Using a flight helmet while flying a spamcan

[piperboy84]

I see quite a few vids on youtube where people flying light aircraft are wearing "flight helmets" basically what we used to call "pudding boilers" with built in headphones/mics much like the guys in microlights wear. I notice more and more folks wearing helmets for other sports like biking, skiing and kids on skateboards, would others on here wear such a thing while flying a cessna/piper or would the embarrassed of looking like a complete pratt override any added safety margin a helmets gives?

[146fixer]

Do you wear one driving your car!

[piperboy84]

No, but probably should I'm a sh*te driver

[flybymike]

I am sure EASA will shortly be introducing a requirement for us all to wear them...

[Whiskey Kilo Wanderer]

I’ve long ago given up worrying about looking like a prat. When I first started flying the Rans, I was flying with a former RAF fast jet pilot. He always wore his bone dome and suggested I get one myself.

The sound deadening is better than a conventional headset and it’s warmer in winter. It can get a bit hot in summer, but there again with our summers, it’s not usually a problem. It has accumulated a few scratches over the years, due to contact with the internal structure of the aeroplane, which might have made for a slightly sore head without it. Should I ever suffer the misfortune of ditching, it will keep my head warm and somewhat easier to see.

So no, I don’t worry about looking like a prat…

[BackPacker]

Safety margin? How many accidents can you name in GA flying where wearing a helmet would've made a difference in the outcome? There's your answer.

IMHO helmets make sense in open cockpits and in aircraft where bailing out (parachute or bang seat) is an option. But not in the average spamcan.

[kharmael]

Backpacker:

Bird Strike. :ok:

[DeltaV]

I was flying with a former RAF fast jet pilot. He always wore his bone dome and suggested I get one myself.
No disrespect to the RAF man but their place of business can involve being shot at with all the unpleasantness that might then ensue. IMO flying an enclosed light aircraft is a different kettle of fish so I choose not to encumber myself with a bone dome, nor an olive drab nomex flight suit replete with squadron badges nor fireproof gloves.
Open cockpit I might reconsider the helmet but then it would probably be leather not kevlar.

[Ultranomad]

Bird Strike.
A helmet is no guarantee...

http://altfast.ru/uploads/posts/2010-06/thumbs/1277323434_15.jpg

[vetflyer]

Modern cars have very good protection for drivers

1950's aircraft do not

Military pilots wear helmets in their light a/c

Are there any stats re survivablity in light a/c?

Maybe we should wear helments and flame proof clothes....

[jecuk]

You would look ridiculous wearing one flying a Cessna/Piper. Like wearing a nomex suit while flying a GA aircraft.

[Torque Tonight]

There certainly have been light aircraft accidents where the use of or lack of a bonedome has made the difference. I recall a case where somebody was despatched by an altmeter setting knob to the forehead, something that would have been survivable with a helmet.

The use of safety equipment is frequently debated in here and in private flying comes down to an individual's risk tolerance. Whilst many think that the use of safety equipment looks uncool or pretentious, wearing unsafe clothing looks reckless and stupid to those who are familiar with some of the potential hazards. Safety gear may be needed rarely or never, but it only has to save you once for it to have been a smart move.

I've seen an interesting trend amongst 16 year old moped riding chavs who are presumably of the 'safety gear is uncool' doctrine. In order to comply with the letter of the law and avoid the attention of the constabulary whilst guaranteeing the absolute removal of any safety benefit, many kids ride around with the helmet perched on the back of the head with the chinguard up on their foreheads. Darwinism at work.:ugh:

[Torque Tonight]

You would look ridiculous wearing one flying a Cessna/Piper. Like wearing a nomex suit while flying a GA aircraft.

But you'll look really cool with 80% 3rd degree burns and your polyester shirt melted to your skin.:ok:

[Unusual Attitude]

Seem to remember reading of a chap who had the top of his head taken off during a forced landing in a Tipsy Nipper when it turned over. Pretty sure if he'd been wearing a bone dome and survived he'd pitch in any minute to tell us the story of how wearing one saved his life......

[tmmorris]

FWIW RAF actually only wear a bone dome in some light aircraft - G115E Tutor, for example, but not G109B Vigilant. The distinction seems to be they wear one if doing aeros. (It's not about bailing out: in both they wear parachutes.)

Tim

[jxc]

oh yes the look olive green babygrow and a bone dome :ugh:
why oh why

[7of9]

I know a few RAF Pilots flying weekends in GA aircraft & they still wear everything as they do at work. Personally i think it's sensible from a safety point of view & offers the protection needed in our hobby.
Having worn the full suit myself, for flying in the fast jets myself, i can see the reasons.
I do fly wearing the Nomex flight suit & Flying Gloves for practical reasons as well as safety reasons, & couldn't give a monkeys what others think.

Up to each individual what they wear.

Fly Safe.

T

[peterh337]

I'd wear one if I ever had to fly with my ex.

