Health & Safety Hi Viz Nonsense! [Archive]

big v

18th Jan 2014, 15:27

....and it's obvious they haven't finished squirting the new cam cream into baby rabbits eyes yet or they would all be wearing it......

....and why aren't they all in sangars?.....

....or armed?....

I guess because they're not in an area where you need to be low vis, cam'd up and armed. Possibly a place where H&S has a proper part to play. Unless that's the real beef. It wasn't like this in the good old days when the death and injury rate from preventable incidents was higher.

TheWizard

18th Jan 2014, 15:50

Yawn......

Mr C Hinecap

18th Jan 2014, 16:05

You think that making yourself more visible in an aircraft operating area is a bad thing?

ShyTorque

18th Jan 2014, 16:07

You think that making yourself more visible in an aircraft operating area is a bad thing?

Depends on the level of risk from snipers. Plenty on this forum, mind! :rolleyes:

Evalu8ter

18th Jan 2014, 16:14

Leon,
Have you ever served at Bastion?

If so you'll know all about the 'hat police', 'high viz police' and 'gun police' - not forgetting of course 'the correct sunglasses with correct lens police'. In effect, if there's a chance you're out and about between dusk/dawn you are mandated to wear a high viz part of clothing to minimise the risk of being mown down by a caffeine or heroin doused driver (depending on nationality).

Never mind that enforcing all these rules (mostly petty...) provide gainful full-time employment for several detached personnel.....

Depending on the length of visit you don't need to be armed; the S/L behind CAS is wearing a thigh holster and the F/L probably has a hip holster. That ramp is waaay out of range of sniper fire from outside camp.

Corrona

18th Jan 2014, 16:39

Look how they're all laughing politely. Or maybe it really was a moment of comedy genius!

NutLoose

18th Jan 2014, 17:18

I realise he is bending forward to shake her hand, but seriously, who released the picture, his stooped look with grey hair makes him look like a senior citizen with curvature of the spine...

It makes him look like a geriatric old man and not a senior officer in the Armed Forces

Heathrow Harry

18th Jan 2014, 17:47

I never realised that good looks were a requirement for running the Military.............

glad rag

18th Jan 2014, 17:56

I remember at Stavanger, [Sola ?] once, we f3 linies were kitted out in hi viz/dpm much to the amusement of the bomber contingent.

Got a bit sporty the banter did.

Until a landrover wiped out two of their guys on the flight line after dusk.:uhoh:

Nice new hi viz bomber boys the following morning.

WHY DID IT TAKE AN ACCIDENT FOR THE BASIC RULES TO BE ENFORCED?

No, I don't know either.

NutLoose

18th Jan 2014, 18:00

They're not Harry, but public perception counts for a lot in assessing their capability in the role, look at half of the US politicians, dyed hair, whitened teeth and you can't tell me John Kerry's hair never came mail order.

And that picture does nothing for his image or position.

NutLoose

18th Jan 2014, 18:07

Glad rag, I believe, It was one of the pilots with Hunting Cargo stepped off the plane steps in black uniform, coat and hat at night and was killed by a vehicle passing as well.

Training Risky

18th Jan 2014, 18:09

http://defenceintranet.diif.r.mil.uk/News/BySubject/Image%20Library/TFH-7Bde-2013-079---013int.jpg

CAS: "So...you're a woman I see. Jolly good show. Boots getting through? Mail fits?"

Sqn Ldr: [Career laugh through gritted teeth] "Ha Ha sir" "(Don't embarrass me guys..!)"

Flt Lt in UBACS: [Career laugh] "Ha Ha sir, that's a good one. Now, about the cuts to my pension..."

MAD Boom

18th Jan 2014, 18:14

I bet he wouldn't be smiling if he had to do RSOI.

Nice creases on the sleeves though....

teeteringhead

18th Jan 2014, 18:20

Take all the points about the dilemma in theatre ... why that would be exactly like putting HISLs on camouflaged aircraft! ;)

.... but I was visiting an RAF training unit the other day, and they had airmen rather than plods or MGS doing "barrier up barrier down". Might have been the trainees I suppose.

But they were in MTP and Hi-Vis vests. No quibble (well - not much) with the Hi Vis, but why MTP and not blue FFS if they wanted to be seen? :ugh::ugh:

Mr C Hinecap

18th Jan 2014, 18:52

but why MTP and not blue FFS

Perhaps because it is crappy and cold out there on the gate and MTP is far more suitable for that role? :rolleyes:

Flash2001

18th Jan 2014, 19:19

I do remember before all this hi viz stuff starts that 2 aircrew walking across the flight line were struck by a runway snow blower when the driver didn't see them. Although they were injured, it was their good fortune that the machine had just broken a shear pin. The impeller drive in one of those things has around 600BHP.

