What to wear when flying
Bob Gardner
A bush pilot once told me that I should always wear clothing that would
allow me to walk home if I had to put the airplane down somewhere. Guess
this guy learned that lesson the hard way.
Bob Gardner
C J Campbell
The headline calls him a student pilot, even though he is a private
pilot with 150 hours and an instrument rating.
There was an Air America pilot by the name of "Shower Shoes" Johnson,
on account of the fact that he always wore shower shoes when flying. He
was at survival school when the instructor looked at his shower shoes
and said, "Johnson, just how long do you think it would take you to
walk out of the jungle in those?" Johnson replied, "Last time, three
days. The time before that, six days."
Either he was a slow learner or shower shoes worked for him. :-) But
then, some of those Air America guys were pretty tough. Maybe he just
didn't notice.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor
Bob F.
to wear while traveling. Two points I got. Wear layered cotton cloth made
clothing that will protect you as long as possible in case of fire. Nothing
is worse than burns from polyester plastic melting and clinging to your
skin. And if you must remove your shoes, don't do it until the AC is well
in the air. If you have a crash, you don't want to be running through sharp
metal, gasoline or fire in your stocking feet. Comfortable leather soled
shoes are better than sneakers. Besides, these days you get through
security more easily.
--
Regards, BobF.
"Bob Gardner" <bob...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:o--dnXCDGISFRXba...@comcast.com...
Dan
> A frequent flyer magazine had a good article several years ago about clothes
In armor units we could not wear polypropylene garments for this very
reason.
We wore NOMEX, but I doubt cotton would provide much protection.
Given that the RJ guys all wear polyester suits, seems like they're
screwed.
Dan Mc
Robert M. Gary
When I flew the J-3 my big feet required slippers to work the brakes
(couldn't get to them with sneakers). I always carried a pair of
sneakers in the back just in case. Wouldn't want to have to walk away
from an accident in bunny slippers.
-Robert
john smith
The answer is... it depends.
Is it hot?
Is it cold?
Is it wet?
Is it dry?
How likely is the risk of fire?
If there is fire, you want to wear cotton.
If there is little risk of fire and it is hot/cold/wet/dry, you want to
wear polyester.
The backpackers mantra is "Cotton kills!"
JGalban via AviationKB.com
>
>We wore NOMEX, but I doubt cotton would provide much protection.
I think by "protection" he meant it won't instantly melt to your skin. It
all depends on the amount of heat. With layered cotton, you can burn the
outer layers without burning your skin (for a short period). At high enough
temps, of course, it becomes a moot point.
>
>Given that the RJ guys all wear polyester suits, seems like they're
>screwed.
Yep.
John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)
--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200803/1
Dan
Yeah.. one of those "sayings" that everyone parrots, with little
justification.
While cotton socks are pretty much worthless -- once they're wet,
hello blisters -- the super fabrics aren't a whole lot better.
That saying probably had its genesis in some North Face or Mountain
hardware guerrilla marketing campaign.
Dan Mc
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
news:cdbbeca2-5b6b-4483...@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 27, 1:53 pm, "Bob F." <b...@abracadabra.com> wrote:
>> A frequent flyer magazine had a good article several years ago about
>> clothes
>> to wear while traveling. Two points I got. Wear layered cotton cloth
>> ...
>
> In armor units we could not wear polypropylene garments for this very
> reason.
>
> We wore NOMEX, but I doubt cotton would provide much protection.
Cotton doesn't give any protection, but it doesn't do as much harm as
polyester.
But, the pilot referenced in the original post should have been wearing a
UNIFORM!!!!!!
He could have used the gold braid to lash up some snow shoes from pine
boughs. Plus, he would have looked much more professional when the rescue
crew picked him up!!!!
;-)
--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.
Tina
Bob Gardner
is hot, it might be cold overnight; if it is cold, you want more than shorts
and sneakers. Same if it is wet. If the terrain enroute is dry, maybe shorts
and sneakers, but not for me. The risk of fire is always present.
