Pilot Safety Gear

[sdennison]

So, if you look at lots of cockpit shots, you see many different versions of what PIC's decide is appropriate apparel to fly the Warbird they fly.

My question is: What is "appropriate"? I have seen P-51 guys with shorts, sneakers, baseball hats, Tee shirts and Nomex gloves??? Jet pilots in full military Nomex, helmets, gloves, etc. and everything in between.

My opinion, (here we go) is: if you are going full protection, it is a helmet, flight suit, boots & gloves. Now a bit much perhaps for an L Bird but maybe not. P-51 in shorts, a tee and cap???? Chutes, no chutes?

Where is the line? I fly the Citabria naked.... naw just hosin ya but it scares the birds away...

Opines?

[Rauhbatz]

In the Synder accident report on P-51 accidents from the early 1960's (makes for a great read, get ready to shudder at some of the aviation antics people could get away with then) that was posted on WIX there are a few sentences devoted to a guy that flew a P-51 cross-country in a swimsuit...

Ahhhh...the gold old bad old days...

[warbird1]

It's all a personal decision and dependent on how lucky you feel. Everyone has a different opinion on it. Here is mine:

1) Anything with a "hot" ejection seat: Helmet, nomex flight suit, gloves, boots - basically full military style gear

2) Anything that is single engine and old or an ex-military trainer, fighter or higher performance - same as above, but I'm okay with shoes instead of boots. Modern day single engine aircraft like Cessna's, Citabria's, etc. don't require any special gear, IMO, because their landing/stall speeds are so slow and their modern engines are not as prone to failure or to catch fire like 70 year old W.W.II technology engines. Some of these modern ones have stall speeds as slow as 40 MPH. That is HIGHLY survivable in a crash or off-airport landing.

3) Anything that is a twin-engine, with "fighter-like" performance, same as above. Would include P-38, F7F, Mossie, etc.

4) Anything that is a twin-engine, multi-crew transport or bomber, I would probably wear normal clothes, but no shorts EVER! A D.C. headset or similar is sufficient

5) Anything with 4 engines - anything at all due to the redundancy of the engines.

Basically my thought process on this evolves down to three distinct issues:

1) How fast is the stall speed - Obviously the faster it lands the higher potential for catastrophic damage and fatalities. Kinetic energy is related to the velocity of the aircraft squared. That means that doubling the airspeed equates to a 4 times increase in the amount of energy that must be dissipated when landing or crashing.

2) How much redundancy is built in for the powerplants, i.e. 1 engine vs. 4 engine - obviously with more engines there is more of a safety buffer built in. With only 1 engine, like a fighter, you are really at the mercy of the powerplant. Your options are REALLY limited at low altitude. Lose an engine in a B-17 or DC-4, it's not that big of a deal in most circumstances.

3) Is there an ejection seat - Any ejection seat demands full coverage and protection. If I have to explain, then you really don't get it.

Believe it or not, I have seen a warbird owner fly an active "hot-seat" ejection aircraft wearing nothing but shorts, T-shirt, and a D.C. headset and nothing else. I guess these people have a suicide wish, IMO.

To me personally, I would wear a parachute for scenario 1, 2 or 3 at the very top and any time aerobatics are planned.

It's the same debate about wearing a helmet and full riding gear when riding a motorcycle. You can do what you want, but I'll have no sympathy for you if you are horribly disfigured due to your own failure to take the necessary safety precautions. I know this is harsh, but I have seen many of my friends go through this before with either airplane or motorcycle crashes, and it breaks my heart to know they could have prevented their terrible outcomes.

My 2 cents.

[Jerry O'Neill]

Heck,
I don't even wear anything but long cotton pants and shirt when I fly on the airlines.
Just a couple of seconds in a fire with anything nylon and you're gonna be in bad shape.
Jerry

[warbird1]

Heck,
I don't even wear anything but long cotton pants and shirt when I fly on the airlines.
Just a couple of seconds in a fire with anything nylon and you're gonna be in bad shape.
Jerry

This is true. Back in the 80's and 90's, it was really in vogue for fighter pilots to wear their nylon flying scarves while flying. There have been several cases where the pilots were exposed to fire and heat while flying. The nylon melted into liquid, fused into their necks, and caused permanent horrible disfigurements around their neck area only, while their face and head were unscathed due to the protection of the helmet.

Generally speaking, natural fibers such as wool and cotton are the safest while nylon and any other synthetics tend to melt into your skin when heated.

[phil65]

Went down on my motorcycle for the first time in May, been riding for 23+ years.
I ride a lot, and thought I might go down some day, but not like this. Middle of the day and on Main St. doing 35 tops. No one hit me and I didn’t hit anyone. Still not sure what happened, maybe a pothole.
Ct. doesn’t have a helmet law, but being from Ma. I have one. It would be cold when I got out of Pratt at midnight, so luckily I was wearing my helmet and my AVG leather jacket. I wasn’t wear my leather gloves, but somehow my hands didn’t get a scratch. Broken a rib, no big deal, but my bike landed on my left leg and broke my tibial plateau (knee cap) and haven’t walked on my own since. (hopefully soon) A plate in my leg and nine screws, but it could have been much worse. Ride and fly safe, because you never know when something bad might happen.

Phil

P.S. Don’t let your girl/girls wear nylon stockings when flying.

