wearing a helmet flying

[Mike67]

Thinking about getting a helmet for bush flying. Why does it seem pilots disapprove of helmet unless your flying warbirds or ultalights???

[gbrasch]

Who knows....we always wear one flying helicopters. One word of advice. Know what you want it for and research accordingly. I know one person who wears a HGU-55 for crash protection, but they are not made for that. Maybe good for a bird strike if the visor is down only. Do your homework. Hope this helps. Glenn

[martymayes]

A number of Ag pilots wear helmets, not convinced it helps much. Was a period when some aerobatic pilots wore helmets.

[Mike67]

Looking at the David Clark K10 helmet, for off airport landings

[WLIU]

Helmets are good when you are doing a type of flying that stresses the machine or puts you in close proximity to ground hazards. Ag pilots run into posts, trees, powerlines, etc more than your average pilot so most wear helmets. And their airplanes are built to provide plenty of crash protection. Helmets also help with noise.

Acro pilots like myself fly the equipment really hard. So we face an increased likelihood of having some part of the airplane break that can make landing problematical, or we have a recent incident where a non-participating pilot failed to check NOTAMs, zoomed through a NOTAM-ed, waivered aerobatic box too fast for the ground observers to pick him up in time, and took the tail off a Yak in the middle of doing a hammerhead. My friend Kirill had a nice gouge in his helmet after he bailed out, so his helmet likely prevented the impact from rendering him unconscious. Can't get out if you are lights out. I will note that the NTSB report put the full probable cause on the non-participating pilot and none on the acro pilot.

So some segments of civilian aviation find helmets very useful.

I will note that the acro pilot who works for Gentex would dispute the suggestion that an HGU-55 is not built for crash impacts. He reports that the visor qualifications involve impacts like shooting a .22 bullet into it. The helmet shells are made from kevlar and carbon fiber so they can take a lot of abuse in a sudden stop that you would rather not take on your naked head.

All of that said, I have never seen a "bush" pilot wear a helmet. Most are very casual about their attire, which varies depending on locale. The Maine and Minnesota based pilots that I have known dress like fishing guides or go with shorts and t-shirts. I think that maybe some of the Mission Aviation Fellowship guys wear a helmet, but all of the JAARS pilots that I have met go casual. And if you like flying into little bush strips, you will be in absolute awe of the JAARS guys. You won't believe what they call an airport.

So as for image, I think that each segment of aviation has a normal pliot "image" based on the type of operation, the type of aircraft, and maybe factoring the hazards. If you are flying people in a floatplane out to a fishing camp in the woods, those nice folks might wonder about the pilot putting on a helmet. If you are roaring around the pylons at Reno going the speed of heat 50' above the desert floor, folks might look at you real funny if you do NOT wear a helmet. Go with the flow.

Best of luck,

Wes
Noorduyn Norseman 13340

[gbrasch]

Wes, what I learned about HGU-55's came from a Canadian government study a few years back when I was attending a safety seminar. The man from Canada worked for their equivalent of the NTSB. He kept calling them the "bump" helmet. When I finally figured out his english he explained that they were designed for F-16 pilot types who did high g maneuvers and it protected them from bumping their heads against the canopies. He had a 3" study that compared helmets that backed up his claim with hard data. So since them I feel compelled to pass that on to fellow pilots thinking about buying one, just because they look cool. For whatever any of that is worth..........

[JimRice85]

Lots of Ag guys wear SPH series helmets. Hello helmets are designed more for the type environment of ag work than fighter types with bang seats.

[WLIU]

HPU and SPH helmets are build to US military and NATO STANAG specs. Those specs speak to impact and to flying objects like shrapnel.

Different military aircraft use somewhat different helmet designs due to the services using different comms, NVG's, and assorted other gear that they are hanging on the helmets these days. And they live in different threat environments.

All of the military helmets are very crash worthy and the differences are in the last few percent of protection calculations.

I will suggest that anyone who says that any particular helmet is just a "bump" protector, when all of the comparable helmets are built to the same spec, likely has an agenda.

