

Agreed! He’s obviously very proud of it.

[@allgood6760]

F111 is a cool plane.... we had 2 RAAF F111's crash here in NZ unfortunately .. crews survived.. Thanks from NZ 👍🇳🇿👍

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Love our channel? Help us save and post more orphaned films! Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/PeriscopeFilm Even a really tiny contribution can make a difference. Subscribe and consider becoming a channel member kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXWliGami8abi6c

[@duellingscarguevara]

That low down radar must have been tricky. A few were lost in Oz, (always around Guyra, the abattoir was a target run). A fairly “crashy” sort of plane, and cleaning the fuel tanks led to some fatalities too I heard. GD did ok out of it though?. That’s all that matters?.

[@orionexplorer]

I have to say thank you for this video. Back in 1978, I worked for Talley Industries of Arizona later named Talley Defense Systems. I mixed the propellant for the casting of the propellant into the body case of the rocket motor, which we called the TFX. The company also made the ejection handle, barostat, and maybe even the rotary actuators that are used to secure the flight crew. No one at the company that I talked to knew how the TFX was mounted in the aircraft. Now over 30 years later I finally found out.

[@rmr24]

Late 80s or early 90s I was working (survey crew) west side of Clovis, NM, heard a boom and a fellow worker yelled that a F111 just crashed. Looked to the west toward Cannon AFB and saw a huge column of black smoke, then saw a chute open with cockpit underneath. Jumped in truck in and drove 3 miles to crash site, I think it was the pilot that was already out of the cockpit and was walking around, I think I remember that the weapon system officer suffered a broke leg. If I remember right one or both engines quit on short final, crash site was about 1 mile from end of runway and cockpit landed about 1/4 mile from crash site.

[@moonshiner5412]

I was stationed with the 366th TFW at Mtn Home AFB, ID as a BB-stacker in 1973 to 1975. I loved watching this bird fly! Nights on the flight line were quite a show. I heard that the crew chief would get upset if the pilot & weapons officer didn't tell him about everything that they wanted to take with them on deployments. He had to make sure the CG was properly computed for the load as I understand it.

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Thanks for your service to our great nation.

[@batyanko8283]

"Severence causes little discomfort" is a nice way to describe a 20g launch xD Pretty impressive though

[@dks13827]

some crews were hurt by that hard ejection of course... at least they lived.

[@voronmatt4748]

I agree with this

[@dougclevenger6748]

I crewed that aircraft taking off at the end of the clip. 66 - 013 at Nellis AFB Arrived November 70 I worked on it " A flight 474th OMS summer 72 Just before my SEA assignment.

[@junak8823]

Cool. Pleas, why escape module is releasing chaff? it was thought that module could accidentally serve as a decoy for missile?

[@hoghogwild]

@@junak8823 To keep missiles from hitting the capsule.

[@harrystone8847]

Nice. Thanks for the video, and the memories. One thing not mentioned, was the need to disconnect all the electrical wiring coming from the capsule. There were 4 capsule quick disconnects, 2 on each side, and each had the capacity of (IIRC) 16 cannon plugs. They were mounted to a plate that was spring loaded, and the spring mechanism locked 4 pins in place, keeping the quick disconnects stable. When any motion was felt on the spring mechanism, the spring released, and retracted the 4 pins, allowing the quick disconnect to float, the plate would allow the connectors to pull apart, and then would not resist separation

[@trafficsignal101]

I remember that film from tech school. I was there for back-shop avionics but when we got to far ahead of the lesson plan, they would show our small class films like this. They couldn't release us early, so we saw a bunch of educational F-111 films.

[@karlreinke]

The Aardvark was a hugely underrated plane. One could say it is a "baby B-1". Or more accurately "The Bone" is a scaled-up Aardvark.

[@incargeek]

“One could it is a “baby B-1”.”

[@ieieieieuekjejejejej453]

The maintenance on it was crazy though

[@notaulgoodman9732]

YES! I love the boner

[@robmclaughjr]

That's true. But they were shooting for a fighter replacement

[@mugilv]

or the tomcat's illegitimate big step brother😂

[@GTR003121]

I love escape capsules etc, fascinating.

