Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:57 AM - Re: Re: Leather Helmets (cjpilot710@aol.com)
2. 05:53 AM - Re: Re: Leather Helmets (Frank Haertlein)
3. 06:15 AM - Re: Re: Leather Helmets (DaBear)
4. 06:39 AM - RPA Clinic Equipment (Drew Blahnick)
5. 06:52 AM - Thanks Dennis S! (Drew Blahnick)
6. 06:53 AM - Re: Danville, VA Airshow June 25/26 (Bill Walker)
7. 07:02 AM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Daniel Fortin)
8. 07:17 AM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Ernest Martinez)
9. 07:21 AM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (A. Dennis Savarese)
10. 07:31 AM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Daniel Fortin)
11. 07:50 AM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (A. Dennis Savarese)
12. 10:44 AM - Re: helmets (Barry Hancock)
13. 11:11 AM - Re: Re: helmets (Vance cochrane)
14. 12:30 PM - Re: Re: helmets & birds & fire (ByronMFox@aol.com)
15. 12:56 PM - Re: Re: helmets & birds & fire (Vance cochrane)
16. 01:37 PM - Mini Clinic (Ernest Martinez)
17. 01:37 PM - Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
18. 02:02 PM - Re: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. (Daniel Fortin)
19. 02:14 PM - Re: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. (Herb Coussons)
20. 02:33 PM - Re: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. (Herb Coussons)
21. 03:46 PM - Re: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. (Daniel Fortin)
22. 05:06 PM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Lance Robb)
23. 05:23 PM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Stephen Fox)
24. 05:27 PM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Vance Cochrane)
25. 06:34 PM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Lance Robb)
26. 06:35 PM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Lance Robb)
27. 07:15 PM - FLIGHT SUITS AND HAIR GEL (Frank Haertlein)
28. 07:48 PM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (cjpilot710@aol.com)
29. 07:50 PM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (cjpilot710@aol.com)
30. 08:04 PM - Re: Re: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. (D Zeman)
31. 08:56 PM - Re: Mini Clinic (Cliff Umscheid)
32. 11:29 PM - Re: FLIGHT SUITS AND HAIR GEL (Lance Robb)
33. 11:33 PM - Re: RPA Clinic Equipment (Lance Robb)
34. 11:42 PM - Re: FAST Cards (Mark Schrick)
35. 11:43 PM - Recall: FAST Cards (Mark Schrick)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Leather Helmets |
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
In a message dated 2/22/2005 2:08:10 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
l39parts@hotmail.com writes:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
Pappy's head is worth a grand. Lots of us have less valuable heads.
Why, Thank You Ron! :-]
Pappy
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Leather Helmets |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
Who said "Pappy's head is worth a grand"? I wouldn't give a plumb nickel
for it!
Frank
YAK-52
N9110M
L71
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Davis
Subject: Re: Yak-List: RE: Leather Helmets
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
Pappy's head is worth a grand. Lots of us have less valuable heads.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Leather Helmets |
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
Wait a sec, I'd give 50 bucks for Pappy's head. On a pike!
:-)
Al
Frank Haertlein wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
>
>Who said "Pappy's head is worth a grand"? I wouldn't give a plumb nickel
>for it!
>Frank
>YAK-52
>N9110M
>L71
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Davis
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: RE: Leather Helmets
>
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
>
>Pappy's head is worth a grand. Lots of us have less valuable heads.
>
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
Folks,
In Jan 2004 we reduced the mandatory personal equipment list required at RPA sponsored
flight training events to:
Nomex Flight Suits
No open toed shoes ("protective footwear")
Parachutes (note the FAR requirements concerning repack and both cockpits equipped
for aerobatic flight)
Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them required for RPA
organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of helmet has come up in the
past and the model/type/material construction is left up to the aviator; some
folks use leather helmets that secure the headsets well, others use hard helmets,
55Ps, etc.
There are other aircraft systems requirements concerning compliance with FARs in
regards to inoperative instruments and communications requirements for the back
seat instructor/occupant.