After an excellent landing etc...

Training Risky

18th Jan 2014, 19:25

Perhaps because it is crappy and cold out there on the gate and MTP is far more suitable for that role?

Look I am no lover of our blue polyester monkey suits, but surely a blue Jeltex jacket does the same job (perhaps better) of deflecting the rain than an MTP jacket?

If a barrier technician is just checking passes and not carrying a shooter (viz Alan Partridge) why the need for MTP?

CoffmanStarter

18th Jan 2014, 19:31

Back to Leon's OP ... Haven't we been putting yellow bands around ground equipment for years :E

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/image_zps34d0269a.jpg

clicker

18th Jan 2014, 21:17

Oh you beat me to it Coff.

IIRC it was noticed that red fire engines stuck out on aerial photos. OK paint them green. Then people in accidents claimed they didn't see them. OK stick a nice yellow stripe round them. Bet they show up on aerial photos, circle completed. :rolleyes:

Willard Whyte

18th Jan 2014, 21:36

Mr C Hinecap

18th Jan 2014, 21:40

ook I am no lover of our blue polyester monkey suits, but surely a blue Jeltex jacket does the same job (perhaps better) of deflecting the rain than an MTP jacket?

If a barrier technician is just checking passes and not carrying a shooter (viz Alan Partridge) why the need for MTP?

Did you spend a career in a flying suit or something? Cold war perhaps?

The uniform designed for stagging on is not blues. It sometimes gets cold out as well as wet and a blue shirt and jumper won't cut it.

Those on guard also tend to be the RRF / whatever the current name is. They deal with anything anywhere on the station. Mincing about in blues doesn't cut it. When not on the gate they may be on foot patrol elsewhere around the fenceline or across station.

Lima Juliet

19th Jan 2014, 00:28

Have I been to Bastion - yes, lots, but never been posted there. I've also been there pre and post the arrival of the colonial booties.

Why is the picture that I posted so ridiculous? It's frickin' daylight and those belts are meant for night time use! :ugh:

T!ts on f!sh springs to mind...:=

Whichever bozo dreamt up the need for a hi viz belt in broad daylight on an aircraft apron must have an IQ of about 6! If you want hi viz in daylight then you must have a contrasting colour tabard (there's even a British Standard* and EC directive on the design of hi viz if you're really bored!). The reflective tape is designed to work at night and 95% of the belt is covered in the tape.

There's also an issue about having too much hi viz clothing on the apron - if there's too much of it, then you may as well not wear it at all (especially if there are lots of signs in a similar colour - like Aircraft Armed boards, Laser warning signs and other health & safety paraphanalia). It's the same with road signs - if you have too many then you miss the really important ones.

Nope, I see no tangeable safety benefit for CAS and his hangers on in wearing reflective safety belts in broad daylight. They'd be better of giving him a bright red Father Christmas hat!!!

(apart from hats and aircraft engines don't mix!)

LJ

* BS EN471 :8

Lima Juliet

19th Jan 2014, 00:39

I'd forgotten about the 'hat police'. That started in KAF when the WO scribbly was tasked by the Detco to stand outside the UK DFAC and tell people to put their hats on.

The next day, at the very same spot the blunty WO had been standing, there was an inscription in big letters written on the blast wall...

"Daddy, what did you do in the war?"

"I was in the hat police, son"

"Daddy, what's a w@nker?"

It was scrubbed out shortly afterwards after half of KAF had come to see it and p!ss themselves laughing!

LJ

Surplus

19th Jan 2014, 01:37

All this talk of Hat Police etc makes me wonder how we managed on Ascension Island in 82. The first deployment I was on was during the 'shooting' phase of the war, just aircrew, ops staff, maintenance personnel, medics and firemen. (and SIB ;) ) We seemed to manage perfectly ok meeting the required op tempo. My last deployment there was after the ceasefire and the difference was astonishing, we had SROs, SSOs, flags going up and down at the requisite periods. In fact we had lots of 'support' and extra rules which really would have made the job a lot harder, if our op tempo was as before. It seems that all the b@#$%^&t arrives when the op tempo decreases, idle hands and the creation of empires etc.