Wes second rule of crashing is "wear a helmet, any helmet". Rule three is "wear a good helmet". Of course rule number 1 is "don't crash".

Now for flying acro, in an airplane with a canopy that is a little tight, I actually wear a Bonehead Composites skydiver helmet made of carbon fiber, with a Clarity Aloft headset under it.

But I still have never seen a professional "bush" pilot wearing a helmet at work.

Fly safe,

Wes
N78PS

[gbrasch]

I will suggest that anyone who says that any particular helmet is just a "bump" protector, when all of the comparable helmets are built to the same spec, likely has an agenda.


No agenda at all, just passing on what I learned at one of the best aviation safety programs in the world, USC. I personally wear an SPH-5 in our helicopters. But I am done commenting now.

[WLIU]

Sorry if what I typed did not express what I meant. I suggest that the presenter at the seminar was looking at the last few percent of performance and that all of the subject helmets perform in the 95%+ percentile of desired performance. IF you are looking at that last 5% then you can validly argue that this helmet performs better than that helmet, but you are still talking about helmets that all do their designed job.

Helmets are a trade-off. I spent many years wearing a fiberglass helmet and the size of my neck reflects the weight of that helmet vs the G loads that I experienced while wearing it. All of the newer helmets are MUCH lighter while providing the same level of protection. But the point is that to gain additional impact resistance requires thicker material (more layers of kevlar etc), which translates into more bulk and weight.

So I appologize if my typing did not come across well, and I sincerely hope that this discussion about helmets remains an academic one and that no reader here obtains real field experience with these products.

Fly safe,

Wes
N78PS

[Tom Charpentier]

There have been studies that suggest most preventable deaths in aviation are the result of head trauma. That certainly makes sense given your head is probably the most critical and most vulnerable part of your body in an impact. While I'd always suggest starting out by investing in good shoulder harnesses, they don't guarantee your head will stay away from the panel in a crash, so a helmet is potentially a layer of safety in any aircraft.

You have to decide what the cost-benefit is for you, but operations such as bush flying could put you at elevated risk and might make a helmet worth it. I've even mulled getting one for myself, and I'm usually not doing anything more than run of the mill GA flying. I always wear a helmet while riding a bicycle and almost always wear at least an inflatable lifejacket while boating. I just feel like it's stupid to get into a survivable incident and then be seriously hurt or killed because I wasn't wearing the right equipment. Is a helmet for recreational flying overkill, or is our flying culture just more tolerant of that kind of risk? I'm not sure.

There are tradeoffs with every layer of safety. We might prevent a few fatalities a year if we all wore nomex flight suits and gloves, military-style boots, and helmets. While some pilots do choose to wear that, many of us are content to simply wear non-synthetics for fire resistance and leave it there. It's a decision we all have to make but we ought to make sure we don't let anyone make that choice for us.

[Bob Dingley]

I grew up in Maine, learned to fly Cubs there and also flew for the Guard. Knew some bush pilots too. The fact that none endorse helmets means little to me. They seem to come from the same gene pool as the Maine lobster men. Another group that I ran with. Those guys have always taken a perverse pride in not knowing how to swim. See a pattern?

I wore the APH-4 & 5, the "ballistic helmet" and the SPH-4 when serving the flag.. All good. One other benefit not mentioned is that they also protect your hearing very well if you fly turbines. Some flight surgeons want you to bring your helmet to the exam so that they can check the fit and remove those pads from the chin straps if you still had them. The USAF once came out with a dual visor model. One clear, one tinted, but lab tests proved that it was a few ounces too heavy, could provide excess inertia to the head and cause spinal injuries. I saw the films of the cadaver tests. Acro pilots should go for lighter weight.

Commercial helo operators with federal contracts under the Office of Aviation Services must provide helmets for crew and passengers.

IMHO its all risk based. First flight in a EAB rates a helmet.

Bob

[Flyfalcons]

In my years flying Beavers I figured that if I needed to wear a helmet to be safe then I probably wasn't doing a good job on the ADM side of flying.

