Jet AC ejection seats

[CF104]

Sorry for interrupting your post with conversation on a topic I do have some experience on. I'm out.

 

Carry on!

[BWDenver]

23 minutes ago, CF104 said:

Sorry for interrupting your post with conversation on a topic I do have some experience on. I'm out.

 

Carry on!

I love to get firsthand info on seats by the folks who actually worked on them. 

 

Your info on the final headbox mod conflicts with what I have, that it dates to the late 80's, but is likely more actuate than what I have as the source is not someone with direct hands-on experience with the seat as you have.  Likely as not, the change was to make it "idiot proof" as it sounds like the separation strap was somehow threaded over the shoulder harness web.   Moving the point of the shoulder harness away from the separation web would certainly address the situation.

 

In the field folks make mistakes.  I talked to a Navy Weps expert, that indicated they had very high guidance failure rates on the early Sidewinder.  They went into the field to find out why.  Turns out the weapons handlers were using the rollerons as "wheels" to drag the Winders around the aircraft.

 

I was a Maintenace Officer and Test Pilot for the Army on the OH-58A.  I would take the birds out after serious maintenance was done to them, to ensure they were safe to fly.  In one instance the wrench turners swapped the measurements on the Pitch Change Links on an OH-58.  As I went through ETL, Effective Transitional Lift around 18 - 20 Kts, the bird developed a viscous lateral vibration, that had my helmet bouncing off the door window.  I aborted the takeoff and landed the bird   It was a bit before i figured out what they had done.

 

We had another mechanic that had a penchant for putting OH-58 tail rotors on backwards.  After the second incident inside of two weeks I made sure he did other things, like sweep the hanger floor.  Where he could not get someone killed.

[BWDenver]

T-33 Ejection Survival Lottery

 

The M5 catapult was the last ballistic catapult in a long line of cartage catapults developed by Frankfort Arsenal.  The last iteration of the M5 Catapult was the M5A1 unit.

 

The M5A1 was an 8.2 Lb 39” catapult made up of three telescoping tubes with a 66” stroke.  The outside diameter was 2.3”.  Once triggered the heart of the catapult is the M28A1 black powder cartage.  As the fining pin is moved to the primer unit a cam unlocks the device.  The M5 was capable of throwing a 300Lb weight.  The M5 gave the pilot a 20G ride, and propelled him to 60 fps.  Stroke time was on the order of 0.220 Sec.  The arm rests on the T-33 (and USAF seats in general) reduced the G force on the spine to around 12 G.

 

 

 

The minimum survival altitude with the M5 Cat and the T-33 varied from 500’ down to 100’ depending on Auto lap Belt timer M4 (2second), M12 (1 second), parachute delay, (F-1A (2 second), F-1B (1 second), and the parachute pack and canopy.

 

So depending on what components you had when you crawled into the cockpit, you had a fairly large spread of altitude to eject in.  And more importantly, you had to remember what the components were, and when you had to step out.  While everything was falling apart around you.

While 100’ was good, they needed a ground level system.  For that they needed a rocket.

 

 

When the M5 was replaced with the ROCAT it was designed to fit into the envelope of the M5.  Particularly the upper attaching point on the top of the ROCAT that matched the M5.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2024 by BWDenver

[BWDenver]

Lockheed Low Level Escape ejection seat

 

In the first half of 1958 there were three “ground level ejections”.  Two resulted in serious injuries, one minor.  In all three cases the pilot did not separate from the seat.  As roughly 65% of all AC failures happened during takeoff or landing there was a need for a ground level system.  In the book Sonic Wind, about John Paul Strapp by Craig Ryan, a rather sobering statistic was cited.  In the Mid to late 50’s 25% of ejections resulted in fatalities.  As roughly 65% of accidents happened in takeoff and landing phase they clearly needed something better.  The T-33 as the primary trainer was likely up front and center on accidents, and unfortunately fatalities as the inexperienced pilots tend to make mistakes.  From my time flying in the US Army, the first 500 hrs. are the most dangerous, as you are still leaning your craft.

 

 

In the late 50’s USAF and USN seat managers tested rockets.  They felt that was the only way to guarantee the best envelope for survival.  In 1957 the Navy developed the “Rocket Assist Personnel Ejection Catapult”, RAPEC, rocket that would eventually go into the AD4 Skyhawk, and a derivative into the F-104A.  The RAPEC unit started equipping Skyhawks in 1960 in what would eventually become the ESCAPAC seat.  Lockheed started working on a Low Level Escape System for the T-33 airframes around 1962, and completed testing and issued a report by April 1963.  The new system incorporated a number of features in what would become T.O. 1T-33A-615. 

 

Low Level Escape system, overall view

 

 

 

Low level Escape system controls.

 

 

Rocket configuration

 

NAVAIR 01-75FJC-501 dated 15 October 1957, Revised 1 October 1967 show both the “latest Aircraft” ballistic seat and the “Low level Escape System” AKA ROCAT seats.  The upgrade incorporated multiple initiators, gas fired units, replacement tubing and the heart of the system, the Rocket Catapult, or ROCAT.  While Navy publications do not show an interconnection between the seats, USAF maintenance manuals do.  The forward seat would initiate the dual ejection sequence, firing the aft seat first then the forward seat.  Either seat could fire the canopy.   The tests indicated the seat could function at ground level and 120 Kts, but in practice a bit under that speed.  The deployment of the parachute was a limiting factor in order to inflate the parachute fully it needed airflow.

 

While this is not a ROCAT seat, it does illustrative the "see through" nature of the ROCAT seat headbox.  Photo by Stephen Miller, a superb aviation photographer.

 

 

ROCAT sequence.

 

The changeover was not immediate, some publications indicate the 4^th series configuration seats and ROCAT seats were present in the T-33 airframes into the early 70’s, but that might have been for overseas customers.

 

 

 

I was digging through my files and found this Gordon Bowen image from Flying Magazine on the Korea T-bird, that showed the upper aft ejection seat structure.  While the image is of a Venezuelan T-33A, it is the same for T-33A/B airframes.

 

The headbox area has a red vinyl headrest attached to a metal plate that has 9 lightning holes in it.  The seat slips into two C Rails that are guides for the rollers.  The ROCAT sits between two L Brackets that ensure the ROCAT does not deflect left or right.  The L Brackets are attached by another L Bracket attached to the seat guide rails and ROCAT L Brackets.  The upper end of the ROCAT attaches to a beefy I Beam assembly.  All the force of the ROCAT is transmitted to the upper structure of the seat.

 

Visible are the two screw jacks that allow for seat height adjustment over a 4” path.  The screw jacks are cross connected by a rod at the top.  Visible just below the cross piece is the Ballistic Pilot Inertia Reel unit.  When the seat was modified with the Single Motion Ejection a bracket was added between the breakers that the Gas Generator was attached to.

 

Parts breakdown on the controls for the Low level Seat

 

 

The Low Level Escape System seat bucket had several stiffening strips attached to the front part of the seat.  It looks like additional padding may have been added but I have yet to find a color photograph showing the details of it.  Additional stiffing panels were also added to the upper and lower parts of the seat.  The pre-ROCAT seats had an open area at the bottom of the headrest.  The ROCAT seat had a plate added below the headrest where the shoulder harness was threaded through.  The pilot separation web was threaded through a lower opening.  Stiffening plates were added to the lower outboard sides of the headrest.

 

T-33B USN seat controls

 

The Low Level Escape System replaced the ballistic M5 catapult, with a Rocket-Catapult or ROCAT.  The initial unit was manufactured by Tally Industries as P/N 2400.  It provided between 2,400 and 6,000 pounds of thrust dependent on temperature.  Burn time was on the order of 0.25 Sec. with a 14 – 18 G kick and up to 200 F/Sec acceleration. Velocity at separation was 50 F/Sec.  Roughly one second after the seat cleared the airframe the pilot separator would fire just as the auto belt fired to throw the pilot clear of the seat.  The initiator was mounted under the seat pan and snaked a web back the upper part of the seat back, and then forming an A web down to the forward part of the seat pan.  When the initiator fired the unit pulled the web in and the separator web became taught, expelling the pilot clear.  The Zero delay lanyard still attached to the seat harness pulled the D ring parachute pack.

 

 

T-33B seat controls and pilot separation system

 

 

Pilot Separation strap on my F-100C seat, showing how the strap ejects the pilot and seat pack.

 

The ROCAT unit replaced the ballistic gun housing of the same dimensions as the M5 66” telescoping unit.  As the ROCAT cleared the primary gun housing tube the rocket blast got the seat free of the airframe.  The early ROCAT gave T-33 crews ground level escape performance at 0 altitude above 120 kts, eventually with better timing and increasing the burn time to ½ Second the speed was reduced to 90 Kts, again the chute properly inflating needed at least 90 kts of airspeed.  The external differences was a “Catapult Cartridge” mounted low on the right side of the catapult housing.  It fired hot gases into the lower end of the ROCAT and ignited the rocket propellant, and also expelled the ROCAT cartage out of the catapult housing.

 

 

Interconnection between FWD and AFT seats.  The "panel" at the base of the FWD seat held the timers and imitators, and one-way valves.

 

The physical difference between the ballistic and ROCAT seat was the addition of a Canopy M3 initiator on the RH aft side of the seat in vicinity of the right shoulder, and removal of the inertial reel from the right mid part of the seat back, and a new unit was installed in the headbox.  In addition to the modifications around the headbox.  The ROCAT seat stayed with the T-33 until it was withdrawn from service. 

 

 

 

Low Level Seat firing configuration.