onetrack

19th Jan 2014, 02:53

Only the military could paint up a refuelling tanker in camouflage "Olive Drab" - and then put "hi-viz" marker strips all over it. :ugh:

bosnich71

19th Jan 2014, 04:38

Some years back I worked on a radar job for the RAAF. The gear was placed in camouflaged shipping containers which was then dumped in various parts of the outback.
At one meeting of 'suits' I suggested a better way of hiding this secret squirrel stuff from people might be putting it into highly visible shipping containers with something like Maersk or China Shipping painted on it. After all every other sheep farm in Oz has it's share of old shipping containers used as sheds etc.
Just got stared at ! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/infopop/icons/icon7.gif

teeteringhead

19th Jan 2014, 08:48

Mr C I do take your point about "stagging on*" wear, but in this case they remained entirely within their over-heated box. And when the RAFP were on, they managed it in blues - but maybe so they could still wear their white caps! ;)

* must we use this Army phrase?

Buster Hyman

19th Jan 2014, 09:23

When everyone is wearing Hi Viz gear, the people that don't stand out...ergo, you are much safer. At least, that's what I said when I got caught crossing the tarmac without it...

"Do you realise that it's harder for you to be seen without it?"
"Well, you saw me didn't you?"

500N

19th Jan 2014, 09:24

bosnich
Agree, sometimes it can be beneficial to hide it in plain sight, especially if it can be dumped and left with little daily / weekly etc activity around it.

bosnich71

19th Jan 2014, 09:34

500 .... hiding them in "plain sight" was my very point but as a lowly person in the hierarchy of this particular project I was ignored. Mind you that was basically S.O.P. for me so I didn't get too upset.
Perhaps the 'suits' thought that if they hid them in plain sight they may never find them when they actually needed them, ho, ho.

Courtney Mil

19th Jan 2014, 09:38

teeteringhead

19th Jan 2014, 10:28

sometimes it can be beneficial to hide it in plain sight Indeed.

One recalls flying some Tech Int guys from London to Aldergrove (in the mighty Wessex) to give a presentation on SAM-7. We stopped at Valley for the (then - o tempora, o mores) obligatory free steak lunch in the feeder - and to refuel and don goon-suits. As a visual aid, the guys had said missile - in a golf-bag under the port seats (aka Wessex luggage compartment).

As we went to the feeder, conversation went thusly:

Teeters: Er, shouldn't we tell someone about you-know-what before we b%gger off to eat?

Tech Int: Nah - right now it's a golf-bag; surround it with Snowdrops and everyone will know something's up!

Made sense to me ........

Mr C Hinecap

19th Jan 2014, 10:34

Leon. You seem to have a superior knowledge of the subject yet your employer seems to be ignorant. Have you ever shared this up official channels? Just asking.

As far as 'day'ight or night' goes - let's put human factors in there. It is much harder to enforce something for 50% of the day, light levels can get lower with storms etc during daylight, it gets dark quite quickly (sorry guv, it was light when I started loading the aircraft) and most vests (and the belts) are not 95% reflective so at least give some level of contrasting colour against a MTP background. I'm not saying it is the best policy applied in the most effective way, but it is a reasonable attempt at something that is at least for the right reasons.

TH - how do you know what they did when not checking passes on the gate? Also - were they RAF and not MoD Guards?

CoffmanStarter

19th Jan 2014, 10:35

... why that would be exactly like putting HISLs on camouflaged aircraft!

Well not quite ... but who remembers the Luftwaffe Fiat G91's with their Hi Viz 3m Dayglow and camouflage scheme ?

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/FiatG_91_DSC_2715_zps573ecc0b.jpg

© Waldemar Winkler

I heard one former BoB Pilot say "shame they didn't paint em like that in 1940" :E

Sorry for the thread drift Leon :ok:

Willard Whyte

19th Jan 2014, 11:04

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Lockheed_F-5_Lightning.jpg

Camo + Hi-viz, t'was ever thus.

Failed_Scopie

19th Jan 2014, 11:39

[QUOTE]I'd forgotten about the 'hat police'. That started in KAF when the WO scribbly was tasked by the Detco to stand outside the UK DFAC and tell people to put their hats on.[QUOTE]

I remember the Det Co, a Gp Capt, appointing himself OC Hat Police at Ali Al Salem in 2003; he used to stand outside the cookhouse and bawl at people (very dignified for an OF5). He bawled at the wrong person one day - an Army One-Star (and my Boss, who I as a mere SO3 was driving that day) who also happened to be COMBRITFOR Kuwait; cue a rather a pointed 'discussion' on the cookhouse steps with the One-Star on send and the Gp Capt on receive. The Gp Capt was still a Gp Capt in 2007 when I ran into him in D.C.

