Bone Domes

[S-Works]

Well said!

I learnt to fly in the chippie at Swinderby back in the day. Grow bags and domes were part of the process of introducing candidates into the stream for fast jets. It was to acclimatise you right from the start into the military kit and way of doing things.

I see no benefit in flying a chippie or any other light aircraft kitted out in the same gear. Rather I just see it as catering to those with the failed schoolboy dream of being a fighter pilot or Biggles. If GA flying was that unsafe then we should give it up!!!

[Background Noise]

I think it would be a good idea to wear a helmet in a Chipmunk. I also started my flying in Chipmunks at Swinderby, but also flew them later on. Helmets and nomex suits were not just to acclimatise fast-jet students - they were mandated for passengers and cadets too.
One of the benefits of a helmet is protection from contact with the cockpit and/or canopy, which in the chipmunk is all very close.

The problem is getting one to fit, and to be compatible with your comms system. The Mk3/4 had web cradles - you still need the basic sizing correct but fine fitting is by adjustment of straps in side the shell. The Alpha/Mk10 has solid pads so you need to get hold of the correct sized pads to make it fit well.

Or you could go completely retro: For Sale: 1960s RAF Bone Dome Helmet with inners and mask. ? FighterControl ? Home to the Military Aviation Enthusiast

[mothminor]

And, your safety would be vastly improved if you wore said bone dome whilst driving to the airfield.
Manage the risk and enjoy.
J.J.

[Capn Bug Smasher]

Where can you buy a Mk 4? Are there any remanufacturers or is it a case of eBay etc.? How are the helmets sized? How easy is it to get spare parts?

This company are well-priced for new SPH and HGU helmets. Not sure how good they are or if they can be exported from the States.

Flight Helmets - Flight Suits - Aviation Helmets

Before the fashion police swoop down my ride is a Vampire so I am allowed to wear one

[abgd]

And, your safety would be vastly improved if you wore said bone dome whilst driving to the airfield.

It always used to be said that driving helmets would prevent more deaths-per-hour than cycling helmets (by the cycling lobby). I suspect it was true in the 1980s but not any more. Airbags and passive safety means that in nearly 4 years in A&E I've personally only seen one fatal road accident - a motorcyclist. The stuff kids do - and get away with - is stupendous. Reversing into lamp-posts at 70mph. Driving off cliffs and being rescued from trees. All sorts.

2013 figures for cars were 5.6 deaths per billion vehicle miles. Assuming 50mph (which seems generous) that's 5.6 deaths per 20 million hours or about 1 death per 3.6 million hours. GA runs at about 1 fatal accident per 100,000 hours (which will equate to more than 1 death per 100,000 hours), on a par with motorcycling (212 deaths per billion miles).

I learnt to fly in the chippie at Swinderby back in the day. Grow bags and domes were part of the process of introducing candidates into the stream for fast jets. It was to acclimatise you right from the start into the military kit and way of doing things.

Now, in peacetime the military accident rate is actually quite competitive. 85 US F16 pilots have died in 10,491,752 hours : 0.8 deaths per 100,000 flying hours.

The idea that GA flying is safer than driving simply doesn't cut it. It probably isn't even safer than peacetime military flying - particularly if you're flying something 'characterful' rather than a C172. The idea that military pilots need to wear lots of protective clothing because their flying is dangerous, but we don't because our flying is safe, simply doesn't hold water.