Bob Gardner
"john smith" <jsm...@net.net> wrote in message
news:47ec06d3$0$22830$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
Dudley Henriques
As a pilot sometimes flying in specialized venues, I've had to wear
specific clothing while in these venues.As a guest at Navy TPS, while
flying the T38 and as a guest of Strike ATD in the F14 in the winter, I
had to wear what the Navy calls a "poopie suit"; an exposure suit in
case I ended up in the Chesapeake Bay after doing something stupid. It's
a wonder ANYONE could fly at all wearing that thing. Took longer to get
it on than the actual flight, but your life expenceny in the water
without it wasn't all that hot. Even with it, they had to pluck you out
pretty fast :-)
For air show work in the Mustang I always wore Nomex. Hot as hell in the
summer but not as hot as it might get with a fire in the cockpit not
having it on. Since most of my display work was done using METO power,
the cockpit got a bit warm wearing Nomex.
In the J3 and in all airplanes having offset heel brakes, I favored
sneaks so my heels wouldn't slip off the brakes at just the wrong moment.
Actually, for everyday pleasure flying, I never gave clothing much
thought other than comfort. Strange now that I look back on it,
especially considering the thought I gave to clothing while in the
specialized environments.
The bush pilot had a solid point. One SHOULD give at least some thought
to clothing. I'm fairly certain most pilots flying distances over
specific routes do actually consider this factor and allow for it in
their survival thinking.
--
Dudley Henriques
Darkwing
I usually just wear a toga, sure the instructor is a little freaked but the
boys need to breathe!
Dan
D0t C0m> wrote:
> But, the pilot referenced in the original post should have been wearing a
> UNIFORM!!!!!!
>
> He could have used the gold braid to lash up some snow shoes from pine
> boughs. Plus, he would have looked much more professional when the rescue
> crew picked him up!!!!
> ;-)
Be sure to wear a uniform from a dictator's country -- those guys have
so many braids and baubles -- you could build a shelter, satellite
tracking station, dish antenna, and wide screen TV..
Dan Mc
gatt
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk At Wow Way D0t C0m> wrote in message
news:k7idnXDtC8drk3Ha...@wideopenwest.com...
> But, the pilot referenced in the original post should have been wearing a
> UNIFORM!!!!!!
>
> He could have used the gold braid to lash up some snow shoes from pine
> boughs. Plus, he would have looked much more professional when the rescue
> crew picked him up!!!!
Right. Somewhere between Captain Kirk and Captain Stubing. With a swagger
stick, and a seegar for whatever chap rescues him.
I wear an A-2, and I bought a "Remove Before Flight" tanktop for the mizz,
strictly for safety purposes you know. :>
-c
gatt
> Be sure to wear a uniform from a dictator's country -- those guys have
> so many braids and baubles -- you could build a shelter, satellite
> tracking station, dish antenna, and wide screen TV..
"What's THAT above your pocket?"
"That's my Cross Country Solo medal."
"Your...what?"
"It doubles as a morse-code signal device. Pilots are very pragmatic."
gatt
"Tina" <tbake...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:53faf87c-8d69-43ab...@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>I guess husband's suggestion of nude was self serving, huh?
Certainly not! I'm SURE he was strictly interested in your comfort and
safety.
-c
Dan
> I guess husband's suggestion of nude was self serving, huh?
>
Nope.
A critical requirement all aviators adhere too. ATC won't let you take
off otherwise.
(Now tell him he owes me)
Dan Mc
Matt W. Barrow
Full pirate regalia.
Jay Somerset
<christoph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On 2008-03-27 10:20:16 -0700, "Bob Gardner" <bob...@comcast.net> said:
>
>> http://tinyurl.com/3ayjjb
>>
>> A bush pilot once told me that I should always wear clothing that would
>> allow me to walk home if I had to put the airplane down somewhere.
>> Guess this guy learned that lesson the hard way.
>>
>> Bob Gardner
>
>The headline calls him a student pilot, even though he is a private
>pilot with 150 hours and an instrument rating.
Well, he was a student, at the college. So easy to parse the sentence
in multiple ways. :-)
--
Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)
john smith
Quite the contrary Dan.
Polyester will wick persperation away from the body to evaporate.
This has advantages in both cold and hot environments.
