<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Jet Pilots Fly in Bed  (Nov, 1949)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/21/jet-pilots-fly-in-bed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/21/jet-pilots-fly-in-bed/</link>
	<description>Yesterday&#039;s tomorrow, today.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:21:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/21/jet-pilots-fly-in-bed/comment-page-1/#comment-1080576</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 02:43:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6825#comment-1080576</guid>
		<description>The boom operator&#039;s position in the KC135 isn&#039;t too far off from this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The boom operator&#8217;s position in the KC135 isn&#8217;t too far off from this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MrG</title>
		<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/21/jet-pilots-fly-in-bed/comment-page-1/#comment-1064972</link>
		<dc:creator>MrG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6825#comment-1064972</guid>
		<description>It was also done in the ill-fated Northrop XP-79 flying wing fighter.  There was a third reason it didn&#039;t work out:  how do you eject?

Incidentally, the seat of the F-16 was, it seems, installed sloping back because that was the only way to fit it into the nose of the aircraft.  The resistance to gee forces was an added benefit.
MrG / http://gvgpd.proboards.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was also done in the ill-fated Northrop XP-79 flying wing fighter.  There was a third reason it didn&#8217;t work out:  how do you eject?</p>
<p>Incidentally, the seat of the F-16 was, it seems, installed sloping back because that was the only way to fit it into the nose of the aircraft.  The resistance to gee forces was an added benefit.<br />
MrG / <a href="http://gvgpd.proboards.com" rel="nofollow">http://gvgpd.proboards.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen</title>
		<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/21/jet-pilots-fly-in-bed/comment-page-1/#comment-1064969</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:01:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6825#comment-1064969</guid>
		<description>The Luftwaffe tried this at the end of the Second World War, and the RAF also did experiments with it, which you can read about in the excellent book &quot;Back To The Drawing Board: Aircraft that flew but never took off&quot;:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Back-Drawing-Board-Aircraft-Never/dp/toc/1853107581
There were two problems: the feet were unable to move properly to work the rudder pedals, and it was impossible for the pilot to look round when he was lying on his face. The idea was abandoned, though much later the F-16&#039;s cockpit was designed for the pilot to sit semi-reclining in the cause of reducing the effect of G-forces. There is a little more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-suit</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Luftwaffe tried this at the end of the Second World War, and the RAF also did experiments with it, which you can read about in the excellent book &#8220;Back To The Drawing Board: Aircraft that flew but never took off&#8221;:<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Back-Drawing-Board-Aircraft-Never/dp/toc/1853107581" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.co.uk/Back-D.....1853107581</a><br />
There were two problems: the feet were unable to move properly to work the rudder pedals, and it was impossible for the pilot to look round when he was lying on his face. The idea was abandoned, though much later the F-16&#8242;s cockpit was designed for the pilot to sit semi-reclining in the cause of reducing the effect of G-forces. There is a little more about it here: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-suit" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-suit</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: seo</title>
		<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/21/jet-pilots-fly-in-bed/comment-page-1/#comment-1064968</link>
		<dc:creator>seo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:22:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6825#comment-1064968</guid>
		<description>This looks kinda like the firing position of the tank in Batman: the Dark Knight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This looks kinda like the firing position of the tank in Batman: the Dark Knight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