 

 

 

The final configuration of the US Lockheed Low Level Escape System was the “Single Motin Ejection” modification.  The primary difference was the replacement of the original tube-shaped finding handles with units of a rectangular cross section, and incorporation of the HUB lap belt.

 

Parts breakdown on the Single Motion Ejection modification.  Post Sep 1978

 

 

Single Motion Ejection with early breakers

 

 

 

Single Motion Ejection seat mod with pilot service connections.

 

 

Shot of the aft left side of the Low Level Escape System w Single Motion ejection modification, with USAF breakers.

 

 

HUB auto seat belt.

 

T-33A/B, the sequence of events was straight forward.  The FWD pilot pulled the handles, the left handrest locked the shoulder harness, the right when pulled fired the canopy and triggered the seat catapult when the pilot pulled the trigger.  As the seat started up the rails a trip rod connected to the M-32 “Pilot Seat Separation System” was triggered.  The initiator directed gas to auto seat belt separator and the Seat man Separator.  ½ second after the delay unit is tripped it fires and the lap belt and shoulder harness is released.  A T fitting also directs gas pressure to the Seat man Separator on the bottom of the seat.   When the web goes taught, it ejects the pilot out of the seat. As the seat goes up the rails it also arms the 2 second delay on the Auto Parachute.  1.5 seconds after seat/man separator fires the chute opens.

 

 

ROCAT Canopy Breakers

 

 

One of the issues with this instalment was the lack of information on the Navy seats.  It has taken several months to get the right information and for that I have the National Naval Aviation Museum Archives section to thank.  Without their help the final instalment would never have happened.

 

The initial Low level Escape System or what I’m referring to as the ROCAT seat retained the strip of metal on top of the headbox that was the initial canopy breaker.  But it became clear a little more was needed other than a battering ram on the top of the seat.

 

The first depiction of the breakers that I’ve found came from NAVAIR 01-75FJA-2-2 QT-33A Navy dated 1 April 1971.  The breakers were wide flat units that did not protrude beyond the headrest.  The first illustration of what would become the “Navy” breakers for the T-33B was in NAVAIR 01-75FJC-1, 1 Apr 1972.  They were narrow profile knifelike blades that extended forward of the headrest.  However based on evidence in hand I cannot positively determine when the breakers were first added.  It appears the Navy installed them first followed by USAF a year or so later.

 

 

T.O. 1T-33A-2 23 March 1959, Change 28 1 Jan 1973 do not show the canopy breakers installed.  Photographs of USAF T-33A’s started showing the breakers around mid-1973.  The parts do not appear to be uniform from a central vender.  In photographs of both Navy and USAF seats there is quite a bit of variation almost as if they were locally manufactured from ¼” sheet stock.  The upper side of the breakers is knife edged.  Each breaker is screwed to the headbox with 4 Philips head screws in the upper part, and one at the lower forward end.  The screws went into nuts plates.    USAF FWD breakers were wider profile, and also protruded forward of the head rest, and up to just below the canopy. 

 

USAF typically did not appreciate through the canopy escapes.  Some seat managers indicated “The Airforce didn’t mind killing a crewman, they just didn’t want to hurt them”.  The Air Force protruded slightly forward of the head rest.  The USAF breakers are rounded at the front, painted various colors and the part that contacts the canopy, are bright metal in some pictures. 

 

 

Overall, the Fwd. breakers extended 2” above the legacy breaker bow corner.  The aft breaker protruded .84” above the legacy breaker corner, see aft drawing of the seat.  The FWD blades extend roughly 2.6” forward of the headrest, the aft breaker protruded slightly forward of the legacy breaker strip.  These measurements are based on -2 maintenance manual drawings.  There is a third breaker in the various documents that show a unit that does not protrude in front of the headrest, and is more vertical. 

 

 

USAF Breaker late 70's.

 

 

USAF Breakers, NASM T-33A.

 

T-33B with "NAVY" breakers, T-33B in the background lacks breakers.

 

Surviving T-33B in Pueblo Co museum, not the knifelike configuration of the breakers.

 

QT-33A with navy breakers.

 

 

QT-33A controls and pilot separator illustration

 

Overseas customers did not upgrade the T-33 seats with canopy breakers.  The countries that did end up with them, like Mexico, had them as a result of buying US Surplus T-33’s from the US Gov.

 

For the most part the T-33A/B seats utilized the standard USAF arrangement of as pilot backpack parachute.  The NAVY QT-33A also had a one-off seat configuration.  The QT-33A was a single seat aircraft, with the back seat filled with drone control equipment.  Since the T-33 was an Air Force aircraft it utilized a seat back parachute worn by the pilot.  The one off QT-33A had the NES-21 Parachute, which was a seat bottom chute.  Since they didn’t use the seatback chute a mid seatback pad was installed on the seat back to ensure the pilot was in the correct position on ejection.  The Navy also took a slightly different approach to the “D” Ring lanyard.  Starting in April 1965, the Zero Delay Lanyard was to be connected at all times below 500 Kts and or below 12,000’.  With the Air Force it was a hard 2000’. 

 

 

 

 

 

The first illustrations of the Single Motion Ejection modification was in the parts manual USAF TO 1T-33A-4, NAVAIR 01-75FJC-4, listed as Change 22, 1 Sep 1978.  The Single Motion Ejection seat was activated by raising either handle, starting the ejection sequence by first firing the Ballistic powered inertial reel and shoulder harness located in the headbox area of the seat, which forced the pilot into an upright position.  Initiators on the armrests directed gas pressure to the initiator panel located near the floor behind the FWD seat.  The panel would facilitate the AFT seat firing first then the FWD seat.   As each seat started its upward travel, a telescoping trip unit that started the timing for the HUB lap belt unit and Pilot-seat separator system.  The independent system would facilitate the HUB lap belt release firing as the separator was fired to eject the pilot and seat pack.  The HUB auto lap belt was used in conjunction with the force deployed parachute on the Lockheed SR2 seat, while I have not found an information on a force deployed chute with the T-33 is an outside possibility as the system was used by the Lockheed F-104.

 

Most indications ae the QT-33 airframes were not modified with the Single Motion Ejection system.

 

 

Colors

The Low level Escape System Lockheed seats initially were Dark Gull Grey FS 36231, with Insignia Red FS 31136 head and arm rests.  Eventually the USAF seats were painted black above the seat bucket.   Some of the breakers (when installed) were painted Orange Yellow FS 33538, black or Dark Gull Grey.  The firing handle was Orange Yellow in color, and on some seats the entire right arm was painted red.  

 

With the incorporation of the Single Motion Ejection system both handles were Orange Yellow with black stripes.

 

The Low Level Escape System in models.

 

Early on in any modeling project you have to come to terms with how much detail you hope to add to the kit.  While some kits do a good job representing the seat in 1/48, other scales are going to be a challenge.  Refer to the upper seat shot above to get an idea on just how much detail you can add. Most of the details that make up the ROCAT seat is hidden from view, so you get a break there.

 

For an accurate Low Level Escape System you have two options, neither are inexpensive if scratching the seat is out of the question.  If you have not purchased a T-33 kit yet, I would start with the Great Wall kit.  Overall, it’s a good representation.  But the headbox will need to be drilled out if you want a spot on representation.  The physical appearance of the kit seat is a post 1978 configuration, so the “Early Version” is actually late-stage configuration with the Single Motion Ejection system seats.

 

While the Great Wall kit is a late stage T-33, it still is the best Low level Escape System/Single Motion Ejection seat.  The seat is made up of multiple parts and is a good representation.  It can be backdated with the Eduard 1/48 Photo Etch set, 49 796, if you can find one.  With the Eduard set you get a great headbox without the breakers.  And a bonus, they also have parts to replace the Single Motin Ejection handles with the older rounded units.  Eduard likely used a European seat as it lacks the breakers, or they chose to depict an earlier seat. 

 

While it would have been great if they added the breakers, we can’t have everything.  Another point, the Great Wall kit, while it has breakers, it’s a one size doesn’t fit all seat.  The kit breakers are the same for front and rear seats, so they are too tall for the Aft seat and too short for the FWD seat.  While you can trim the aft seat to the correct height, the FWD seat is going to be an problem.  I would recommend you get the Eduard seat and rebuild the seat.  You can use some of the brass fret to shape the breakers if you want to a post ‘71 Navy seat or Post ‘73 USAF seat.  As always, match the seat to the real AC you’re doing.

 

Verlinden offered a 1/48 cockpit upgrade and detail set.  The seat lacks the breakers, and Single Motion Ejection handles, so it could be a Pre-ROCAT or pre-canopy breakers representation.  On the downside, the headrest is a solid unit and will have to be hollowed out.  The bucket seat resembles a Low Level Escape System seat back.

 

Both head boxes are pretty close to the actual size.  But the solid head box is going to be problematic to detail.  The headbox has multiple items relating to the shoulder harness and retraction system.  Again the Eduard kit headbox will offer a quick way to fix the headbox.

 

Another challenge for the modeler is to replicate the gas lines that are routed all over the seat.  For the Special Hobby 1/32 T-33A it would likely be a bit easier, 1/48 a bit more difficult.  And 1/72, have fun.

 

On the Special Hobby T-33 the seat looks a bit “odd”.  The head rest appears to be a bit large, and the seat pad does not appear to be the standard unit.  The kit parts show leg extensions for the seat pad.   I have seen one image of a T-33 seat with this pad, but not in any US or Canadian -1’s.  It is usually found on seats with a lower seat firing handle (not used in the T-33) or extensions for the legs similar to the ESCAPAC seats.  It would be interesting to find out what aircraft they used as a pattern.  The Special Hobby seat has an inertial reel on the back of the seat, so it appears they used ballistic seat as a patten.  They also used the seat for the F-80 kit, which is completely wrong.