A counter-argument I can see is that our flying is so dangerous that protective equipment is useless. The ratio between serious injuries and fatalities is low enough that you could argue that we either survive intact, or are mangled well beyond any hope of survival. On the other hand my military surplus Nomex garb is cheaper than a pair of new jeans and a woollen sweater so why not?

~~~~~~~~~~~

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...-2013-data.pdf

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP667.PDF

http://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/...stics/F-16.pdf

[abgd]

There are quite a lot of MkIV helmets at the moment on Ebay. Some of them need new plugs (I suspect this is the sellers way of dodging liability). You do seem to be able to buy new webbing and parts as well.

[clareprop]

What does wearing a hard helmet in a Chippie protect the wearer against?

[Flying_Anorak]

To answer CP's question - er the ground, the instrument panel, the windscreen frame, the canopy hoop etc.....

I'm amazed how much polarised debate my question has presented. I did my conversion with a well known 'Mr Chipmunk' at a west of London airfield. In the cafe / bar before and after flying he can be found wearing a smart shirt, cords and brogues but when it comes to flying his beloved Chipmunks its Nomex flying suit, gloves and leather flying boots always. Apparently having had an in-cockpit fire once is his rationale for this level of protection but each to his own I guess.

I also fly a more normal motor glider and gliders and other than the practical advantages of the pockets in a grow bag, I usually fly those in shorts and trainers.

[3wheels]

Post 27 from abgd sums it up nicely particularly the interesting, and probably very valid, comparison between GA and current military accident statistics. A point I hadnt considered before. His sensible remarks are well worth digesting.

The comparison between GA and motorbikes is also a well known fact.

Any professional flight safety expert will tell you of the advantages of helmets. Listen to Them...

[overstress]

Clareprop: Parachute landings (abandoning appropriate in certain circumstances). The military want you to survive them. Military Chipmunks had parachutes, hence bone domes worn. Same in Bulldogs.

Nomex suits - fire resistant, same as gloves.

Flying boots (still have mine!) - parachute landings

Cold weather jackets - Saves shivering while you waited for rescue after your parachute landing, etc etc

Applying civilian values to ex-military aircraft has never gone wrong, has it?

[9 lives]

The idea that GA flying is safer than driving simply doesn't cut it. It probably isn't even safer than peacetime military flying - particularly if you're flying something 'characterful' rather than a C172.

On the surface I have to agree with this. But, there's more to it that that. I've been flying a year longer than I've been driving. I suppose I've driven more than flown, but not by much. I've never had an injury in a car, nor plane. But I've had four cars destroyed in collisions, while I drove, but never lost a plane. I've had two friends killed while flying, but they were both doing very silly low level maneuvering, which did not work - entirely flyable aircraft were crashed fatally.

If I could not have a shoulder harness (hopefully four point), I'd wear a helmet. I always wear reduced flammability clothing, and suitable footwear, in case on fire (never sandals). I always wear a life jacket when flying on/off the water.

I have found a sense of security when flying helicopters in wearing a helmet, and I'm sure that in some aircraft types (ejection seats) a helmet is an outstanding idea. For regular GA aircraft, I don't perceive a risk which a helmet would reduce.

[Capn Bug Smasher]

abgd - Thank you

My mind returns to the accident report where our man makes a perfect forced landing only to split his head open on the altimeter subscale knob... or the other 'perfect' one which ended with a chap bouncing his head off the cockpit in three places hard enough to split his helmet (this one survived.)

At the end of the day I suppose it's like aircraft parachutes... nerdy but when the time comes I bet you'd rather have one than not

[John Eacott]

This subject seems to continue across forums with threads galore, everyone seems intent on expounding their opinion regardless.

I've been knocked unconscious during an accident because I was daft enough to go low level filming without a helmet, in a bog standard Bell Longranger. I wouldn't dream of ever going into a higher risk flying environment without a bone dome again as it hurts. As a further example, all our fire agencies in Australia mandate helmets for all crew in any aircraft be it a Firebird stoogeing around at 5,000ft or a Helitak down in the weeds.

FWIW, having done EFT on the Chippie and a few hours to contemplate the cockpit hazards, I'd consider a helmet a sensible option when flying it but wouldn't be critical of another pilot who chose a headset instead.

[clareprop]

So am I right in thinking that the argument from a number of posters is not whether helmet's should be worn in a Chipmunk but that, for safety and security, they should be worn in all types of light aircraft including helicopters?

[strake]

Just look at these mad fools...:

http://www.pprune.org/aviation-histo...ml#post9565280

[abgd]

So am I right in thinking that the argument from a number of posters is not whether helmet's should be worn in a Chipmunk but that, for safety and security, they should be worn in all types of light aircraft including helicopters?

Not from me. Flying is inherently risky and we each need to find a level of risk/reward with which we're happy. That can include wearing a helmet or not wearing a helmet. I could entirely understand why someone might not want to wear a helmet in a tiny bubble canopy on a sweltering hot day, for example.

What I don't like is people either kidding themselves that flying is much safer than it is (one of my pet hates is to hear the 'safer than driving to the airport' trope from GA pilots and particularly instructors) or to hear other people being put down for taking what they see as sensible precautions to reduce the risks.

[Arclite01]

Flying Anorak - to answer your question rather than subject you to a diatribe of whether it is right or wrong to wear a helmet in a GA aeroplane:

I had 2 x Mk4 when I was flying the chippie (1 for my passenger also).

I brought them on Ebay and then had a friend of mine (an Ex-Squipper) overhaul them. He changed the avionics in them as the Mic was not compatible with the GA Avionics in my chippie.

I think I spent £200 for each on Ebay, a drink for my friend and £70 for a microphone per helmet.

I found them comfortable and easy to use in the Chippie, I felt safer with one on and also warmer on a cold day !!, I rarely used the visors although mine were both operational and had soft covers.

When I finished I sold them on Ebay again for £475 each.

There is definitely a Market out there.

Don't be put off by what people say about image and poseurs, If I was able to wear one in what I am currently flying I would certainly do it. It's a bit like wearing flying gloves - some people say I am a poseur for doing that, for me they are just another piece of safety equipment........

Regards


Arc

[hoodie]

clareprop: No such argument from me.

My position is that (1) the use of safety equipment is a personal choice, and (2) ridiculing people for their choice is not sensible.

[tractorpuller]

Each to his own, but seeing the dent made by a helmet in a Super Cub panel makes for a lasting impression...

[Downwind Lander]

Originally Posted by Pontius

I am 6' and there was plenty of canopy clearance.

So am I and never had any problems. But a very good friend of mine is 6' 2" and he split a canopy. The visor: "It's the knob wot did it".