Re:Interceptor pilots' suits : realism vs keeping faces visible

>> I've always felt the Interceptor pilots should have been wearing flight
>> suits more akin to John Glenn's original suit, with a full helmet and
>> breathing apparatus attached. That way, if a pilot had to bail out ...
>
>Ditto. Clearly here, practicality of realism was overridden by the desire
in
>movies for actors' faces to be visible.

I've always thought of the interceptors, in fact most of the space hardware
of SHADO to be sort of a scrambled together last minute do or die type stuff
with pieces not fully thought out in an effort to get something up there to
defend the Earth. I know Straker took 10 years to get SHADO going but we
also took 10 years to put men on the moon and when we did it was a paired
down version of what was originally thought of.

So on an interceptor there is one missle and ski's instead of multible
missles and a descent engine. Now comes the question of the pilots. Maybe
they left out the space suits because the interceptors were designed to
shoot the missles into the flight path of the UFO's and not dogfight with
the UFO's. Any direct encounter in space with the UFO would be deadly as
the UFO isn't worried about disintegrating in Earth's atmosphere. So aren't
the Interceptors more like...B-52 Bombers or Submarines instead of F-14
fighters?

>In "Top Gun" the actors had to wear what real fighter pilots wear. But in
Star
>Wars only the baddies (TIE fighter pilots) wore oxygen masks; the goodies
(X-
>wing fighter pilots) had crash helmets and uncovered faces.

And in the trench sequence in Star Wars the rebels are always yelling EJECT
EJECT! when they get hit. It would make sense if the entire cockpit shot
out of the stricken ship like they do on Babylon 5. They also wear
Spacesuits on B5. Can the entire cockpit of an Interceptor eject from the
body of the ship? Is there room in an interceptor for that type of device?

I'm quite enjoying the Identified thread so far. Thanks everyone for
contributing. I should be able to post on it in another day or two. I
haven't decided if i just want to comment or review the episode as I've seen
it many times.

"Phil Merkel" wrote:


> So on an interceptor there is one missle and ski's instead of multible
> missles and a descent engine. Now comes the question of the pilots. Maybe
> they left out the space suits because the interceptors were designed to
> shoot the missles into the flight path of the UFO's and not dogfight with
> the UFO's. Any direct encounter in space with the UFO would be deadly as
> the UFO isn't worried about disintegrating in Earth's atmosphere. So aren't
> the Interceptors more like...B-52 Bombers or Submarines instead of F-14
> fighters?
>

Exactly - I agree. The interceptors are really manned missile
platforms - they obviously are not ideal for dogfighting.

James

I seem to recall, that the pilots were hoisted or raised into the cockpits
on the interceptors. As for dogfighting, the interceptors are could not do
this, as a matter of design. Look at the shape and engine arrangement. There
are no thrust or vectoring rockets for minor trim and axis turning.
The interceptors were designed as a missle launcher, to engage the UFO 's
with an atomic missle that was supposed to disintergrate the UFO upon
detonation. They were never to get close enough for the UFO's weapons to
engage them.
Steve Christensen



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

"Steve Christensen" wrote:
> I seem to recall, that the pilots were hoisted or raised into the cockpits
> on the interceptors. As for dogfighting, the interceptors are could not do
> this, as a matter of design. Look at the shape and engine arrangement. There
> are no thrust or vectoring rockets for minor trim and axis turning.
> The interceptors were designed as a missle launcher, to engage the UFO 's
> with an atomic missle that was supposed to disintergrate the UFO upon
> detonation. They were never to get close enough for the UFO's weapons to
> engage them.


I'm not convinced that the interceptor missiles are
nuclear-flavoured. Certainly the explosions they cause
look relatively minor compared to those caused by nuclear
weapons - and in some cases we see an interceptor missile
appear to detonate a mere few hundred feet at most in front
of a UFO, yet the UFO rides through the blast unscathed.

In one episode, Mindbender I think - Straker sends
congratulations to the Interceptor astronauts for destroying
a UFO within a few miles of Moonbase. It turns out that his
congratulations are misplaced, and they have done no such
thing - but a nuclear explosion within a few miles would
surely have most unfortunate consequences for the Moonbase
inhabitants, would it not?

James

--- In [hidden email], "Steve Christensen" <christensensteve@h...>
wrote:
>...
> The interceptors were designed as a missle launcher, to engage the
> UFO 's with an atomic missle that was supposed to disintegrate the
> UFO upon detonation. They were never to get close enough for the
> UFO's weapons to engage them.

That depends on how far and how accurately the UFOs' weapons could
fire.