[Mike67]

Thanks for the good replys, I was thinking I was going to be bashed here. I think the military helmets are a little over kill for the type of flying I do. Low & slow. I'm looking at the David Clark K10 helmet. I all ready have the DC H10-13X headset that I like. A lot of you comented on the military helmets. Anyone know anything about this helmet or equivlent?

[Bill Greenwood]

Mike, I have used the David Clark helmet and it predecessor for 20 years, fortunately without having it tested in a crash.
In summary, I think it is a lot better than no helmet, but it is not something heavy duty like a motorcycle racer would wear, like the ones my Son so thoroughly and repeatedly crash tested.

The DC doesn't cover all the way down to the base of your skull and it doesn't have as much thick insulation inside at the other ones. But it is much lighter, cooler and more comfortable, and of course it uses the excellent DC headsets, and some other brands might fit also. I sent my headset to Headsets, Inc., in Amarillo to have noise cancelling added and it works fairly well in a high noise environment.

I have two stories of helmets and the lack of. About 20 years ago a warbird pilot was doing some low level acro in a basic trainer and crashed. The impact might have been survivable, except he did not wear a helmet and his forehead hit an instrument knob on the panel.

Another pilot, Craig Hoskings, was flying airshows in a Pitts modified with landing gear on the top and bottom so that he could land and takeoff inverted, quite an act.
He hit the ground hard out of a standard inside loop. I saw this myself at Salt Lake #2. He hit at perhaps 100 mph, bounced, hit again and the plane was badly damaged. But he had every safety device short of an airbag; dual seat belts, shoulder harness and a heavy duty full helmet and he walked away, shaken and sore, but uninjured.
His helmet had an impact dent right in the forehead, but it protected the pilot.

[lyle85213]

I'm building a HiMax which has a simple roll cage in it. Being a tail-dragger, a few pilots have "tested" the roll cage and it appears to work. Still, I'm getting a helmet before I fly mine. I'm going to get one that works with the headset I already have. I really don't want to spend another $1000 for a helmet with headphone when I have a headset I like. I know I could get a used helmet for much less but buying a used helmet is like buying a used Jock strap. :D I saw some leather ones and also one that was canvas with ceramic "armor".

[WLIU]

Not sure you can have too many headsets, at least if you sometimes fly an airplane that can carry a passenger.

As for the cost of helmets, the question is what is your head worth? Helmets are cheap compared to the cost of reconstructive surgery and traumatic brain injury treatment. It is a trade-off, but if you don't have a cheap head, you probably don't want to make "cheap" the primary criteria for your helmet purchase. Darwin always lurks.

Best of luck,

Wes

[bboss74]

I've got about 3k hours in an HGU-56, and can attest that's its a stout helmet. I've banged the living heck out of them, and they've always protected my noggin. I think over the years, my favorite uncle (Sam) has given me maybe 5 of them to abuse. Thats with 2 mandatory exchanges due to damage. Only complaints are the restriction of peripheral vision and bulk compared to the SPH series. Otherwise they are pretty lightweight and comfortable. I've worn one for about 15 hours straight. The Army won't go to anything different due to the superior crash rating on the -56 vs. any of the others, from what I've heard.

[Kurt Flunkn]

I built up a DYI flight helmet using a the shell and liner from an HGU-68 (you can also use an HGU-55). Helmet parts are available at:

http://www.flighthelmet.com/

The I used the "guts" from an old headset (speakers, wiring, connectors, etc) and purchased an Oregon Aero hush kit as headset and helmet foam are different sizes.

http://www.oregonaero.com/hushkit/hushkit-selection

All up this helmet was less than $400 and I consider this an important piece of safety equipment.

[Mike M]

Thanks for the good replys, I was thinking I was going to be bashed here. I think the military helmets are a little over kill for the type of flying I do. Low & slow. I'm looking at the David Clark K10 helmet. I all ready have the DC H10-13X headset that I like. A lot of you comented on the military helmets. Anyone know anything about this helmet or equivlent?