Cotton absorbs the persperation and retains it. This may have some
benefits in hot conditions but in cold conditions is absorbs the body
heat away and cools the body further as the heat is dissipated through
convection.
Why do you think all the special ops troops in Afganistan and Iraq are
given an allowance to purchase poly-goods from the backpacking stores in
the States before ship out?
I have been wearing polyester hiking socks for the past year. The only
problem I have is that they are so effective the skin on the soles of my
feet crack because they are so dry. The polyester also wicks away the
bodys natural oils.
Because it wicks the moisture away from the body polyester fabrics such
as good quality fleece will keep you warm even when wet. Between
gravity, convection and your body heat, the fabric will dry in a couple
of hours after total immersion.
Dan
>
> Why do you think all the special ops troops in Afganistan and Iraq are
> given an allowance to purchase poly-goods from the backpacking stores in
> the States before ship out?
Yeah, I kinda know all about it after serving in the Armor and the
Infantry.
Here's the deal -- cotton doesn't "kill." It may be slightly less
comfortable, but "kill"?
No -- that's marketing hype.
Dan Mc
Margy Natalie
>
> The bush pilot had a solid point. One SHOULD give at least some thought
> to clothing. I'm fairly certain most pilots flying distances over
> specific routes do actually consider this factor and allow for it in
> their survival thinking.
>
Don't tell Ron, but I carry an emergency blanket in the pocket of my
winter coat. If we go down I'm NOT freezing to death! Summer it's
usually jeans unless it's so hot I can't stand it. I usually wear
cotton, but if we leave straight after work I wear whatever I went to
work in.
Margy
Dudley Henriques
Sounds like a plan Margy.
--
Dudley Henriques
Private
I disagree, it is not marketing hype at all, rather it is the opinion of
unpleasant experience. Living in Canada and engaging in many outdoor
activities has given me lots of experience with cold and cool and damp
weather. IMHO the saying is or should be 'wear cotton and you will die'.
Die may be a figure of speech or an exaggeration depending on circumstance
but the fact remains that cotton will result in reduced physical ability and
hypothermia in most cool or cold weather especially if combined with
moisture from exertion or weather. Hypothermia is more common in cool
weather than in severe cold and it does kill. I will not wear ANY cotton in
the mountains except in the height of summer and even then my fleece (and
Gore-Tex) is in my pack. Polar fleece (polypropylene, 'polypro') will wick
moisture away from your body and help to prevent heat loss that can lead to
hypothermia. It is only fair rain gear but it will air dry much faster than
any other fabric and will retain heat when wet similar to wool. A garbage
bag will help in a rain emergency. Fleece does not like fire or sparks and
while it does nor burn easily it does melt and is not suitable for
circumstances requiring flame resistance. Some fleece does retain body odor
and many people are now using fine Merino wool next to the skin, and wool is
much more flame resistant.
IMHO polar fleece and a warm hat are the basic essentials of any survival
kit.
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=polypropylene+%22polar+fleece%22&btnG=Search&meta=
Happy landings,
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
<f2f797b1-3810-4e07...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>:
There are measurable differences between the insulating qualities
of different materials when wet:
http://www.losalamos.org/lasar/lafb/cotton_kills.htm
People can die of hypothermia in above-freezing weather:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002466204_hiker02m.html
The CDC recommends synthetics over cotton: "The outer layer of clothing
should be tightly woven and wind resistant. Inside layers of wool, silk,
or polypropylene are preferred over cotton."
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5205a3.htm
From a retrospective analysis of a death from hypothermia:
http://www.traditionalmountaineering.org/News_Lost_Snowmobilers.htm
Traditional "Layers" based on the forecast weather are essential protection from
hypothermia. These layers include - 1. a (non-cotton) wicking layer of light
polypropylene, next to the skin, - 2. light layers of (non-cotton) loose fitting
weather dependent insulating clothing of modern design that can be added or
removed to avoid dangerous sweating and - 3. an outer layer of water proof-
breathable hard shell clothing. Extra insulating layers to be worn while
inactive and extra dry insulating gloves and hats are carried in the day pack.
The thin light hard shell pants and jacket can be carried in the day pack until
needed. These sophisticated layers are designed to move possible quarts of
perspiration through the layers to the outside.
