Soaring hats
Trent Moorehead
sailplane pilots wear? I'm a private pilot preparing to get my
glider rating, but I've never heard an explanation for these
things. Can someone enlighten me?
-Trent
PP-ASEL
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Arnd Wussing
plexiglass canopy, the rims keep out extraneous sunlight and one important
aspect is that there is no little button on the top - that has been known to
hit the canopy in turbulence (with the pilot attached underneath) and either
cause the canopy to crack or extreme pain.
-Arnd. LS-4a & 304CZ
p.s. There was an interesting thread a while ago from the U.K. where the
discussion was about banning pilots who flew with mere baseball caps - I'm
not sure of what the outcome of the thread or the actual status of Baseball
caps in the U.K.
"Trent Moorehead" <mooreta...@cat.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:0a32c798...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
David & Kathy Martin
terry cloth so you can soak them with water before the flight.
This provides evaporative cooling to keep the main processor
cool.
Al
They make you look funny walking around the ramp with them on.
but hey looking funny is a lot better than melanoma
Al
www.silentflight.com
where you can find a picture of me looking funny in my gomer hat from Hilton
cup.
David & Kathy Martin <kmartin...@lcc.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:123308e8...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com...
Larry Goddard
so that with a slight tilt of your head you can keep the direct sunlight out of
your eyes, even while thermalling. This is impossible to do with a ball cap.
And wider brimmed hats obscure too much of the sky.
Larry Goddard
"01" USA
Trent Moorehead wrote:
> What's the story behind the white hats that I see so many
> sailplane pilots wear? I'm a private pilot preparing to get my
> glider rating, but I've never heard an explanation for these
> things. Can someone enlighten me?
>
> -Trent
> PP-ASEL
>
Jean Richard
>
> You left out another aspect...
>
> They make you look funny walking around the ramp with them on.
> but hey looking funny is a lot better than melanoma
And they are now "fashion". Walking downtown, taking bus or metro, you
will see a lot of young people wearing soaring hats.
For the colour, many instructors will ask their pupils not to wear
white hats while flying on dual because of reflection in the canopy.
It's mostly true if you fly in mountains, with snow on the top.
In France, they call them « bobs » (because they look like that
British Police hats).
Jean
Ernie
removed) ;-)
a ball cap does all the things you can have from a hat without obscuring the
sight to the side and .... ONE SIZE FITS ALL
Ernie
"Larry Goddard" <la...@siriusimages.com> wrote in message
news:392E98C0...@siriusimages.com...
Larry Goddard
But unless you only have one eye in the center of your forehead you will need to
be doing some pretty wild gyrations with your head to keep the sun out of your
eyes while thermalling and looking around for traffic.... hence, in my opinion,
not as safe because you can't see as well.
Larry
Tom Serkowski
cancer.
I remember reading somewhere that the incidence of skin cancer on the
top of the ear relates directly to the side of the car one drives from.
USA is the left ear, & UK is the right, for example.
-Tom
Phil Morgan
soaring hats but I will tell you what I think that I know. First of all, it
is really sunny up there under the clear canopy and easy to get a sunburn. I
plan on always wearing sunscreen to protect my skin and eventually getting a
hat with a wide brim. The back of the neck can get burned also so a regular
ball cap may not be sufficient. A second reason for the white caps is that
they don't have a knot in the middle like most ball caps do. I have heard
stories of pilots getting bounced up in turbulence and bumping the canopy.
The canopy would have been fine if it had been hit with a bare head or a
soft hat but the button in the middle of the ball cap focused all the force
of the impact in a small area and the canopy ended up getting cracked.
Phil
Tomasz Sielicki
Tomasz Sielicki
Trent Moorehead napisał(a):
Brian Case
cap. Also the long brim often interferes with the canopy when
rubbernecking as you should to clear turns and keep track of other
aircraft in the area.
Tango4
have been banned by the BGA. I know for sure that getting caught flying with
one down at our club will get you grounded.
Ian
Doug Hoffman
We Colonists aren't bound by such an edict, upstarts that we are. ;-)
I wear a "painter's cap", which is similar to a baseball cap except
it has a much smaller bill and no crown. It is light colored and
provides the extra sun protection that I need for my forehead,
where skin cancer has been an issue (yes I also wear sun blocker).
The button has been removed and this cap in no way interferes
with my ability to look up, back, or wherever in scanning for
traffic.
Very important for visual safety, IMHO, are the Suntigers
eye protection that I always wear. In addition to offering
the best possible protection for my eyes, they allow me to
see better/farther/clearer and with less strain than
anything else I've tried in bright sunlight.
-Doug
Burt Compton
>have been banned by the BGA. I know for sure that getting caught flying with
>one down at our club will get you grounded.
I heard from a UK pilot flying with us in Miam that the restricted vision of a
pilot wearing a ball cap was a contributing factor in a UK midair. In any
case, I take off my goofy tennis hat when in a thermal with other gliders, so
I can see all of them (and salute them if they outclimb me!). I'd rather risk
a few minutes of sun exposure than a midair.
Burt Compton
Miami Gliders
sunny Florida
Ernie
banning a ball cap.
Do you ban pilots as well who have their standard soaring hat too deep to
see ? Or those who are not looking out at all ? Or those who fly without a
relief system and become a serious risk into the flight before they wet
their pants ? Or those who wear stupid clothing which reflects in the canopy
?
how much does the soaring dress (the official one) cost which entitles you
to fly in a BGA club ;-)
I hope this is just a joke as otherwise it would show that there is now such
thing as free flying in the BGA.
Ernie
"Tango4" <i...@imolesworth.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:959418099.25466.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> I think ball caps ( stop the giggling on this side of the atlantic
chaps! )
> have been banned by the BGA. I know for sure that getting caught flying
with
> one down at our club will get you grounded.
>
> Ian
>
>
VY
sunglasses I hear talked about from years ago. Same quality
lenses?
J.P.
>Very important for visual safety, IMHO, are the Suntigers
>eye protection that I always wear. In addition to offering
>the best possible protection for my eyes, they allow me to
>see better/farther/clearer and with less strain than
>anything else I've tried in bright sunlight.
>
>-Doug
>
>
Marc Whisman
>
> You left out another aspect...
>
> They make you look funny walking around the ramp with them on.
Yup. I was wearing my "geezer" hat around an FBO at Long Beach (LGB) on
a hot day and was immediately addressed as "Gilligan" by the clerk
there. :)
-Marc
QuoteMonster
VY wrote in message <00a762dc...@usw-ex0104-032.remarq.com>...
Tom & Linda Dixon
Item # 14114 Australian Toweling Hat @ $12.95 + S/H They come in white,
sky blue and royal blue. S 6 3/4-6 7/8/M 7 -7 1/8/L 7 1/4 - 7 3/8/Xl 7 1/2
- 7 5/8 /2X 7 3/4 - 7 7/8. They shrink about 1/8 inch when washed but
stretch back out when you get them wet. Get the white or sky blue not the-
dark/ hot- royal blue. Get them for the crew too.
P. O. Box 3000, Manchester Center, VT 05255-3000, 1-802-362 or
1-802-262-8484 fax
>
>
>
vaughn simon
Trent Moorehead wrote in message
<0a32c798...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com>...
>What's the story behind the white hats that I see so many
>sailplane pilots wear? I'm a private pilot preparing to get my
>glider rating, but I've never heard an explanation for these
>things. Can someone enlighten me?
>
>-Trent
Trent:
It's really very simple. If you are going to drive a train, you wear a
train engineer's hat. If you are going yachting, you wear a yachting hat.
If you are going to ride a horse, they have hats for that too. If you are
going to drive a glider, you wear a soaring hat.
Questions?
Regards:
Vaughn
George Dennis
covers your ears and the back of your neck and a long peak. There is no button
on top that may crack the canopy upon impact. Remove the peak and wear sun
blockers. Fly the glider - do not drive it.
