Why dont warbird flyers wear the real warbird flightgear?

[retroaviation]

Here's one of the models of the Campbell Aero Classic Tim is talking about........




Sorry for the duplicate posting of this picture from the "What did Santa bring you for Christmas" thread, but I thought it might apply here on this thread and show that you can get at least some head protection while also looking somewhat original to the era.

Gary

[Jack Cook]

I remember on freedom flight, the fellow who was flying the Darzizecks (sp) new SNJ-5 overshot his approach and landing in WV and crashed suffering a severe brain injury. BTW-no helmet.

[L2Driver]

I think there's a certain misconception on what nomex actually does. Having been in an aircraft fire, I have a rather unique perspective on it. Nomex is not fire proof. It's meant to protect against flash fires not prolonged exposure to flames. In the military setting, the intent was to provide a few seconds of protection and allow the crewman to abandon the aircraft via the ejection seat.

When exposed to high heat, the nomex becomes extremely brittle and the suit will actually come apart if you thump it with a finger.

The woolen flight suits and uniforms worn during WW2 actually have very good flame protection properties. Wool does not burn. The relatively thick uniform fabrics, with a woolen flight suit over the top of it, provided adequate protection from fire.

As for helmets, modern helmets are clearly superior with regards to hearing protection. Head protection is pretty good for what these are designed for -- keeping you from knocking yourself silly while rattling around the cockpit during high-energy manuevering and pushing through plexi during an ejection sequence.

[Jeff Funk]

A bit of additional info on NOMEX from a technical perspective. I worked at the US site that produces NOMEX fiber in 1981-82. I am not a company representative for this product and users should always follow the manufacturers recommendations. However, I can provide a bit of insite in how it works for your consideration.

The superior burn protection provided by NOMEX is due to two inherent characteristics of the polymer (polymetaphenylenediamineisophthalamide).

1) It cannot support combustion by itself..ie it won't burn by ITSELF

2) It does not melt

For someone in a petroleum fueled fire due to an aviation or vehicle crash, the second factor is probably as important as the first. NOMEX does burn if it is exposed to another burning material such as aviation fuel. However, since it doesn't melt, it tends to char from the outside away from the skin with the inner layers of material providing protection. Other common materials tend to melt as they burn and the melt causes burns as well as the flames. NOMEX does not make you Superman in a fire, but if properly used it provides invaluable seconds of protection to hopefully allow the wearer to escape the fire. As pointed out in an earlier post, the best protection would probably would come from a layered approach. The effectiveness of NOMEX has be demonstrated many times by race drivers that walked away from fiery crashes with minimimal injuries.

[DB2]

I once worked with a test pilot who had been through some nasty crashes, including the "pendulum" crash of the prototype V-22. He wore a helmet constantly...even in a Twin Comanche we would fly. He would regularly admonish me to always wear a helmet.

So I was going up in the front seat of a 450 Stearman one day (with another extremely seasoned test pilot flying), with only a lap belt in the cockpit. On a whim, I grabbed an old Vietnam-era helicopter helmet. We groundlooped and ended up in a ditch. The helmet, with my head in it, hit the panel and cracked the glass on several instruments. A few weeks earlier I had cracked a helmet mountain biking, so this was enough to convince me to buy one for flying..a custom fitted Kevlar HGU-55.

I wore it off and on. Then I watched a guy roll-up a Pitts into a ball. He walked away, with the altimeter knob stuck in his helmet. Since that brought back some memories, I decided I would wear a helmet religiously when flying anything remotely high performance.

One day several years later, I couldn't find the adapter cable for the helmet, and went to go practice some sequences without it.

I hit the ground that day at 180+ mph and spent the next eight months in the hospital. On my face, I broke my cheekbones, nose, septum, and crushed my sinus cavities. One side of my face was ripped up pretty good. I also had swelling on my brain, which didn't exactly speed my recovery. Obviously, I had a lot of other injuries which the helmet wouldn't have helped with, but life would have been a lot better had I just worn that helmet. (I had 5 surgeries just to repair damage to my face, and I still have some nasty scars).

So, I believe you have to be AN ABSOLUTE IDIOT to fly without a helmet in any taildragger, anything high performance, anything with a tempermental engine, etc. That instrument panel is a lot closer than you think. It is difficult to express how far your neck will stretch in a sudden deceleration. I even feel "naked" now flying in a King Air without a helmet.

One thing to consider is the weight of the helmet...some of the old ones are pretty heavy, and obviously this puts extra stress on your neck if you do crash. I used the Campbell helmet down in New Zealand several years ago, and was quite impressed with it. Not cheap, but part of the price of admission, in my opinion. If you can't afford the dress, then you shouldn't go to the dance.

[L2Driver]

I once worked with a test pilot who had been through some nasty crashes, including the "pendulum" crash of the prototype V-22. He wore a helmet constantly...even in a Twin Comanche we would fly. He would regularly admonish me to always wear a helmet.