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Thanks for being a sub!

[@albertsmith9315]

I worked these as an Egress Tech for three years. Changed out those 70 foot recovery chutes which was a shock after starting on basic ejection seat jets. Three years was enough for me (out of 22 years) and happily went back to ejection seat aircraft.

[@josephstevens9888]

Watching the F-111 fly out of Nellis, past Sunrise Mountain brings back a lot of memories when I was based there from 83' to 85'. The ramp at Nellis was always an exciting place to be.... action always going on!

[@mk1cortinatony395]

I enjoyed working on these in the late 80's at Filton and got to watch quite a few take off. Nice acceleration on those and quite a steep climb

[@paulschab8152]

Love the F-111 and the A6 Intruder. The crew ejection module for the F-111 was awesome, but I have heard stories of some screwed up injuries from it lol.

[@keithmoore5306]

well you'll get injuries with any system they're not fool proof!!

[@itsjohndell]

And deaths. flew -E and-F models for near ten years. It was a great aircraft. The module was a death trap. We would only go in the last worse possible case. I was back in the States on leave when my regular ship was in an incident. Crew pulled the handle. Both died.

[@keithmoore5306]

@@itsjohndell let me guess the wing hinge pin fell out in midair!!

[@hoghogwild]

The ejection capsule was a requirement due to the possibility of supersonic penetration missions at 200 feet altitude. The B-1A also had a supersonic penetration mission as such, the first 3 prototypes had a similar ejection capsule while teh 4th prototype had 4 ejecytion seats. Since the B-1B lost its supersonic penetration mission, all 100 B-1Bs were built using conventional ejection seats. At max thrust, the B-1B was to penetrate at 600 knots, at 200 feet altitude, in bad weather, at night with the pilots hand not touching the stick. Terrain Following RADAR was amazing. Many flyers have been injured during ejections, be them in capsules or conventional seats.

[@barriewright2857]

Amazing piece of engineering. And from the diagrammatical description of the actions, this all happens in less than ten seconds from activation to end, Amazing ! .

[@highonimmi]

proud to have been a fuels troop who got to gas a few varks. when the crew chief tells you the fuel load...they mean it!

[@HAL_9001]

I'm glad you are re-uploading some of these videos. The old version of this, and a few others caused my video card to choke and stutter when I went full screen. I'm guessing it was a weird resolution that wasn't natively supported.

[@PeriscopeFilm]

That's interesting...well...reality is that some of the original scans we did were captured on somewhat primitive equipment. We started out with what is called a TRV-16H, which was a standard definition transfer system (telecine). We upgraded from that to a Tobin telecine, then went full digital and HD with a machine called a "Sniper". In more recently years we made the commitment to buy a Lasergraphics ScanStation, a full blown scanner that can support a lot of different film formats and has many corrective features including image stabilization and de-scratch built in. We can scan at variable speeds, in HD, 2k and 4k, and capture audio digitally. So the new scans (and soundtracks) are entirely different from the old! BTW you should be subscribing to this channel! For the inside scoop support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/PeriscopeFilm

[@HAL_9001]

@@PeriscopeFilm That's an excellent behind the scenes. I am currently subscribed, but I don't have the finances available right now to do the Patron thing. I'll keep liking and commenting in hopes the algorithm will be kind to you. :)

[@MrProach2]

I enjoyed watching these operate from RAF Lyneham (UK) in the mid-to-late seventies when I was a child (I lived in Clyffe Pypard at the time). The USAF were obliged to double-glaze all the houses in the local villages due to the noise! It was a very advanced aircraft for it's time.

[@AbuctingTacos]

They make it seem much more comfortable than it actually was

[@stevedemarest276]

Damn. These slide-rule toting 1960's engineers knew their shit backwards and forwards. Respect.

[@pauletxfish4976]

My Dad worked in R&D at McDonnell in developing the ejection system for r=the F-111. How all the cables and wires had to be systematically severed before separation, each by a small guillotine type cutters

[@sed6]

Who else remembers building a plastic model of this as a kid? That was my first introduction to the cockpit capsule ejection system.