All of these can be downloaded from www.flyredstar.org in "operations" via the Formation Room.
Hope this helps,
Drew
---------------------------------
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Thanks Dennis S! |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
Thanks to Dennis for taking the time to copy the RPA 2004/1 equipment info to the
list.
Folks,
Just a heads up on where we are at with our biggest communication project. Deon
is finishing up a special administrative tool so the RPA staff can access the
latest membership databse information on the server. Once this is done, I or
another officer can "extract" the latest email address file and distribute the
newsletters and bulletin products. This process is needed so we insure the
products go to the most up-to-date contact file we have on you. For RPA members,
its important to update your current email address on the web site under
"manage my account" (left side menue when you log in).
Non RPA members; once we take care of this for RPA members, I will load a sign
up form on the web home page so we can capture your emails for the newsletter/bulletin
products. It won't be everything, but safety related materials need
to get out to as many as possible.
Drew
---------------------------------
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Danville, VA Airshow June 25/26 |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Bill Walker" <bwalker11@charter.net>
Hi shane,
Sorry you have to work during Sun-N-Fun. Did you get someone to help with
your stuff? I can make Danville and would look forward to flying with Ski,
Dutson, and the rest of those Yankees.
Bill Walker
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shane Golden" <scgsmg@direcway.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Danville, VA Airshow June 25/26
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Shane Golden <scgsmg@direcway.com>
>
> The folks in Danville are requesting 6-10 aircraft for mass form, strafing
> runs, static display, PR rides etc. for their airshow. Dates are 25/25
Jun
> with arrival on the 24th.
>
> They are offering to provide fuel (practice and airshow), oil, rooms,
vans,
> and food. If anyone's interested please let me know.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Shane Golden
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
>
>
>Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them required for
>RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of helmet has come up
>in the past and the model/type/material construction is left up to the
>aviator; some folks use leather helmets that secure the headsets well,
>others use hard helmets, 55Ps, etc.
Drew,
While I understand and respect the need for someone to wear a helmet for the
type of flying we do, I must voice my concern with having it mandatory for
RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. First and foremost, let ma say
that I am a firm believer in wearing a helmet and if I could, I would wear
one. My problem is simple; I am too big/tall. I do fit in the CJ with my
helmet, but my head movement is limited in a manner which decreases my
situational awareness too much for my taste, so I prefer to take the risk of
flying without my helmet to the risk of flying formation with decreased SA.
So where does that leave me? Well simply put, I am forbidden by my
association to participate in an activity that I am really looking forward
to (I know it is not the intent, but it is the result).
Unlike wearing a parachute, a helmet is not mandated by the FARs. I
personally believe one should take all the precautions possible in our type
of operation, but the choice should be left to the individuals. Where I come
from one cannot ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but some US states do
allow it. something to do about freedom of choice I think. Perhaps the RPA
should recommend the helmet uses, but not forbid non users from
participating in certain events.
Only my 2 cents,
Dan "Whish his canopy was 2" taller" Fortin
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Ernest Martinez <erniel29@gmail.com>
You should consider what the acro guys use. Very little protection,
but as I understand it, qualifies as a helmet.
Ernie
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:01:15 +0000, Daniel Fortin
<fougapilot@hotmail.com> wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
>
> >--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
> >
> >
> >Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them required for
> >RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of helmet has come up
> >in the past and the model/type/material construction is left up to the
> >aviator; some folks use leather helmets that secure the headsets well,
> >others use hard helmets, 55Ps, etc.
>
> Drew,
>
> While I understand and respect the need for someone to wear a helmet for the
> type of flying we do, I must voice my concern with having it mandatory for
> RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. First and foremost, let ma say
> that I am a firm believer in wearing a helmet and if I could, I would wear
> one. My problem is simple; I am too big/tall. I do fit in the CJ with my
> helmet, but my head movement is limited in a manner which decreases my
> situational awareness too much for my taste, so I prefer to take the risk of
> flying without my helmet to the risk of flying formation with decreased SA.