Al R

19th Jan 2014, 12:05

I am certain that everyone was acutely aware he was on walkabout, but hey. Health and Safety is about risk awareness and appreciation, surely, and not risk removal. If it subordinates common sense and responsibility because it is used so prescriptively and dogmatically, then is the threat to common sense and self determination a greater threat than the blanket perceived threat to life and limb?

Surely, in theatre, there should be heightened alert and self awareness anyway. Individual responsibility has been eroded by the state/system seeking to justify its importance by imposing its will on the individual to the point that the individual no longer has rights or responsibilities. The system can argue, quantify and define RTA incidents, but not common sense and self help. I just prefer less intrusion and government which doesn't make itself indispensable however it can.

teeteringhead

19th Jan 2014, 12:12

TH - how do you know what they did when not checking passes on the gate? Also - were they RAF and not MoD Guards?

Point 1. I asked! Nothing else - MGS were doing "mobile patrol" - the airmen did gate only. (But to be fair [sic] everybody in MTP [why?] had the Hi-Vis too. :ugh:)

Point 2. I refer the Hon member to the answer I gave earlier (Post No 17)and they had airmen rather than plods or MGS doing "barrier up barrier down"

Originally Posted by Teeteringhead
... why that would be exactly like putting HISLs on camouflaged aircraft! Which is exactly what we do!!

The ;) was meant to denote irony ......... :ugh:

SASless

19th Jan 2014, 12:42

Several of us towing a Huey on ground handling wheels across Blackpool Airport Apron.....we were confronted by Jobsworth Security Type who was insistent I was violating the Queen's dignity by not having a Hi Vis Waist Coat visible for all to see.

All being himself as the Airport was closed.

Me temporarily attached to the Tail Stinger of said Huey.

He insisting we cease what we were doing unless and until I was attired in full compliance with HSE Regulations.

Mind you.....that would have left the Huey in the middle of things unattended and a risk to all aircraft moving about the parking apron....but after all Befehl its Befehl.....Guv.

My observation that even if I had a Hi Vis Jacket....anyone that was so blind as to miss seeing the Huey and Tug would probably not be able to see little ol' me either.

Added to that....my suggestion that if they did see the Huey and avoided it....they would at the same time avoid me....Vest or no Vest.

Lacking that even .... with every assurance I would find a position of sanctuary by use of my pegs and wit....did not compute with Jobs either.

Even being told we would all obtain our very own monogramed Hi Vis Waistcoats immediately upon the completion of the current evolution made no difference to the Jobsworth.

We did out fox him in the end.....as we kept towing the Huey to the Hanger door and into the Hanger.....then informed him since we were now safely inside the hanger would he mind taking his Hi Vis Jacket and Ass somewhere else as he had not authority or reason for being in the Hanger.

Why do the HSE crowd find commonsense so alien to their thinking?

Mr C Hinecap

19th Jan 2014, 14:44

everybody in MTP

Uniformity then. Seems sensible. For a uniformed organization.

glad rag

19th Jan 2014, 15:22

My Goodness! I never realised how lucky I was. All those years wandering around flight lines and similar spaces on airfirields without being run over or hit by something. Never once have I warn anything hi-viz apart from the reflective cross on my bonedome - and I generally only put that on when I was safely inside the cockpit.

Is anyone else here still alive after walking on an airfield?

During your spell on 43 you obviously never had the pleasure of "working" at night around the bowser or squadron maintenance MT areas... I seem to remember two maintenance cock ups [how apt] one with lox pots and Q and another a broken shear pin that wasn't discovered until on the runway that with maturity could be handed right back to MT, sodiums and shadows.

I was almost taken out by a landrover in a fully illuminated HAS 3 one night, a radar crew in snag developed, I returned to the cabin to bleat for help again, and on leaving the cabin was almost taken out by said lr as it screamed to a halt across the walkway [that was the episode that started me hair turning gray LOL]

ps we kept the lights on in H3 all the time in case the ghost came round again, but that's another story....

Lima Juliet

19th Jan 2014, 16:31

Mr C H

Leon. You seem to have a superior knowledge of the subject yet your employer seems to be ignorant. Have you ever shared this up official channels? Just asking.

Nope, wouldn't bother with sending it up the line as A4 people are hard over on it and they pull the strings (in error I believe). All I do is that I make it personal choice on my airfield born out of the fact that after 100 years of aviation and ~1 million flight movements there has never been a human run over but there have been plenty of aircraft hit - the last being a Chipmunk hit by a grasscutter! :{ No hi viz on the aircraft but it was painted red/white/black and was on green grass. The driver just got too close - idiot!