For your intended use, that helmet should be adequate. Not too heavy, better than no helmet.

[Zack Baughman]

I love these "throwback" leather flying helmets by Campbell Aero Classics:

http://www.campbellaeroclassics.com/

2933

[WLIU]

I thought that they were really cool also.... until I checked the price.

For what its worth, from what digging I have done the HGU-55's and -68's and a couple of other variants of the fixed wing helmets use the same shell and nape strap assemblies. The differences are in the visors, boom mic vs oxy mask, NVG mounting, etc. My understanding of the genesis of the -68 visor assembly is that the -55's bungee visor would not stay in place during 600kts ejections. And the lower profile side lock knob for the -68 visor is used because if you fly an airplane with a canopy, that huge center locking knob that you see on the old HGU-33's visor puts big scratches in the canopy if you fly with the visor up.

The military helmets are all overkill for most civilian aviation, but great for those of us who put more stress on our ships.

For what its worth, I have had a number of friends crunch Cessnas, Mooneys, Bellanca's, and Beechcrafts. Their experience has been that if you follow the maxim of "fly until all of the expensive noise stops", that is keep flying and aiming between the trees, they did fine with only a baseball cap for head protection. And as I think about local history, I can remember a whole BUNCH of pilots who kept their cool and flew their airplane until there was nothing left to do but dust themselves off and hike to a telephone. So as with many things, crashing is about software, not hardware.

Fly safe,

Wes
N78S

[Bill Greenwood]

The Campbell helmets are top of the line if price is not a barrier. I think the main one is about $2200, ,might be more by now, and of course that includes the headset. And of course they aren't just leather helmets, they are really hard shells covered by leather.

I got a chance to borrow one from Dick Hansen at Oskosh and fly with it a few years back. First of all, the electronics are first rate, just as good as David Clark and that is very good. There was not noise canceling then, but clear and sharp. I had the boom mike in a high noise cockpit and had very good communication with the tower or other planes.

The helmet is very strong looking, I think the shell is kevlar, and with the period leather or cloth covering they really have to right look, sure made my tan D C one look funny.

The only problem for me, and it was a big one, was lack of comfort. The shell is more round than oval and my head is more oval, so that after 30 minutes I really had a headache. I had the medium size, the small would not go on, and the large was loose and sloppy. So I think if you are going to buy one, try it on very carefully and maybe even see if they would let you do a test flight.
The comfort factor was the only thing that stopped me from buying one, and back then the price hadn't gone up so much. I have talked to several people that fly with them and have not found anyone who doesn;'t like them.

[WLIU]

Bill, thanks for the pilot report. I am surprised by your discomfort as most heads are oval front to back and I would have thought that the Cambell helmet would accommodate that. I will no longer feel bad about cheaping out.

Best of luck,

Wes
N78PS

[Bob Dingley]

This has been an education for sure. Here's one for the group. Is there a way to resurect an old APH-5 at a reasonable cost?
It was issued to me (by a grateful government) when I was activated in San Antonio. When I arrived at my overseas destination, I was given a bullet proof "ballistic" helmet. It looked just the same as the old APH-5, suspension was a little different. But it was like wearing a torture device. I disobeyed the order to toss the APH- 5 in the conex with all the others and I wore it instead. Around the clock on special occasions. Of course it got personalized.
Fast forward a decade or two and I felt a need for a helmet that was compatable with civilian avionics. The avionics tech at my place of employment said that he would convert it. Instead, he just screwed it up with salvaged parts, then gave up on it. I got it back in "kit form." I was thinking that maybe a real compact head set might fit inside. Any ideas?

Bob

[WLIU]

You can find all kinds of helmet parts of e-Bay or all places. And Government Sales in CT (www.aviationhelmets.com (http://www.aviationhelmets.com)) can sell you parts or even update your helmet for you. Nice folks.

So you can put the latest comfort padding into your older helmet.

