OK I meant whatever the Health and Safety Executive are calling themselves this government!

Get over it. So they ask you to where a jacket?
I wonder how many of you will still go to the PFA rally after you have said you won't on this forum?
If all you guys have to moan about is been told to wear a hi-viz jacket, then spare a thought for the people having bombs dropped on their heads. :rolleyes:

hi viz vests
 

Why are people getting so upset about hi viz jackets! It has been in Kembles' AIP for last 3 months so maybe pilots should have noticed it b4 now, plus loads of other airfields/airports say the same Its not a question of how many incidents are occurring with peeps on airfield, what you want to wait till something does happen? Horse riders are requested I believe now to wear hi viz vests due to a couple of fatal horse riding accidents with low flying mil helos, would wearing them have saved them we will never know but maybe could have? It cannot be enforced but come an incident, god forbid, Kemble have done their bit on the HSE side to prove they are proactive. its just a cover your backs policy that you will find in all other quarters of daily life. It doesnt say wear it flying? so why are you getting on a high horse about what if I had an engine fire and pax got burnt with a hi viz jacket? From what I understand a crew member NOT all pax to wear hi viz. Maybe all this heat gone to everyones head!! Relax go flying and enjoy.......maybe I could set up a high viz jacket business

NM

So if I land at Kemble, innocently wander over to pay a landing fee without a high viz jacket, what will happen? Will I be escorted off? Not allowed back to my aircraft? Clapped in irons?

SS

There will be NO requirement for high viz jackets to be worn airside by pilots or passengers during the PFA rally.


Kemble do not operate the airfield for the period of the rally, the PFA does.

While wearing Hi-viz is no big deal and carrying enough for every passenger is also no big deal it is a pain in the @rse. The AIP entry is not 100% unambiguous. If it's good enought for Heathrow Gatwick & Stansted to have pax crossing from terminal or bus to aircraft without hi-viz it ought to be good enough for Kemble.

The problem is that pointless "safety" rules produce a fog that obscures the real issues. Pilots are required to meet a standard of visual acuity that allows them to avoid driving into things. The tower at Kemble is painted a sort of yellow (though I doubt the actual colour complies with BS EN 471) so I suppose we're unlikely to drive into it. The railings round the parking in front of AV8 are deffo non-compliant though. That said, it's Kemble's owner's prerogative to set the terms under which we are permitted to play with his toy.

If he demonstates that he doesn't understand the requirements of CAP 642 then he shouldn't be surprised if people decline to use his facilities.

Mike

If you want to wander round in such attire, nobody is stopping you. What is unreasonable is to foist your paranoia on everyone else.

I once got reprimanded for not wearing one as I clambered out after a cross-channel trip. The gross stupidity of this was that I was wearing a bright orange survival suit plus a life jacket with high vis reflective tape. It didn't stop the barking mad jobsworth from taking a pop though.

Kemble will be fun, as I'm planning to fly in to the PFA Rally by paramotor, weather willing. I'm looking forward to seeing the high-vis jacket Gestapo determine when I'm "in" my aircraft or "out" of it before they pounce. Anyway, there's no way to put on a high-vis jacket before "removing" this type of aircraft from one's back, so the idiotic safety police will just have to do their worst.
VP

Not the point. The aircraft has one high-viz jacket in it, the use of which I think is not unreasonable, but on principle am I not going to acquire more to just satisfy the pointless whims of someone at Kemble - and as far as I can tell, only at Kemble, no where else. I do not NEED to go to Kemble, but I have done so on a number of occasions in the past. As with any free-time activity, there are constraints that make us decide whether we want to engage or not. Whilst this rule is in place, I shall not be contributing anything further to the income of Kemble airfield, the shop in the tower, nor the AV8restaurant - sad, but I feel its more their loss than mine as it would cost them nothing to adopt the more reasonable approach that prevails everywhere else.

Andy

Does this mean that the PFA will have to get a load of different colour Hi Viz gear so we can tell the Marshallers from the punters trying to find where they've hidden the booking in tent this year!
An opportunity for Big Red L if he's not flogged all those hooky British Rail Orange ones he had a while back.
Oh yeah it'll be Cirencester International not Swindon. Swindon's too chavy for the Glossy Possie that they're aiming for. ;)
PS Did any one go to RIAT this year the Lions club had some very fetching Pink ones. :yuk:

Time for the GA world to say ENOUGH OF THIS NONSENSE and have a mass anti road-digger's coat rebellion, I say.

Pile the b£oody things up into a large heap outside the Kemble jobsworth's door.

I go to sensible aerodromes which do not have such silly rules!

Pilots & their passengers WILL NOT be required to wear Hi Viz Jackets airside during the PFA Rally!!

At Wycombe Air Park (Booker) we don't have to wear hi-viz jackets despite having one of the busiest 'airside' GA operating areas in the country. It works fine without anyone getting run over, people are just sensible!

A friend of mine landed at Norwich, went through to meet his passenger then wasn't allowed back airside by the security man to his plane because he didn't have a hi-viz jacket.

'How do you know I haven't got one?' he said.

'Because I saw you when you walked in from your plane' came the reply.

'Well if you could see me, I obviously don't need one then do I?'

Conversation ended with a quietened security guard.....

Just out of curiousity, can anyone actually remember an incident where an aircraft hit a pedestrian at an airfield?

I can't help but suspect that the hi-viz-vest legislation is something of a perfect solution to a non-existant problem.

I work in construction where the health and safety Gestapo are continually thinking of ways to shut down the industry. However, IMHO one of their better regulations is the wearing of Hi-Vis vests. The easier you are to see, the less likely you are to be flattened. I always thought that aviation was very much a "Safety first" industry, clearly, many disagree. At Cranfield the club has Hi-Vis vests (BA Ones !) hanging on the door. It must take at least 10 seconds to take one off the door and put it on. For your free vest bearing the name of my company, PM me !

Jodel Man I was being Ironic ;)
Actually It's given me an idea. Over the years there have been a number of cheapskates who don't book in to avoid paying. To prevent this we should get a sponser to provide a job lot of Hi Viz jackets which would be presented to the Pilots on booking in. Anyone trying to leave without a rally jacket would be impounded until proof of payment had been provided or the appropriate fee had been stillsoned from their wallets. Maybe we've finally discovered a real use for the things at last. :ok:

Of course we are safety conscious! But there is a belief that there is no safety case associated with the wearing of high-vis jackets at airfields. Building sites where blokes carry planks of wood etc. over their shoulders, cranes operate, power tools are in use, etc. don't to me seem comparable.

Andy :rolleyes:

So should we wait for there to be a case ? Do you guys also object to switching on your beacon ?

Well, I for one would be more than a little concerned sharing the sky (and the road on the way to the airfield) with some-one who cannot see an object the size of a human on the ground in front of him.
The next question, in accidents where humans/aircraft have tried to share the same space time continuum, did the 'plane hit the human, or did the dozy human walk into the aircraft? A hi-vis vest will of course prevent this.

Edited to add:- Not much sign of them here at the moment
http://www.kemblecam.co.uk/

Despite the fuss and emotion there is a real issue of principle involved. Safety is a risk management discipline. This means that you assess the likelihood of serious accidents occurring in a specific environment and if that is high, then you look at precautions that would prevent it.

The most dangerous thing you can do in safety management is follow a "tick box " approach, you must assess the specific risk in the specific context.

Hi Viz for Hi Viz sake suggests that we are in tick box not risk assessment mode.