Not bumping into things in daylight is all about contrast and movement - that is why we painted our trg aircraft black. So sometimes, hi viz in daylight is counter productive as it doesn't have the correct contrast and lulls the wearer of it into a false sense of security that they can be seen. Whenever I walk around on aprons/manoeuvring areas/ORPS I always think that no one can see me - that is how I have stayed alive in over a quarter of a century (in answer to Courtney's question). The only thing of mine ever hit was my helmet/electric razor in a bag within a huge pile of luggage outside a C130 on the Nellis Ramp - the driver? The idiot DAMO who even had to rev his truck harder to get over the pile of luggage! :ugh: i did enjoy launching myself at him through the window, in front of the groundcrew, shouting "stop the f-ing engine you cnut, you're driving over the luggage!".

Considering the DAMO's performance on that day isn't it a good job that A4 set our hi viz policy? :ugh:

(still he did ground me in Vegas for 48 hours whilst a new flying helmet was sent out! - every cloud and all that :ok:)

Anyway, the belt being worn by CAS and his entourage is uneccesary and looks just plain stupid. If you don't want CAS being run over, then do something else than putting on a useless belt and think 'job done'. A vest would be better as at least 80% is in a probable contrasting colour unlike the majority reflective material on the belt that only works at night or in fog (when it picks out head lights).

LJ

PS. I also remember the unfortunate individual that was the only one wearing hi viz to get run over.

Lima Juliet

19th Jan 2014, 16:41

PPS I also don't wear default hi viz on my motorbike, but I dress for the conditions. If it's a bright day and the roads are dusty and light grey I'll wear black with a silver helmet. If it's a dull day I'll wear my jacket with reflective strips and white helmet. If it's frosty then I won't wear my white helmet. At all times I put on my headlight. In other words, the default of pulling on hi viz vest just does not cut it for all conditions.

LJ

Al R

19th Jan 2014, 16:53

but I dress for the conditions.

Correct. Maybe no one has the energy to question blanket silliness. At night, maybe.. but slow walkabout on a sunny pan? I agree with your comments about contrast.

Why cycling in high-vis may be not as safe as you think | Peter Walker | Environment | theguardian.com (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2013/jan/10/cycling-high-visibility-safe-fluorescent)

The authors looked at 12 studies dating back as far as 1969, a number of which seemed to show that a fluorescent jacket or similar garb made riders more visible. However, the paper notes that many of these put the bikes against relatively uniform backdrops rather than the every-varying contrast of a moving landscape.

One study, from 2011, appeared to show that drivers saw moving motorbikes more quickly if there was a greater colour contrast between the background and the rider's clothes. Another, from last year, concluded that depending on the road and traffic the most visible rider apparel could be a high-vis jacket, a white jacket or even a black jacket.

Mr C Hinecap

19th Jan 2014, 17:54

Nope, wouldn't bother with sending it up the line as A4 people are hard over on it and they pull the strings

Isn't airside safety is normally driven by the Ops side of things? I never saw anything to do with a/c operating areas that wasn't approved by the Flight Safety Officer and I never saw one of them from the A4 world.

In other words, the default of pulling on hi viz vest just does not cut it for all conditions.

Quite right. but try to convert that into something like Airfield SOPs would be impossible. At least high viz works a bit during the day (contrasting to the background and also breaking up the body profile) and quite a lot at night. Given the air side problems tend to come from vehicles and not a/c, it seems reasonable to help safety and drivers to see for a small requirement.

gr4techie

19th Jan 2014, 17:57

I like to cycle (in the warm summer daylight) and hi-viz is a pretty big topic in cycling internet forums. Key points were...

- At night there is no colour perception. So painting something dayglo is cock all use. At night dayglo yellow is not much better than any other colour.

- In certain situations even reflectives can be cock all use. When there is a narrow beam of light, nothing will be seen in the peripheral. For example, a guy wearing a reflective jacket is walking across an apron 90 degrees to a vehicle light. Also reflectives don't help you see something approaching when you are sat at a T junction.

- If yellow dayglo is widely used, others get so familiar seeing it all the time, that it looses it's effectiveness. People switch off to it. Maybe a different colour people are not used to seeing would be better.

Maybe in the future H&S will make us dress like characters in the film Tron?

clicker

19th Jan 2014, 18:04

CM,

Yep, spent nearly a hour wandering around the apron and hangers at West Raynham with the camera many years ago, with authority I should add.