Keep flying,
George
Richard B
"vaughn simon" <vaughnsimo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> Trent Moorehead wrote in message
> <0a32c798...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com>...
> >What's the story behind the white hats that I see so many
> >sailplane pilots wear? I'm a private pilot preparing to get my
> >glider rating, but I've never heard an explanation for these
> >things. Can someone enlighten me?
> >
> >-Trent
>
> Trent:
> It's really very simple. If you are going to drive a train, you
wear a
> train engineer's hat. If you are going yachting, you wear a yachting
hat.
> If you are going to ride a horse, they have hats for that too. If
you are
> going to drive a glider, you wear a soaring hat.
>
> Questions?
>
> Regards:
> Vaughn
>
>
I've spent some time looking for something suitable, settling on
something quite similar. Sunburn on a bald pate will change your mind
and opinion of hats in general, very quickly. Think the origin of the
soaring hat is from a navy white hat with the brim turned down. The
commercial version is made with the brim a little more full, and
probably not as good materials as the navy version. It's a little more
serious than might be thought, I've tried the "outback" and several
ball caps, none of which I can avoid running into the canopy with when
I turn my head.
Richard B
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
evals
fly open cockpits all wear woollen "bobble hats"
--
Evals
bob....@btantispaminternet.com
"Phil Morgan" <n5...@cswnet.com> wrote in message
news:siu4h6s...@corp.supernews.com...
Martin
Jean Richard <j.ri...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message >
> In France, they call them « bobs » (because they look like that
> British Police hats).
>
In the Netherlands we call them "Thermiek petjes" wich can be translated
into "thermal caps".
Martin
Phil Morgan
pilots who fly open cockpits all wear woollen "bobble hats"
What is a bobble hat and where can I buy one? I have heard that some 1-26's
can be flown without the canopy so I might need to buy one of those hats.
Robertmudd1u
<ar...@wussing.com> writes:
>s. There was an interesting thread a while ago from the U.K. where the
>discussion was about banning pilots who flew with mere baseball caps - I'm
>not sure of what the outcome of the thread or the actual status of Baseball
>caps in the U.K.
When I flew at Bicester last year I was told they would not launch me if I was
wearing my baseball cap. I was sitting in the cockpit with it on but intended
to change to my soaring hat anyway. At the other sites the subject never came
up but maybe I did not wear the baseball cap while sitting in the cockpit.
Robert Mudd
Sonum Norbu
> > What's the story behind the white hats that I see so many
> > sailplane pilots wear? I'm a private pilot preparing to get my
> > glider rating, but I've never heard an explanation for these
> > things. Can someone enlighten me?
I just couldn't resist this thread.
In australia, terry towelling hats (TTH) are the usual headwear. So much so that some hang glider pilots refer to us as Old Farts In
Terry Towelling Hats (OFITTH). Unfortunately, I never had one cos I thought they looked a wee bit daggy myself, but after
hearing about the OFITTH's I just had to have one. I've tried everywhere to get one only to be told that there are none as they are
the current rage with all the young kids. (YFITTH). <shaking head>
I will eventually obtain one or preferably two (dark for winter, light for summer), as it seems that half of the subscribers to
aus.soaring news group are looking for one for me. :)))
graham
Thomas Ploch
In article <0a32c798...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com>,
mooreta...@cat.com.invalid says...
> What's the story behind the white hats that I see so many
> sailplane pilots wear? I'm a private pilot preparing to get my
> glider rating, but I've never heard an explanation for these
> things. Can someone enlighten me?
>
> -Trent
> PP-ASEL
Dave Kahn
robert...@aol.comnojunk (Robertmudd1u) wrote:
> When I flew at Bicester last year I was told they would not launch me
> if I was
> wearing my baseball cap.
There is a BGA edict that any instructor observed gliding while wearing a
peaked cap shall immediately have his/her rating suspended. There was some
discussion about this in this group round about last June. There were some
persuasive arguments that the BGA's ruling is not justified, however it's
no longer a matter for individual pilot discretion in the UK. Nothing that
could interfere with upward peripheral vision is permitted.
Dave Kahn
JohnPegase
robert...@aol.comnojunk (Robertmudd1u) writes:
>s. There was an interesting thread a while ago from the U.K. where the
>>discussion was about banning pilots who flew with mere baseball caps - I'm
>>not sure of what the outcome of the thread or the actual status of Baseball
>>caps in the U.K.
>
>When I flew at Bicester last year I was told they would not launch me if I
>was
>wearing my baseball cap. I was sitting in the cockpit with it on but intended
>to change to my soaring hat anyway. At the other sites the subject never came
>up but maybe I did not wear the baseball cap while sitting in the cockpit.
>
>Robert Mudd
>
If you don't think baseball caps severely limit your view try sitting and
looking at the far wall, and look up with just your eyes. Then put your hand
in place where a baseball cap peak would be and notice how much above you you
CAN'T see now. Then try telling me it doesn't obstruct your view. Yes, you
can tilt your head up to see more, but the cap will still be obstructing about
30% of the area you could see.
(The ex-CFI at Bicester had just become chairman of the BGA safety committee
about the time you brought the tailless wonder along, so you were getting
advice ahead of the rest of the BGA.)
All the silly talk abut how baseball players had no problems seeing the fast
moving ball when wearing such caps ignored the important point that they were
looking at the point where the ball was known to be about to come from,
(pitcher and batter) straight in front of them and moving up, rather than a
ball whcih might randomly come towards then unexpectedly from above and
descending when they where just looking up from staring at a vario for example.
John Wright, 742
Fred Steadman
found that under normal circumstances it takes an uncomfortable eye roll
to get it done. Actually, the rim of my sunglasses blocks out more sky.
That said, in sailplanes where we typically have a fishbowl canopy, we
need the little hats that protect our ears and the backs of our necks,
as well as our eyes. Fortunately we seldom wear headsets in sailplanes,
because the gardening hats get in their way.
In power planes, light planes, the tops of our heads and backs of our
necks are typically blocked from the sun by aircraft structure. This is
fortunate because we do need our headsets, which work best with ball
caps.
--
Fred Steadman
Irving, Texas
Terry Edmonds
mentioned the problem of wearing the traditional soaring hat with a
headset that is needed in a self-launch glider. Any comments about that?
Terry Edmonds
DG-400
Bernie
> The white reflects the sunlight and keeps your head cool underneath the
> plexiglass canopy, the rims keep out extraneous sunlight and one important
> aspect is that there is no little button on the top - that has been known to
> hit the canopy in turbulence (with the pilot attached underneath) and either
> cause the canopy to crack or extreme pain.
>
> -Arnd. LS-4a & 304CZ
>
> p.s. There was an interesting thread a while ago from the U.K. where the
> discussion was about banning pilots who flew with mere baseball caps - I'm
> not sure of what the outcome of the thread or the actual status of Baseball
> caps in the U.K.
> "Trent Moorehead" <mooreta...@cat.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:0a32c798...@usw-ex0105-034.remarq.com...
> > What's the story behind the white hats that I see so many
> > sailplane pilots wear? I'm a private pilot preparing to get my
> > glider rating, but I've never heard an explanation for these
> > things. Can someone enlighten me?
> >
> > -Trent
> > PP-ASEL
> >
> > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network
> *
> > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
> >
--
to email change cableinot to cableinet
John M. Morgan
tower controlled airport . . . when they talks, they wants a response. The
solution? Two soaring hats, one is about two sizes too large and goes over
everything loosely.
I also use sunscreen on the nose and hands. As one of those unfortunate few
that lost the top of an ear to cancer (basal cell, left side, drove a police
car for years), you won't catch me wearing a baseball hat. Sun screen is now
a religious thing. Amen brother.
--
John "Bumper" Morgan <bump...@castles.com> S10-VT N50ZZ
To REPLY please remove aviation part of address.
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink.."
Terry Edmonds <tedm...@icaen.uiowa.edu> wrote in message
news:3933E2FD...@icaen.uiowa.edu...