 

Another issue is the instrument panel.  The Eduard photo etch set is fantastic, but it’s a Lt Grey instrument panel similar to FS 36495, which should be Dark Gull Grey FS 36231 for a post ’56 instrument panel.  Pre ’56 the panel should be black.

 

Next up will be the NATO T-33's. 

 

Might be a bit delayed as I have to get my shoulder overhauled....

 

Edited October 18, 2024 by BWDenver

[ya-gabor]

Here is an opportunity not only to search and look at virtual ejection seats on the net, but to have a close look at them at first hand!!!

 

In a weeks time, on Saturday and Sunday of 9th and 10th of November we will have again the annual models show of GOforGO Travel, the “Márton-Napi” model show. So if you are around Budapest next weekend then drop in. As usual I will have few real ejection seats at the show and lots of other interesting stuff, hopefully including real bits and pieces (even big ones) from a real MiG-21bis fighter.

 

It will be a perfect chance to have a chat, try on a helmet or two, compare and get into a pilots G-pants one from an F-16 and the other from a Soviet fighter. Sit in and strap into a real ejection seat or simply have a look at real aircraft colours and compare them with your reference cards / paint bottles or your latest master piece kit!   : )  : )

 

I will be there on both days from doors opening at 10 AM all the way to closing time around 5PM. Entry is 1000 Forints for adults (it is about 2.50 Euro) and 800Ft for kids and there is also a family ticket.

 

Look forward to meet you, speak to modellers or simply ones curious of what all those big pieces of metal are for and how they work!   : )    : )    : )

 

Best regards

Gabor

[ya-gabor]

This is the place where the annual Márton-napi model show will take place. It is the cultural centre to the North from Budapest at Békásmegyer. There is a monster display on that front wall and today when I took the photo (by accident) (there are no accidents) it was showing the ad for the actual modelling event with a photo of an F-16. It turns out that the main theme of the event will be the F-16 for its 50 year anniversary.

 

OK. I don’t have an ACES II seat from an F-16 (never say never) but I have an appropriate CSU-13P G-pants from a Dutch F-16. So . . .

It will be possible for visitors to try it on!    : )    : )  Just as a lot of other things also.

 

Hope to see you there next weekend!  : )  : )

 

Best regards

Gabor

[ya-gabor]

I have been at the location this evening to prepare the display for the weekend show. This is what you can expect to see at the “Márton-napi” model show on my stand. Of course a lot of “small stuff” will be on the table only on weekend. Wraps come off tomorrow morning.   : )    : )

Weather is going to be a little on the cooler side with around 10-12 C in daytime but with glorious sunshine and blue sky’s. Inside the venue this should not really affect us only when getting there. Morning should be chilly with close or below Zero.

 

Look forward to see you at the show. It should be a lot of fun!  : )  : )

 

Best regards

Gabor

[BWDenver]

Hey Gabor!

 

I think you might get more traction if you advertised on the German site Flungzeugrorum.de:

 

https://www.flugzeugforum.de/threads/schleudersitze.58760/

 

The focus of the page is Ejection Seats, primarily Martin-Baker and Russian hardware.  The page is dedicated to rebuilding the seats and history.

 

Great group of collectors and enthusiasts!

 

Bryan

Edited November 25, 2024 by BWDenver

[BWDenver]

NATO seats, Oh Canada!

 

Canada was an early adopter of the T-33.  I have conflicting reports as to how many TF-80C/T-33A airframes the RCAF obtained from the US.  One source says 20, another 60.  However, the focus on this article is not how many, but on the seats likely in those AC. 

 

 

The earliest RCAF T-33A I have a record of is USAF SN. 50-429 delivered in May 1951 as Silver Star I 14675.    Most sources indicate the initial RCAF AC had a mix of ejection and fixed seats. 

 

All but one of the surviving airframes were returned to the US and in many cases transferred to NATO countries.  Canadair started producing their own license built T-Birds.  One bird was retained, 51-4198, and was modified to take a larger engine which required the aft fuselage modification.  It was retained as the Silver Star Mk.2, 14695.  There is no definitive information if the initial T-33’s lacking seats got retrofitted while in Canadian service. 

 

The CT-133 Mk 3, Canadair license built 656 T-Bird were delivered initially with the Lockheed designed “Un-Modified” seat.  The seats, like the US birds, were continuously upgraded to the Low Level Escape system with a ROCAT. 

 

 

0

The early seatless T-33's got the seat from the F-80C with the headbox drogue chute, I do not have conclusive proof this seat was fitted to the early seatless Canadian birds.

 

Canadair delivered CT-133's with the Lockheed Un-Mod seat.  At some point they were modified with Gas Actuators, creating the Mod seat.  Likely the same time frame as the US T-33 seats

 

 

Very likely the initial colors of the Canadair produced seats was black.

T-33 seats generally were online with seat pack survival packs, but not backpatch chutes.  Here is a Pre-ROCAT seat.  They likely upgraded the seats in a similar time frame to US operated T-33's.

 

Some seat headrests had decals on how to remove the seats, some did not.

 

 

 

Shot showing wear patterns in the cockpit.

 

It's hard to tell if this is a Ballistic seat or the ROCAT.  Ex Canadian bird, on the Mojavi Flight Systems Drone Ramp.  June 1979, so possibly a ROCAT seat.  Note the weathering on the headrest.

 

There are some reports that the re-routing of shoulder harness belts took place around 1970.  However, photographs in my collection of Canadian CT-133’s show the harnesses modification took place in the late 80’s.  One Dave Brown photograph of CT-133 133593 taken on Sep 04, 1987, shows the original harness rigging. 

 

Late 1987 shot be Dave Brown showing the Low-Level Escape system seat.

 

Small section of Dave Browns excellent shot of the Canadian T-33.

 

The earliest photograph of a CT-133 Mk 3 with the modification is one of my shots of a bird taken at Tyndal in mid 1991, and show the new rigging of the shoulder harness coming out of the headrest. 

 

Profile shot of a CT-133 at Tyndall AFB.

 

A close up of the cockpit area shows the shoulder harness coming out of the headrest.

 

 Left rear shot of the CT-133, little bit better sun angle, with dual Jamming pods.

 

 

Shot from Canadian IPMS publication by Craig Baldwin, Random Thoughts Vol 46, No. 2, summer 2024, by Craig Baldwin.

 

 

 

Another shot from the RT article.

 

 

Additionally I have found a shot of AETE based 133190 taken on July 10^th 1990 with the harness mod.  So I’m inclined to think the modification took place post 1989, and prior to mid 1990.  In order to re-route the harness, a rectangular hole was opened up in the headrest, and an insert placed allow the harness to move in and out without fraying.

 

 

Post Low level Escape system or ROCAT mod, The maximum vertical travel of the Canadian seat is 4.5 inches ± 0.25 inches (114.3 mm ± 6.35 mm).   The Rear seat is ejected from the front, regardless of being occupied or having the seat pins installed.  The rear seat occupant can only eject the rear seat.  Either seat can blow the canopy.

 

The final modification to the CT-133 was an ARAD ridged drogue arm deployed from the back of the seat.  The arm when deployed locked into a 90 degree angle to the seat back, and extended roughly 38.9” behind the seat. 

-1 illustration, LF

 

-1 illustration, RR

 

 

ARAD deployed

 

Droge chute package.

 

laurent Querite Photo illustrating the drogue chute.

 

HBU-12B auto seat belt release.

 

The unit was attached to the left seat back rail, hinged at the bottom and held in place with an arm.  This was installed after a reported failed separation from a seat.  The modification comprised of the ARAD, a drogue and larger parachute were developed by CEPE, later AETE at Cold Lake.  The Canadians never upgraded to the Single Motion Ejection configuration, or for that matter added canopy breakers. 

 

 

 

One of the problems of a larger parachutes, is they takes more time to fully deploy, absent a force deploy system like the Stencel spreader Gun.  In the case of the T-33 the use of the C-9 28’ flat canopy lowered the minimum recovery altitude to 50’ (with other automatic features) over the C-11 30’ canopy with a minimum altitude of 150’.  Smaller chutes deploy faster.  Unfortunately, I do not have conclusive proof via photographs as to when the ARAD unit was installed in the CT-133 Mk 3.  The drogue unit is clearly visible resembling an object about the size of a Stanley Thermos bottle between the top of the seat height adjuster actuators and the canopy breaker strip.  It protrudes a little above the canopy breaker bar.  Please note the drogue case was a soft case, the reference to the thermos is purely to give an idea of size.  Most shots from the late 90’s do not show the seat top drogue case.  Shots of the aircraft in mid-2001 show the unit, or after they were removed from service in storage.  So it apparently was installed after 1998/99, based on the dates on published photographs.

 

Ian Abbott photo of an ex-Canadian bird with final seat mods.

 

Ian Abbott photo, showing the drogue container on top of the seat.

 

The CT-133 T-Bird was retired at some point in 2001, with 4 examples retained by AETE Cold Lake, Alberta, Canadas equivalent to Edwards AFB.  A fair number of the CT-133’s went on to server in other careers, two went to Boeing and serve as chase planes until late 2020.

 

 

Final configuration of the Canadian CT-133 Mk 3.  The built-up area around the rear cockpit was adopted by USAF and USN seat test AC in order to reduce turbulence with the aft canopy removed.

 

Canadian colors. 