Note: Cotton fibers can hold 40 times the water weight than polypropylene
fibers. Hydrophilic cotton clothing loses about 70% of its insulating value when
it becomes wet. Hydrophobic wool or man made fibers loose little insulating
value when wet. Layers are: wicking - light polypropylene material next to the
skin, insulating - loosely fitting layers of pile, fleece and other patented
thick materials that trap insulating air and lastly, a light thin outer
breathable-waterproof - hard shell layer such as Gore-Tex.
...
The men were reportedly wearing non-breathable waterproof pants and coats
"layered" over heavy absorbent cotton sox, cotton "thermal" underwear and cotton
canvass clothing. This heavy cotton work clothing became wet from melted snow,
actual immersion in water and sweating from trying to manhandle their snow
machines through deep unconsolidated powder snow and through several streams.
Cotton absorbs and retains 40 times more water than man made fibers. Wet cotton
loses about 70% of its insulating value.
...
Hypothermia causes an insidious loss of mental and physical ability. Hypothermia
can be avoided by personal choices and actions using simple information,
training, proper gear, and knowledge gained through the experiences of others.
=============
I didn't see anything that made me think that "cotton kills" is a
marketing ploy with no basis in fact.
Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
Dylan Smith
> The headline calls him a student pilot, even though he is a private
> pilot with 150 hours and an instrument rating.
Well, we all know what the media are like... but it may have had a grain
of accuracy if he was still in training, for example, for the commercial
rating. While at a pilot certificate level it wasn't accurate, he may
still have been an aviation student in a very real sense.
--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Dan
wrote:
>
> I didn't see anything that made me think that "cotton kills" is a
> marketing ploy with no basis in fact.
Thanks for the long post, but hypothermia is usually the last link in
a very long chain.
Trust me -- I've got the gear --polypro, wool, etc. I hunt in below 0
temps, have backpacked in winter, canoed whitewater in early spring,
and spent weeks in the field in training on two continents.
I love my polypro, but wasn't allowed to wear any of it on a tank --
ever.
"Cotton kills" oversimplifies the problem. If you are to the point
where the only thing protecting you is a t shirt and cotton long johns
-- you're in a world of hurt.
Dan Mc
Stealth Pilot
wrote:
rotfl
gatt I never thought of you as a comedian.
priceless, absolutely priceless.
Stealth (still laughing ) Pilot
Private
> On Mar 28, 12:38 am, "Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole...@canisius.edu>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I didn't see anything that made me think that "cotton kills" is a
>> marketing ploy with no basis in fact.
>
> Thanks for the long post, but hypothermia is usually the last link in
> a very long chain.
With respect, poor preparation causing hypothermia is usually a primary
link, quickly followed by deteriorating mental acuity. It is like hypoxia
or dehydration, you do not recognize it until it is too late, usually at
sunset.
> Trust me -- I've got the gear --polypro, wool, etc. I hunt in below 0
> temps, have backpacked in winter, canoed whitewater in early spring,
> and spent weeks in the field in training on two continents.
>
> I love my polypro, but wasn't allowed to wear any of it on a tank --
> ever.
Tank wear is irrelevant, and most tank discussion similarly quite OT.
> "Cotton kills" oversimplifies the problem. If you are to the point
> where the only thing protecting you is a t shirt and cotton long johns
> -- you're in a world of hurt.
If you even own cotton long johns or wear cotton tshirts then you have
already taken several steps toward hypothermia. In a survival situation,
you should take your cotton shirt and wear it as far from your body as
possible.
Happy landings,
Dan
>
> > I love my polypro, but wasn't allowed to wear any of it on a tank --
> > ever.
>
> Tank wear is irrelevant, and most tank discussion similarly quite OT.
It's very On Topic -- we weren't allowed to wear any poly fabrics. It
was Nomex and Cotton -- period. And somehow we didn't die.
Look -- I'm not arguing that cotton t shirts and long underwear are
suitable for wilderness situations.
Cotton duck as an fabric has been used for over 200 years by plenty of
wilderness types -- long before GPS, polypro, and rescue helicopters.