Dan Marotta
Cheers,
Dan - Normally LS-6a
David Newill
top! Several of us have found that wearing a typical baseball cap, when you
hit a strong cell the shock of smacking the canopy with that button is not
fun ;(
As for white - again probably from tennis!
"Tomasz Sielicki" <tsie...@tchr.org> wrote in message
news:392EE0F8...@tchr.org...
> Please include yellow hats as well while developing the thread. :-)
> Tomasz Sielicki
>
> Trent Moorehead napisa³(a):
Armand A. Medeiros
Armand
(tongue in cheek)
"Terry Edmonds" <tedm...@icaen.uiowa.edu> wrote in message
news:3933E2FD...@icaen.uiowa.edu...
RHallifax
>have been banned by the BGA. I know for sure that getting caught flying with
>one down at our club will get you grounded.
>
>Ian
I'm beginning to grasp the reason why soaring is a dying sport: it's over
regulated beyond reason. Now, you Brits might like that crap, but us Yanks get
a belly full of regulation pretty quickly... I haven't even done a solo yet,
and am almost regretting getting involved in this sport due to the regulations
(and I ain't talking about the FAA either).
Blue skies, and jump often.
Bob
Bill Daniels
that there would be no rules - until someone did something really stupid.
Then, we would write a rule prohibiting the stupid action, naming the rule
after the offending person.
Faced with the prospect of permanent notoriety, common sense prevailed among
the membership and we never got around to writing a single rule.
Bill Daniels
> Well, do keep in mind that this is a function of clubs, not soaring. It's
> quite
> unfortunate, but somehow in every club I've ever dealt with, the people
> who want to make rules always seem to manage to get into a position to
> do so. In the US, soaring is fortunately regulated by the FAA. The FAA
> rules are not always meaningful, but in general the rules are few enough
and
> the enforcement lax enough that the situation is quite acceptable.
>
> On the other hand, many clubs make rules that are nothing short of moronic
> and do manage to piss off and drive away members.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
Tango4
necessity of having an audio vario installed against the wearing of 'ball'
caps?
Some time ago I believe ( again ) the BGA made some reccomendations about
the fitting of audio varios. I know of several clubs where the majority of
the club fleet still fly without these. If it's OK to fly without audio then
it must be OK to fly with a ball cap.
Ian
RHallifax <rhal...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000601134829...@ng-ft1.aol.com...
Tango4
newbie who's already ticked off!
Jan Lustrup
Jan
Ian Johnston
: I'm beginning to grasp the reason why soaring is a dying sport: it's over
: regulated beyond reason. Now, you Brits might like that crap, but us
: Yanks get a belly full of regulation pretty quickly...
You've got a rather unbalanced picture, I think. Soaring in Britain is, by
and large, wonderfully lightly regulated compared to just about anywhere
else in the world. I'll put the BGA regulations up against the FAR's
any day!
Occasionally little bits of silliness do happen - in any voluntary
organisation you get the odd dictator floating around and in the UK
we are used to sudden safety panics (a bit like the loyalty pledge in
Catch-22) when some strident individual decides to make his or her mark.
Not flying with a big brim is simple common sense: the pompous notice
which went round threatening instant suspension (strappado?) for any
instructor seen wearing a baseball hat inspired (in most of the pilots
I know) a mixture of indignation, amusement and resignation.
But don't judge us by that. Buy a copy of the "Laws and Rules" from the
BGA (www.gliding.co.uk) and see just how well off we are!
Ian
Michael
> >I think ball caps ( stop the giggling on this side of the atlantic
chaps! )
> >have been banned by the BGA. I know for sure that getting caught flying
with
> >one down at our club will get you grounded.
>
> regulated beyond reason. Now, you Brits might like that crap, but us
Yanks get
yet,
> and am almost regretting getting involved in this sport due to the
regulations
> (and I ain't talking about the FAA either).
Well, do keep in mind that this is a function of clubs, not soaring. It's
Dylan Smith
:
: But don't judge us by that. Buy a copy of the "Laws and Rules" from the
: BGA (www.gliding.co.uk) and see just how well off we are!
I noticed on Flyer's website that now the JAA wants to get its act
in on the gliding scene. Being a power plane pilot, and seeing what
a clusterf**k JAR/FCL was, please resist the JAA with every ounce of
your strength! The JAA has proved itself to be nothing but trouble
from what I've read in the UK aviation press and from what I've heard
from friends there.
(IMHO, Britain would do well to leave the EU, but that's a topic for
another newsgroup...)
--
Dylan Smith, Houston TX.
Flying: http://www.icct.net/~dyls/flying.html
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"
Sonum Norbu
>
> I'm beginning to grasp the reason why soaring is a dying sport: it's over
> regulated beyond reason.
>
> Blue skies, and jump often.
>
Interesting comment Bob, but I gave away jumping because of the egomaniac arseholes that one had to contend with. I now
enjoy the blue skies much more and I dont think it's any more regulated than jumping. Maybe pilots obey the rules more but that is
a matter of opinion. As for the hats, I reckon that common sense is the answer and just cos the poms ban peak caps that doesn't
make all soaring pilots nutters, just the poms, and being an australian we just accept this. :))
Blue ones.
graham
BAToulson
(RHallifax) writes:
>
>I'm beginning to grasp the reason why soaring is a dying sport: it's over
>regulated beyond reason. Now, you Brits might like that crap, but us Yanks
>get
>a belly full of regulation pretty quickly... I haven't even done a solo yet,
>and am almost regretting getting involved in this sport due to the
>regulations
>(and I ain't talking about the FAA either).
>
Hmmm! Interesting viewpoint!
When I first went solo, I thought I was invincible.
By the time I had 500 hours I was convinced I had the answer to everything
about gliding.
At 1000 hours, and having had a few frights, including an official near miss
with a Tornado aircraft at 500 feet teaching field landings in a motor glider,
I realised that perhaps I should be a little more careful about safety issues,
particularly lookout. (thank goodness the Tornado pilot was wide awake, he
pulled away before I saw him and we missed by about 100 ft) but this was the
subject of a CAA enquiry at which no one was judged to be at fault!
At 1500 hours, having been Chief Flying Instructor of one of the largest Clubs
in the UK, I became very aware of my personal responsibility to fly as safely
as possible but also I had a responsibility to ensures did as well. I can
assure you that investigating a major accident, and yes, we had a few, really
does focus the mind.
During my gliding career, over 100 glider pilots have been killed in the UK, a
large number recently were as a result of mid air collision (3 last year alone
).
The only cause of a mid air has to be a failure to maintain a good lookout by
the pilot involved, therefore anything which impairs vision is not only totally
stupid, but selfish beyond belief. Any large brim or peak on headgear comes
into this category, particularly as it is totally unnecessary.
Most UK clubs would not provide a launch to a pilot whose vision was judged by
the instructor in charge to be impaired by any means.
I hope you stick with gliding. I look forward to a conversation with you on
this subject when you have done your first 1000 hours. I suspect you will have
a totally different opinion.
On the other hand, perhaps you would be better off out of the sport, with your
attitude it would be a tragedy if you caused someone else's death through your
dogmatic views.
Barney UK
Dylan Smith
: The only cause of a mid air has to be a failure to maintain a good lookout by
: the pilot involved, therefore anything which impairs vision is not only totally
: stupid, but selfish beyond belief. Any large brim or peak on headgear comes
: into this category, particularly as it is totally unnecessary.
Sticking my neck out, I would beg to differ on the hat issue. I think
when the sun is overhead, they enhance vision, not limit it. Of course,
I have fewer flight hours than you by a long shot, but here goes...