Didn't get hit by a Canberra or the AEF Chippies. Didn't have the Bloodhounds at the servicing unit throw a wobble despite wearing a dark suit, although I did get stopped by an RAFP dog man and his mini to check me out.

Even the mini didn't have go faster stripes or high vis markings and I managed to get some nice photos that day as well. ATC Annual camp was good for quite a few reasons

ShyTorque

19th Jan 2014, 18:05

In early 1980s some senior RAF officer decided that his aircrew needed to be more tactical. It became mandatory to "cam up" our faces like flying Rambos. He obviously saw it as a career enhancing breakthrough for himself.

The army thought it bizarre to the point of being totally laughable. As one officer pointed out, in our "battle positions", sitting in the front of our 7 tonne helicopters, it was fairly easy for the enemy to spot us, cam creamed faces or not.

Evalu8ter

19th Jan 2014, 18:27

CM,
Doubtless you were wandering around a pretty well lit ORP/Apron on a well found Cold-War funded station with only well trained UK mil pers worked in well maintained vehicles. It's a bit different in the dustbowls or KAF/BSN where the passing vehicles kick up plenty of dust as few of the roads are tarmac, and some of the coalition partners have a more 'relaxed' attitude to driving...and that's before you get a dust storm come through. It's not the pan you need to worry about, it's getting between work, domestic accn and the DFACs without being run over.....

NutLoose

19th Jan 2014, 19:19

found Cold-War funded station with only well trained UK mil pers worked in well maintained vehicles. I

Lol dream on re well maintained

TheWizard

19th Jan 2014, 19:25

If Standing Orders for movement around the WHOLE base are to wear a reflective belt due to the reasons mentioned by Evalu8ter, would it not be sending the wrong message to the 'troops' if the top man (in this case CAS) and his staff just ignored them? :hmm:

Who is to say he didn't arrive early in the morning and go for breakfast whilst it was still dark and then go straight on his 'tour'?

This is not a new thing out that way. It was exactly the same at (insert airbase in the Middle East) for a long time. You picked up your reflective belt alongside your morphine and CAT.

gr4techie

19th Jan 2014, 19:39

Lets face it. The reason for H&S these days is down to liability.

If you get run over. The employer isn't liable if you wore the hi-viz belt, it must have been your fault.

bosnich71

19th Jan 2014, 21:32

gr4 Techie ..... 'it's down to liability'.
Back in the olden days we Cold War warriors didn't even have ear defenders, in fact, at times, we were lucky if we even had a cold weather jacket. It was only after the RAF started to get sued that they were deemed to be necessary. Nowadays when I don't hear what the Wife says to me I blame it all on my service to 'Queen and Country'.

NutLoose

19th Jan 2014, 21:48

The stupidity of it all is that at an airport the people forced to wear them, the handlers and the engineers etc, the people who work day in day out airside and understand the dangers and pitfalls of working there.

The people that don't wear them, those who have no knowledge of the dangers, and therefore are prime candidates for them are the passengers.

SASless

19th Jan 2014, 23:41

n early 1980s some senior RAF officer decided that his aircrew needed to be more tactical. It became mandatory to "cam up" our faces like flying Rambos. He obviously saw it as a career enhancing breakthrough for himself.

The army thought it bizarre to the point of being totally laughable. As one officer pointed out, in our "battle positions", sitting in the front of our 7 tonne helicopters, it was fairly easy for the enemy to spot us, cam creamed faces or not.

Whilst filming with the BBC for that SAS program they did.....the Make Up Artist was told by the Director to "Cam Up" us Huey folks. Now I know where the idea that Helicopter Pilots should put on their "War Face" comes from.

That Ross feller sure had a cracker jack of a girl friend.....like a young girl friend...the lucky old rascal.

500N

19th Jan 2014, 23:59

Are you talking about Ross Kemp ?

He was married to Rebekah Wade at one stage,
of News of the World "hacking mobile phone fame" :O

Courtney Mil

20th Jan 2014, 06:01

Doubtless you were wandering around a pretty well lit ORP/Apron on a well found Cold-War funded station with only well trained UK mil pers worked in well maintained vehicles.

You think I've never been on deployed ops?

fireflybob

20th Jan 2014, 06:17

Has there ever been any scientific research to establish whether wearing a High Viz makes any difference to conspicuity and accident rate?

MAD Boom

20th Jan 2014, 06:44

4 pages on CAS wearing a hi-vis belt. Wow.