Personally I rely on wool, with a cotton duck shell when the wind
whips or I'm traipsing through briers. Silk long underwear -- when
it's really cold -- completes the ensemble
I'll say it again -- the "cotton kills" statement is overblown, and
leads to millions spent by people whose biggest concern is getting
damp getting out of the Land Rover on their way to Macy's.
Dan Mc
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
<c8a844dc-16a5-479c...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>:
>Thanks for the long post, but hypothermia is usually the last link in
>a very long chain.
While that is true, the length of the chain does
not mean that hypothermia after a survived crash
is a negligible threat.
>Trust me -- I've got the gear --polypro, wool, etc. I hunt in below 0
>temps, have backpacked in winter, canoed whitewater in early spring,
>and spent weeks in the field in training on two continents.
>I love my polypro, but wasn't allowed to wear any of it on a tank --
>ever.
The subject of this thread is (oddly enough) "What to wear
when flying."
It may well be that the analogues from hiking, biking, and
moutaineering are more relevant to the thread than lessons
learned from driving a tank. I imagine it is rare for tank
crews to end up in a situation where they have to survive
in a cold, wet wilderness.
>"Cotton kills" oversimplifies the problem. If you are to the point
>where the only thing protecting you is a t shirt and cotton long johns
>-- you're in a world of hurt.
I think the point of the advice given at the start of this
thread is that it is well to think things through so that,
in a worst-case scenario, one is as well-prepared to survive
as possible.
Of course it is best to break the accident chain earlier and
not have to rely on the kind of clothing being warn in order
to survive. But stuff happens and people end up outdoors.
The pilot who was wearing shorts while flying over snow-covered
mountains in the dark lucked out twice: he didn't get killed
immediately and he didn't die of hypothermia.
"Cotton kills" is a slogan and a mnemonic, not a substitute
for accident investigation. It wasn't wearing cotton that
caused the two snowmobilers to enter restricted area without
telling anyone where they were going; but once they got in
trouble, their cotton clothing didn't help them as much
as other kinds of clothing would have.
Dan
wrote:
>
> The subject of this thread is (oddly enough) "What to wear
> when flying."
>
> It may well be that the analogues from hiking, biking, and
> moutaineering are more relevant to the thread than lessons
> learned from driving a tank.
Wrong. the tank example is more relevant -- enclosed space, possibiity
of fire, possible breakdown in inhospitable terrain.
There's nothing I've worn Mountain Biking that would do a bit of good
in an airplane -- or a tank.
> I imagine it is rare for tank
> crews to end up in a situation where they have to survive
> in a cold, wet wilderness.
You haven't spent much time on a tank in Hohehfelds, have you?
> "Cotton kills" is a slogan and a mnemonic, not a substitute
> for accident investigation. It wasn't wearing cotton that
> caused the two snowmobilers to enter restricted area without
> telling anyone where they were going; but once they got in
> trouble, their cotton clothing didn't help them as much
> as other kinds of clothing would have.
The chain was long. Polypro instead of cotton would have prolonged the
inevitable.
Perhaps we should attribute it to Darwin?
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
<8b4b02c8-a944-4866...@y24g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>:
>> The subject of this thread is (oddly enough) "What to wear
>> when flying."
>> It may well be that the analogues from hiking, biking, and
>> moutaineering are more relevant to the thread than lessons
>> learned from driving a tank.
>Wrong. the tank example is more relevant -- enclosed space, possibiity
>of fire, possible breakdown in inhospitable terrain.
Well, there's no accounting for taste in the use
of analogies, I guess.
>There's nothing I've worn Mountain Biking that would do a bit of good
>in an airplane -- or a tank.
The situation envisaged is the kind of clothing that may
be necessary for survival if and when the plane comes down
in inhospitable territory.
>> I imagine it is rare for tank
>> crews to end up in a situation where they have to survive
>> in a cold, wet wilderness.
>You haven't spent much time on a tank in Hohehfelds, have you?
Neither have you.
I'm sure you meant to type "Hohenfels."
http://benefits.military.com/misc/installations/Base_Content.jsp?id=1645
40,000 acres of playground is big.
But I doubt that even the military could lose a
tank there in such a way that the crew had to
hike out in order to survive.