In a low wing aircraft, or even more so, a canopied
low wing aircraft with the sun in the position it usually is during
the best flying conditions, a peaked cap improves vision because
under those conditions, the sun shining on your face and eyelashes
and sunglasses washes everything out, making low-contrast things
(such as white objects on a light blue sky - and guess what colour most
gliders are!) more difficult to see. Even worse, the sun can force you to
squint if the sun falls through the gap between your sunglasses and
face, making it even more difficult to pick out a white glider. This
is eliminated by the bill of a baseball cap. I never used to wear
any kind of hat until my flight instructor (6,000 hours teaching
single-engine, flying club chief instructor) pointed out that during
the middle of the day, it helps vision.
I have found this so in low-wing aircraft (a baseball cap made my two
hour flight on Monday in a Beech Bonanza with the sun shining in through the
top of the windshield a lot more bearable, and eliminated the need
to squint) as well as my limited glider experience. [1]
Remember that you're only going to see another aircraft in daylight conditions
if its image arrives in the fovea of your retina, which is a fairly small
and which will not be blocked by any kind of cap, unless the brim/peak
is a couple of feet long, or the cap is pulled ridiculously low over
the head! Hat or no hat, moving your head is the only way you're going
to keep a proper lookout.
[1] Actually what looks ideal are those brimmed hats I've been seeing
a lot of people at the glider club wearing. They seem to have enough brim
to keep the sun out of your eyes, but smaller than a baseball cap. They
also keep the sun off the back of your neck.
I'll have to go to Wally's World this Saturday and see if I can pick one
up...might be good for Bonanza flying too... I don't bother with
any kind of hat in a high wing aircraft, it's just not necessary and
it's uncomfortable in the heat down here!
As for your near-miss with a Tornado, you probably would have still had
it if you were keeping the world's best lookout. With the size and speed
of military jets, the only way you're going to stack the odds in your
favour is to suppliment see-and-avoid with radar services. We've got
F-16s in our area, and they turn from an almost invisible speck on
the windscreen to a fully grown fighter so fast I doubt there's time
to take evasive action.
Michael
> We've got
> F-16s in our area, and they turn from an almost invisible speck on
> the windscreen to a fully grown fighter so fast I doubt there's time
> to take evasive action.
That's by design, is it not?
Michael
evals
drag factor) :-)
"Phil Morgan" <n5...@cswnet.com> wrote in message
news:sj2ohq...@corp.supernews.com...
Dylan Smith
: Dylan Smith <dy...@alioth.net> wrote
Absolutely. The ANG make that point in their leaflet about Ellington
operations. Those of us who live around Ellington get to know their
routes fairly quickly.
Peter Wilson
vast majority of my 250 glider hours, and in all that time I wore what
we called a 'beanie hat', the hat of choice for gliding in the UK. I did
try baseball hats once when I transitioned to single seaters but very
quickly decided that they were bad news for the following reasons :-
1. In a thermal if you start looking up and to the sides (as any glider
pilot should - a lot) you are very likely to dislodge the cap as the
peak hits the caonpy and after the hat comes adrift it is more than
likely to fall over your face since the peak pulls the front of the hat
down - a major hazzard since it can completely obscure your view for the
second or two it takes you to swear and throw the hat away.
2. I'm thinning up top and any sort of hat is a godsend in summer a
burnt scalp is no fun and hurts like hell, but the tops of my ears are
the first things to get sunburnt and a baseball cap doesn't help with
that, a beanie does, it also stands more chance of protecting the back
of your neck too.
3. It becomes a mark of the pundit to have a grubby, once white, beanie
cap, when it goes on it means you intend to stay airborne. Its almost a
good luck charm now and I feel naked without it in summer, my hat will
be grubby one day too.
I don't want to get into an arguement over the choice of hat, I'm simply
stating that this is what I found and happily it agrees with the BGA's
overstrong edict.
I now an starting to fly in California and I brought my beanie with me,
I'm sure that I'll discover things I don't like about the FAA regulated
gliding over here but I'll comply, there is usually a good enough reason
for rules, and if there isn't then who am I to try and buck the system.
Peter
OFITTH
> > regulated beyond reason.
> >
> >
>
>
Another reason why I find soaring more satistying than jumping is the current thread on headwear. It remains civilised with
balanced reasoning plus a little bit of humour, but no animosity!! You have to admit it's different from rec.skydiving. Keep the flying
up. Sure there is the occaisional transgrssion - Sion comes to mind - but its not often.
Bloo ones, and fluffy clouds.
graham
Dave Kahn
i...@imolesworth.demon.co.uk (Tango4) wrote:
> Heads up guys at the IGC who are worried about dying membership! Here's
> a
> newbie who's already ticked off!
For me one of the big attractions of the sport of gliding is its relaxed
and informal attitude. As free from restrictions as it possibly can be
consistent with safety and the law of the land - that's the way I feel it
should be. The BGA ruling on peaked caps may be mistaken; I think it
probably is, but it's made in the right spirit - that is to say trying to
eliminate a factor that is suspected of having contributed to at least one
fatal accident. We've had too many incidents recently following failure to
maintain a proper lookout. That being the case I'm more than happy to
comply with all safety related rulings, including this one.
Dave Kahn
Fred Steadman
recommended.
--
Fred Steadman
Irving, Texas
Ian Johnston
: That being the case I'm more than happy to
: comply with all safety related rulings, including this one.
Which is all very nice as long as the safety related rulings actually
improve safety. Which then often do, of course, but there is a real risk
that "safety" becomes an unchallengeable mantra which automatically wins
the argument for the first person to invoke it, regardless of the strengths
of the arguments. And then, of course, people start having less respect
for the idea of safety and things get worse again.
At this point, of course, the old farts start harumphing and complaining
that I should dangerous anti-authoritarian attitudes. Guilty as charged,
boys - when it's my life at stake I don't take anything for granted.
Ian
Christopher Nicholas
small-brimmed soft cotton hats) and probably applies to the towelling hats
used elsewhere, is that one can also put them on at an angle when
thermalling, to improve sun protection. I also like the way I can turn up
the brim so that any possibility of obscuring upward vision can be removed;
and for landings into sun late in the evening, the hat can be worn forward
with the brim down to shield eyes from the sun.
I don't think it was really necessary to make it a BGA rule to suspend
intstructor's ratings if they are caught wearing what we call a "baseball
cap" with its peak forward - I would have thought that it would have been
sufficient to advertise the danger and leave it to our club organisations to
see that people act sensibly. But now it's been done, it might as well stay
that way.
As humans we keep on doing silly things sometimes anyway, whether or not
there are rules - we both duplicate old mistakes by forgetting or not
communicating their dangers, and periodically invent new ones. I've seen one
of each today, fortunately without damage. I had a minor involvement in a
near-incident yesterday. Instead of arguing about which should have rules
and penalties invented or not, I wish we could find a good way of
continuously maintaining our "corporate memory" and our vigilance, so that
we become more effective at eliminating potential hazards.
Chris N.
mil...@cgpp.com
mau...@funsystem.de (Andreas Maurer) writes:
> The reason why aviation is susceptible for regulations is that many of
> these regulations are written with blood.
>
> Too many people have died because of not-seing thje other one,
> including some very, very famous pilots.
Yes, unfortunately we have plenty of midair collisions to draw
experience from. So I'm curious: has it actually been established that
wearing a brimmed cap is a statistically significant factor in midairs
or other accidents? Or is this just one of those things that's
"obvious" and therefore operational experience is irrelevant?
Not to take sides; genuinely curious.
(apart from the button issue)
Judah
--
Judah Milgram milgram -> cgpp.com
P.O. Box 8376, Langley Park, MD 20787
(301) 422-4626 (-3047 fax)
Dave Kahn
Johnston) wrote:
Ian,
I don't think the number of rules is excessive. There's just this one rule
that some people are taking exception to. Others seem to think it's
self-evidently correct. Let's argue against the basis for the rule by all
means, but let's also adhere to it while it's in force. If individual
pilots can pick and choose which safety rules apply to them it's going to
get more dangerous up there.
There's a nice academic paper here for someone actually to do some
experimental research to find out whether, and in what conditions, a
peaked cap really makes a glider pilot's chances of avoiding a collision
better, worse or the same.