Now what I do for comms is put a Clarity Aloft headset under my helmet. I suspect that one of the Halo headsets would work also. They are both very light and low profile. You can keep the old ear cups for noise attenuation or fill the space with pink comfort/noise attenuating foam from the drug store or Aircraft Spruce. The pink and blue foam is what is inside the aftermarket headset ear seals.

Hope this helps,

Wes
N78PS

[Bob Dingley]

You can find all kinds of helmet parts of e-Bay or all places. And Government Sales in CT (www.aviationhelmets.com (http://www.aviationhelmets.com)) can sell you parts or even update your helmet for you. Nice folks.

So you can put the latest comfort padding into your older helmet.

Now what I do for comms is put a Clarity Aloft headset under my helmet. I suspect that one of the Halo headsets would work also. They are both very light and low profile. You can keep the old ear cups for noise attenuation or fill the space with pink comfort/noise attenuating foam from the drug store or Aircraft Spruce. The pink and blue foam is what is inside the aftermarket headset ear seals.

Hope this helps,

Wes
N78PS
Thanks Wes. I might as well get started on this helmet.

Bob

[steveinindy]

In my years flying Beavers I figured that if I needed to wear a helmet to be safe then I probably wasn't doing a good job on the ADM side of flying.

They used to say the same thing about seat belts in both cars and planes....


Anyone know anything about this helmet or equivlent?

Nope. But so far as my head goes if the helmet isn't approved by the US military for use in helicopters (the jet helmets are a completely different standard) or by one of the major auto racing bodies (NHRA, F1, NASCAR or Indy Car), I won't use it.


His helmet had an impact dent right in the forehead, but it protected the pilot.

Speaking of that, if anyone has a helmet that has been through a crash and would not mind, I can arrange to have it examined which can help improve future designs. I probably get three or four a year looked at for folks after crashes currently but I would like to increase that. The most important thing to remember is that once it has been in a crash, it needs to be replaced.


I know I could get a used helmet for much less but buying a used helmet is like buying a used Jock strap

Talk to one of the company that makes helmets. You can get them "reupholstered" for less than the cost of a new helmet. I had to do this with my helmet after my daughter spilled a bottle of Coke into it.


I love these "throwback" leather flying helmets by Campbell Aero Classics

Very cool, but I have sort of a tradition/superstition of having Thumper the Rabbit on my helmets (both aviation and firefighting) and I don't think that would work too well.


For what its worth, I have had a number of friends crunch Cessnas, Mooneys, Bellanca's, and Beechcrafts. Their experience has been that if you follow the maxim of "fly until all of the expensive noise stops", that is keep flying and aiming between the trees, they did fine with only a baseball cap for head protection. And as I think about local history, I can remember a whole BUNCH of pilots who kept their cool and flew their airplane until there was nothing left to do but dust themselves off and hike to a telephone. So as with many things, crashing is about software, not hardware.

That last point is true, but I can point to just as many folks who didn't do so well. Yeah, crash survivability can depend to a large degree on luck and skill, given the choice are you willing to bet your life on everything lining up perfectly when things have gotten bad? I'd rather go for "hardware" and "software" than relying upon either alone.

[WLIU]

Based on a surprising to me large sample of local incidents over the years, I am comfortable with my safety gear. Back when I flew ratty old airplanes around, and before cell phones were invented, I heard the advice to try and crash near a phone. That tells you something about the equipment and the culture that I was immersed in. Looking back, I firmly believe that what kills most pilots is poor training, which begets poor decision making, and finally you have to have the determination that the airplane may wind up a pile of trash but you are not going with it. Its about software, not hardware.

Example - I was based at an airport where the rotating beacon was up on a hill next to the airport, some distance from the runway. One night a Bonanza driver passing by had a total engine failure. He had some altitude and saw the beacon so he thought that he could make the airport. And don't they put the rotating beacon on the airport right next to the runway? Well, he got close enough to see the runway lights and realized that the position of the beacon had fooled him, he wasn't going to make the runway, and that there were lots of trees waiting for him. Rather than give up and drive straight into the dark trees, he kept his brain going and decided that since he was in the left seat he would wreck the airplane in a right side slip so that the right wing would reach the scene of the accident first and absorb as much crash impact as practical. Went into the trees that way, crawled out the wreck and over to the nearest house.