[@aixaburlison4]

I've shown this film hundreds of times, I was an Egress Insructor at Chanute AFB

[@aevangel1]

"Got somebody you do not like?" "Don't shoot them; Chanute 'em!"

[@aixaburlison4]

@@aevangel1 I had a great time there, but I was permanent party, so it was different for us

[@aevangel1]

@@aixaburlison4 Just an old joke I heard when I was in. I was stationed at Offutt for a time, but I did find a way *off it...*

[@aixaburlison4]

@@aevangel1 the quote is....shoot me don't Chanute me. Like why not Minot freezing the reason. Retired U.S.A.F 76-95 TSgt

[@edwinsalau150]

All I ever worked on was the the Martin Baker.on the A-6.This was unbelievable. Thank you!

[@peterbustin2683]

The music really is fitting.

[@GrymsArchive]

The presenter later retired to the private sector where He led ground breaking work in the field of *Encabulator's* and winning several awards for his *Turbo Encabulator* with that work leading to the *Rockwell Retro Encabulator* and the ground breaking *SANS ICS HyperEncabulator*

[@pillscottvt6628]

Had one eject in Concord Vermont 88-89. worked well some snowmobilers rode out and picked them up.

[@chrispearson3333]

And the module works ok, a F111 with the 48th TFW at RAF Lakenheath in eastern England got into trouble about 20 miles north of our house, we were talking about it the other day. My late father was one of the local community civilian fire fighters who went to the scene of the ejection. Two fire stations nearer the scene got there first and assisted the crew out of the pod, they were sitting there chatting away, before the base picked them up. The crash scene was near Binham, Norfolk, England, you can Ytube it, around 1987. I was interested on the film when he said to clear the fumes they opened the hatches a bit, yet I was told a story where two local farmers arrived to help and we're going to use an axe to open the canopy, but the crew signalled to them to stop because the module was pressurised? But you know how bits get added onto a story. There's a thank you plaque from the USAF in the village somewhere thanking locals for there help. With at the time around ten British and American operated bases near by it wasn't the first time we first responded to an ejection.

[@Pvt_Wade]

"The module was pressurized"💀

[@claycook5773]

I was stationed at RAF Lakenheath from '85 to '88. I know the crewmembers involved in this accident. Firstly, both survived. I am not sure about pressurization continuing after ejection, but I'd doubt it. I do know that both crewmembers were injured because of a partial malfunction in the ejection system It may be simply that they were a bit stunned and in pain and didn't want to be moved or messed with.

[@martindavis9930]

My Amana refrigerator and the world's longest extension cord came over on the Mayflower... still runs great.

[@Sky_Ellie]

F-111 very interesting and progressive plane.

[@davenone7312]

I worked all AF models at depot as an Avionics guy. I sure miss that challenge to make them work again after modifications were done!

[@deltabassjet1]

My grandfathers work, so cool 😄

[@ianmontgomery7534]

I used to buy the explosive bolts from the US for the RAAF ones many many years ago. It always struck me as a good way to stuff up your back.

[@patton303]

The ejection rocket had 38,000lbs of thrust!

[@lineshaftrestorations7903]

Development of the escape system must have been executed like a complete aircraft program.

[@richardpearcy6149]

I there is any way to remove the PF# line from your videos that would be great. I enjoy your subjects and videos but that PF# plate inevitably obscures at least one detail.

[@midnighttutor]

must be some kind of vendor marketing film before the implementation -- the Lt Col does not show his name tag.

[@ericbainter826]

The Air Force from its birth in 1947 did not use name tags on uniforms. I don’t believe they added the blue and white plastic name tag to the service dress until late 60s? Early 70s? It was well established by the time I came on the scene in 1978.

[@hirisk761]

this is sooo cool! just subbed

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Great! Consider becoming a channel member kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXWliGami8abi6c

[@briancooper2112]

Great video!!

[@dks13827]

Notice the drogue chute does not jettison on early versions.... this killed 2 crews before they fixed that.

