Warbird Information Exchange

While I'm a helmet advocate, I'm really more an advocate for decent seatbelts and harnesses. The example of the ground-looping Stearman could have avoided injury had there been a full harness in the cockpit instead of just a lap belt. A good restraint system will not allow you to face-plant into the panel.

That's got to be spot on in my opinion. I saw a Cessna 172 go in just after an airshow here in TX, and it sure seemed that the majority of what killed the two front occupants was the impact with the instrument panel and yokes.

Ryan

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.

And people thought I was way over the line a year ago when I posted a thread similar to this one. The only reason for the thread was to spark a debate about safety.

JH

Great point about the seat belts. How many of us have seen old, worn out seat belts that are dated from the 40's, 50's, or 60's installed in these old Warbirds? I know I see them frequently. Hooker Harnesses are outstanding seat belts and also come in gray or o.d. green, so they look somewhat like an orignal belt would.

Just a thought.

Gary

I think warbird pilots should wear modern helmets, flight suits, ect. They don't look that bad, I wouldn't wear vintage stuff due to the fact it wouldn't protect you from squat. My helmet does a great job toning down the 1340 noise. About the seat belts, Hooker Harnesses look good in warbird cockpits, so why not be safe. Its safety that is a #1 concern to alot of people.

Modern equipment does't look bad at all in my opinion, this is me in my gear. The Hooker Harnesses seem to blend in pretty well to me.

[img][img]http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a5/Mister51/DSC_0085.jpg[/img][/img]

_________________
"There are two types of people here; airshow whores and airshow prostitutes. The whores, like you and I, do airshow stuff for free, whereas the prostitutes are paid" - Reg Urschler

Agreed on Hooker stuff. I have it in the Focke-Wulf and it's top notch. I'd prefer having RAF style seatbelts with the round lock, but I guess you can't have everything!

_________________
Olivier Lacombe -- Harvard Mk.4 C-GBQB

I can't say enough about Hooker Harnesses.

A few years back when I first started flying my SNJ, I went out to fly one day and as I was putting the shoulder strap on, it just feel about. I thought maybe it was time to take a good look at the straps in the airplane. Turns out they had been installed at Pensacola during a Navy overhaul in 1956 or so. Needless to say, I put in Hookers, including the crotch strap which will keep you in the seat in the event of a rollover incident in soft ground. I don't understand the physiology of it all, but I know those type of incidents have been attributed to a couple of fatal accidents over the years.

I wore an HGU-55 in my Stearman and had the seatbelts re-webbed by an approved rigger. The helmet looked a little silly I suppose, but it kept the noise down and gave me feeling of security.

I also know someone that crashed due to an engine problem on takeoff in a warbird and his head hit not only the panel but the windscreen on impact. Wearing a good quality harness and a helmet he walked away although he was a bit beaten up.

I have a helmet:



Nomex flight suit, although I do not wear the long underwear due to temperature and hydration issues.

Flight boots, and gloves. I turn the flight suit collar up to better protect the back of the neck.

I have an email from a Thunderbird pilot who was badly burned not wearing his flight suit properly.

Most importantly a 4 point harness, properly worn.

All that just to fly a little old O2.

I'm guessing that if you go back and look at that thread you'll see similar people making similar comments about it, too.

Remember that the '55 was primarily designed to be light to reduce neck strain for pointy-nosed guys who would be pulling lots of G with it and wearing it for long periods of time day after day. It is not optomised for crash protection, and is definitely not the helmet that offers the most in that regard.

I had one in my hands the other day. It seemed like I could rap it against the corner of the bench and put a hole in it.

_________________

Commemorative Air Force
Experimental Aircraft Association
Warbirds of America

What are you waiting for? Join us!

Best way to contact me- email my last name @gmail.com

another reason for wearing a helmet: birdstrike protection!
http://www.flightgear.dk/safety.htm
For taildraggers and such, I agree that the 55 is not the best suited. It's a good helmet, but more suited for jet use. I think a HGU-56 (helicopter type) helmet is more suited.

_________________
Magister Aviation
It's all in my book

You are right Randy, so a LH-250 would be the top pick for lightweight and crash protection.

The thing I dislike with my 55 is that I can only wear one visor at the time, Flight Suit didn't want to sell me the dual visor kit, because they said I would scratch me visors... That's not bad for airplane flying, since I hardly fly at night or in lousy weather, but in the helos, you can go from nice to not nice in the same flight, so the two visors come in handy.

Anyways, that problem will be solved next summer...

_________________
Olivier Lacombe -- Harvard Mk.4 C-GBQB

What amazes me is that people wear the dumbest things to fly on civilian aircraft (non warbird). Shorts, flip-flops, tank tops, etc. I suppose to each their own. I wear either the nomex or WW2 Navy gear, since I fly in a WW2 Navy plane.