>> "Cotton kills" is a slogan and a mnemonic, not a substitute
>> for accident investigation. It wasn't wearing cotton that
>> caused the two snowmobilers to enter restricted area without
>> telling anyone where they were going; but once they got in
>> trouble, their cotton clothing didn't help them as much
>> as other kinds of clothing would have.
>The chain was long. Polypro instead of cotton would have prolonged the
>inevitable.
The son survived; the father died.
Polypro instead of cotton may have saved the father's
life.
>Perhaps we should attribute it to Darwin?
If any of us want to avoid starring in the Darwin awards,
foresight about the dangers we face might help.
Dan
wrote:
>
> >> I imagine it is rare for tank
> >> crews to end up in a situation where they have to survive
> >> in a cold, wet wilderness.
> >You haven't spent much time on a tank in Hohehfelds, have you?
>
> Neither have you.
Yeah, I have.
Funny, I never saw you there.
> But I doubt that even the military could lose a
> tank there in such a way that the crew had to
> hike out in order to survive.
Based on your vast experience?
"Hiking out" isn't the only concern. Proper clothing allows crews to
perform despite the conditions.
Dan Mc
john smith
Wear cotton while flying.
Carry a fanny/backpack with polyester survival clothing to change into
when safely on the ground. The cotton can then be used for bedding and
fire starting at that time. :-))
WJRFlyBoy
> You haven't spent much time on a tank in Hohehfelds, have you?
Preferred black PJs on LRRPS.
WJRFlyBoy
> "Dan" <dan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c8a844dc-16a5-479c...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> On Mar 28, 12:38 am, "Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole...@canisius.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I didn't see anything that made me think that "cotton kills" is a
>>> marketing ploy with no basis in fact.
>>
>> Thanks for the long post, but hypothermia is usually the last link in
>> a very long chain.
>
> With respect, poor preparation causing hypothermia is usually a primary
> link, quickly followed by deteriorating mental acuity. It is like hypoxia
> or dehydration, you do not recognize it until it is too late, usually at
> sunset.
Yes, you have the sequencing accurately, hypothermia is a long way from
the end of any physiological chain of events.
Dan
Oh god -- now you were a LRRP in 'Nam?
Keep it coming.. this is too good.
WJRFlyBoy
> On Mar 28, 4:49 pm, WJRFlyBoy <994wjrfly...@geemail.com726> wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:35:56 -0700 (PDT), Dan wrote:
>>> You haven't spent much time on a tank in Hohehfelds, have you?
>>
>> Preferred black PJs on LRRPS.
>
> Oh god -- now you were a LRRP in 'Nam?
How about that? You read my books?
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
<0390a4ff-e48b-49e5...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:
>On Mar 28, 2:57 pm, "Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole...@canisius.edu>
>wrote:
>>
>> >> I imagine it is rare for tank
>> >> crews to end up in a situation where they have to survive
>> >> in a cold, wet wilderness.
>> >You haven't spent much time on a tank in Hohehfelds, have you?
>> Neither have you.
>Yeah, I have.
>Funny, I never saw you there.
"Hohehfelds" doesn't exist. There is a huge
military training base by a different name
(Hohenfels). I presume that is what you meant.
>> But I doubt that even the military could lose a
>> tank there in such a way that the crew had to
>> hike out in order to survive.
>Based on your vast experience?
Based on reasonable expectations of how the military
feels about 1) losing tanks on maneuvers; 2) leaving
tank crews to walk out of harsh terrain.
Here's another way of putting it: the rules you were
given for what you would wear in the tank were only
concerned with surviving a fire in the tank. They
were not geared toward surviving in the bush after the
tank failed because, as a general rule, tanks don't
get lost out in the bush in such a way that the tank
crews have to hike out of the wilderness.
Airplanes, unlike tanks, often do get lost in such
a way that survivors need to spend some time in the
cold and damp.
>"Hiking out" isn't the only concern. Proper clothing allows crews to
>perform despite the conditions.
Hiking out after a crash is the situation that was
envisaged in this thread. Tank maneuvers on a
closed reserve under the watchful eye of a huge
corps of support staff just don't strike me as
a reasonable analogy to the difficulties that
pilots may face elsewhere in the world.