Dave Kahn
Andreas Maurer
>>I think ball caps ( stop the giggling on this side of the atlantic chaps! )
>>have been banned by the BGA. I know for sure that getting caught flying with
>>one down at our club will get you grounded.
>>
>>Ian
>
>I'm beginning to grasp the reason why soaring is a dying sport: it's over
>regulated beyond reason. Now, you Brits might like that crap, but us Yanks get
>a belly full of regulation pretty quickly... I haven't even done a solo yet,
>and am almost regretting getting involved in this sport due to the regulations
>(and I ain't talking about the FAA either).
The reason why aviation is susceptible for regulations is that many of
these regulations are written with blood.
Too many people have died because of not-seing thje other one,
including some very, very famous pilots.
Bye
Andreas
Ian Johnston
: I don't think the number of rules is excessive. There's just this one rule
: that some people are taking exception to. Others seem to think it's
: self-evidently correct. Let's argue against the basis for the rule by all
: means, but let's also adhere to it while it's in force.
Personally, the don't-wear-hats-which-obscure-your-vision rule seems so
sensible that it shouldn't have to be a rule.
: If individual
: pilots can pick and choose which safety rules apply to them it's going to
: get more dangerous up there.
If individual pilots *can't* choose their own safety rules then it is going
to get even more dangerous, because they will assume that the rules protect
them. Which, by and large, they don't. Naturally this doesn't apply to
right of way rules, for example, but are you saying, for example, that
every pilot in the UK should have the same personal minimum for attempting
to soar?
Ian
Bruce Hudson
This man seems to have the sensible approach to my mind. Shade when you need
it, not when you don't.
Todd Pattist wrote in message <393ca63b....@news.snet.net>...
>mil...@cgpp.com wrote:
>IMHO. shading my eyes with a hat sometimes aids and
>sometimes detracts from visibility. I don't like any brim
>when I'm themalling with other aircraft and straining my
>neck to track everyone in the corners of my canopy.
>The brim sometimes hits the canopy as I put my head into the
>upper corners to see behind the wing. OTOH, when I'm
>scanning the sky for that distant speck coming towards me
>from the sunward quadrant, I want my eyes in shade, with no
>scattering from the dust or scratches on my glasses. My
>personal solution is a small brim hat or visor that I can
>pull off or turn backwards when thermalling.
Ian Strachan
NTSPAMME.worldnet.att.net> writes
>when I'm
>scanning the sky for that distant speck coming towards me
>from the sunward quadrant, I want my eyes in shade, with no
>scattering from the dust or scratches on my glasses. My
>personal solution is a small brim hat or visor that I can
>pull off or turn backwards when thermalling.
I absolutely agree with the above. For decades I have flown with hats
with (relatively small) brims because I think being dazzled by a low sun
is dangerous when there are other aircraft about. The secret for
collision avoidance is constant scanning rather than what type of hat is
worn.
Perhaps my eyes are more subject to glare than others, but I think that
sensible use of hats with small brims adds to safety, not only in
gliders when looking into sun, but particularly when aero-towing. In
South UK we get a lot of SW winds and with a low sun in the SW, when
tugging we are often taking off and climbing with a bright sun. The
same on the approach to land. I believe that wearing a sensible brimmed
hat is very desirable if you suffer from glare.
The problem, like most things in life, is people taking things to
extremes, either banning something which when used sensibly is perfectly
OK, or wearing some idiosyncratic gear which is probably unsafe in
crowded air. Some so-called "baseball caps" have very long peaks
nowadays (the Disneyland effect?), and they are obviously undesirable in
a glider cockpit for a number of reasons.
My gliding headgear started with an Air Force issue peaked cap, and then
for years I wore a (Sherlock Holmes) deerstalker, and now I have a
couple of old baseball caps with 6.5 cm peaks (about 2.5 inches). In
clear air I wear the peak high up on the forehead and (hopefully) scan,
scan, and scan again. The latter is far more important than what
headgear you are wearing.
In cloud you can pull the peak down to avoid that bright glare which
makes it more difficult to read the instruments. When flying on a
straight course into a bright sun, you can alter the angle of the peak
both up/down and laterally (ie put the peak at an angle of bank!), to
cut out the bright glare and enable you to see other objects in the sky
without being dazzled. When turning out of sun, the hat can again be
adjusted. That is what I do, anyway. And always, scan, scan, scan.
A rather strongly worded message last year from the Chairman of the BGA
Instructor's Committee sparked off this useful debate. However, I do
not think it said that all peaked headgear was banned, it was
criticising large and clearly undesirable obstructions to clear-vision
and the ability to scan. You have to put this in the context that we
had just had a fatal collision in the UK where it was thought that some
Instrument Flying instruction had been carried out with the pupil in the
front seat of a tandem seater. The suspicion was that temporary screens
had been put in the front cockpit, thus obscuring the forward view of
the safety pilot. The follow-up message had more to do with not
deliberately obscuring view in an important direction, than with
headgear. Instrument instruction is now carried out with the pupil in
the back and the safety-pilot in the front.
Audio Instruments:
One thing we should be concentrating on is putting audio variometers in
to all two-seat gliders, so that ab-initios can be trained in proper
outside lookout right from the start. There should be enough old audio
systems being retired from single-seaters to make this feasible. I am
lucky enough to have audio speed-to-fly and vario in my syndicate
glider, and so can fly for long periods without needing to "look inside
the office". If McCready is set properly for the conditions there may
be no need to look inside for complete legs ....
Finally, at the IGC meeting in March 2000, there was a debate on safety.
Collisions naturally were discussed. One suggestion was that all
delegates should go back to their countries with a remit to approach the
various instructor committees with a view to setting up formal training
in scan and lookout at an early stage in basic pre-solo training. When
I was an Air Force instructor we used have outside-scan as a formal
lesson. I believe that this should be included in the gliding ab-initio
syllabus at about the same time that we are teaching balanced medium
turns, which are after all the essence of thermalling.
PS: A story has been going round about someone who was deliberately
trying to thermal with sideslip, in an attempt to gain maximum
aerodynamic efficiency. The glider spun out, thus demonstrating a new
concept of aerodynamic efficiency. How about starting a thread on that
now that ball hats and the like have been flogged to death ....
--
Ian Strachan
RHallifax
balanced reasoning plus a little bit of humour, but no animosity!! You have to
admit it's different from rec.skydiving. >>>
No argument there. I've often wondered how some of those folks can go to big
skydiving meets without having a shootout, after all the hostility on
rec.skydiving. Still, the folks I jump with are as friendly as the folks I
soar with....
Bob
RHallifax
Ian: Thanks, but no thanks. I'll take your word on things. I will say that
it's a relief to go out to the club on a Saturday morning and witness a
population of seemingly normal (and real) humans, rather than the bureaucrats
one would seem to find in all the written regulations.
Never has a regulation stopped anyone who refuses to exercise judgment.
Therefore, there's no substitued for teaching sound judgment first, followed on
by what the regulations "say" they require of pilots.
Blue skies,
Bob
RHallifax
Is that because of brimmed hats? Or is it becasue all sail planes are white
and don't stand out against the sky? I recommend lots of color to sail planes.
Mine, I want to be hot pink, deep plum, neon, white, and black. Save the
white for top and black for bottom. I would want no blue or green anywhere, no
white on bottom.
I'll bet that baby will be visable from any angle. I'll bet this idea could
save lives as well as adding much color to the sport.
That being the case, should these colors be codified?
Bob
JohnPegase
<I...@ukiws.demon.co.uk> writes:
>in scan and lookout at an early stage in basic pre-solo training. When
>I was an Air Force instructor we used have outside-scan as a formal
>lesson. I believe that this should be included in the gliding ab-initio
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^
>syllabus at about the same time that we are teaching balanced medium
>turns, which are after all the essence of thermalling.
