New ANTHRO rules for RAF pilots

[stianwalker]

Anybody heard that the RAF have yet again changed the goalposts with reference to maximum heights for pilots.

Apparently, the max sitting height has been reduced to 990mm due to injuries caused by ejecting from the ejection seat type used on the Harrier and Hawk.

Also, new 980mm max for Harrier pilots and 965mm for Puma(?)

[Southern Rotary Bloke]

Slightly confused - are we really looking for Persons Of Restricted Growth - or have I misunderstood?

[stianwalker]

...especially since there was a big thing about EFA being comfortable for 95 percetile of the population!

[Spacer]

Yea, I've heard something about it <img src="frown.gif" border="0"> It seems myself (and possibly some others) have fallen outside of the new limits, and they are deciding what to do with us. Are there any others outside Scotland's finest up the same creek as us?

[Lucifer]

Take off your stilettos

[Flap62]

I was told when I applied that my sitting height was to tall for Harrier and Canbera (!). Didn't stop them posting me there and there wasn't a problem in my 9 years on it. There was also a mate - Wildpig as I remember, who was posted GR1's as he was too tall Harrier and Jag. He was relating this tragic tale in the crewroom at Wittering while waiting for his Fin course, and while doing so was overheard by the then OC Ops (who was ex-jag). OC Ops thought that this chap would be fine and packed him off on a train to Lossie to be measured by the SMO there. The upshot of it is that Wildpig has been flying the Jag for years now. The moral of this is - if you're borderline don't just take their word for it, try and use any means to get measured up inside the actual jet by the local SMO.

[Raytofclime]

This is just a ploy for short-arses to take over the world. . .I call on all tall people to fight back and kick a shorty.

[Splosh]

I thought the GR7 had a large cockpit? Built for Americans, and that. And which recent crashes have led them to believe that all of a sudden they need to lower the limits? None that I can think of.

And another thing...injuries caused by sitting height? That'll be banging your bonce then. Again, that's never happened.

Idiots. :)

[Gingerbread Man]

I'm with Raytofclime on this subject. I was rejected at OASC last week for being a trifle 8mm over on hip-to-knee height, and I was very pissed off about it. Reducing the height again means i'll have even less chance of squeezing under the limit if I re-apply.. .(P.S. Harrier GR7 seats move up and down like in a car i think, so why the problem there? Just a thought.)

[Poison Arrow]

Ginger, sorry to hear about your recent bad news. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" /> . .However, just for the record, the hip to knee length is one of the most crutial. If you're in a hurry and decide to leave the jet and take the furniture with you, its nice to land under silk with your knees, calves, feet etc still attached. Rather than leave them underneath the shiney TV screens of the GR7. Unless you want to look like Toulouse LeTrec of course (excuse spelling).. .Splosh's point, and others, are questioning the bum to head height. A valid point- surely if you can close the lid you'll be OK. But again I know of several incidents when chaps were sitting slightly too high (by choice, it seems a shame not to enjoy the view) and wind blast caused serious lateral neck damage at moment critique (1xRIP).. .Excuse the egg sucking, but bang seats can only be adjusted vertically by the way, fore/aft movement is done by moving the rudder pedals.

[Gingerbread Man]

PA,. .Don't get me wrong, I completely understand why it's not in their best interests to employ people who could become wannabe Douglas Baders in an emergency. I wouldn't want to fly a fast jet knowing that I would leave valuble items behind in the cockpit if I ejected. . .A point that was raised by the review officer was that the EFA cockpit dimensions are based on average heights from the 1970's, and the average height of the population has increased quite a bit since then. If the RAF is shortening its limits, does that mean there are going to be even more disappointed people like me in the future, or will the RAF begin to recruit people solely to fly multi-engined or rotary wing? My point is that I don't really understand why everyone needs to be a potential fast jet pilot.. .(P.S. I apologise for not really keeping to the point of the original post). . . . <small>[ 03 March 2002, 12:06: Message edited by: Gingerbread Man ]</small>

[moggie]

Damn - I needed to be another foot taller to get my weight back into proportion!

[Spacer]

An update on the Anthro limits:
My friend (UAS stude also) has just been to OASC and they didn't bother to take any sitting heights, etc. They just took his normal height and weight. He was told that anyone that passed a Cranwell medical from Jan 00 - present will get the same treatment. He did have to sign a disclaimer about being to tall for two a/c, but I think he can live with that :)

[FOMere2eternity]

How come there's no limit on pie ingestion once you're past selection ? :p

[ShyTorque]

The good news is that no-one has ever had to eject from a Puma.

However, we had one pilot who was too big to fit in once they replaced the old seat cushions with a hard PSP.

[Human Factor]

Greetings from a Civvy,

Our mob, Big Airline, use risk analysis a fair bit. (Some would say too much - flight deck doors, etc. - another story, I'll stop rambling).

Anyway, how many Hawks are there? How many new FJ pilots are there? What are the chances of said new FJ pilot exiting said Hawk using the seat?

Seems to me like the mob are worried about litigation as much as anything else. A great shame because undoubtedly there will be a number of excellent potential FJ pilots who will not now get the chance to prove it.