So I was going up in the front seat of a 450 Stearman one day (with another extremely seasoned test pilot flying), with only a lap belt in the cockpit. On a whim, I grabbed an old Vietnam-era helicopter helmet. We groundlooped and ended up in a ditch. The helmet, with my head in it, hit the panel and cracked the glass on several instruments. A few weeks earlier I had cracked a helmet mountain biking, so this was enough to convince me to buy one for flying..a custom fitted Kevlar HGU-55.

I wore it off and on. Then I watched a guy roll-up a Pitts into a ball. He walked away, with the altimeter knob stuck in his helmet. Since that brought back some memories, I decided I would wear a helmet religiously when flying anything remotely high performance.

One day several years later, I couldn't find the adapter cable for the helmet, and went to go practice some sequences without it.

I hit the ground that day at 180+ mph and spent the next eight months in the hospital. On my face, I broke my cheekbones, nose, septum, and crushed my sinus cavities. One side of my face was ripped up pretty good. I also had swelling on my brain, which didn't exactly speed my recovery. Obviously, I had a lot of other injuries which the helmet wouldn't have helped with, but life would have been a lot better had I just worn that helmet. (I had 5 surgeries just to repair damage to my face, and I still have some nasty scars).

So, I believe you have to be AN ABSOLUTE IDIOT to fly without a helmet in any taildragger, anything high performance, anything with a tempermental engine, etc. That instrument panel is a lot closer than you think. It is difficult to express how far your neck will stretch in a sudden deceleration. I even feel "naked" now flying in a King Air without a helmet.

One thing to consider is the weight of the helmet...some of the old ones are pretty heavy, and obviously this puts extra stress on your neck if you do crash. I used the Campbell helmet down in New Zealand several years ago, and was quite impressed with it. Not cheap, but part of the price of admission, in my opinion. If you can't afford the dress, then you shouldn't go to the dance.

Agree completely. It's now commonplace to see bicyclists wearing helmets, skiers and snowboarders wearing helmets, mountain climbers wearing helmets, etc. Fifteen years ago these people would have been tormented mercilessly as being wimps.

And yes, helmets can be expensive but put it in perspective. How much is your head worth?

[planeoldsteve]

If you can't afford the dress, then you shouldn't go to the dance.

In Gary's case with the Campbell Aero Classic helmet would that be a new whore in an old dress.

Steve

[Eric Friedebach]

The sizes were a lot smaller back then as well.

Airshow food doesn’t help.

[Edward Soye]

Agree completely. It's now commonplace to see bicyclists wearing helmets, skiers and snowboarders wearing helmets, mountain climbers wearing helmets, etc. Fifteen years ago these people would have been tormented mercilessly as being wimps.

Thats sort of an interesting point. I just got a helpmet for skiing for Christmas, and comparing the two it does seem a little silly not wearing one while flying some of these old things...

[L2Driver]

That's sort of an interesting point. I just got a helmet for skiing for Christmas, and comparing the two it does make it seem a little silly not wearing one while flying some of these old things...

I think there's somehow a greater sense of perceived danger cycling or skiing as opposed to flying in which aviation gets lumped, wrongly, into the same risk category as driving a car.

[retroaviation]

In Gary's case with the Campbell Aero Classic helmet would that be a new whore in an old dress.

Steve

Now, I've been called many things (some just today), but I've never been called a whore before now. I'm not sure if I should be offended or appreciative.

Gary

[Randy Haskin]

In reality, for most of the modern protective gear to be effective it needs to be worn layered correctly with long underwear and liners in the gloves. How many of you wear long underwear in the peak of summer under your nomex gear? If you were serious about fire protection that’s probably what you should be doing.

The USAF-issue flight suit needs only to be worn with cotton undergarments -- standard short sleeve t-shirt and boxers -- to function as designed. The Aramid/leather gloves, too, are standalone and do not require liners.

[Mudge]

I gotta' come down on the "pro" side of safety gear. Used to race stock cars (in my ute) and have been in a few wrecks in them. Am I glad I had a "hard hat" and 4 point seat belt? You bet your tushy.

On the other hand, you have those who are "indestructible". Case in point:
Dale Earnhardt.

When a warbird is going past at 300+ mph, I can't see what the driver has on anyway.

Mudge the cautious

[Nathan]

I'd like to see more of the real or reproduction stuff on the warbird pilots. I think they look a lot better and more authentic. But I guess safety will always over ride that. Although I had planned that if I ever got to fly WWII warbirds that I would wear the WWII gear and clothes(most of it anyway). Helmets are good, but they won't help ya if you plow straight in the ground!

Cheers,

-Nathan

[Ollie]

If you want better head protection than the standard HGU-55 helmet, you can get a HGU-84 (for helicopters but with the same shape as the HGU-55) or a Gallet LH-250. Those are the cat's ass. Bob Erdos from Vintage Wings is never seen in the Hurricane without it. I currently work with my HGU-55, but I'll be getting a LH-250 next spring for those fling wings things.