[@r0cketplumber]

My coworker Rick Searfoss was proud of his Aardvark driving days, and boasted that he flew it faster than he did the Space Shuttle- since while the Shuttle did Mach 25, that was in such thin air that the KEAS never broke 400, but the F-111 could go supersonic on the deck at nearly 900 KEAS. With the shuttle, EZ-Rocket, and X-racer, he flew the largest and smallest rocket planes, too. I called him our NASA-surplus astronaut. Miss him.

[@hoghogwild]

900 KEAS on the deck is fast for a -111. The FB-111A could do around 730 knots at sea level. the F-111B Seavark could do 793 knots at SL at 63,220 pounds combat weight with 2 Phoenix missiles, or 698 knots with 6 Phoenix missiles loaded(68,365lbs). All -111 models were structurally limited for top speed, not thrust limited, though the F-111F was the most powerful variant with 30% more thrust.

[@welshpete12]

It sounds very complicated , I wonder if it was a success in operational use . And if it worked as it should, why wasn't it used in later aircraft ?

[@duster0669]

Of course it worked, many times. Unfortunately the TF-30 was a garbage engine and it caused many crashes. The capsule failed a few times as well. Ejecting out of the envelope would get guys. And failed attenuation bags broke a few backs. Other wise it worked pretty well. The US Navy insisted on the capsule and side by side seating. The airplane was Navy in a lot of designs. They backed out of the deal when they could. The F-14 was their answer, and it was a better airplane. But it did have the crappy TF-30 engines, and all of the problems that engine created. The Vark was an ok bomber. It had few evil traits. Except the engines.

[@geoffmcnew5863]

It's a flying bomb with det-cord, linear shaped charges, explosive bolts, rocket engines = INSANE!

[@Johnnyred51]

Surely the system worked well in most cases. I did see a video about a pilot who suffered a severe back injury because the shoulder straps retention device failed. Otherwise the F-111 is a super fighter bomber!

[@ximenoworks]

McDonnell was contracted to developed this ejection system.

[@frankpinmtl]

Capsule system seems like a great way to protect the crew. Thing is, if you eject over enemy territory - you are essentially giving them the entire electronics suite of the model, no? Even if you put in a destruction charge, setting off an explosion on the ground once the crew egresses, is like saying "we're over here, come get us!"

[@punman5392]

The electronics are very likely stored elsewhere on the plane and all that is in the cockpit are the controls that interface with the computer and flight controls. That’s how I would do it if I were designing this to keep the weight of the capsule down

[@HeirloomGameCalls]

All the electronic stuff was elsewhere in the fuselage. All that remained with the capsule was control heads

[@xx3868]

Basically a rocket plane inside a jet plane!! Like spacecraft, umbilical's have to be cut and its all so complicated and amazing as it has to work even after sitting and sitting in heat and vibration endlessly for that one time the handle is pulled... Even today the F111 is amazing and outdated but so damn powerful and big and heavy and could go really fast carrying a heavy bomb load and like the Warthog, sad it cant fly on as both planes are so capable. The Space Shuttle was extraordinary to but thats gone for a decade now and the US doesn't even have its own spacecraft to lift men into orbit so a lots changed....

[@hoghogwild]

Space X regularly lifts humans to orbit, Boeing will also do so this December.

[@nicflatterie7772]

Around 08:00 I swear he was about to explain that it uses turbo encabulation.

[@Seminal_Ideas]

So did I...

[@stevecooper2873]

Seems like an awful lot of square footage open to damage from hostile actions [or other problems] that might affect the complex operation of this. Looks like a lot of "space tech" is similar to astronaut recovery systems.

[@stevep5408]

Damned interesting.

[@kingfish4575]

Wow that is a complicated system.

[@DFEUERMAN]

While they're at it, why not eject a mini-plane with wings and fly back to base?

[@MitzvosGolem1]

Early wing hinge failures?

[@nate4745]

Is this the guy that gave us the Rockwell Automation’s "Retro Encabulator" speech? "...six hydrocoptic marzelvanes, so fitted to the ambifacient lunar waneshaft that sidefumbling was effectively prevented."

[@skrape99]

... with a base plate of prefamulated amulite."