Most of the accidents that I know of in my aeronautical neighborhood involve weather or pilots who stalled rather then fly the airplane to impact. Train and mentally condition yourself to not make those two mistakes and you greatly reduce the probability that you will show up in an NTSB report. But getting back to the subject of helmets, none of the pilots I know of who flew into hard objects in the clouds would have benefited from wearing a helmet, or cockpit airbags, better belts, etc. You just can't be flying into tall rocks in the clouds.

But helmets are great for us guys who fly close to the ground or beat the crap out of the equipment on good weather days. And while certifications are nice, any helmet is better than no helmet if you operate in these types of environments.

But I've still never seen a bush pilot put on a helmet. Would scare off the customers.

You mileage may vary. Past history is no guarantee of future performance. Void where prohibited by law. The names have been changed to protect the guilty. Only to be done under adult supervision.

Wes
N69795

[Bill Greenwood]

Steve, I never heard of anyone who wore a helmet while doing coke, that must be some strong stuff to require that much protection.
But then I am not really an expert, don't do it myself and am pretty far out of touch with the party crowd from the old days who do.

[steveinindy]

Well said Wes....I see your points but I am one for wearing a helmet if for nothing else than the fact that I can't stand the feel of a plain headset rubbing on the top of my head and I got so used to wearing a helmet while flying ultralights that it feels weird to have my hands on the controls without a helmet on. It's like getting in a car without a seatbelt on....it just feels like something is wrong.


Steve, I never heard of anyone who wore a helmet while doing coke, that must be some strong stuff to require that much protection.
*snort* Huh?

;)

[1600vw]

Here in central IL I believe it was two years ago there was a plane they used for jumping. After everyone jumped it looked as the plane stalled and one wing dropped. They believe there was such a force when the plane stalled the pilot hit his head and was knocked out. Not sure if that is what happened.

But I like to fly with a helmet. I would not fit in my airplane with a helmet so I modified my airplane by lowering my seat. From now on a helmet will be on my head.

[steveinindy]

Here in central IL I believe it was two years ago there was a plane they used for jumping. After everyone jumped it looked as the plane stalled and one wing dropped. They believe there was such a force when the plane stalled the pilot hit his head and was knocked out. Not sure if that is what happened.

Are you referring to the crash near Taylorville (I think it was Taylorville....)? Given that there were witnesses who said the aircraft was maneuvering to avoid the buildings, I don't think that is probably the case. However, the chances of knocking one's head hard enough to knock oneself out is a real one in a lot of the "faux fighter" type homebuilts because of tight fit necessary to maintain the desire aestetics. Even in non-fatal crashes, it's not uncommon to find blood, hair or even pieces of skin stuck in the frames on the sides of the canopy or on the instrument panel. Somewhere I have a picture of a "faceprint" from the face of a RV pilot being bounced off the side of his canopy during a crash. He survived (thankfully there was not a post-crash fire) but had to have his face bolted back together by a maxillofacial surgeon.


I would not fit in my airplane with a helmet so I modified my airplane by lowering my seat.

I did the same thing but I am working on my design around a 6'3" 230 lb occupant. If someone that size can fit in there, my 5'9" 170-something pound frame should be able to easily accommodate a helmet with some room to spare.

[JimRice85]

I wore a helmet flying a Mooney Mite one time on a lark. That was a really tight fit!

[1600vw]

Are you referring to the crash near Taylorville (I think it was Taylorville....)? Given that there were witnesses who said the aircraft was maneuvering to avoid the buildings, I don't think that is probably the case. However, the chances of knocking one's head hard enough to knock oneself out is a real one in a lot of the "faux fighter" type homebuilts because of tight fit necessary to maintain the desire aestetics. Even in non-fatal crashes, it's not uncommon to find blood, hair or even pieces of skin stuck in the frames on the sides of the canopy or on the instrument panel. Somewhere I have a picture of a "faceprint" from the face of a RV pilot being bounced off the side of his canopy during a crash. He survived (thankfully there was not a post-crash fire) but had to have his face bolted back together by a maxillofacial surgeon.