[mlenoch]

Just to repeat something previously said - per Jack Roush, flight suits do do provide protection from any sustained fire (400deg.), but rather the flash in an explosion (1500deg.). The Nomex will not melt and instantly combust.
[Feel free to fill in the details.]
VL

[Randy Haskin]

Aramid clothing has always only been intended for flash fire protection.

[RickH]

You say you wear Arabic clothing when you fly ?

Randy gone native !

[sdennison]

Guess I was looking more for people's philosophy of what they wear and why?

[Saville]

Sightseeing in a Piper Warrior, Arrow, J-3, Cessna 152/172 or XC in any of those plus a Cherokee 6:

plainclothes, no chute, and a DC

Twin engine training:

plainclothes, no chute, and a DC

Acro and/or formation flying in a Citabria or Super Decathlon:

plainclothes, chute, a DC

Anything other than practice t/o and landings or XC in a J-3 (e.g. spins):

plainclothes, chute, a DC


My one hour in a T-6, and one hour in a P-51C:

plainclothes, chute, DC

Any of the above over water:

inflatable life vest plus a raft (one FBO I rent from has one available if you want it)

Any of the above in Winter:

Nomex flight gloves.

Were I to start flying a warbird regularly I'd switch to nomex and a helmet.

Anyways the above is what I do/have done. I'm open to having my mind changed about any or all of that by good arguments.

Last edited by Saville on Thu Jul 22, 2010 11:24 am, edited 2 times in total.

[RyanShort1]

Now that I have a helmet thanks to Bill Greenwood, I'm wearing it most of the time, even in Skyhawks and LSAs. I may revert to a regular headset on occasion, but only because of peer pressure and comments about it. I'm still convinced that in the Skyhawk stall/spin accident I saw at New Braunfels, a helmet might have at least prolonged the life of the right seat guy. I remember that vividly. As far as the rest of the outfit, it's usually business casual because of clients or when flying the L-5 our squadron shirt for professional appearance. Every once in a while I wear a reenactor's uniform, with it, but hate to subject it to the very real wear and tear of the cockpit environment.

Ryan

[Jack Frost]

< don't even wear anything but long cotton pants and shirt when I fly on the airlines.
Just a couple of seconds in a fire with anything nylon and you're gonna be in bad shape.>
Jerry.

Good advice and if you need to take your shoes off, wait until climbout and have them on before landing. Real leather is the best for walking (running) through the fire and wreckage that usually shows up after an accident.
Rubber and vinyl shoes melt quickly and flip flops.....well, why bother.

[John Beyl]

Now that I have a helmet thanks to Bill Greenwood, I'm wearing it most of the time, even in Skyhawks and LSAs. I may revert to a regular headset on occasion, but only because of peer pressure and comments about it. I'm still convinced that in the Skyhawk stall/spin accident I saw at New Braunfels, a helmet might have at least prolonged the life of the right seat guy. I remember that vividly. As far as the rest of the outfit, it's usually business casual because of clients or when flying the L-5 our squadron shirt for professional appearance. Every once in a while I wear a reenactor's uniform, with it, but hate to subject it to the very real wear and tear of the cockpit environment.

Ryan

Ryan,

You seem like a pretty smart kid...and don't take this the wrong way but you just laid out one of the most ridiculous lines I've read in a long time: "...because of peer pressure and comments about it". Never do something against your better judgement when you know it's the wise/smart thing to do even though people may comment about it negatively or ridicule you for it. Their opinon does not matter. Your safety and what it takes for you to feel safe in the cockpit does. A "For instance": I see plenty of guys on motorcycles with full blown race suits on and think nothing of it. It's a matter of personal choice and what you believe will help you survive a crash. Don't let comments from the peanut gallery compromise that! In my opinion there is little if any difference at all in the survivability of a crash in a GA aircraft or a warbird. Fire is fire...impact force (Kenetic energy) is impact force. Seems reasonable to me.

My opinion tells me full gear should be worn at all times whenever possible but it rarely is (As a passenger in these antiques I'm guilty as charged). Why do bomber pilots not wear helmets but everything else? I would think the chance of fire in a B-25 or B-17 cockpit would be very low but the chance of wacking yer bean would be about equal in it as any other airplane in the event of a crash...

Regards,
John

[JDK]

I think Vlado meant:

flight suits do not provide protection from any sustained fire

Meanwhile...

Guess I was looking more for people's philosophy of what they wear and why?

As an occasional warbird passenger, I have a Nomex flight suit which I use for flying in light aircraft and warbirds, when I am offered the chance. The main reason I wear it is it has pockets which I can get to for batteries, memory cards and sickbags - the latter yet to be used, thankfully. Oh, and people give me patches to go on it (Thanks Stormin'!)

Thought provoking stuff here though, and while I always have my shoes on for airline landings and take offs, I'd not thought about the nylon clothes thing. Will now!

As a photographer I don't like seeing pilots flying in non-period hard helmets in vintage pre-jet aircraft, but I respect that it's a sensible thing to do, and not everyone likes the Campbell hard shell helmet. I'd be surprised if anyone who was familiar with serious burns on others would fly behind an engine or fuel tank without full clothing at the very least.

The Guinea Pig Club doctors used to be able to tell Hurricane pilots by the patters of their burns.

Good link here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_Pig_Club