[@paoloviti6156]

Very interesting but I understood that it was very mantainace intensive and took hours to reconnect the escape module to the airplane. Nevertheless I always found the F-111 a really cool airplane but feel very sorry that I never saw this airplane flying 😢 😞

[@paoloviti6156]

@@FIREBRAND38 perhaps I didn't explain well: of course those modules once utilised by by the crew to bail out are not used or junked but those still installed on their airplane needs to be routinely inspected and generally the airplane was very expensive to fly hence the reason why the Australians terminated the use of F-111...

[@keithmoore5306]

yeah they ditched they system entirely and went to straight ejector seats on the B model on due to maintenance!!

[@paoloviti6156]

@@keithmoore5306 exactly! It was for the same reasons also the US Airforce terminated the use of this airplane despite performing very well during the Gulf War and performed better than any other U.S. strike aircraft used in the operation.The group of 66 F-111Fs dropped almost 80% of the war's laser-guided bombs, not bad isn't it?

[@keithmoore5306]

@@paoloviti6156 well spare parts supply was also starting to an issue too in it's retirement!

[@paoloviti6156]

@@keithmoore5306 you are right, I forgot to mention it...

[@rmp5s]

TIL: The Aardvark has its own re-entry pod. lol

[@notmenotme614]

“Aerodynamic lifting force” What if the aircrew eject the module while flying inverted?

[@hoghogwild]

The that same lifting force is used, along with gravity, to gain separation between the aircraft and the capsule.

[@captainahmethakantunckol5307]

This module two life rescue

[@mantia39]

Anybody out there ever had to use this? If so,did it work as prescribed?

[@hoghogwild]

Yes, many times.

[@jfan4reva]

Great story kzbin.info/www/bejne/iWnZl62GqNyjr6M

[@johnchristopher20]

It would be much simpler for a passenger vehicle ejection module. External impact airbags would minimize human injury on landing. If only General Dynamics made automobiles.

[@hoghogwild]

Just don't "eject" under a bridge or in a tunnel.

[@bret9741]

This aircraft was so complex. The cost to maintain and operate per hour was astronomical! Just the ejection system alone is unbelievable. Now… here I am dreaming. I’d love to take the plans for the F-111 and have Boeing/Saab, Lockheed / Martin and Northrop/Grumman compete to make a new version of this aircraft. Part of competition would be that the size, the variable sweep wing and overall shape must remain very close to the same. Anything else would open to change. With todays technology it would be so cool to see what these companies could do. Here is what we know they could do for certain. (1) reduce weight by 25-30% (2) increase thrust by 20-30% while increasing fuel efficiency by 35-50%! (3) fly by wire (4) at least F-15EX or F-35 Avionics, Radar, data links, much better flight crew comfort and helmet similar to the F-35. (5) much reduced radar cross section (6) reduction in maintenance hours by 50% or greater. Partly achieved by new technologies and better designed engine removal /install and maintenance modules that are easy to access and exchange. I believe with some aerodynamic cleaning up, Mach 2.8 or possibly 3.0 possible. The big increase in performance would be how incredibly fast this platform could be at super low altitude. It might even actually work well on a carrier. That being said….. it still would be low stealth and more costly than a clean sheet non variable wing platform.

[@sensualchocolate4928]

Amazing that this was all done with analog technology. The way he talks though you'd think it was digital, this happens when q sensor gives this or that signal, that's chosen at when this signal is given ect. truly amazing.

[@hoghogwild]

Some variants were indeed digital.

[@HeirloomGameCalls]

Yeah, we're old and sometimes cell phones can mess with us but remember, we did alot of this stuff with pencil and slide rule. In fact, your Cell Phone has more computer power than the Space Shuttle or F-111

[@jagmarc]

Analog signaling is orders of magnitude more efficient

[@cameronalexander359]

All without a single microchip. One helluva plane.

[@jeffwardlow4626]

Why can't they have these parachutes in regular Airline planes?

[@thomasfx3190]

Because USAF pilots are worth millions of dollars each. You and I are just expendable.

[@notmenotme614]

Because it’s less complex to have a lot of redundancy built into airliners. While the escape pod looks impressive it would have been a nightmare for maintainers

[@Plumbump]

With smaller private planes now, they just use a chute for the whole dang plane.