> So where does that leave me? Well simply put, I am forbidden by my
> association to participate in an activity that I am really looking forward
> to (I know it is not the intent, but it is the result).
>
> Unlike wearing a parachute, a helmet is not mandated by the FARs. I
> personally believe one should take all the precautions possible in our type
> of operation, but the choice should be left to the individuals. Where I come
> from one cannot ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but some US states do
> allow it. something to do about freedom of choice I think. Perhaps the RPA
> should recommend the helmet uses, but not forbid non users from
> participating in certain events.
>
> Only my 2 cents,
>
> Dan "Whish his canopy was 2" taller" Fortin
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <DSAVARESE@ELMORE.RR.COM>
Dan,
Forgive my ignorance, but I believe unless you are flying in RPA organized
Simulated Air Combat events (read ACM), not formation flying events, a
helmet is not required. IOW, you can fly formation at any RPA formation
event without a helmet.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
>
> >--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
> >
> >
> >Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them required
for
> >RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of helmet has come
up
> >in the past and the model/type/material construction is left up to the
> >aviator; some folks use leather helmets that secure the headsets well,
> >others use hard helmets, 55Ps, etc.
>
>
> Drew,
>
> While I understand and respect the need for someone to wear a helmet for
the
> type of flying we do, I must voice my concern with having it mandatory for
> RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. First and foremost, let ma say
> that I am a firm believer in wearing a helmet and if I could, I would wear
> one. My problem is simple; I am too big/tall. I do fit in the CJ with my
> helmet, but my head movement is limited in a manner which decreases my
> situational awareness too much for my taste, so I prefer to take the risk
of
> flying without my helmet to the risk of flying formation with decreased
SA.
> So where does that leave me? Well simply put, I am forbidden by my
> association to participate in an activity that I am really looking forward
> to (I know it is not the intent, but it is the result).
>
> Unlike wearing a parachute, a helmet is not mandated by the FARs. I
> personally believe one should take all the precautions possible in our
type
> of operation, but the choice should be left to the individuals. Where I
come
> from one cannot ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but some US states do
> allow it. something to do about freedom of choice I think. Perhaps the RPA
> should recommend the helmet uses, but not forbid non users from
> participating in certain events.
>
> Only my 2 cents,
>
> Dan "Whish his canopy was 2" taller" Fortin
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
Dennis,
I agree with you. My point is simply that I, and perhaps other are being
prevented from participating in RPA ACM simply because we eithrt cant (my
case) or chose not to wear e helmet.
D
>From: "A. Dennis Savarese" <DSAVARESE@elmore.rr.com>
>Reply-To: yak-list@matronics.com
>To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
>Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:19:34 -0600
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
><DSAVARESE@ELMORE.RR.COM>
>
>Dan,
>Forgive my ignorance, but I believe unless you are flying in RPA organized
>Simulated Air Combat events (read ACM), not formation flying events, a
>helmet is not required. IOW, you can fly formation at any RPA formation
>event without a helmet.
>Dennis
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
>To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
>
>
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
> >
> > >--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
> > >
> > >
> > >Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them required
>for
> > >RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of helmet has come
>up
> > >in the past and the model/type/material construction is left up to the
> > >aviator; some folks use leather helmets that secure the headsets well,
> > >others use hard helmets, 55Ps, etc.
> >
> >
> > Drew,
> >
> > While I understand and respect the need for someone to wear a helmet for
>the
> > type of flying we do, I must voice my concern with having it mandatory
>for
> > RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. First and foremost, let ma
>say
> > that I am a firm believer in wearing a helmet and if I could, I would
>wear
> > one. My problem is simple; I am too big/tall. I do fit in the CJ with
>my
> > helmet, but my head movement is limited in a manner which decreases my
> > situational awareness too much for my taste, so I prefer to take the
>risk
>of
> > flying without my helmet to the risk of flying formation with decreased
>SA.