 

The initial Canadair birds were painted per what turned into the Canadian 1-GP-12c, 1965 color standard.  Eventually they adopted the FS 595a color standards.   Overall, the seats and cockpits were black.  Instrument panel Lt Grey, black bezels on the instruments.  Cockpit/canopy sill red, with the red extending approximately 1” down, interrupted where black console attached to the canopy shelf.  The black cockpit went a long way to reducing canopy glare.  That is why in the late 70’s the US Army started painting flat cockpits black.  From my flights in OH-58A’s with and without the black cockpits were remarkably free of glare with the flat black cockpit.

 

With the advent of the ROCAT white decals were applied to the heard rest instructing on how to remove the seat, some Canadian seats had the warning “ROCKET SEAT” on the head rest.  Late stage seats with the modified shoulder harness rigging show only a single white lettered decal below the shoulder harness.  Canadian seats were reported to be black, Olive Drab or Dark Gull Grey, but most indications are they were black.  Initiators and catapult housing were generally an anodized gold color.  Lines to and from the initiators were silver braided tubing.  Black stripes were also added to the Right-hand firing grip.

 

The photographs of the CT-133 seats were obtained from the Canadian IPMS magazine, Random Thoughts in an article on the CT-133 Silver Star by Canadian modeler Craig Baldwin.  In Craigs article he indicated the changeout to the modified shoulder harness location as “Pre-1989”.  Without copies of the Modification Work Order is hard to narrow down the time frame on the modification.  Markings on the Canadian seat differ from the US seat.   The earliest photos I have of CT-133’s with the re-rigged shoulder harness was 133083, tankan on Feb 28^th 1991 at Tyndall AFB.

 

Based on photographs, the seat, or the reference seat, is the following. 

 

Seats frame and bucket, Fl Black.  Headrest and arm rest cushions, Insignia Red, FS 11136.  Chute harness, Field Green, FS 34097.  Chute pack, Similar to FS 34098.  Survival kit FS 14115 fiberglass, seat cushion a light sand.  Lap belt and shoulder harness off white.  Buckles and D ring, silver.  Fining handles FS 13591 w black stripes on the upper side.  D Ring to chute pack, silver. 

 

The seat tends to wear around the top of the seat bucket, and the footrests, and foot wells in the cockpit floor.

 

Some of the chute harness shots are close to a Md Blue, with the upper harness web a very light purple, similar t a lightened FS 17155.  The fining handles for this seat, are yellow, but without black stripes.  The seat was a Pre Low level Escape System Mod, so post late 60’s.  No decals on the front headrest.

 

Also of note, is the rigid arm drogue unit that was added to the CT-133 Mk3 seat late in life.  Photos taken of the AC at Tyndall do not show the drogue chute container on top of the seat, or for that matter up to around 1998-99.

Edited December 9, 2024 by BWDenver

[RichB63]

Bryan…I can’t thank you enough for your contributions. Happy to see the administrators have pinned this thread for posterity’s sake.

-Rich

[BWDenver]

NATO and other overseas T-33 customers.

 

Three countries manufactured the T-33.  The US was the leader, Canadair No 2 and Kawasaki built 210 for Japan as No 3.   However based on Japan’s constitution, no arms are eligible for export.  Well over 30 countries have used the T-33 at one time or another.   Most obtaining airframes from the US.  Bolivia was the last country to operate the T-33, retiring them in 2017, close to 70 years is a fairly good run for a military aircraft.  Many still fly on in civilian hands.

 

Dutch seat

 

Late German seats, repainted

 

Another German Lockheed seat in a brown scheme

 

US aircraft painted as a NATO airframe

 

 

Exports to NATO countries under MDAP started in the early 50’s.  The initial export birds would have had a mix of Un-Mod and after 1954, Mod seat.  The Royal Netherlands Air Force operated 60 T-33A’s and 3 RT-33A airframes.  They were withdrawn in 1972 and were passed to other NATO countries or sold as surplus.  A lot of the NATO countries got surplus or early production USAF T-33A’s.

 

Some dates and SN’s,  the Serial No. of the airframe will give some insight into what seat it may have had.  It’s likely a large number of them had either Un-Mod or Mod seats.  But from a modeling perspective one is very much the same as another, as the Gas Actuators are tucked away.

Denmark got the T-33A with 51-4404.

Dutch AF got 51-4511 in 1952.

French AF got the T-33A with 50-431 in 1951

Belgium got the T-33 with 51-4041

Greek AF got the T-33a in 1951 with 50-434 Greece got the German T-33’s, with the MB Mk.GU5A seats

Norway got the T-33A in 1953 with 51-8828

Turkey got the T-33A with 50-1275 (Ex RCAF bird)

Yugoslavia got the T-33A in 1953 with 51-8724

Canada Earliest SN 50-430 in May1951 as Silver Star 1, then later to Greece

Italy got the T-33A with starting with 51-4418.

 

Dutch T-33 seats in original green and Grey.  Note the 2nd to the right in the back row is a Lowe Level Escape System mod seat.  It may have come from a US source, had had the seat swapped out with the Mk.DU5.  Low Level Escape System had an initial 0 altitude 120 kts envelope.  The Mk.U5 had a 0' 90 kt envelope.

 

 

West Germany got the T-33A with 51-4421, eventually returned it to the US.  Another early airframe, 51-17471 transferred in 1957, and is still in Germany.

  A number of fatal Low-Level Ejections led the Germans to look at the Martin-Baker “Fully Automatic Seat” early 1958. 

 

Group of Dutch seats in green and grey finish

 

 

 

A German official made a ground level ejection from the MB Meteor on May 5^th, 1958.  Herr R. Bullwinkle was the test subject.  Truth is funnier that fiction.  The Germans were impressed and entered into early negotiations with MB for seats in the T-33 and Canadair 6 Sabre. 

T-33A AB-814 (USAF 54-1570) arrived in England along with a Sabre Mk 6 for test fitting in the last half of 1959.  The starting point for both seats was the new American Mk.5 seat with a 40G shoulder harness “go-forward” mechanism.  The 40G seat and harness criteria was the new American standard, the British standard was 25G.  The uprated crash protection was the result of John J Stapp’s live sled tests.  The new seat would be the Mk.U5, with three country prefix letter, DG&N.  The T2V (USN navelized T-33) Mk.L5 and new Mk. U5 seats are very different from each other as seen in previous instalments.

 

54-1570 was initially delivered to the USAF 36^th FDW, SOC on May 5^th 1958 and shipped to  W Germany in June 1958 as T-33A AB-814.  Recoded to 94+71 in 1968, and sold surplus to France for spare parts 1972.

 

Installation in the T-33 posed a few problems, not the least was the T-33 wooden cockpit floor.  The MB Boffins decided the cockpit floor would not take the 80 FPS gun forces, and redesigned the guide rail anchors that would take the increased forces. 

Early prototype Mk.GU5 seat in front of T-33 AB-814.  Note position of O2 bottle.

 

Right side of early prototype Mk.GU5 seat

 

The existing Lockheed seat ejected at a 14 degree angle; this was judged not sufficient for what would become known as the Mk.GU5 seat for German T-33’s.  The obvious choice was to move the seat pan forward and do asway with the Horseshoe parachute pack to allow the pilot to recline a bit more.  A seat pack chute was selected, by doing away with the dingy and survival kit.  As the aircraft flew over Europe this was considered a low risk.  To deploy the chute, a line was run from the Duplex Drogue down the seat into a false floor in the seat pan to the parachute. 

 

The false floor prevented the weight of the pilot from interfering with the deployment.  The seat headbox, with two canopy breakers, was re-designed to accommodate the revisions, and was similar to the Mk.l5.  The Mk.L5 probably was an earlier design to the Mk.U5.

 

As the seat pan was moved forward, 1”  had to be cut off the front of the seat pan to clear the control column.  Additionally, the lower front of the seat had to be “chamfered” in the center.   

View of Mk.GU5A seat without the shoulder harness, not back plate above the seat pan.

 

The headbox housed the Duplex-Drogue chute, patented by Martinn-Baker and a key to their main chute deployment and a ground level system, typically a 0 altitude, 90Kts seat.

 

The rear of the seat pan was also chamfered to clear the rails.  The overall seat height was cut by 4” to stuff the MB seat into the decidedly cramped T-33 cockpit.  This resulted in only a 4 position seat height adjust, limiting it to 3”.   The seat adjust arm was also moved inward slightly.  In order to compensate for the reduced seat height, a new Face Curtain firing unit was incorporated with a ”B” handle, shaped to fit over the pilot’s helmet.

 

B loop Primary Firing unit

 

The original ”British style” 10 minute Oxygen bottle was mounted on the left hand side of the seat back side, along with the PEC (Personal Equipment Connecter) block.  However, production seats had the O2 bottle moved to the right side of the seat.

 

 

NATO countries utilizes the PEC Block for Oxygen, G Suir air and communications.

 

The new installation was reviewed by a board of German Officials between December 15^th to the 17^th, 1958.   An initial test flight was conducted by CPT Wilhelm Stubenrauch, Flugzeugfuhrerschule B (pilot training school).  He indicated post flight the incorporation of the fully automatic system was an improvement, as all the pilots had to do was pull the face curtain to eject, reducing the time it took to eject from the T-33 over the Lockheed seat.  Eventually the Lockheed seat would be modified for a Single Motion Ejection for US operators, but that would occur in US seats around 30 years later.

