Live data from Hacker News

1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

airpigz.com

11–20 of 77 posts

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#11

Wow, do yourself a favor and read the comments section since the Project Officer, tracking antenna designer, a co-worker of one of the engineers, and a trajectory dynamics engineer for General Dynamics. They all dispute the one comment saying the bears were hurt / destroyed although the chimpanzee was slightly injured.

It's bit controversial anyway cause another comment tells a different story altogether:

'''According to the government white paper on the subject all bears were destroyed shortly on return to base. All but the last three bears suffered serious internal injuries and multiple broken bones. 'Several hundred' bears were acquired for this purpose, all of which were destroyed 'in or after the testing process, by the testing process or by gun shot to the heart to preserve cranial damage from impacts'.'''

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#12
post #3

Humans need to have some fucking respect.

A bear ain't going to treat you nearly as well when the tables are turned.

I don't know about that, a bear society that is capable of supersonic flight might have some different code of ethics.

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#14
Those were innovative ejection seats, but sadly, similar style 'capsule' ejection seats failed during the ultimate test during the prototype XB-70 Valkyrie accident. [0]

In that case, the centrifugal forces generated by the aircraft going into a spin meant that the second pilot, Carl Cross, waited just a few seconds too long to initiate the ejection sequence, and his seat was unable to be retracted into the capsule for ejection, so he ended up riding the aircraft all the way to ground impact.

[0] - https://tacairnet.com/2014/10/27/crash-of-the-valkyrie/

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#15
post #13

This is horrible science. A bear surviving an ejection is nothing like a human surviving an ejection.

Early this on, the process of building physically accurate "fake humans" was not really possible.

Bear tests were probably more an early proof of viability than anything else. The bears survived, proving that humans wouldn't be completely annihilated.

Animal testing cruelty wasn't really being thought about heavily in post WWII military aerospace development. It's unfortunate but a historical footnote reminding us of the importance of proper testing.

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#16

Wow, do yourself a favor and read the comments section since the Project Officer, tracking antenna designer, a co-worker of one of the engineers, and a trajectory dynamics engineer for General Dynamics. They all dispute the one comment saying the bears were hurt / destroyed although the chimpanzee was slightly injured.

It's bit controversial anyway cause another comment tells a different story altogether: '''According to the government white paper on the subject all bears were destroyed shortly on return to base. All but the last three bears suffered serious internal injuries and multiple broken bones. 'Several hundred' bears were acquired for this purpose, all of which were destroyed 'in or after the testing process, by the testin…

That’s the comment I referenced, but notice the white paper is never linked or even titled.

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#17
post #3

Humans need to have some fucking respect.

A bear ain't going to treat you nearly as well when the tables are turned.

Chances of bears testing humans in ejector seats are rather low. In spite of bears being massive and dangerous humans are far more dangerous to bears than the other way around, even before we start using them as test subjects for new technology.

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#18
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... that's really no excuse? 1. How many animals have humans driven to extinction now? Perhaps they would not be extinct were people to treat them with greater respect. 2. If you treat an animal with respect the tables will never have an opportunity to turn, because you won't be blatantly trespassing on it's turf.

Using animals as test subjects isn't really comparable in magnitude to the damage we do on a global scale to ecosystems, which is what is actually causing extinction

That we do even worse is really no excuse.

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#19
post #13

This is horrible science. A bear surviving an ejection is nothing like a human surviving an ejection.

Early this on, the process of building physically accurate "fake humans" was not really possible. Bear tests were probably more an early proof of viability than anything else. The bears survived, proving that humans wouldn't be completely annihilated. Animal testing cruelty wasn't really being thought about heavily in post WWII military aerospace development. It's unfortunate but a historical footnote reminding us of…

Logging the max acceleration in x,y,z would have been better than throwing a bear out of plane. Knowing a bear survives is ridiculous and they knew it. Ethics are orthogonal, cadavers would have ben a better choice.

Re: 1962 U.S. Military Ejects Bear from B-58 to Test Escape Capsule

#20
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Early this on, the process of building physically accurate "fake humans" was not really possible. Bear tests were probably more an early proof of viability than anything else. The bears survived, proving that humans wouldn't be completely annihilated. Animal testing cruelty wasn't really being thought about heavily in post WWII military aerospace development. It's unfortunate but a historical footnote reminding us of…

Logging the max acceleration in x,y,z would have been better than throwing a bear out of plane. Knowing a bear survives is ridiculous and they knew it. Ethics are orthogonal, cadavers would have ben a better choice.

Logging what with what, in 1962?
Post reply on HN