YMMV.
Dan
wrote:
> >Based on your vast experience?
>
> Based on reasonable expectations of how the military
> feels about 1) losing tanks on maneuvers; 2) leaving
> tank crews to walk out of harsh terrain.
OK, so the answer is, you don't know.
> Here's another way of putting it: the rules you were
> given for what you would wear in the tank were only
> concerned with surviving a fire in the tank. They
> were not geared toward surviving in the bush after the
> tank failed because, as a general rule, tanks don't
> get lost out in the bush in such a way that the tank
> crews have to hike out of the wilderness.
How much time is spent on the tank? Off the tank? What happens when
the tank breaks down? Any idea?
> Airplanes, unlike tanks, often do get lost in such
> a way that survivors need to spend some time in the
> cold and damp.
And tank crews and helicopter crews (who operate under the same
uniform restrictions) certianly are always just a few miles from a
comfy hut.
> Hiking out after a crash is the situation that was
> envisaged in this thread. Tank maneuvers on a
> closed reserve under the watchful eye of a huge
> corps of support staff just don't strike me as
> a reasonable analogy to the difficulties that
> pilots may face elsewhere in the world.
What Army were you in? I froze and sweat my a$$ off in damn harsh
conditions, and and off a tank.
It 'doesn't "strike [you] as a reasonable analogy" because you decided
you know all about tanks and crews and Army training without really
having the faintest idea that in fact there is a direct co-relation
between the clothing needs of the two -- both pilots and tankers need
to survive the initial fire, and then the Long Walk to the Rear.
NOMEX is the fabric of choice for both.
Now, where this thread got hijacked was the use of the brilliant
marketing phrase, "cotton kills."
If it's stuffed down your throat in the form of a sock, maybe. If it's
all you're wearing and you drop into a lake when it's under 40 degrees
F, and you don't dry off, maybe.
By that reasoning, we should also say "Doritos Kill", "J.C. Penney Big
and Tall Man's Dress Slacks Kill", and "Phil Collins Playing the
Background on the Radio Kills" because there is some tenuous casual
link that someone, somewhere can imagine.
Patently absurd.
Dan Mc
Jim Logajan
> By that reasoning, we should also say "Doritos Kill"
Well for your information they do! Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0nliPWaCvA
If that doesn't prove it is unsafe to fly in the winter in shorts and a bad
haircut, I don't know what does.
> Patently absurd.
Mission accomplished.
Dan
> Dan <danm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > By that reasoning, we should also say "Doritos Kill"
>
> Well for your information they do! Check this out:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0nliPWaCvA
So what are you saying -- we should fly in mouse costumes???
Dan Mc
Bob F.
--
Regards, BobF.
"Dan" <dan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:23dd3244-764e-4707...@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Jim Logajan
You mean there are people who aren't flying in mouse costumes???
Saville
> On Mar 27, 4:30 pm, john smith <jsm...@net.net> wrote:
>>
>> The backpackers mantra is "Cotton kills!"
>
> Yeah.. one of those "sayings" that everyone parrots, with little
> justification.
>
> While cotton socks are pretty much worthless -- once they're wet,
> hello blisters -- the super fabrics aren't a whole lot better.
My understanding is that wool is the best for socks, if you are worried
about getting wet.
B A R R Y
wrote:
>
>
>My understanding is that wool is the best for socks, if you are worried
>about getting wet.
My outdoor experience bears that out.
Dan
> My understanding is that wool is the best for socks, if you are worried
> about getting wet.
A long time ago I was an instructor for the Army Officer Candidate
School (OCS). Early in the program we made it very clear -- no cotton
socks, issue wool only.
Of course some thought they were exempt, so on mile 5 of a 10 mile
road march the route happens to go through a stream.
Guess who had blisters?
Right -- all the cotton sock wearers.
Wool doesn't keep you dry, BUT it lets the water retained by the sock
warm to body temperature as it slowly evacuates (like a dog's coat).
No one was killed by cotton, but they were certainly uncomfortable and
those that blistered, ineffective.
Dan Mc