 

Most information I’ve been able to find indicate Mk.GU5 seats were installed in the 1964 time frame for German T-33’s.  However, the Norwegian AF replaced their Lockheed seats in 1963 with Mk.NU5 seats.  In addition the MB Mk.L5 seat started to be installed in USN T2V’s in April 1962, sharing some design points with the Mk.U5 seat.  So, it is more likely the Germans retrofitted the seats in 1962 or 1963.  The final question is the color of the seat.  In the Marting-Baker Review No.1 an article on the T-33 Mk.GU5 has a color photograph of the Mk.GU5 seat.  One is black, the other a medium blue frame with a md blue cloth headbox cover.  The third country to adopt the MB Mk.U5 seat was the Netherlands with the Mk.DU5 seats.  The designations for the T-33 seat were, for Germany, Mk.GU51 and Mk.GU52 for front and back seats.  Bothe seats were essentially the same, with minor changes. 

 

The final T-33 NAT0 seat was the Mk.U5A.  Most sources indicate the upgrade from the GU5 to GU5A was the addition of a Manual Guillotine Control Handle in leu of the original ring, and other minor changes, as opposed to the US equivalent where the harness was changed out to an integrated harness.  NATO counties retained the single point harness.  The customary place to store the shoulder straps was over the top of the seat.  The Manual Guillotine Control Handle was an override to release the pilot from the seat if auto separation should fail.  Both the Netherlands and Germany upgraded to the MkU5A seat, Norway did not.

 

 

On the Lockheed front, the French AF upgraded to the Low Level Escape system when it became available.  Some sources indicate the Norwegians upgraded to the Low Level Escape System, but they retrofitted Martin-Baker Mk.NU5, and later Mk.NU5A seats, starting in 1963, which is prior to the Low Level Escape System being available.  A European seat collector send me a photograph of a Dutch T-33A seat that was clearly modified to the Low Level Escape System configuration, and incidentally, it had a distinctly nonstandard head rest.

 

It is very likely other countries elected to skip the MB seat in favor of upgrading to the ROCAT seats.  As France did, or simply accepted the ballistic seat.  The only definitive evidence is looking at the seat and seeing the stiffening strips and plates added to the front of the seat bucket as well as enclosing the bottom of the headrest area, as seen in the French and Japanese seats.  I have obtained one photograph of a Dutch seat with the ROCAT mod.

 

One of the earliest records I’ve found of T-33A aircraft to Japan was 54-1584 assembled by Kawasaki, with a Modified seat. 

 

Kawasaki started building the T-33A in 1956 with the “latest aircraft” seat, or pre-Low Level Escape System ballistic seat, with 51- series Serial Numbers.   They upgraded their remaining seats to the Low Level Escape System configuration.

 

Canopy lift unit

 

 

An interesting shot of a Dutch seat, modified to Lowe Level Escape System configuration.

 

The S American countries also operated the T-33 along with about 30 other countries.  Guatemala got a number of airframes from the Far East but for some reason they took a great deal of time to get back into the air. 

 

A group of T-33A airframes I came across on the Interantional Airport in Guatemala city, in in early 1994.  They were fitted with what appeared to be ROCAT seats.

 

The Lockheed seat in kits.

 

I’ve covered the Lockheed seat in detail in previous articles on the T-33 line.  Again, the best seat out there is the Great Wall kit, and its T-33 seat.  But you will need to modify the kit’s seat by removing the Single Motion Ejection System handles, and back date them to the rounded levers.  In addition to the “Modified” headbox for early seats.

 

The Martinn-Baker Mk.U5 seat poses a significantly different issue.   Aftermarket companies have released a plethora of Mk.H5A/7 and Mk.F5A/7 seats for Phantoms and Crusades, there are a number of Mk.4 seats are available in 1/48 or 1/72 scales.

 

The “best” solution of starting from an existing aftermarket resin piece would be with the ARS4597 1:48 Aires MB “Mk-4BRM” Ejection Seat (or more accurately  Mk.DRM4 Mirage seat).

 

Or Aires 4233 1/48 MB Mk 4BS Late Ejection Seat Demon For GPM (but the Mk.4BS seat was for the Lightning)

 

 

 

The Wolfpacks WPD48186 Mk 6 seat for the MB 326A seat, actuya,ly a Mk.O6A lacks the Sugar Scoop and might offer less sculpting.. 

 

Another is the Quickboost BAE Lightning Ejection Seat with Safety Belts 1:48 Kit

 

An alternate is the Quickboost 48540 1/48 Sea Vixen Ejection Seat w/Safety Belts or

 

 

The Wolfpack Martin-Baker Mk.A5 resin set which gives you a fairly close Mk.4 seat pan.  Although this Mk.A5 seat is actually a Mk.A5A, and not the early seat with the single point harness. NATO aircraft used the single point harness, as opposed to the use of a personnel harness as used by the USN and USAF seats.  The seat pan is about right, and the breakers are close.

 

If you choose to scratch the seat, this could be a starting point for the seat pan, although not a Mk.U5 seat.

 

 

Once you have a doner seat, you will have to remove the headrest, “sugar scoop” (if present) and the Horseshoe parachute pack.  Essentially you will be using the seat pan and the gun assembly.  The back pads can be used but will need to be move backwards against the vertical seat frame.  Refer to the images in this article for detailing.  You could also choose to raid the parts box for a Martin-Baker seat, The Kitty Hawk TF-9J is a good starting point.  The seat is similar in size to the Great Wall Lockheed seat.  The seat pan for the Mk.H5/F5 is not suitable for the Mk.U5 as it is significantly deeper.

 

 

The majority of information on these articles came from looking at the real airframes, and gleaning information from both flight and maintenance manual.  Information on NATO seats has come from collectors in Germany and Holland.  As some of the information dates back 70 years, some details are rather sketchy.  In addition to a number of Martin-Baker contemporary documents and publications, to include a listing of major Blueprints on MB seats up to the Mk.10.

 

Researching the F-80 and T-33’s has taken a lot longer than I had thought.  All together I have accumulated just under 800 documents and photographs that take up about 4 GB of disk space.  The T-33 was a bit of a challenge as it stayed in service for a great deal of time and had multiple seat upgrades by the US and Canada.  I just hope this information is helpful to a modeler.  One of the biggest challenges is boiling down the 1017 documents and photographs I have on T-33 Lockheed and Martin-Baker seats accumulated during the research in order to cover the subject, without burring the reader in details.  Special thanks to European seat collectors Ron Kraan, Kai Sporhase, Jeffrey Kubiak (Hypersonic Models), Emmanuel Banon.  In addition to the great folks that contribute to European seats on "https://www.flugzeugforum.de/threads/schleudersitze.58760/" like "Done Deal", "Tracer" or "Zippermech".   And the Canadian IPMS publication Random Thoughts.  And thanks to the Technical Publications Section at the Naval Aviation Museum on the Navy operated T-33's.

 

 

Colors.

 

For USN and USMC aircraft, NAVAIR 07.1.1 dated March 25, 1954 directed that all cockpit and interior surfaces were to be painted Nonspecular (flat) Dark Gull Grey FS 36231.  The only exceptions were the interiors of canopy framing, instrument bezels, horizontal surfaces above the instrument panel, switches and knobs, data placards “Post-Light” fixtures were to be painted Nonspecular (flat) black.  This was to be applied to aircraft at overhaul and maintenance activities, as well as new builds.  The reason for this was to increase lighting in the crew areas.  Similar arrangements were made in Air Force aircraft, although in addition one Wright-Patt “Grey Beard” indicated it also had a better psychological effect on crew and passengers.  The B-66 was the first aircraft to get this treatment in USAF.  So gradually over several years the changeover took place.  Non crew/passenger areas were left Zinc Chromate green or Interior Green.  Dutch seats were eventually painted grey, in addition to the Dutch seats.

 

Color standards.

Later MIL-C-8779(ASG) Interior, Aircraft, Requirements for, dated July 7, 1955 was the first MIL-SPEC to direct cockpit and interior colors.  In addition to the 1954 NAVAIR directive it specified that glare shield and canopy windscreen framing have at least a 1” flat black area.  If a glare shield was not fitted a ½” flat black band be applied.  Sound proofing Light Gull Grey.  Walkways and stairs, Dark Gull Grey.  This standard was also accepted by USAF and airframe venders.  However some NATO countries did not adopt the US Interior Green, in favor of other colors.

 

Lockheed seats

 

One of the major problems with this part of the series is attempting to determine colors.  I’m comparing screen colors to online colors or 1984 GSA color Fan Deck or a 1968 GSA FED-STD-595A color chips.  The online colors are from the  FS 595c Color/Hobby Paint Table, https://www.cybermodeler.com/color/fs_table.shtml An online copy of the FS-595 can be obtained from Microsoft Word - Federal_Standard_595_Paint_Spec.doc, or http://cdn.gonorthwebsites.com/4a5c41f30714c1ed24994610bc2d257897c1c48b/Federal_Standard_595_Paint_Spec.pdf

Several NATO countries adopted a slightly “greener” interior color.  Similar to Strong Green 34090  or FS 34230.  Theres were the Dutch, Norwegian and German Air Force.  The Dutch eventually changed to a color a bit lighter than Dark Gull Grey.  This color was applied to interior cockpit surfaces and the seat.  Instrument panel and side consoles appeared to be a semi matt black. 

 

German Lockheed T-33 seats were later painted a darker green similar to Olive Green, FS 14097.  I have found one photograph of a German seat painted in a color similar to Field Drab, FS 30118, ANA 617 or MERDC FD.  However the original color was likely very close to Strong Green 34090.  The German F-84 seats were also this color.

 

The headrests on the Lockheed Un-Mod and Mod seats were black.  The Pre ROCAT seat headrests and cockpit sill and combing, and arm rest pads  were similar to Redish Orange FS 11320.  Firing handles Orange-Yellow FS 33538, later black stripes were added.  One German Pre-ROCAT seat had a right armrest entirely in yellow, along with the arm handles.