[POBJOY]

Plus side:- Noise reduction and protection

Debit side :- Ribbing from other club/airfield users.

However there seems to be so little flying & people around airfields nowadays who will notice !!!

[A and C]

I'm with backpacker on this, the numbers don't support the use of helmets in touring light aircraft.

[foxmoth]

Flying open cockpit I would wear one, also formation/aeros with a chute, just round the local area in a Piper etc I really would not bother, not so worried about other club members, but if I have pax it makes it a lot more relaxed if you make it as normal as possible, start dressing up in special gear will make most nervous pax worse, not sure if it would be more or less nerve racking if you also dress them the same.

[GGR]

I recall a rather rotund red faced instructor in the 1970's at a Manchester flying school who possesed every piece of RAF and USAF flying clobber known to man and wore it constantly. He even had the dagger in the leg pocket, very handy in a PA28. Has to be said he never turned up in a mixture, he was either Dan Dare or Biggles. The cold wx gear in July probably accounted for the rosy cheeks! He also kept snakes....

GGR

[Above The Clouds]

kharmael
Bird Strike.

Your having a laugh, bird strike in a spam can the bird would be over taking you :)

[7of9]

Your having a laugh, bird strike in a spam can the bird would be over taking you

I wouldn't say that about having a laugh!! Today at 200 feet on approach to land at Old Buck RWY 27, nearly came to grief with a fully grown seagull Just missed the prop & would have made a right mess if I had been just that bit closer!!
Frightened the C**P out of me & my pax, Was flying a PA 28 Arrow R T Complex.
T

[A and C]

PA28 RT complex ?? I don't think so!

[7of9]

Piper PA-28RT-201 Arrow IV,

[A and C]

What as that got to do with it ?

[7of9]

What as that got to do with it ?

Variable pitch Prop, Retractable undercarriage = Complex, Where we come from anyway, why what do you know it as. (sorry about thread drift)
T

[A and C]

EASA in their wisdom might call it a complex aircraft but in the grand plan it is just an SEP with a few extra bits.

EASA regulation is killing light aviation my demanding Diffences training for things that twenty years back would have been handled by a check with a club instructor.

[BackPacker]

I wonder how effective your average flying helmet is in protecting you against the effects of a birdstrike. I mean, the bird has just flown through your 6mm-or-so windshield, and that windshield was probably angled 30 to 45 degrees to the airflow and convex, making it effectively a bit stronger than that. And now it hits your 4mm visor - assuming it's down in the first place. Or your unprotected throat or lower half of your face.

To protect against a birdstrike you would probably need a motorbike-style integral helmet, not your typical flying bonedome.

As for the shards of glass flying around, well, sunglasses will probably work just as well.

[7of9]

EASA in their wisdom might call it a complex aircraft but in the grand plan it is just an SEP with a few extra bits.

EASA regulation is killing light aviation my demanding Diffences training for things that twenty years back would have been handled by a check with a club instructor.

Fair Enough...........

[Big Pistons Forever]

I wear a bone dome when flying high performance ex Military aircraft. I would wear one in my Nanchang CJ6, except that the canopy is too low to allow proper seat height. I do wear nomex and a parachute in it, though.

For flying you average Piper/Cessna I don't wear anything special, except that for a bit of the part time instructing I do the school makes me wear a shirt and tie :ugh:

I am hard over about seat belts. I will not fly in any aircraft that does not have poperly fitted and operating shoulder belts, ever. There is a long sad list of deaths and traumatic injuries in light aircraft where the pilot/pax folded around the lap belt and smashed their face into the knobs/switches and buttons on the instrument panel.

I also pay attention to the condition of the seat belts on my pre flight inspection. I have grounded several aircraft because of torn/frayed belting or poorly operating buckles. In one case a club airplane had been flying for months with a buckle that would release if you gave it a sharp tug :rolleyes:
Needless to say that flight never made it pass the initial cabin inspection part of my pre flight inspection........

[kharmael]

I don't know about you lot but If I have a birdstrike I would love to have a piece of plastic between my face and the bird guts, blood, bones, flying shards of glass, bits of avionics and the windblast. If you're in a SEP then you'll likely have bits of engine, smoke, oil, or other fluids splattering in your face.

The likelihood of this happening in a puddlejumper on final approach is quite low I reckon, especially the speed you'll be going. But having seen some birdstrikes firsthand flying around at low level in the military I've got a new respect for helmet visors.