We have high-vis, hats-on, correct sunglasses-wearing (the list is endless) bulls@!t all over theatre. Threat of MAA (the telling-off kind, not the non-independent safety committee) for driving without headress on is simply ludicrous. I can't even wear the beanie I received in my free Christmas box - probably the most useful thing in it!

When these things are becoming commonplace, it's a sure sign we've been here too long.

Time to go home.

SASless

20th Jan 2014, 12:49

In the Sandbox....if "local" drivers are operating inside the secure perimeter....and for some reason are there under false pretenses....would not the wearing of hi-viz garb not make one a much more conspicuous target especially at night? I would think that counter-productive to ensuring safety....but doubly effective for the Taliban Driver to locate his targets.

Courtney Mil

20th Jan 2014, 13:31

Fireflybob,

The first bit of research that Google threw up wasn't very supportive of hi-vis clothing:

Study finds hi-viz clothing has no effect on driver passing distances | Latest News | Cycling Weekly (http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/541390/study-finds-hi-viz-clothing-has-no-effect-on-driver-passing-distances.html). Probably just makes it easier for drivers to target bloody cyclists!

Interesting too that another site, discussing the intorduction of legislation to require motorcyclists to were hi-viz, quoted Department for Transport as saying “The Government has no plans to make Hi Viz/Day Glo jackets/vests and protective clothing for motorcyclists compulsory.” Either they're happy for motorcyclists to keep getting hit or they're not convinced of their effectiveness.

backTOfront

20th Jan 2014, 14:40

Anyone else notice that CAS has his Hi Vis belt inside out? :}

CoffmanStarter

20th Jan 2014, 15:17

The first bit of research that Google threw up wasn't very supportive of hi-vis clothing:

Courtney ... I understand that some empirical research has been done that clearly demonstrates visual acuity in males is inversely proportional to the surface area of flourecscent material worn by certain "targets" in their field of view :E

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af162/CoffmanStarter/image_zps669e61a7.jpg

NutLoose

20th Jan 2014, 15:53

Not all Hi vis is wasted, here is a case where it shows you a couple of accidents about to happen and warns you to avoid them.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02793/camboris_2793157b.jpg

Look at me Mummy, we're playing at being workers..........

*****

"The way out? Yes Dave, it's that way, but be careful the concrete hasn't fully set yet"

Dysonsphere

20th Jan 2014, 16:41

Hmm as I recall it is the duty of ground staff to avoid taxing aircraft not the other way round.

Wensleydale

20th Jan 2014, 17:01

Everyone seems to have forgotten what this is about... it has nothing to do with health and safety - it is to do with anti-litigation. All the regulation and enforcement is to ensure that the person responsible does not get sued following any accident/incident. Wearing of hi-viz and jobs- worth "managers" will continue for as long as we have ambulance chasing lawyers. (And those annoying all day phone calls from call centres despite the BT preference service).

Courtney Mil

20th Jan 2014, 18:43

Coff, didn't notice any Hi Viz clothing in your picture. Must have missed something.

CoffmanStarter

20th Jan 2014, 18:45

:D:D:D:D:ok:

Courtney Mil

20th Jan 2014, 18:49

Yeah, fine, but Mrs C is now beating me repeatedly with a rolling pin. Oh, no, she's stopped and is showing me a picture of her in a Hi Viz bikini. Ah, I feel better now. :cool:

Hangarshuffle

20th Jan 2014, 19:02

If you came out of Yeovilton Fire Station to meet a requirement at night with the airfield open (or worse, not open-think about it), the good people walking out from 899, 845, 846 and across to their aircraft were always much more difficult to spot when they did not have some kind of reflector or the combined high viz jacket set up. Modern kit is far safer and long may it be so. Amazed there weren't more people run over if I'm honest.

500N

20th Jan 2014, 19:18

"Amazed there weren't more people run over if I'm honest."

Aaahh, sounds like some common sense and awareness from drivers
was in play ;)

BlackadderIA

20th Jan 2014, 19:21

In the vortex of all "ops" admin nonsense that is Musannah the hi-viz belt is only allowed during the day - at night you have to wear the full vest...

Hangarshuffle

20th Jan 2014, 19:31

500N spot on. Long may it be so. That does seem a bit silly Blackadder, the military mind in overdrive?

PICKS135

20th Jan 2014, 19:46

As someone who wears Hi-Viz every work day, working on highways and byways. I can tell you drivers dont see you.
We have got so used to seeing people in Hi-Viz vests wandering the streets, that it justs blends into the background, and doesnt register with drivers.