> > So where does that leave me? Well simply put, I am forbidden by my
> > association to participate in an activity that I am really looking
>forward
> > to (I know it is not the intent, but it is the result).
> >
> > Unlike wearing a parachute, a helmet is not mandated by the FARs. I
> > personally believe one should take all the precautions possible in our
>type
> > of operation, but the choice should be left to the individuals. Where I
>come
> > from one cannot ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but some US states
>do
> > allow it. something to do about freedom of choice I think. Perhaps the
>RPA
> > should recommend the helmet uses, but not forbid non users from
> > participating in certain events.
> >
> > Only my 2 cents,
> >
> > Dan "Whish his canopy was 2" taller" Fortin
> >
> >
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <DSAVARESE@ELMORE.RR.COM>
Dan,
I understand.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
>
> Dennis,
>
> I agree with you. My point is simply that I, and perhaps other are being
> prevented from participating in RPA ACM simply because we eithrt cant (my
> case) or chose not to wear e helmet.
>
> D
>
> >From: "A. Dennis Savarese" <DSAVARESE@elmore.rr.com>
> >Reply-To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: Re: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
> >Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:19:34 -0600
> >
> >--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
> ><DSAVARESE@ELMORE.RR.COM>
> >
> >Dan,
> >Forgive my ignorance, but I believe unless you are flying in RPA
organized
> >Simulated Air Combat events (read ACM), not formation flying events, a
> >helmet is not required. IOW, you can fly formation at any RPA formation
> >event without a helmet.
> >Dennis
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
> >To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: RE: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
> >
> >
> > > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin"
<fougapilot@hotmail.com>
> > >
> > > >--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick
<lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them
required
> >for
> > > >RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of helmet has
come
> >up
> > > >in the past and the model/type/material construction is left up to
the
> > > >aviator; some folks use leather helmets that secure the headsets
well,
> > > >others use hard helmets, 55Ps, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > > Drew,
> > >
> > > While I understand and respect the need for someone to wear a helmet
for
> >the
> > > type of flying we do, I must voice my concern with having it mandatory
> >for
> > > RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. First and foremost, let ma
> >say
> > > that I am a firm believer in wearing a helmet and if I could, I would
> >wear
> > > one. My problem is simple; I am too big/tall. I do fit in the CJ
with
> >my
> > > helmet, but my head movement is limited in a manner which decreases my
> > > situational awareness too much for my taste, so I prefer to take the
> >risk
> >of
> > > flying without my helmet to the risk of flying formation with
decreased
> >SA.
> > > So where does that leave me? Well simply put, I am forbidden by my
> > > association to participate in an activity that I am really looking
> >forward
> > > to (I know it is not the intent, but it is the result).
> > >
> > > Unlike wearing a parachute, a helmet is not mandated by the FARs. I
> > > personally believe one should take all the precautions possible in our
> >type
> > > of operation, but the choice should be left to the individuals. Where
I
> >come
> > > from one cannot ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but some US states
> >do
> > > allow it. something to do about freedom of choice I think. Perhaps the
> >RPA
> > > should recommend the helmet uses, but not forbid non users from
> > > participating in certain events.
> > >
> > > Only my 2 cents,
> > >
> > > Dan "Whish his canopy was 2" taller" Fortin
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <barry@flyredstar.org>
On Feb 21, 2005, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
> Don't need a helmet.
> Don't need a flight suit, However, some folks will complain or make
> comments.
> Save your money for gas.
You are so right! You don't need to strain your fuel before you fly,
or do a prefllight for that matter. You don't need to pull your engine
through before start. Heck you don't even *need* a checklist.
However, if you've ever seen a pressurized fuel line spring a leak and
know how easy it would be for that leak to be directed at the exhaust,
formation and other flying activities with added risk don't even need
to be considered.