 

Oxygen hose similar to a slightly lightened Bronze Green, FS 34058.  D Ring to and lead to chute, Redish Orange FS 11320.  Shoulder harness and lap belt, off white to a dirty grey.  Lap belt leather fob, Light Brown, FS 30215.  Seat cushion similar to FA 34300.  Remove Before Flight Streamers, bright red with white lettering.

 

 

Martin-Baker

The standard overall color for Matin-Baker seats was black.  The rivet heads were unpainted, bright aluminum.  Oxygen bottles varied from Md Blue to a  “Green Apple”, not unlike Strong Green 34090.  The Face curtain B rings were yellow and black, with a red base support tube.  The D ring on the seat frame was a yellow anodized aluminum and black in color.  A red ground safety disarm lever was also on the D Ring.  The Mk.DU5A Guillotine Control Handle was yellow and black where the pilot would grab it.  The leg restraint garters were blue Right, and white left.  PEC and Emergency Oxygen pull knob was anodized green, similar to Strong Green, FS 14115.  O2 lead a Light Grayish Yellowish Brown, FS 20318.  The Top latch, located on the left side of the head box was an anodized green.  The top Latch is the mechanical component that keeps the Martin-Baker seat in the cockpit.  The Mk.GU5 seat had a dark brown hand wheel used to screw the Top Latch in.  Drogue line to Duplex Drogue was a braded silver.

 

The Mk.U5A (note the Guillotine handle) seats were fairly colorful.

 

Profile shot of the Mk.GU5A

 

 

Harnes and nonmetal parts.  Harness Cream, FS 13595, some parts OD.  Seat back cushion, lumbar pad and seat pas, similar to a vivid Yellow, FS33655 (flat).  Seat cushions had a black leather layer on the top for the Mk.U5A seats. 

 

Leg restraint “Azure Blue” FS 35231, slightly darkened with purple.  The parachute harness had a light green liner pad, similar to FS36329, this was more often than not folded over the top of the seat.  Harnes metal parts, bare metal, aluminum in color.  The cloth on the headrest was black or charcoal.  Duplex Drogue cover was light grey on color.

 

The next US seat to be covered is the Webber T/A-37 lightweight seat.  Another of the 50’s seats that transitioned from a catapult to a rocket seat, after a fashion as the final seat retained the M5 catapult, and added a pair of Tally seat back rockets, similar to the Stencel seats. 

 

Requests for seat might be helpful to me to figure out what’s next.  Presently my information is with US airframes, although I do have a bit of Martin-Baker data and drawings supplied by Martin-Baker in the late 80’s.

 

cheers,

 

Bryan Wilburn

 

 

 

 

Edited December 10, 2024 by BWDenver

[ya-gabor]

On 11/9/2024 at 3:33 PM, BWDenver said:

Hey Gabor!

 

I think you might get more traction if you advertised on the German site Flungzeugrorum.de:

 

https://www.flugzeugforum.de/threads/schleudersitze.58760/

 

The focus of the page is Ejection Seats, primarily Martin-Baker and Russian hardware.  The page is dedicated to rebuilding the seats and history.

 

Great group of collectors and enthusiasts!

 

Bryan

 

Hi Bryan,

Thanks for the advice! I did visit that site or to be more precise got as far as the first step only. They wanted a full registration with all my very private data which I was not willing to give out. Anyway I am sure they are doing some great work.

 

Since what my work represent is very different from what you are doing I feel the best way forward is for me to do something different, the way I like it.

Good luck!

 

Best regards

Gabor

[BWDenver]

OK, first two attempts at posting the T/A-37 article failed....

[BWDenver]

 

T-37 Tweet, A-37 Dragonfly.  Alternately known as the 6000 Lb Dog Whistle, Converter and a few other names had two distinctly different escapes system during it’s service in the US and overseas.

 

In the early 50’s USAF decided it needed a better primary jet trainer.  While the T-33 was ok, USAF wanted a better solution.  Cessna offered a side by side solutioning, Temco (later part of LTV Ling-Temco-Vought) offered a tandem seating configuration similar to the T-33, the TT-1.   Cessna was the final winner.

When Cessna developed the new USAF primary trainer they needed a lightweight ejection seat. 

 

 

The XT-37 was a lightweight side by side trainer, as USAF felt a side by side seating arrangement was more effective for training.  The specifications called for a seat that would function between 100 Kts – 450 Kts, from 300’ to service ceiling, and utilize the M4 catapult, with a 9G kick.  The parachute would be the BA-15 with a “Quarter Bag” to control the chute opening at high speed. 

 

Early seat configuration

 

There are two schools of thought about the Quarter Bag.  The unit held the suspension lines near the base of the parachute and delayed the opening until full line stretch.  The thought was it controlled opening at high speed and reduced opening shock.  That was the Air Force view.  That possibly was one of the reasons the USAF chutes in the T/A-37 needed 120 Kts of airflow to fully open.

 

The Navy view, however, looked at anything that delayed the opening of the parachute as a decidedly bad thing, and were loath to use them.  One Navy Manager I talked to felt the use of the Quarter Bag on the OV-10 may have contributed to fatalities as it increased the time needed to fully open the parachute.  In a low altitude ejection any delay to a fully open canopy could be fatal.

 

The basic seat would also be used in the Canadair CL-41/CT-114, as model 80290C with slight modifications (addition of a canopy breaker), in addition to a number of NASA one off test vehicles.

 

Webber won the contract and would produce three T-37 seats models, Model 75124, 77399 and 802900, primarily a seat with an ejectable weight of 97.5 Lbs, and an installed wight of 106.75 LB.  The weight with pilot was  306.75 Lb.  The seat was 18” wide at the firing handles that also functioned as thigh guards, Overall length it was  43.6” tall from the bottom of the frame rails to the top of the seat. 

 

 

XT-37

 

The frame rails were 2” wide and 42.7” tall with 3 slider blocks on each side, one in the upper area and 2 towards the bottom of the seat.  The slider blocks went into two C Rails that were attached to the aircraft floor and cockpit aft bulkhead.  One of the more important aspects was the seat was semi-automatic, the pilot still had to kick away from the seat after the auto belt released.  Initially the firing handles/leg braces were exposed, and on the XT-37 they came to a rounded tapered point.  This was flattened later for production aircraft.  The initial XT-37 seat headrest was built up, early production headrests were foam, with a vinal type material enclosing the foam.  Later the foam was sprayed with a rubberized red material.

 

Catapult and seat guide rails

 

 

Lower seat adjustment springs and lever

 

Adjusting the up and down motion of the seat was accomplished by two 18” x .84” springs attached to the seat back.  The pilot unlocked the seat and used his legs to push upwards, or to lower the seat.  The seat back was reclined to 77 Degrees, and seat rails at 73 Degrees.

 

 

The bottom of the seat pan contained a box structure that housed linkage and various initiators.  The front of the box had a black cushion attached to it.  A pilot separation web was added to the seat after the introduction of the T -37A.  The seat cushion was placed onto the top of the Seat pan box, and along the front of the seat.  The A/T-37 seat stayed very similar over the years until the Tally Rockets were added to the seat.

 

Basic dims

XT-37 seat

 

It appears the early XT-37 seats were similar to  the Model 77399 seat, with skeletal firing handles.  Basic seat with exposed firing handles that came to a tapered rounded point.  The headrest was about 2” thick.  Some references indicate the catapult may have been an M3.  The M3A1 Catapult, made by Frankfort Arsenal, had a rectangular probe on the top to insert into the receiver on the seat frame.  It’s held in place by a bolt.  The 30” triple tube catapult has a 88” stroke and expands fully in 0.240 Seconds.  At full stroke the target velocity is 77 FPS.  The mounting ring at the bottom of the catapult is 2.39” OD, center tube housing is 2.25” OD.  The tube is a light anodized gold color.

 

Early production seats, open firing grips

 

Production birds had the M4.  The shoulder harness lock was located on the LH front side of the seat bucket, and did not extend above the seat frame.  The pilot “Oxygen, electrical and Ballistic breakaway” interface was located behind the LH seat back, mid way up the back.   The seat was anchored in the cockpit by the catapult guide C rails to the cockpit floor and a triangular wedge that secured the guide rails to the aft cockpit bulkhead.  The rails were open at the tip and had two upper cross trusses.

 

Seat guide rails with early firing handles

 

The Tweet.  The origins of the nickname of the T/A-37 came about with the centrifugal engine.  From the front of the AC the sound is defining, but as the bird taxies past the shriek is replaced by a low frequency whoosh.  It’s almost silent.  Ground crews started calling it the Tweet, and other names.

 

T-37A

Similar to the XT-37 seat, but had a slightly built up flat headrest.  Seatback had a plastic insert, similar to the F-100C seatback filler.  Firing handles were exposed and came to a flattened end.  The shoulder harness lock was modified to have a round black knob.

 

System schematic, ballistic

 

The heart of the early production seat was the gas fired M4 catapult.  The M4 had an OAL of 30.14” max, with a 2.63” base and upper rings, the tube was 2.5” OD.   The 45” stroke propelled the seat at 38 FPS and a 12G ride.  Stroke time was 0.240 Sec.

As with all seats from the Mid-50’s it was not a stellar performer.  The 300’ minimum ejection altitude in the specification was a serious limit.  The other was the parachute needed at least 120 kts to fill quickly.  At lower speeds it took more time, read altitude.  Each second equaled about 100’ in altitude.