>
It's in the BGA instructor's manual, Chapter 5, has been since at least 1994,
starts with the warning "The main cause of mid-air collsions and airmisses is
'failure of the pilot to see the other aircraft in time'. "
John Wright, 742
Andreas Maurer
>So I'm curious: has it actually been established that
>wearing a brimmed cap is a statistically significant factor in midairs
>or other accidents? Or is this just one of those things that's
>"obvious" and therefore operational experience is irrelevant?
I still haven't seen a statistic, but having tried ball-caps myself I
felt that they blocked an extremely important part of my perphal
vision: If you look at the horizon in a turn, the peak blocked all
visibility into my turning direction.
And my students never see the hand coming from above touching them on
the forehead, simulating a glider they approach from behind while
climbing.
Bye
Andreas
OFITTH
> Mine, I want to be hot pink, deep plum, neon, white, and black. Save the
> white for top and black for bottom. I would want no blue or green anywhere, no
> white on bottom.
>
YEAH, me too, and I'm an old fart.
graham
Sula
>is it becasue all sail planes are white
>and don't stand out against the sky? I recommend lots of color to sail
planes.
>white for top and black for bottom. I would want no blue or green
anywhere, no
>white on bottom.
could
>save lives as well as adding much color to the sport.
>That being the case, should these colors be codified?
The subject has come up before and it appears much more investigation is
needed. To many it's "obvious" that multicolored gliders are easier to see
than all-white ones. But research has not lent much support to this.
Before we "codify" anything (hats, colors, etc.), perhaps we should insist
that proposed regulations be based on fact rather than speculation.
IcarusZulu
surface..
IcarusZulu
South Africa
Sula <su...@shn.org> wrote in message
news:nYX_4.40352$Ft1.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
Ian Johnston
: The reason why aviation is susceptible for regulations is that many of
: these regulations are written with blood.
This just about qualifies for my safety-justifies-everything complaint. Sure,
many regulations have been written because people have died. But these people
were following regulations which were thought to be the safest possible.
Similarly, people will die in the future and regulations we think are good
now will be amended to reflect that.
In short: some regulations save lives and some regulations kill people.
The trick is to spot which are which.
Ian
JohnPegase
<su...@shn.org> writes:
>RHallifax wrote:
>>is it becasue all sail planes are white
>>and don't stand out against the sky? I recommend lots of color to sail
>planes.
>> Mine, I want to be hot pink, deep plum, neon, white, and black. Save the
>>white for top and black for bottom. I would want no blue or green
>anywhere, no
>>white on bottom.
>>I'll bet that baby will be visable from any angle. I'll bet this idea
>could
>>save lives as well as adding much color to the sport.
>>That being the case, should these colors be codified?
>
>
>The subject has come up before and it appears much more investigation is
>needed. To many it's "obvious" that multicolored gliders are easier to see
>than all-white ones. But research has not lent much support to this.
>
>Before we "codify" anything (hats, colors, etc.), perhaps we should insist
>that proposed regulations be based on fact rather than speculation.
>
>
We have a Putch with masses of fluorescent orange markings as part of a study
on colours aiding visibility on our airfield. Whenever I'm flying I keep an
eye out for it to see if I can spot the bright colours. I have _never_ seen
the fluorescent markings as standing out clearly before I spot the glider. I
have seen the glider and recognised it as the one with the markings soon
afterwards, but not the other way round. Frequently the markings are totally
invisible, even when its thermalling a few hundred yards away and I can repeat
the observation many times as I thermal.
I think the problem with these coloured markings as a visibility aid is that
people _recognise_ the glider because of the colours (and it's the only Putch
on the airfield, which is a mistake as there is no otherwise identical control
aircraft !) and confuse recognition with the colours making it easier to see.
I posted some time ago that some identical gliders, some with fluorescent
markings, some without, should be placed equal distances from the hanger door
and a large number of blindfolded people taken out side one at a time, the
blind fold removed, and note taken of which one gets spotted first and the time
it took. This would be more valid than having one uniquely shaped aircraft to
spot in the air. We have four K21's on site and one of these would have made a
much better candidate for the tests. This BGA experiment is badly flawed, they
should have asked a scientist first on how experiments should be designed. (I'm
free.)
As for the original poster's desire for a multicoloured glider, remember
camafluage works by breaking up the shape you are expecting to see, and as
gliders are usually seen as dark shapes against a very bright sky, he's more
likely to hide his glider. Ever noticed how if you see two identical gliders in
flight, one with coloured wingtips, the other without, the coloured one's wings
look shorter?? I see this with our K21's all the time.
John Wright, 742
Steve Pawling
says...
This is graphically demonstrated by razzle-dazzle camouflage from a few years
back. See:
http://www.shipcamouflage.com/measure_33.htm
See and be seen,
Steve
Bill Daniels
design on a glider, regardless of the colors used will make the glider LESS
visible at a distance. Unfortunately, the solution, if indeed there is one,
it the choice of the base color of the glider.
I have been thinking about this for years. (Kodak has published some really
good books on how the human eye sees color - The normal human eye sees
colors in a weird and unique ways.) Red, however bright, seen against a
blue sky will look grey then black as the distance gets greater,
disappearing altogether at relatively short distances. Red in on the
opposite end of the visible spectrum from blue and, since the human eye
suffers from chromatic aberration, has difficulty focusing on both at the
same time. Red seen against the browns and greens of the earth can be
equally difficult to see.
According to Kodak, the human eye is much more sensitive to colors in the
middle of the visible spectrum like greens and yellows than the reds and
blues at either end. An application of this is the proliferation of a
particularly putrid florescent green color seen on emergency road vehicles
and road signs.
Although I have no doubt that a bright fluorescent green could be seen at
great distances, I don't think I would paint my glider that color. Perhaps
white is the best we can do.
Bill Daniels
Steve Pawling <paw...@tminet.com> wrote in message
news:8hkp3n$21...@drn.newsguy.com...
Andreas Maurer
wrote:
> But these people
>were following regulations which were thought to be the safest possible.
>Similarly, people will die in the future and regulations we think are good
>now will be amended to reflect that.
>
>In short: some regulations save lives and some regulations kill people.
>The trick is to spot which are which.
This is the problem.
perhaps each new regulation should get an index that marks then
(scientificaly proven) efficiency... ;)
Bye
Andreas
Dave Kahn
Johnston) wrote:
> No obfuscation intended at all. There is a point of view - which I
> perhaps wrongly attributed to you - which says that to make soaring
> safe you need a set of rules which are obeyed without question and
> permit no variation. It's very difficult to fit "additional personal
> rules" into this sort of mindset because it's based on the idea that
> any sort of querying of rules is wrong.
OK, it sounds as though we're in broad agreement. Previously you appeared
to be contradicting my assertion that the hat rule should be followed by
all UK pilots regardless of whether or not they agreed with it, but I now
accept that you did not mean that.
In terms of laid down actual rules, and your collision avoidance procedure
is a clear example, there should be as few as possible consistent with
safety and the law, and there should be no personal discretion in
complying with them. It is of course impossible to write down a complete
set of rules which, if followed slavishly, will keep you safe at all
times. That's my opinion anyway.
Dave Kahn
Ian Johnston
: In article <8i0fdo$brk$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>, engs...@sable.ox.ac.uk (Ian
: Johnston) wrote:
:> No obfuscation intended at all. There is a point of view - which I
:> perhaps wrongly attributed to you - which says that to make soaring
:> safe you need a set of rules which are obeyed without question and
:> permit no variation. It's very difficult to fit "additional personal
:> rules" into this sort of mindset because it's based on the idea that
:> any sort of querying of rules is wrong.
: OK, it sounds as though we're in broad agreement. Previously you appeared
: to be contradicting my assertion that the hat rule should be followed by
: all UK pilots regardless of whether or not they agreed with it, but I now
: accept that you did not mean that.
Indeed - but I think they should be following it because it's plain
bleedin' obvious, ratyer than because it's a rule, and that the rule
wouldn't have been necessary if the plain bleedin' obviousness had been
adequately instilled.