I did the same thing but I am working on my design around a 6'3" 230 lb occupant. If someone that size can fit in there, my 5'9" 170-something pound frame should be able to easily accommodate a helmet with some room to spare.


Yes the one near taylorville. I just heard that what was being said about this was wrong and it looked to this person to have been a stall for some reason.
I am not quilified to speak about this and maybe should just keep my mouth shut but this is what I heard or was told. I just listened.

The other dayI looked at the wife and said....Honey I think I want to buy a little handgun and put it in my airplane, for if it ever flips over and catches fire I would want to shoot myself in the head instead of burn alive.....She just looked at me.....I told her..These are the things I think about.....

[pacerpilot]

Yes the one near taylorville. I just heard that what was being said about this was wrong and it looked to this person to have been a stall for some reason.
I am not quilified to speak about this and maybe should just keep my mouth shut but this is what I heard or was told. I just listened.

The other dayI looked at the wife and said....Honey I think I want to buy a little handgun and put it in my airplane, for if it ever flips over and catches fire I would want to shoot myself in the head instead of burn alive.....She just looked at me.....I told her..These are the things I think about.....

Wow.

[WLIU]

I have a lot of hours flying ratty old Cessnas hauling skydivers, and have also done a bunch of stalls in them, but have only occasionally have those two experiences intersected. There is no way that in the course of stalling a Cessna you can hit your head on the instrument panel. Even flipping one end for end on landing its hard to hit your head on the instrument panel. I have friends who have demonstrated that.

The aerobatic community has recorded a few incidents where pilots have knocked themselves silly by having seat belts release while doing a snap roll, I think outside (negative) snaps. But in that case the pilot came off the seat and smashed into the canopy. No helmet of course. In the cases that I know of, after the surprise and shock wore off, the pilot got back down into the seat, collected themselves, and landed the airplane.

If the accident pilot in question was avoiding buildings, there is more to the story. Like the airplane was sick, well over gross, and the day was very hot. Which is a narrative at a few of the skydiving operations I have seen.

Fly safe,

Wes
N6234A

[1600vw]

I have a lot of hours flying ratty old Cessnas hauling skydivers, and have also done a bunch of stalls in them, but have only occasionally have those two experiences intersected. There is no way that in the course of stalling a Cessna you can hit your head on the instrument panel. Even flipping one end for end on landing its hard to hit your head on the instrument panel. I have friends who have demonstrated that.

The aerobatic community has recorded a few incidents where pilots have knocked themselves silly by having seat belts release while doing a snap roll, I think outside (negative) snaps. But in that case the pilot came off the seat and smashed into the canopy. No helmet of course. In the cases that I know of, after the surprise and shock wore off, the pilot got back down into the seat, collected themselves, and landed the airplane.

If the accident pilot in question was avoiding buildings, there is more to the story. Like the airplane was sick, well over gross, and the day was very hot. Which is a narrative at a few of the skydiving operations I have seen.

Fly safe,

Wes
N6234A

Like I said I was just standing there minding my own when this Pilot-Parachutest" My spelling sucks" spoke of this. He said the same thing happened to him. He did not hit his head on the instrument panel but hit his head on the side of the window framing or something along those lines.
He said the break on the stall was so voilent that this caused his head to slam the side of the cabin and almost knocked him out. Like I said, I am just relaying what was said not to me but to others around me, I just listened.

[WLIU]

I hope that you know that all aviation stories begin with "There I was, thought I was gonna die..." Sounds like the individual was embellishing his story, perhaps to impress the listener.

Don't pay attention to stories like that. Go fly.