 

 

1956

The T-37A got a slight upgrade with a slightly built up headrest circa May 1956.  Firing handles were still exposed and the seat utilized a gas fired M4 catapult. 

 

The seat had a seat/man separator, automatic MA-3 or MA-4 auto lap belts and auto deployed parachutes via the Zero Delay Lanyard.

 

 

The T-37B became operational in 1959.  It appears the T-37B had an upgraded seat and started with the M5 catapult, along with seat man separator and enclosed firing handles.  Additionally it had M-5 and M-6 Auto Belts.  Other upgrades included a BA-15 or BA-16 Backpack/C-9 Canopy with an F-1B 1 second delay timer that brought the minimum altitude to 200’, and a Zero delay Lanyard that dropped it to 100’.

 

 

The US army looked at the T-37A Tweets, but settled on the OV-1, partially to avoid the conflict with USAF over operating jets.

 

Next up, the M5 catapult upgrade and the T-37B

 

 

Edited December 22, 2024 by BWDenver

[BWDenver]

In January 1959 the M4A1 catapult upgraded for T-37A airframes, 54-2729 to 57-2301, was upgraded to the gas fired M5A1 unit with MWO T.O. 1T-37A-536. 

 

802900 seat with M5 catapult

 

The M5A1 39.016” OAL, with a 300 throw weight, 20G, 60 FPS. 0.220 Sec firing time.  The surviving T-37A airframes were upgraded to T-37B standards by mid 1960.  Another part of the MWO was to put sheet metal guards around the firing handles.  The handles themselves were enlarged, presumably to make them easier to grab.  The seat model was the 802900 which remained the standard T/A-37 seat until the 19982 time frame.

 

 

Type MA-3 & MA-4 auto belt

 

The next upgrade was the T-37B, here Lee Croissant is getting into his trainer.  Note canopy frame and holes.

 

 

T-37B seats had warning on headrest, the right side is always more worn.  note the red canopy piercer and yellow line to M5 catapult.  Final finish of the T-37B.

 

 

T-37B seats eventually got a warning Stencel telling pilots not to store the shoulder harness on top of the seat.  iut was largely ignored...

 

1967/68

As Viet Nam was heating up, VNAF was losing A-1 Skyraiders and something was needed to fill in the gap.  USAF looked at the T-37 as a stating point and the A-37A was produced to supplement the Skyraider losses in Viet Nam.  The A-37 was a very effective weapons platform as it was a very simple bird, and almost all the pilots trained on the T-37.    The Viet Nam configuration was the basic 802900 seat with a canopy breaker knife fixed to the upper left side of the seat back.  Around mid 1967 to early 1968 the A-37B seat used either the MA-5 or new install M-6 Auto belt.  On the T-37B no canopy breaker knife on seat back, and the upper seat mounting bracket was changed to a box structure.

 

1968 - 1971

The next upgrade was around late 1971 for the A-37B and the implementation of the HBU-2B/A Auto belt changed the harness slightly.  Parachute was the BA-15, BA-18 or BA-22 Backpack w C-9 Canopy  w 1 sec ( 200’) and the USAF standard   Zero Delay (100’).

 

 

 

 

 

T-37C, export version, note to right seat is higher than the left.  The two seats are seldom at the same height.

 

 

T-37C to YAT-37D and eventually the YA-37A.

 

 

 

VNAF A-37A on final, Lee Croissant

 

 

 

Viet Nam seats had canopy knife on the seat frame.  note notch on the seat cushion, and "bar" pad on the front of the seat pan.

 

A-37A V T-37B instrument panel.

Cockpit configuration

 

 

M-5 or M-6 auto belt

 

Zero Delay lanyard, hooks to the D ring below 2000'

 

Next up the OA-37B and the Webber rocket seat.

 

 

Edited December 23, 2024 by BWDenver

[BWDenver]

in the 1982 time frame the headrest got a change, with a built lobes for the pilots helmet.

 

T-37B Basic seat with seat man separator.  Type HBU-12.   Some configs had canopy knife on the upper LH side of the seat frame.  Canopy piercer was mounted on top of catapult.  Oxygen and coms leads moved to the RH side of the seat rails.

 

The HBU-2B/A auto belt of the OA-37B

 

 

 

Note crew disconnects have been moved over to the right side.  Coms lead stayed on the left seat back.

 

 

A-37B, note winged emblem on the seat frame.  Koku-Fan cover Oct 1980

 

1971 and 1982 configuration

 

Webber-Tally Rocket seat.

 

Around September 1983 the capability of the escape system was upgraded with two seatback rockets similar to the Stendel SIIIS seats.  Which makes a degree of sense as Talley purchased Stencel in 1976.  The combination of M5A1 ballistic catapult and the Talley seatback rockets gave the crew a 0-80 KTS escape envelope.  I’m not sure why USAF didn’t go with a 0-0 capability.

 

 

T.O. 1A-37B-2-2 Maintenance manual on the A-37B started showing both Webber ballistic seats and the Webber-Talley rocket seats with change 15, Sep 1983.  Unfortunately, some authors have introduced confusion to when the rockets were introduced to the A-37 airframes.  In his book on the A-37 and T-37 Ken Darling has a photo of the Webber-Talley seat on Pg23, and indicates it was used in both the A-37 and T-37. 

 

I have found no evidence the T-37B seat was ever upgraded with rockets.

 

 

Rear view of the A-37B Webber-Talley seat with some dims.

 

Fortunately it’s easy to ID the Webber-Talley seat.  When looking at the seat from the outside, the upgrade to the rocket seat added a large numbers of braided steal tubbing in the upper outboard seat rails.  The Ballistic seat lacks the braided stainless steal lines.  Based on looking at a lot of shots of Tweet’s, the T-37B was never upgraded with rockets.  Only the OA-37B’s got the rockets.

 

The inboard rockets are clearly visible between the seats, just below the drogue chute case.  The outboard rockets are visible only if you look straight down into the cockpit.

 

Headrest, T-37

The most obvious portion of the seat that changed over the years is the headrest.  The XT-37 headrest was around 2” or more think, extending beyond the seat frame.  The early production seat headrests were about 1” out from the seat frame, but a solid unit, and red in color. 

 

The early headrests were foam inside a vinyl sheet as seen on early se0ats in the US Army T-37A’s.  This was later changed to hard foam sprayed with a rubberized red paint. 

 

In the late 80’s the T-37B’s got a warning stenciled onto the headrest, basically telling crews not to sore the shoulder harness on top of the seat.  The left seat is always more worn than the left.  In the late 80’s or around 1990 USAF changed the color of the seat headrest from red to black.  A few shots of the seat in the 1990 time frame shows white stenciling, probably about the harness storage.  In the 1993 time frame a decal was added to the outboard side of the seat frame rails, warning the crew no to store  the shoulder harness over the headrest.  That’s how the Tweets went to the Bone Yard, and some to S American counties.

 

Headrest A-37

 

OA-37B V T-37B

 

The A-37A was an outgrowth of the T-37A and YAT-37D redesigned as A-37A.  And therein lies a lot of confusion.  The YAT-37D got bigger engines, beefed up wings for stores, and a new cockpit and reworked nose. The lower fuselage contours were deeper than the T-37A.  But the A-37A is a different aircraft than the T-37A.  The A-37A headrests were always flush with the seat frame and red coated foam.

 

In the early 80’s the designation of the A-38B was changed to OA-37B when they were given the FAC role.  In the Mid 80’s the A-37B/OA-37B headrest had two built up lobes, similar to the Century Series seats. The headrest was made of multiple layers of dense white foam.  The top two layers had a notch cut into it for the helmet.  Most shots of the OA-37B shows red built up headrests, some USAF OA-37B aircraft had black built up headrests.  

When the built up headrests started to appear they were initially red, but some units like the 110the TASG out of Battle Creek MI had black headrests.  The 182 TASG / 169 TASS out of Peoria Il stayed with red, but they tended to dirty quite a bit.

 

 

 

Nose compartment & gun sight

 

 

Final cockpit config

 

 

Export Tweets.

Most of the export operators utilized the original configuration seats T-37A seats in the T-37C and A-37A.  The A-37B has been active in a number of brush fire wars in S America.  One operator, the  Salvadoran air force, the Fuerza Area Salvadorena (FAS), was very involved in combat operations around the Nicaraguan border.  With the introduction of the SA-7 in 1989 and the SA-14 in 1990.  FAS lost an A-37B in November of 1990 to an FMLN MANPAD.

 

Honduras also operated the A-37B and in November of 1986 used them in airstrikes around the Nicaraguan border.  I was sitting on an airbase in Honduras at the time and found the hectic tempo by the Honduran AF to be interesting.

 

The Peruvian Air Force, PAF, purchased 36 A-37B’s and has had a strong rivalry against Chili and Equator, other A-37B operators.   The first PAF bird flew on May 17^th 1975, by the plane serial 43449 (ex 74-01694).  In the summer of 1981 two A-37B’s squared off one, Peruvian, the other Ecuadoran in the first A-37 v A-37 combat, neither scored a hit.  At least one S American country, Chili, operated the Rocket upgrade seats.

The VNAF, South Vietnamese Air Force, operated A-37’s and they eventually flew with N Vietnamese markings after the takeover of the south.  T-37C’s were also active in a number of other countries.  After it was withdrawn from service a  majority of the USAF OA-37B’s ended up in S American, many as parts aircraft.

 

 

Peruvian Ballistic seat, A-37A Note the line to the catapult is warped in plastic anti chafe tape.  Katsuhiko Tokunaga Via Santiago Revas and Pucara Magazine

 

Seat headrest evaluation

The early seat headrests were foam encased in a red vinyl type material.  Later the built up foam was simply sprayed with red rubberized material.  The XT-37 headrest was built-up and flat.  Initial production headrests were flat against the seat frame.  Then the headrest protruded about an inch beyond the frame but was still flat.

