TexasCHLforum.com

jb2012 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 06, 2018 5:26 pm I really don’t see that much of an advantage over splitting the upper and lower? What are you gaining 4 inches? In all reality you don’t gain or lose any length just splits more evenly.

In this particular application, size is everything. That extra 4 inches would probably make it a no-go.

Y’all flyboys had all the neat things: life rafts, parachutes, ejection seats, etc.

The only survival kit we had on our M60A3 was an escape hatch, our .45s, and our M3 Grease Guns.

I was glad when we got upgraded to the M1s. Less need for the escape hatch, so we had none.

Thank God for the air support crews - ‘specially the Warthogs.

n5wd,

Pretty sure the Aussies were flying a variant of the Canberra that the USAF called the B-57, not the B-58 Hustler (what a beautiful airplane, but had a very short service life, but was only used by the USAF). USAF also used B-57s in Viet Nam with low light TV and IR for the back seater to acquire targets and bomb at night. The B-58s were supersonic bombers for nuke strike. AFAIK, the B-58's never deployed to Viet Nam and were retired in the early 70s and replaced in SAC with the FB-111. When stationed in Blytheville, AR on B-52s, flew with a guy who had bee a bomb/nav on B-58s. Also, had a couple of acquaintances that flew the EB-57 electronic jamming variant of the B-57 into the late 70s.

jb2012 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 06, 2018 5:26 pm I really don’t see that much of an advantage over splitting the upper and lower? What are you gaining 4 inches? In all reality you don’t gain or lose any length just splits more evenly.

I don't understand. The length of the kit is has the dimensions of 16 x 14 x 3.5 inches.” So I assume that the length is somewhat less than 16", the length of an M4 according to Wikipedia is 29.75 inches with the stock retracted. Thats about 13" shorter by my reckoning. A big difference when storing behind a seat.

This would be agreat use for the m17.

MaduroBU wrote: ↑Sat Jul 07, 2018 12:11 pm This would be agreat use for the m17.

IMHO, an M17 pistol with a mag or two would be quite inferior for self-protection
until pilot extraction, compared to the rifle with 120 rounds.

SIA

Liberty wrote: ↑Sat Jul 07, 2018 10:03 am

jb2012 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 06, 2018 5:26 pm I really don’t see that much of an advantage over splitting the upper and lower? What are you gaining 4 inches? In all reality you don’t gain or lose any length just splits more evenly.

I don't understand. The length of the kit is has the dimensions of 16 x 14 x 3.5 inches.” So I assume that the length is somewhat less than 16", the length of an M4 according to Wikipedia is 29.75 inches with the stock retracted. Thats about 13" shorter by my reckoning. A big difference when storing behind a seat.

I’m saying if you separate the upper from the lower. Use what you already have, and have less points of failure. I can’t imagine that it actually will hold a very good zero removing the barrel. Maybe enough for man sized targets at close range I guess.

surprise_i'm_armed wrote: ↑Sat Jul 07, 2018 3:58 pm

MaduroBU wrote: ↑Sat Jul 07, 2018 12:11 pm This would be agreat use for the m17.

IMHO, an M17 pistol with a mag or two would be quite inferior for self-protection
until pilot extraction, compared to the rifle with 120 rounds.

SIA

I meant the M17S rifle.

What I am wondering about, which I don't think has been discussed, is this:
when the ejection happens, doesn't the pilot and his parachute detach from the
seat at some point?

If so, the ejection seat and the pilot could end up landing quite far from one another.
If the rifle was still attached to the seat itself, the pilot would be unable to access it.

Would the rifle somehow be attached to the pilot, as in a dangling cargo bag on a long tether rope?

SIA

surprise_i'm_armed wrote: ↑Sat Jul 28, 2018 4:31 pm What I am wondering about, which I don't think has been discussed, is this:
when the ejection happens, doesn't the pilot and his parachute detach from the
seat at some point?

If so, the ejection seat and the pilot could end up landing quite far from one another.
If the rifle was still attached to the seat itself, the pilot would be unable to access it.

Would the rifle somehow be attached to the pilot, as in a dangling cargo bag on a long tether rope?

SIA

Rhino1 gave us the most likely answer: viewtopic.php?f=87&t=92964#p1210490

Since there seems to be some interest, I'll expand on Rhino1's post. I flew A-6 Intruders. Like the F-4 and others, we wore a full body torso harness, over the shoulders and around the crotch. (You had to make sure the family jewels were postioned properly ).

The two Koch fittings on the shoulders connected to the parachute risers, the small fittings at the waist were connected to the seat pan. Your oxygen mask plugged into the seat pan. When you ejected, and the seat fell away, you were still connected to the seat pan (which contained emergency O2) and the parachute of course.

As Rhino1 said, you had the option of deploying the seat pan, which would drop the life raft and automatically inflate it. THe emergency beacon was also activated (which you could disable if you landed in enemy territory). All of your emergency gear was either in your life vest pockets or the seat pan.

Tomcat A models: same same.

When over the box, my squadron was issued 1911s and two magazines. A rifle would certainly give a hiding airman a better chance against a squad looking for him, but I'd rather have it be a suppressed blackout model. Firing 120 rounds from a short-barreled .223 would certainly bring the cavalry... their cavalry.