Im with BEagale on this one its just another way for the insurance companys and the big airport operators to get out of paying up if you have an accident.

At night on a busy airport ramp I can see the need for the things but the people who mince around in them at small GA airfields in the daylight just look like pratts.

To those of you who are victims of the self serving safety industry at the big airports ( cranfield comes to mind ) you have my simpathy in being forced to use these things even when the conditions quite clearly dont require it.
However see it as a social service , you are keeping these "safety officers" in a job and off of the streets because clearly they are unemployable in any other industry.

Just visited Swansea, where the airport manager is a high viz hitler, piss whilly little airport in the back of beyond with about 6 movements a day and its high viz jacket and passes; total bollocks. It's about two things, aswaging the litigation culture, and trying to turn backwater aerodromes into the next International Egomanic Mega galactic space park. I suppose if you aspiration and world is limited in some backwater you have to have something to make you feel important.

Flickoff - did you get to fly in Welsh Wales?

Stik

XH328
 

Is it really that hard to just put a jacket or vest on? Ok so it might not save your life but it will keep everyone happy and you never know it just might help you not get run down. As for hearing planes coming, I work at Duxford and it is surprising how quiet some planes can be when you have your back to them.

As for the arguement about them not being fire resistant, could I ask a question? Is all the clothing you wear fire resistant when you go live side? Someone noted the French dont wear vests and only from my limited experiance of one French crew at Duxford I know they dont mind smoking under their aircraft either!! So just because they dont doesnt mean it is a good idea.

I wish they would make these vests out of something other than that plastic materal! It makes it very hard to sow my wings and other cloth badges to!

Now there's a solution - a bright yellow flame retardant flying jacket with useful pockets.

Takers anybody?

G

OK then, if not luminous jackets, how about making all the flying badges out of "day - glow" material.
Some folk would stick out like dogs doofers.:p

Or being serious for a moment, as a Boy Scout I used to have to wear dayglo armbands on night hikes and such like. Would this keep both sides of the argument happy? Less irritating, not big enough to be a fire risk, cheaper, still pretty visible, and doesn't get in the way of your pockets.

Alternatively, there are the bright orange nomex suits much loved of certain companies FT departments - but even many test pilots can't bring themselves to wear those.

G

(1) I'm sure that you would agree that one aircrew is a grossly insufficient sample population from which to derive any real idea of a nation's safety practices.
(2) The French are not alone in this absence of vests. As far as I know, it's not done anywhere other than the UK ... at least, I have not seen anyone wearing vests in Canada, Australia or the USA. It would be interesting and instructive to compare the respective national statistics re the number of collisions between a/c and people on the apron. If the UK stats are, say, 1/3 those of the other countries, perhaps it's a good idea; otherwise, an obvious waste of time.

P.S. I guess those in favour of high visibilty clothing would also be keen on mandating that all aircraft must be painted in solid dayglow orange? If not, why not?

They wouldn't be so bad if you could get them with the words AIRCREW, PILOT, CAPTAIN, CHIEF PILOT on them in very big letters.

bluskis,

There's a real opportunity for a canny clothing manufacturer. They could be made of Nomex, TSO'd, and priced ten times higher than unmarked versions ... and pilots being pilots, they would sell out!

You wouldn't be in marketing, would you? ;)