Rearcrew Restraint Systems

[Could be the last?]

Restraint system improves aircrew safety (http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123103097)

Wolf Technical Services, Inc. - Research and Development (http://www.wolftechnical.com/content/research-and-development/military-systems.html)

Gents,

I am currently undertaking research into both RW and FW restraint. Has anyone used or seen better systems than the current Tri-Service Harness (GQ1091) or it's variants? I know there is equipment out there, I just need feedback to ensure I have not overlooked anything.

PM me if you have specifics.:ok:

[bigley]

CBTL,

Are you bored?:)

[Could be the last?]

Using my time productively, after a hot drain and flush on my knee!

Anyway, back to the thread, there may be some money in the pot to fix the issue and I want to keep the momentum going!!

[minigundiplomat]

There was mumblings of some kind of inertia reel harness, but it probably entailed financial outlay and so was shelved - at a guess!

The best form of restraint is to not fall out.

MGD

[minigundiplomat]

Why don't we have a rail in the center of the cab roof so I can walk up-and-down with my harness sliding behind me?


An excellent idea until you encounter a sudden stop, or rather the aircraft does and you don't!

Not that a harness would make much difference, but that is the common reason.

[TheWizard]

As MDG points out, not falling out is a good starting point.

Why don't we have a rail in the center of the cab roof so I can walk up-and-down with my harness sliding behind me? That way I could have it tight enough so it would be impossible to fall out most of the time (not that I came close the other day to looking at the wrong side of a Merlin whilst over a nice and friendly Iraq...). Of course something to keep me inside the ac when it all goes wrong would be nice too.

Blame the crewman for not adjusting it for you!!
The Merlin 3a has just such a rail system as described, so once we have enough of them........

[Could be the last?]

MGD, JTO and others,

So what do you want your restraint system to do?

Consider the following:

Some ac, RW in this case, may not have a dedicated rearcrew crash position; therefore, remaining within the ac boundary would be a distinct advantage when everything goes wrong.

A system that requires manual adjustment is fundamentally flawed; because people forget!

A combination of different systems may be a solution - Rail plus Inertia real etc.

The solution does not have to be pan-platform, although it would help.

Could part of it be a stand-alone harness? I.E separate from the LCJ or MK60.

Thoughts?

[davejb]

An excellent idea until you encounter a sudden stop, or rather the aircraft does and you don't!


Then add an inertial reel anchor system to the bit that slides along the cab roof ... so you can move freely up and down, but the reel locks when you decide to fall out for fun.

Just This Once -
Of course something to keep me inside the ac when it all goes wrong would be nice too.

Personally, and you can quote me on this, I always preferred to get OUT of the aircraft when it all went wrong....:}

[Wessex Boy]

Why don't we have a rail in the center of the cab roof so I can walk up-and-down with my harness sliding behind me? That way I could have it tight enough so it would be impossible to fall out most of the time (not that I came close the other day to looking at the wrong side of a Merlin whilst over a nice and friendly Iraq...). Of course something to keep me inside the ac when it all goes wrong would be nice too.


We had one of those in the Wessex until a stude on 2FTS (Jabba 10 bellies) left his harness on whilst egressing rapidly to do the stops and took the rail with him.

The whole fleet (Global) was grounded for 2 days whilst they looked at it and the decided that we had to use the stretcher roof points instead...unclipping and reclipping if we needed to go to the back of the cabin(radio bay):eek:

And yes I have fallen out, I missed the grab rail in the top corner of the door and 'supermaned' out thankfully the harness brought me up short and dumped me on the step:O

[Madbob]

Personally, all my flying was FW and I either had a 4 or 5 point harness/with or without a banh seat but as an observer I think that your research should be encouraged as it is likely to reduce the liklihood of injuries to those down the back.

My suggestion would be to take a look at the yachting community. Harnesses are commonly worn by all on deck either in bad wx or at night to avoid a man/woman going overboard. Typically these involve a strong nylon tape that runs the length of the boat, securely fixed to the deck at intervals, onto which lifelines are then clipped. Rather than having an ordinary caribiner (sp?) as used in montaineering which would need to be unclipped/clipped at each point the tape passed through a securing "eye" some clever chappie has invented a device that "walks over" each eye whilst maintaining a hold of the lifeline. A similar system would give good mobility in the cabin whilst preventing a man overboard situation whether in a C130 or in a Chinook or other RW ac.

The RYA (Royal Yachting Assn) or the RNLI might be worth contacting.

Just my twopennyworth but I hope it leads somewhere.....

MB

[Wessex Boy]

Somewhere for the crewman to put his sandwiches?
:E

[bigley]

I've always foound that the best place for my sandwiches (and those of the frontenders) is in my tummy!! :O

[cornish-stormrider]

try looking at roof access and restraint/ work positioning systems. They have it all apart from the flare dispenser. mind you working with some of the trogs out there a chain gun would be more of an idea......