Wes
N78PS

[SBaircraft]

After browsing the thread, there seems to be a consensus that helmets are ok for "risky" types of flying, such as crop dusting, aerobatics and off-field landings. The way that I see it, all flying is risky. "Normal" flying has approximately the same fatality rate as motorcycles, and 60% of motorcyclists wear helmets.

I'm not sure how much helmets improve flight safety, but the CDC found that helmets reduce the fatality rate of motorcycle crashes by 37%. It seems reasonable for pilots to wear helmets, even if only for a 10% safety improvement. Our cars have air bags, collapsible steering columns, safety glass, and other features to protect our heads. By comparison, cockpits are pretty dangerous. I wouldn't make fun of anyone for wearing a helmet, even in a regular airplane.

[WLIU]

If you crash your motorcycle, there is no structure protecting you. Your tender body parts make contact with the ground very quickly. Been there.

If you crash your airplane, you are in a structure that absorbs energy. And I have witnesses some pretty high speed aircraft impacts with the ground that only resulted in minor injuries.

Statistics are funny things. Airplanes cover a lot more miles than motorcycles. Per mile I don't buy the notion that airplanes and motorcycles are equivalent. And I will suggest that it is per mile that counts.

The most critical part of safety is common sense and using your brain. And I look at the concerns expressed here and realize that if aviation worked the way some folks fear, I should have been dead at least 1500 skydives and 3000+ pilot hours ago.

Go fly. Be happy.

Best of luck,

Wes
N78PS

[steveinindy]

SB, a major reason for the attitude of "you only need it for risky flying" is that a lot of GA pilots are by their very nature rather risk tolerant and pretty sure they are personally better than the average pilot. There is also a healthy degree of fatalism tossed in for good measure (i.e., "If I can't avoid the crash with my superior flying skills, I'm as good as dead any way you shake it") so it's an uphill battle trying to advocate for any sort of changes. Recently, we've also run into the political problem of pilots with "conservative" leanings who view any suggestion of voluntary improvements in the experimental community as a violation of their "Don't Tread on Me" views on their perceived right to kill themselves and their passengers by tolerating the same long standing issues in popular designs and as an excuse to get up on their political soapbox.

I have a now elderly friend who was part of the initial push for shoulder harnesses in aircraft and recalls how people used to argue that it would prevent you from reaching the controls in an emergency. Some of the rebuttals people try to use are rather laughable both in that case and in the debates going on today.

My personal take is that I am going to wear a helmet and offer one to whomever flies with me. If you choose to do so and take your chances, so be it.


Our cars have air bags, collapsible steering columns, safety glass, and other features to protect our heads. By comparison, cockpits are pretty dangerous.

All of those things are nice but the biggest problem in many cockpit designs (along with insufficient strength of seat anchorages and restraint attachment points) is the lack of longitudinal stiffness which predisposes to collapse of the cockpit. The best airbag or collapsible steering wheel in the world isn't going to do much if you wind up with a Lycoming in your lap because the firewall fails backward in an otherwise low speed survivable crash.

[steveinindy]

Statistics are funny things. Airplanes cover a lot more miles than motorcycles. Per mile I don't buy the notion that airplanes and motorcycles are equivalent. And I will suggest that it is per mile that counts.


For crash survivability, "deaths per mile" is a poor comparison. If we had an accurate number for GA operation hours, it might make sense to use "X crashes per 100,000 hours" or something like that but we don't have anything but a rather crude estimate so I argue that those numbers aren't really all that helpful Looking at the survival/injury rate of crashes as a percentage of the total number of crashes is probably the best way to look at it in the setting of determining comparability of crash survivability.


The most critical part of safety is common sense and using your brain. And I look at the concerns expressed here and realize that if aviation worked the way some folks fear, I should have been dead at least 1500 skydives and 3000+ pilot hours ago.
Yup. Use your brain to avoid when possible and survive when you can't avoid a crash. Thankfully, most of us (at least those who don't fly ultralights) will never experience a serious crash in our flying careers. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be prepared for it if it happens which is why you have folks like myself who look at this stuff day in and day out to try to figure out the best possible balance between design for operations and design for safety.