[@HeirloomGameCalls]

@@notmenotme614 not as bad as you think. Components were replaced as needed for inspection and recertification.

[@andrewmccririck8412]

This makes car air bags look very basic

[@JGCR59]

The sled ejection test looks staged, there were zero/zero ejection seats already in 1968 that didn't flip over the pilot.

[@keithmoore5306]

gee imagine that a test that was staged! all tests are staged and depending on the system in question some will flip the seat! just the nature of that particular seat design especially seeing how the F 106 was over a decade old by then as was it's seat design! it doesn't mean anything but to show a difference between the systems!!

[@Thunderbyrd.]

So? So what if tumbled or flipped, the goal of the ejection seat system is to get the crew out of the plane, clear the plane and deploy a parachute. It was meant to save the life of the crews.

[@mfx1]

A lot to potentially go wrong.

[@109-w7v]

Not the best looking aircraft but interesting for sure.

[@Leti2115]

Ese avion es muy largo

[@keithbrown2458]

This film looks like it sold but I remember when it was new who would think

[@broderp]

Why dont we have this level of engineering today? As a pilot, hands down an enclosed ejection system has so many benifits.

[@notmenotme614]

Probably complexity and cost. Ejector seats are quick to lift out during their maintenance and don’t disturb the rest of the aircraft. We only had to unhinge the canopy to lift the seat out for its routine maintenance. Modern ejector seats are also zero-zero capable with a high survival rate.

[@wayned1807]

I think they found that it wasn't always practicable in some situations like when the capsule landed on a steep hill side and would roll injuring the pilots. This happened more that once I've been told. Better to land on your feet.

[@Seminal_Ideas]

Although an ingenious design. General Dynamics TFX proposal and eventual F111 was seriously flawed. The undercarriage position negated the use of the full under fuselage for weapons stowage despite the Bombay. The position of the intakes created horrific boundary layer shocks for the smooth airflow into the engines. The side by side seating arrangements presented a wide windscreen for birds trikes at high speed low level flight. However the crew escape capsule was a very successful design despite costing as much per capsule as an F-86 Sabre.

[@thomasfx3190]

USMC F-4 B aircraft already had a 0/0 ejection seats that all worked fairly flawlessly in 1964(MB Mk 7) it’s kind of funny how this guy is goofing on standard ejection hardware.

[@c.8276]

F-111 was a great plane for its time. But this escape system was not the best idea, imho.

[@hoghogwild]

Ejections at supersonic speeds are difficult to survive, teh capsule system made sense for the supersonic penetration missions the -111 flew.

[@dirttdude]

it has a kajigger to it that i like but its heavy, complicated and expensive. Do away with all the bells and whistles and tell the pilot to deploy it once he gets his air speed under 300 knots with a choochchute then deploy the gizmo with the gazoontitechute. Old dad would have said 'keep it stupid simple'

[@jeanhaney2203]

The nik is taking the f 111 and re activating them was annoynced recently

[@HeirloomGameCalls]

Not likely dor the FB-111A as most are buried in the Australian Outback somewhere.

[@ProfessorImbakeXBoomshaka]

"crew sustains little discomfort" Yeah, ok

[@keithmoore5306]

compared to a normal ejection seat that's right!! wind blast is a bitch!!

[@Thunderbyrd.]

One F-111 crew that ejected over NZ complained of back injuries but I'd take back injuries over splattering any day, lol.

[@jfan4reva]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/iWnZl62GqNyjr6M

[@jagmarc]

When they compulsory install these on passenger cars everyone will drive even more like idiots than they do now with airbags and stability programs

[@georgedreisch2662]

Here’s someone relating their experience ejecting from a F-111. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iWnZl62GqNyjr6M

[@keithmoore5306]

not too bad of a bird once general disaster figured out how to install a hinge pin so it wouldn't fall out in flight!!!

[@DanielLopez-up6os]

I swear this guy sounds the same as the narrator in "The missile knows where it is, by knowing where it isn't" video.

[@rexpositor6741]

Retroencabulator