Example 1

Hi-Viz long sleeved jacket AND Hi-Viz trousers on. Working at side of road. Driver swerves to avoid me. Stops and gives me grief, as he didnt see me till the last minute. This was on a straight road :ugh:

Example 2

Hi-Viz vest in a 20mph area. idiot drives straight at me only braking at the last minute. Yet again didnt notice me till he saw my Hi-Viz beanie hat.
Because it was something different.

Never wore Hi-Viz doing Brake chute recovery at Leuchars. Never had a near miss with an aircraft either :ok:

500N

20th Jan 2014, 19:49

Agree. Rules and Regs can never make up for common sense, or lack of it.

Whenever we did exercises with vehicles and aircraft, no great emphasis was placed on warnings, the usual about staying away from Tail rotors, engines etc although the average soldier was a bit of a cut above the usual grunt.

We (and others) had engines turning, vehicles driving onto the aircraft, troops spread out across the airfield firing weapons, all at night with no lights and certainly no hi viz, no one got injured. Though I am not too sure how the H&S would view it now.

Edit
I was looking back at the photos of Port Stanley airfield on the other thread
and links which didn't look the most organised of places after the war and
plenty of movement. Any perspectives from those who were there at the time
as to any accidents that occurred because of no hi viz or did common sense
come into play ?

Dan Gerous

20th Jan 2014, 20:06

That hi viz green colour is useless. I can quite easily miss it, especially when it is manky. The orange stuff is far more visible. Is there some sort of management/workforce divide with Hi viz clothing? I often see "workers" in the green stuff, and "management" in the orange.

500N

20th Jan 2014, 20:09

Over here it is mainly hi viz yellow which I prefer to Orange.

Lima Juliet

20th Jan 2014, 20:21

Believe it or not, orange hi viz is supposed to be for railway workers only!

Reference: GO/RT 3279:2008 “Railway Group Standard – High Visibility Clothing, Issue 6: August 2008″

...try telling that to the RAC man!

Courtney Mil

20th Jan 2014, 20:33

Port Stanley airfield on the other thread and links which didn't look the most organised of places after the war and plenty of movement. Any perspectives from those who were there at the time as to any accidents that occurred because of no hi viz or did common sense come into play ?

Yep, indeedie, 500N, my friend. And that was exactly the point of my earlier post. The place was chaotic and everyone just looked about themselves very carefully. There was no significant lighting, no one really knew where the mines were, people were all doing totally disjointed jobs with some pretty dodgy machinery. So we all just kept our whits about us. Don't ever recall H&S being mentioned. Don't recall anyone being hurt - apart from a few self inflicted of alcohol rleated injuries (NOT on duty). Not in my time there. And all whithout Hi Viz jackets. :eek:

NutLoose

20th Jan 2014, 20:44

I have it on good authority these are Coffs underwear

http://www.craftster.org/pictures/data/500/medium/safetypants2.jpg

:p

Lima Juliet

20th Jan 2014, 20:46

Nutty

That's the temperate climate version.

These are the ones for Coff's hot weather release to service...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Mankini.jpg

:yuk:

NutLoose

20th Jan 2014, 20:50

Surely he wears a tie with those.

Lima Juliet

20th Jan 2014, 20:52

Cable-tie?

500N

20th Jan 2014, 20:55

And the only reason for the "over the shoulder straps" are so that medals can be worn with them :O

NutLoose

20th Jan 2014, 21:07

Or wings :p

CoffmanStarter

21st Jan 2014, 07:12

40/15 to Leon and Nutty :ok: ... But I should remind you both of the terms on your respective Restraining Orders :E

BTW ... That material in your pic Nutty looks surprisingly like the stuff used to make the "Remove Before Flight" streamer on Pressure Head Covers ... Squipper handiwork me thinks :cool:

500N

21st Jan 2014, 21:58

Partly related article. Shows some people just aren't aware of what is around them.

"Gove, a 56-year-old newspaper carrier, was shocked that the driver didn't see him on his three-wheeled delivery bike."

"I was wearing my blue overcoat with my neon reflective vest," said Gove. "I had my front and rear flashers on. I have no idea why he didn't see me."

'Hello, I'm the guy you hit on the bicycle': man stuck in car windshield greets hit-run driver (http://www.theage.com.au/world/hello-im-the-guy-you-hit-on-the-bicycle-man-stuck-in-car-windshield-greets-hitrun-driver-20140122-hv9e7.html)