: In terms of laid down actual rules, and your collision avoidance procedure
: is a clear example, there should be as few as possible consistent with
: safety and the law, and there should be no personal discretion in
: complying with them. It is of course impossible to write down a complete
: set of rules which, if followed slavishly, will keep you safe at all
: times. That's my opinion anyway.
And mine. I'd also make it clear that "the rules" don't ensure safety, and
that personal responsibility is essential.
Yup, I think we agree! I shan't worry if I see you approaching in the air.
Ian
ALPHA
Do you folks still fly in clouds in the UK? I also wonder if they still do in
Europe?
What is the current status?
Alpha
Ian Johnston wrote:
> This just about qualifies for my safety-justifies-everything complaint. Sure,
> many regulations have been written because people have died. But these people
> were following regulations which were thought to be the safest possible.
> Similarly, people will die in the future and regulations we think are good
> now will be amended to reflect that.
>
> In short: some regulations save lives and some regulations kill people.
> The trick is to spot which are which.
>
> Ian
Dave Kahn
Johnston) wrote:
> Yup, I think we agree! I shan't worry if I see you approaching in the
> air.
Ian,
It's when you _don't_ see me you need to worry.
:-)
Dave...
QuoteMonster
Ian Johnston wrote in message <8i3u54$7g1$2...@news.ox.ac.uk>...
>ALPHA <al...@infinet.com> wrote:
>
>: Do you folks still fly in clouds in the UK?
>
>One can, though I don't (until I get my horizon fitted and have some cloud
>flying instruction). BGA rules are that a parachute must be worn and radio
>used, iirc.
>
>Ian
ALPHA
Doesn't this practice, being allowed, even with proper instruction and
equipment, make the rule of "no baseball hats" somewhat questionable? As I
recall during my U.S. Air Force days some many years ago, that in a cloud,
your world ends at the mold line of the canopy. What am I missing in all
this? What prevents mid air collisions in these cases.
Alpha
Sula
>Doesn't this practice [cloud flying], being allowed, even with
>proper instruction and equipment, make the rule of "no baseball
>hats" somewhat questionable?
Surely you don't believe that separation in cloud flying is based on "see
and avoid"??
Eric Greenwell
> "Terry Edmonds" <tedm...@icaen.uiowa.edu> wrote in message
> news:3933E2FD...@icaen.uiowa.edu...
> > This thread on soaring hats has been interesting guys. However no one
> > mentioned the problem of wearing the traditional soaring hat with a
> > headset that is needed in a self-launch glider. Any comments about that?
I use a traditional soft, round "tennis" style hat with a moderate brim.
My cheap headset goes over the top of it, and simply flattens it so it
doesn't interfere. Usually, I push the edge of the brim out from under
the earcups for a better seal, but the seal is still pretty good.
Sometimes I don't put the hat on while under power, because it is an
annoyance at times (falls in my face when I remove the headset, e.g.). I
can stand the sun for the 5-10 minutes the launch takes.
--
Remove REMOVE from my e-mail address to reply
Eric Greenwell
Ian Johnston
: Doesn't this practice, being allowed, even with proper instruction and
: equipment, make the rule of "no baseball hats" somewhat questionable? As I
: recall during my U.S. Air Force days some many years ago, that in a cloud,
: your world ends at the mold line of the canopy. What am I missing in all
: this? What prevents mid air collisions in these cases.
Radio use to give position and, it's hoped, separation. But above all,
probability theory ... there are very few gliders in cloud these days.
As for obstructive hats - well, if you *could* see out it's a bit daft to
do anything to reduce the view.
It really reduces to a principle that "all pilots should keep the best
possible look out at all times". Hats, sunglasses, gps-fiddling and so on
are all logical corollaries of the principle.
Ian
ALPHA
I guess the point I was trying to make was a little too subtle. If the BGA is so
concerned about a type of hat that has NO proven guilt of association, used to a
much greater extent in the USA with no associated problems, it surprises me they
still allow cloud flying. No one is shooting at us, so stealth is not a factor,
we are enjoying a sport so there are no schedules for busy paying customers, you
are putting your life in someone's hands sitting safely on the ground staring at
a tube, or, another glider pilot consulting a map trying to relate lats and longs
while flying in the cloud. You notice I didn't say reading a map! The ground
doesn't exist as a reference in a cloud, no matter what you have on your head.
Am I again missing something?
You mentioned a chute is also a requirement. Is that in case a thunderhead rips
a wing off or you might run into someone else while in the cloud? I'm not trying
to be difficult, even though it might appear that way, it just strikes me as a
totally incongruent approach to "safety". As far as a parachute in a glider, I
just don't know. I did a little acro in my ASW-15 some years ago, after going
through Les Horvath's acro school in Arizona. There, the prevalent mishap was
probably pulling a wing off, or such, but being an engineer, I always pondered
how I would get out of that tight cockpit while pasted up against the side wall
from the centripetal force in a spiral or such because I'm minus a wing or
horizontal? I finally decided I wore it because it was required, not because I
was certain it was going to save my life. I've been told you get awfully strong
in those kinds of situations, but I never got to practice.
Pardon me for being so windy, but I have been lurking and reading all these posts
and I finally decided I had to ask some questions to try to understand the
relativity of the ruling. We might get some people on this side of the pond who
also might think this idea is better than sliced bread.
Sula's post:
Surely you don't believe that separation in cloud flying is based on "see
and avoid"??
No sir, I had no illusions or delusions in that respect. I do however, wonder
about the accuracy of someone telling me where they are when, certainly without
GPS, they don't really know themselves. If you are relying on a controller and a
scope, I have heard stories that we don't "paint" to well.
I have asked my questions and I thank you. I guess I still have a big question
in my mind. But, that's my problem.
I flew gliders in Germany a couple of times but never got into the clouds while
flying with a German host. In fact it was never mentioned.
Alpha
Sula
[concern about safety of cloud flying in Britain]
I think the safety record of cloud flying in Britain is fairly good (perhaps
someone who knows for sure could tell us). Once again, there are both
imagined and real risks, and it's probably better to rely on the latter when
making rules.
Richard Brisbourne
>> Ian,
>
>I guess the point I was trying to make was a little too subtle. If the BGA is so
>concerned about a type of hat that has NO proven guilt of association, used to a
>much greater extent in the USA with no associated problems, it surprises me they
>still allow cloud flying.
The situation is totally different. The main collision risk by far is in
crowded thermals, sometimes by people carelessly entering populated thermals.
In cloud we use radio to maintain seperation, and I mean _seperation_. On a
cloud flying sort of day I have my radio permanently on 130.4, and if anyone's
in cloud thinking he's within five miles of where I know I am I'm not going in.
And even if he doesn't know exactly where he is he knows how high he is.
Funnily enough, this doesn't inhibit cloud flying much. Even in competitions
it is less of a problem than you think; days when cloud flying is an advantage
are usual complex enough to spread people out.
And to put the probability theory aspect in perspective, if I was in the middle
of a 4,000 ft deep cumulus, could you hit me with a bullet if you tried?
Realistically, as in clear air the collision risk most significant if you
are circling in, or aiming at the same bit of lift. The chances of hitting
someone flying on a different straight line course are negligible even if he
hasn't announced his presence.
Compare and contrast the situation where you have a dozen people milling around
in the same thermal.
Having said all that, I wore a baseball cap in the cockpit for many years: I
now have a BGA beany hat which appears to impinge on my visual field by about
the same (negligible) amount, but humours the powers that be. My neck muscles
are fine, so my upward vision has always been limited by the edges of the
cockpit (did you know in a Kestrel you can see your own tailplane? Gives an
interesting sensation of being followed until you get used to it). The
circular that went round last year announcing the ban on instructors wearing
caps stated that wearing a baseball cap was equivalent to having the top third
of your canopy blacked out. If I found that was the case, I wouldn't just give
up wearing a cap, I'd consider myselg medically unfit to fly.