[Winch-control]

To add..
1.Ataches to the rear of the harness/LSJ.
2.Is not required to be removed when emplaning/deplaning troops in any order. ie fast roping/ helicasting etc.
3. God forbid another 'man overboard situation' but the yachting solution may be worth investigating.
Cost is for sure, peanuts...although the system to introduction would be years.
Think safe and stay safe, it probably ain't ever going to happen.

[Faithless]

So the Statement of Requirement so far:

A full length rail / cable / nylon anchor strap

‘Walk-over’ device

Inertial Reel

Energy Absorbing Attachment

Quick Release Fitting

Wireless Intercom

Flare Disp Button

Anything else?

Blackhawk or NH90 perhaps :rolleyes:

[TheWizard]

I've always foound that the best place for my sandwiches (and those of the frontenders) is in my tummy!! :O

It shows!!:p

[TheWizard]

To add..
1.Ataches to the rear of the harness/LSJ.
2.Is not required to be removed when emplaning/deplaning troops in any order. ie fast roping/ helicasting etc.
Think safe and stay safe, it probably ain't ever going to happen.

That's exactly what the 'new' Mk60/61 ACLP jacket is like. Restraint wise, a great improvement over the MK25 LC/SJ and monkey harness, on a Merlin at least. Now all that needs sorting is the weight of the blooming thing (with armour et al).

[Faithless]

Now all that needs sorting is the weight of the blooming thing (with armour et al).

Get to the Gym more then. :E

[TheWizard]

Get to the Gym more then. :E

Not bad from someone who sits on his arrse all day long!!;)

[St Johns Wort]

CBTL

Bet you wish you'd never asked :)

Regards

St John

[Faithless]

Not bad from someone who sits on his arrse all day long!!

:confused:

[Could be the last?]

Gents,

Thanks for your comments. I haven't come across the walkover system previously mentioned, so thanks for that.

For those that use the MK60, I have heard that the Puma variant may be modified to just one strop in total. Would that be the preferred option on other types?

This has several advantages:

- It will allow the min length adjustment to keep the cmn inside the ac boundary.

- The adjustment will be at the attachment point; therefore allowing one handed adjustment.

- It will remove the uneven weight created by the pigtail.

Further things to consider:

- Would you want the 'harness' separate from the survival aids/ba carriage system?

- When using the current 'Dispatchers Harness' and working close to an exit, could you adjust it to such a point that if the ac impacted, it would retain you inside the ac boundary?? Thinking Seaking and other SAR platforms??:confused:

[Dundiggin']

Back in the '89/'90 era I initiated the search for a replacement for the 'monkey harness'. In discussions with Aviation Medicine at Farnborough and a civvy strap-manufacturing firm we evolved the 'Upper Body Torso Restraint Jerkin'. The LCJ basic jacket had restraint straps sewn in to give support under the arms and keep the 'victim' upright if he should cast himself to the airstream! :) The basic idea was to give the crewman support under the arms as opposed to around the waist if he should fall from the aircraft. We also designed an aircrew 'donnable/doffable' stole (the inflation bit around the neck!) so you could remove it if you were fighter affilling and trying to spot the 'incoming' through the bay windows! :E He should also have a means of releasing himself easily if he was underwater hence the release handle and the 'snake' quick release system. The 'pigtail' was evolved, as far as my memory serves, to enable the crewman to attach easily to the strop part which remained attached to the aircraft. The 'pigtail' was originally attached at waist level at the back to give a good sense of security to the wearer. However, as with 'topsy' over the years of development, the jacket has grown and grown and is now very heavy and almost unwieldy. The basic principle remains a quantum improvement in what we had with the monkey harness. And I agree that a return to the initial principles would be no bad thing by seperating the survival malarky from the restraint harness.
As previously stated in this topic, the Wessex had a rail in the cabin roof to attach static lines and the crewman harness. I read that the Merlin has one of these rails and I presume it is useful, but the Chinook could probably benefit from a retro-fit rail (certainly from my experience) but like everything else it will cost lots and it will be well down the pecking order of priorities :(.
A crash restraint system to stop the crewman zooming along the rail in a crash would I feel be impossible both practically and financially. However, the practical advantages of having the rail would far outweigh the disadvantages in 'the unlikely event' :uhoh:.
Having just looked at the new American restraint device referred to in the opening article on this topic, I feel this may have merit and should be looked into by the appropriate authority in the SH World. Gotta be better than a rail but will the 8' reach be enough?

[FE Hoppy]

Rearcrew Restraint Systems:
Intercom switch to OFF position.








Sorry couldn't resist!!:}