Talk:Escape crew capsule

Untitled
Only four flying U.S. military aircraft have had escape crew capsules:[1]

* The B-58 Hustler and XB-70 Valkyrie had individual encapsulated seats. * The F-111 used cabin ejection where both side-by-side seats were in a single 3000-lb capsule.[2] * Three of the four B-1A prototypes also used cabin ejection. They had a single capsule "roughly the size of a mini-van" [3] for all four crew members. Uh, that's wrong... Both the B-58 and the F-111 are retired aircraft. The neither B-1A and the XB-70 never made it into service. The B-1B did enter service in early 80's but that uses conventional ejection seats.

Nkuzmik 17:27, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the statement is correct. It does not mean "flying today", and it does not mean "flying a lot". The statement means just what it says: "only four flying U.S. military aircraft have had [note past tense] escape crew capsules". Each of the four aircraft were 1) flown whether in operation or in testing, and 2) were originally designed for military use.

Also, I added the qualifier "flying" because there were tests on a non-flying aircraft, this was during testing prior to use in the B-58.

Maybe a better wording would be "Only four aircraft flown by the U.S. military have had escape crew capsules". If you prefer this, put it in.

--Pmurph5 05:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Starfury
Given that we are mentioning Thunderbirds here, is it also appropriate to mention the Starfury from Babylon 5 apparently having such an ejection system. Damburger 16:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

American centric?
This article is very american-centric. The Soyuz capsule is an escape capsule, also the Apollo system was similar. While they were not technically aircraft (except for the parachutes) they were crew escape capsules.WolfKeeper 18:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Word order in title
I'm confused by the order of the words in the title of this article. Is "Escape crew capsule" universally used? Does no source instead use "Crew escape capsule"? The second seems more "logical".... Could someone familiar with the subject incorporate into the article a reference for this? Thanks! (sdsds - talk) 18:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)