 

The final headrest was built up with two lobs.  Some of the final headrests were built up foam, coated with a rubberized red covering, some appeared to be encased in vinyl material.  The difference between the two is a seam on the power part of the lobs.

 

Seat colors. 

The T/A-37 was brought online after the conversion to Dark Gull Grey, so the seat overall color is Dark Gull Grey FS 36231 with Orange-Yellow FS 13538 fining handles.  Head rests were either Insignia Red FS 11136 or a very dark grey or black.  Gas lines silver braded lines

 

Shoulder harness color off white, end loops brown leather.  Lap belt light grey, similar to FS 36440.  Pilot separation strap and seat cushion, Olive Drab FS 34087. 

 

Buckles, silver.  The lap Belt line was surrounded in black tubing, at least on the OA-37B.  The seat back drogue bridle was rigged so it was along both the seatback rails, off white, inserted into a black plastic housing that allowed it to deploy.  Drogue case similar to Light Gull Grey FS 36440.  Seat back rockets white bodies, with black and red warning labels.  Note, the rockets are visible on the inboard sides of the seats.  M5 Catapult anodized silver.  Above the catapult, the canopy breaker was either Dark Gull grey or Insignia Red.  The drogue box has a decal that says “NO HANDHOLD” on it, in most photographs it looks like a white stripe.

 

The M5/Rocket seat has a number of bright metal lines on the outside of the seat back frame.  Around the tip are several yellow lines, one leading to the catapult.  Some S American operators have painted the lines, or encased the catapult line in white anti chafe covering.

 

OA-37B seats had a white plastic extension on the inboard side of the seat handle guards.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 23, 2024 by BWDenver

[BWDenver]

Guess I got a double post....

Edited December 23, 2024 by BWDenver

[Drifterdon]

Bryan,

Your ejection seat series are a treasure trove of information.   Thank you for posting these.

Don

[BWDenver]

15 minutes ago, Drifterdon said:

Bryan,

Your ejection seat series are a treasure trove of information.   Thank you for posting these.

Don

Thanks Don, 

 

they are not all going to be so in depth.  I just happen to be lucky enough to have a lot of info on the T-33 and T/A-37. 

 

Hopefully it will be of help to some.

 

Bryan

[Tailspin Turtle]

18 hours ago, BWDenver said:

The Navy view, however, looked at anything that delayed the opening of the parachute as a decidedly bad thing, and were loath to use them.  One Navy Manager I talked to felt the use of the Quarter Bag on the OV-10 may have contributed to fatalities as it increased the time needed to fully open the parachute.  In a low altitude ejection any delay to a fully open canopy could be fatal.

If I remember the sizes correctly, at McDonnell flight test, our rigger installed 28-ft chutes in the M-B seats rather than the standard 24-ft chutes because our test pilots didn't want to break an ankle if they had to eject and were therefore willing to accept the slight delay in opening.

[BWDenver]

24 minutes ago, Tailspin Turtle said:

If I remember the sizes correctly, at McDonnell flight test, our rigger installed 28-ft chutes in the M-B seats rather than the standard 24-ft chutes because our test pilots didn't want to break an ankle if they had to eject and were therefore willing to accept the slight delay in opening.

Interesting historical item!  I think they eventually went to the 28' skysail chute.

 

 

 

Edited December 23, 2024 by BWDenver

[BWDenver]

A-37 seats in kits.

 

One of the confusion items for some modelers is the belief the T-37A and A-37A are the same airframe.  The simple fact the A-37A came out of the development of the T-37C then YAT-37D line.  Then USAF redesignated the airframe as the A-37A.  The A-37 airframe was modified on the underside around the J85-GE-17A engines as they were physically larger that the T-37A/T-37B engines.  The flight test airframes for the A-37A program were 67-14507 and 67-14799.  Additionally A-37B 67-14789  67-14777 performed flight tests.

 

There are presently two readily available 1/48 A-37 kits.  One by Trumpeter, the other Revell/Monogram.  A number of 1/72 kits are also available.

 

 

When Monogram did the research for their offering, they likely went to Peoria Ill, and visited the Air National Guard unit that operated OA-37B airframes.  The Webber seats in the original 1993 Monogram kit featured the built up head rests of the final rocket assist configuration.  This modification also included a drogue parachute that’s attached to the upper back of the seat.  The downside is if you want to do a Viet Nam version, or any number of early export versions, you need flat headrests. 

 

 

One of the drawback of the Monogram/Revell offering is the configuration of the seats.  The final OA-37B had dual seatback rockets and a seatback drogue parachute.  The issue is the pack for the drogue is on the inside between the two seats.  The Monogram instructions have you put the drogue box on the outside. 

 

Monogram/Squadron Products issued a further variant in their Encore line.  Encore 1/48 A/OA-37B Dragonfly.  Included in the kit are two resin seats, with flat headrests.  Overall not a bad representation of an A-37A seat.  This kit would be a good starting point for Viet Nam birds and a number of South American countries, as well as Korean birds.  The seat in the Encore kit resembles the 77399 seat, with an early set of guide rails.  However, the 802900 that was the standard after Jan 1959 time frame had very different guide rails, with 4 curved cross truss units and closed at the top of the rails.  The triangular bulkhead brace was retained.  One of the issues with the Encore seats is the firing handles.  They are enclosed on the left outboard side, but open on the right outboard side.  The Encore seat also lacks the Triangular bulkhead anchor. 

 

What is more interesting is the instructions for the encore seat shows a reasonably correct upper guide rail, but the instructions don’t match what was in the box.

 

Additionally 1/48 resin update kits can be obtained with AEROBONUS, Aires and Quick Boost offerings.  Both have flat headrests for the A-37A and early A-37B seats. The top of the catapult guide is also open, and needs to be reworked. 

 

 

AEROBONUS offers a seat with pilot, but I’m not sure what they used for a reference.  The catapult looks like a Martin-Baker 80 FPS gun assembly and the guide rails are all wrong.

 

 

 

Aires seat and cockpit set

 

 

Quickboost offering

 

 

The Trumpeter A-37A kit offers the rocket update and built up headrests, and unfortunately, they appeared to copy parts trees of the Monogram kit, but at least they have you put the drogue to the inside.  The only issue is the A-37A never had the rocket seats. 

 

Neither Monogram or Trumpeter have accurate “Fixed Rail Structures” that serve to guide the seat out of the cockpit on ejection.  While normally not an issue, in the T/A-37 airframes this structure is very visible. in the cockpit.

 

Hasegawa offers a very simplistic 1/72 offering with semi plane flat headrest seats.  Academy offers a kit that appears to have built up headrests.  The Academy 1/72 OA-37B is not too bad seat wise but the seats are very blockish, and they apparently have you install the seas into the cockpit with the drogue box to the left side.

 

 

 

Pavla offered T/A-37 basic seats in 1/72 and 1/48, and looks pretty good, but availability is sketchy.  Tasman offered a set of T/A-37 seats, again basic seat, in white metal, but “sole out” and availability is sketchy.

 

 

SBS 1/72 OA-37B cockpit set

 

At least one company offered a resin T-37A, Croco 1/72 Cessna T-37.  Tasman offered a 1/72 Webber-Talley white metal seat, but it does not look that promising and is no longer in production.

 

Hopefully some of you will have one of these kits under the tree in a day or so!

 

Suggestions are always welcome on US airframes.

 

Bryan Wilburn

Edited December 24, 2024 by BWDenver

[Drifterdon]

What would a modeler have to do to get the kit Monogram seats more accurate for a Viet Nam era A-37?  And for those of us trying to convert the Monogram kit into a somewhat passable T-37?  Don

[BWDenver]

You would probably be ahead of the game getting a set of Quickboost seats, and fixing the issues with the guide rails.

 

If you have to use the monogram seats, you will need to strip off all the details on the seatback rails.  That will leave you with a hole to fill around the drogue unit.  Use the shot with the title "802900 seat with M5 catapult" under it.  The Viet Nam seat had the O2 and Coms leads on the left hand back of the seat.

 

As to making a 1/48 trainer, you will need to flatten the contours on the bottom of the bird in the vicinity of the engines.  Then fix the wingtips, and strip off most of the antennas and lumps and bumps.  And then you get to rebuild the cockpit as the instrument panels and RH side of the cockpit is different.  I've included enough info on the cockpit to make a go of it.  Then rebuild the back end of the engine areas as the Tweet had smaller deflectors.

 

Getting to a Tweet is not insurmountable, but it is a bit of work.

 

The two shots below may be of some help.  You can see in the head-on view the Tweet has "flatter" intakes on the lower end, and the instrument panel of a T-37 the Army has.  They have long since sealed the cockpit.  When I shot the bird in 1987 the canopy was up and the cockpit was full of leaves.  One detail that might make it interesting is the gust Lock on the pilot side, LH, that locks the control stick.

 

And a bottom shot of an A-37B as it buzzed me on a mountain top on ft Carson as I was directing a "strike".  Note the asymmetrical load of drop tanks.

 

Good luck on the Tweet!

 

Bryan

Edited December 24, 2024 by BWDenver
add detail

[Drifterdon]

Thanks Bryan.  This is very helpful.   I've already updated the instrument panel for the Tweet.  I'll try and see if I can get my hands on a set of Quickboost seats.  I think the tough part is going to be flattening the bottom of the engine area.   Wings I'm not worried about.   Those I can fix easy enough.

don