--
Richard Brisbourne
Soar the big sky
JohnPegase
<su...@shn.org> writes:
>ALPHA wrote:
>>Doesn't this practice [cloud flying], being allowed, even with
>>proper instruction and equipment, make the rule of "no baseball
>>hats" somewhat questionable?
>
>Surely you don't believe that separation in cloud flying is based on "see
>and avoid"??
>
>
If I was in a cloud and saw another glider, I'd do my best to avoid it!!! ;-)
John Wright, 742
Ian Johnston
: I guess the point I was trying to make was a little too subtle. If the
: BGA is so
: concerned about a type of hat that has NO proven guilt of association,
: used to a
: much greater extent in the USA with no associated problems, it surprises
: me they
: still allow cloud flying.
It is interesting. But I think it can be resolved on the basis that
a) gliding is dangerous, and some bits are more dangerous than others, but
b) it's a lot of fun so
c) as long as we make each bit as safe as possible, and in particular make
our actions as safe as possible for other people, we'll have an acceptable
compromise.
Well, that's my view.
Ian
Ian Johnston
: I think the safety record of cloud flying in Britain is fairly good (perhaps
: someone who knows for sure could tell us). Once again, there are both
: imagined and real risks, and it's probably better to rely on the latter when
: making rules.
The rate of accidents/year is pretty good. I don't know about accidents/cloud-
hour though: very very few people seem to fly in cloud these days.
Ian
Fred Steadman
lashes out against baseball caps.
Fred Steadman
Irving, Texas
ALPHA wrote:
>
> > Ian,
>
> I guess the point I was trying to make was a little too subtle. If the BGA is so
> concerned about a type of hat that has NO proven guilt of association, used to a
> much greater extent in the USA with no associated problems, it surprises me they
> still allow cloud flying. No one is shooting at us, so stealth is not a factor,
> we are enjoying a sport so there are no schedules for busy paying customers, you
> are putting your life in someone's hands sitting safely on the ground staring at
> a tube, or, another glider pilot consulting a map trying to relate lats and longs
> while flying in the cloud. You notice I didn't say reading a map! The ground
> doesn't exist as a reference in a cloud, no matter what you have on your head.
> Am I again missing something?
> You mentioned a chute is also a requirement. Is that in case a thunderhead rips
> a wing off or you might run into someone else while in the cloud? I'm not trying
> to be difficult, even though it might appear that way, it just strikes me as a
> totally incongruent approach to "safety". As far as a parachute in a glider, I
> just don't know. I did a little acro in my ASW-15 some years ago, after going
> through Les Horvath's acro school in Arizona. There, the prevalent mishap was
> probably pulling a wing off, or such, but being an engineer, I always pondered
> how I would get out of that tight cockpit while pasted up against the side wall
> from the centripetal force in a spiral or such because I'm minus a wing or
> horizontal? I finally decided I wore it because it was required, not because I
> was certain it was going to save my life. I've been told you get awfully strong
> in those kinds of situations, but I never got to practice.
>
> Pardon me for being so windy, but I have been lurking and reading all these posts
> and I finally decided I had to ask some questions to try to understand the
> relativity of the ruling. We might get some people on this side of the pond who
> also might think this idea is better than sliced bread.
>
> Sula's post:
> Surely you don't believe that separation in cloud flying is based on "see
> and avoid"??
>
> No sir, I had no illusions or delusions in that respect. I do however, wonder
> about the accuracy of someone telling me where they are when, certainly without
> GPS, they don't really know themselves. If you are relying on a controller and a
> scope, I have heard stories that we don't "paint" to well.
>
> I have asked my questions and I thank you. I guess I still have a big question
> in my mind. But, that's my problem.
>
> I flew gliders in Germany a couple of times but never got into the clouds while
> flying with a German host. In fact it was never mentioned.
>
> Alpha
>
> > Ian Johnston wrote:
> > ALPHA <al...@infinet.com> wrote:
> >
> > : Doesn't this practice, being allowed, even with proper instruction and
> > : equipment, make the rule of "no baseball hats" somewhat questionable? As I
> > : recall during my U.S. Air Force days some many years ago, that in a cloud,
> > : your world ends at the mold line of the canopy. What am I missing in all
> > : this? What prevents mid air collisions in these cases.
> >
> > Radio use to give position and, it's hoped, separation. But above all,
> > probability theory ... there are very few gliders in cloud these days.
> > As for obstructive hats - well, if you *could* see out it's a bit daft to
> > do anything to reduce the view.
> >
> > It really reduces to a principle that "all pilots should keep the best
> > possible look out at all times". Hats, sunglasses, gps-fiddling and so on
> > are all logical corollaries of the principle.
> >
> > Ian
--
Rickenbacker
be allowed to do it.
--
Rickenbacker
DonDLHMN
(1) Ever notice how most people preaching about safety with no associated
common sense are usually preaching about SOME OTHER person's safety (read:
action THEY THEMSELVES don't like) and not their own? Gordon Jennings (a
motoring press writer, for those of you unfamiliar) has a great name for such
people.....Morally Superior Beings, or "MSB". And most of them are truly
convinced that they are, with absolute certainty, correct. Please don't confuse
them with facts!!
(2) It doesn't take a rocket scientist to pull the little button off of the top
of a baseball cap so you niether bean yourself nor knock a hole in the canopy.
I think that if you can tolerate the bill of a baseball cap in the narrow
confines of a glider, it should be nobody else's business if you want to wear
one. For what it is worth, my opinion is that if you are moving your head and
eyes enough to keep a good lookout for traffic, you won't like a baseball cap.
Don Johnson
Janusz Kesik
m/s inside BIG cumulus...
Janusz Kesik
Aero Club of Czestochowa, Poland
lan...@polbox.com
http://www.soaring.enter.net.pl
Rickenbacker napisał(a) w wiadomości: <8i6c6e$juf$1...@zingo.tninet.se>...
F.L. Whiteley
A friend has told me of doing aerobatics at night at Leszno. He held the
flashlight on the panel. US pilots generally find such behavior, ah, .....
different.
Frank Whiteley
Colorado
"Janusz Kesik" <lan...@polbox.com> wrote in message
news:rKI15.8930$DC.2...@news.tpnet.pl...
Janusz Kesik
our club. It's necessary to get a "first class of glider pilot" rating when
using Polish shooling programme.
It looks exactly how You wrote - an handy light hangs on Your neck, and
lights instruments panel. Towplane is usually PZL-104 Wilga.
I think that in US, most of pilots haven't heard about this experience.
Second interesting thing is that all pilots are "bending" direction of
moon...
Regards,
Janusz Kesik
Aero Club of Czestochowa, Poland
lan...@polbox.com
http://www.soaring.enter.net.pl
F.L. Whiteley napisał(a) w wiadomości:
<7sM15.35$G3.170...@news.frii.net>...
EColeson
(JohnPegase) writes:
>If I was in a cloud and saw another glider, I'd do my best to avoid it!!!
>;-)
>
Like as not he'd hear ya comin' (8-O "aaaaaaaaugh!) and be doin' some avoiding
of his own ;-)
Cheers,
E.
Eric Greenwell
= Dave Kahn <dk...@nospam.cix.co.uk> wrote:
= : In article <8hfm5h$qdk$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>, engs...@sable.ox.ac.uk (Ian
= : Johnston) wrote:
=
= :> Personally, the don't-wear-hats-which-obscure-your-vision rule seems so
= :> sensible that it shouldn't have to be a rule.
=
= : Yes it's common sense, isn't it. Unfortunately when common sense is
= : subjected to scientific scrutiny it sometimes turns out to be plain wrong.
=
= True, but rules set becuase the new CFI at a large club feels impelled to
= make his mark ain't exactly scientifically validated either.
Since this thread has drifted significantly from "Soaring hats", I
implore the participants to ensure the subject line reflects the
subject. That will let those of us that are interested in the new
subject find it and perhaps learn something, or pass on useful
experiences.
Thanks!