[first taff]

coming from a motorsport background where fireproof clothing is mandotory I sometimes wear a flying suit together with the nomex long johns and polo neck in winter , I have seen fire burns in motorsport and i'd rather not have that thank you , I also have a pocket knife on me for this reason ,say you have a prang and the seat belt or harness release jams (it can and does happen ) you can cut and get out , i had mine taped to the roll cage in the racing car, one ot these "life hammers "is also a good idea .
At the end of the day you wear what you want , bone dome got one , tried it in our aircraft , sliding canopy which can be opened in flight , never done it since ,same with a chute we can slide open the canopy , in a PA 28 what chance would you have to get out ??.
However and what ever you wear there is no need to call anyone a pratt ,but if anyone wants to call it to my face when I'm wearing mine come on over LOL

[Alogan]

A 4 lb bird hitting the average spam can travelling at approx 80-90 kts is highly unlikely to come through your windshield given the angle of deflection and slow IAS, true it will make a hell of bang and frighten the life out you.

Having had a seagull smack right into the windscreen at 90 knots, I can confirm that it certainly makes a resounding impact but thankfully left no damage to the windscreen.

[jecuk]

Of course in motor sport it makes sense as many accidents lead to fires. What proportion of GA accidents lead to post crash fires?

Different if you are in the RAF and it is your normal work clothes.

You would be better to spend the money on aircraft airbags. More likely to help you.

I am not commenting on warbirds or other exposed aircraft where we all agree it can make sense. But in a Warrior - you have to be joking.

[aluminium persuader]

What about the guy who burned to death in the PA38 at (?)Barton?
Or the guy in the TB20 at Bournemouth?

[piperboy84]

BPF
I will not fly in any aircraft that does not have poperly fitted and operating shoulder belts, ever.

Does that include shoulder harnesses for the rear seat passenger(s) also?

[abgd]

I don't particularly like the idea of wearing a helmet whilst flying. They can increase fatigue, restrict movement and reduce the field of view, depending on the type. On the other hand, you do see a lot of pictures of wrecked planes following forced landings where the occupants have survived, but have clearly gotten rattled about a bit.

Head injuries are worth avoiding. Medicine - at least traditionally - tends to be quite limited in terms of assessing head injuries. If you can walk, subtract sevens from 100 all the way down to zero, and don't have a squint, then you've made a full medical recovery. Even if you have mood swings and an inability to concentrate for more than a few minutes at a time and have therefore lost your job and marriage etc... More recently, it's being recognised people quite often suffer major after-effects from head injuries, even sometimes when they may not have lost consciousness and have no obvious physical or neurological injuries.

If I had the choice between proper harnesses and a helmet, I'd go for the harnesses. Newer designs of aircraft - e.g. Cirrus - seem to make a point of designing stronger crew compartments into the aircraft, and again this seems to me preferable.

Professor John Adams has a theory that the safest car would be one where the driver doesn't have a seatbelt, but all the passengers do. Perhaps the same would be true for flying - the pilot shouldn't be allowed to wear a helmet. The idea is that if you feel safe, then you are liable to take more risks and so tangible safety measures can be counterproductive.

[VictorGolf]

A couple of chums had a near one at 7000 feet over Nairobi when a crested crane (I think) came through the windscreen of a Cessna 182 they were flying. It passed between them and ended up on the back seat, closely resembling a scene from Monty Python. The modified aerodynamics didn't help but they got the aircraft down at Wilson airport OK. Personally I wear those Nomex gloves with a leather palm, not because of in-flight fire so much as in the event of an over-priming ground fire I might be inclined to grab something hot. They are also very comfortable. Also a vote for proper 4/5 belt shoulder harnesses.

[sharpend]

My views for what they are worth.

1. Read The Last Enemy by Richard HIllary. Then you will then wear gloves & nomex.

2. You would not be allowed to do a track day in your car with short sleves or helmet!

3. One of the biggest problems with a forced landing is tipping upside down. Wear a helmet. The other is fire. Wear gloves & nomex. In a fire you need your hands to egress. Your hands are vital!

4. However, on a very hot day, weigh up the risks of heat exhaustion v wearing protective clothing. Ignore comments from idiots.

4. Lastly, see item 1.

[Big Pistons Forever]

BPF


Does that include shoulder harnesses for the rear seat passenger(s) also?

Unfortunately hardly any light aircraft have rear seat shoulder belts fitted or even provisions to retrofit them. However the good news is that the accident record for survivability of the rear seat occupants is quite a bit good even without shoulder belts. The big issue IMO is the danger for people sitting in the front seat hitting the instrument panel with their head. That is where traditionally the really nasty crash injuries come from and why it is vital to have proper upper body restraint.

However your point is taken and I should amend my earlier statement to "I will never fly in the front seat of an aircraft that does not have front seat shoulder harnesses fitted".

As for wearing nomex clothing in a typical light GA aircraft....well the accident record shows that the number of accidents where nomex clothing would have made a difference is extremely small. Better to spend the money on annual recurrent training.

[stickandrudderman]

It seems to me you have two options here:
1. Wear a helmet or
2. Be a helmet.

With option 1 the choice is yours.
With option two the choice is for others.

Personally I like to make my own choices.

(And I express no, nor indeed have any preference for whether to wear a helmet or not, I only urge that whatever decision you make should be one of choice).