The RPA and other FAST organizations have a duty to set a professional
standard for their activities if they are going to be a "signatory"
organization. If you don't subscribe to that set of standards, that's
fine. However, to criticize an organization for creating a safety
conscious environment is irresponsible, at best.
Consider for a second that most of the people that are so adamant about
the use of personal safety gear are intimately acquainted with both
safety gear that has saved lives and the lack of it that cost same.
There is always rationalization for behavior, heck, I do it all the
time. However, if you need to save money for gas get the T-bone
instead of the prime rib!
Cheers,
Barry
Barry Hancock
Western Regional Coordinator
RedStar Pilots Association
(949) 300-5510
www.flyredstar.org
"Communism - Lousy Politics, Great Airplanes"
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Vance cochrane" <vec@ecochrane.com>
Barry, you make excellent points. We all have to remember that safety comes first
and fun second.
--
Vance Cochrane
Cochrane Consulting, Inc.
PO Box 854 Belmont, CA 94002
Voice: 415-412-3062
Email: vec@ecochrane.com
Web: http://www.ecochrane.com
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: helmets & birds & fire |
--> Yak-List message posted by: ByronMFox@aol.com
I used to fly with my helmet visor up and my flight suit sleeves rolled to
the elbow. Then, the fellow from Flight Suits spoke at All Red Star II. He
showed slides of burned forearms and what happens when a bird comes through the
windscreen. Now, the visor's down as are my cuffs. ...Blitz
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: helmets & birds & fire |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Vance cochrane" <vec@ecochrane.com>
Also I keep my collar up if I can too.
-----Original Message-----
From: ByronMFox@aol.com
To:yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: helmets & birds & fire
--> Yak-List message posted by: ByronMFox@aol.com
I used to fly with my helmet visor up and my flight suit sleeves rolled to
the elbow. Then, the fellow from Flight Suits spoke at All Red Star II. He
showed slides of burned forearms and what happens when a bird comes through the
windscreen. Now, the visor's down as are my cuffs. ...Blitz
--
Vance Cochrane
Cochrane Consulting, Inc.
PO Box 854 Belmont, CA 94002
Voice: 415-412-3062
Email: vec@ecochrane.com
Web: http://www.ecochrane.com
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Ernest Martinez <erniel29@gmail.com>
I havent received a serious show of hands for the mini clinic here at
Leeward Air Ranch on Mar 17-20. But there are several people that are
showing interest.
Right now I have
Craig Payne
Pappy (tentative)
Rich Langer
Charlie Ball
Drew (I think)
Deon expressed interest
and one more person who I cant find in my email archives.
This is a final call for a show of hands, if it remains this small,
then I will not bother renting a van and will just give a ride to the
local rental place so someone can just rent a car and you guys can
split it amongst yourselves. Unfortunately there are big horse shows
between Jan and April and hotel space is sparse. The local La Quinta
is getting $150.00 + tax per night.
If you guys are still interested please let me know and I will reserve
a block. There are some smaller cottages near me, but I cant find
there number so I am going to have to drive there, but please those
who WILL need rooms please let me know if you are definately planing
on attending so I dont jump through hoops for nothing.
Ernie
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
May I ask the list readers for comments please? And yes... I ADMIT....... I
am stirring the pot, but hopefully in a way to make us all think things
through, and not just to pull chains.
There are people in this world that are big. Some are also tall. Some are
actually both. I sadly fall into the latter category. I can not fit into a
Sukhoi 26 or 31. A Pitts is out of the question. So is a YAK-52.
Possibly, an aircraft could be custom build for my size if I happened to
have a large amount of AT&T stock... sadly, I do not.
I purchased a YAK-50. With great care, my friends and I managed to move the
seat about 3 inches to the rear and add some more "tilt" to the seat. With
that mod, I can get in.... barely. My shoulders are actually wedged in
place by the fuselage itself. Even with all that, I can not QUITE get full
aileron throws because of interference with my legs. With just a David
Clark headset on, the top of the headset rubs the canopy. A cloth or
leather helmet is "do-able", however the thicker hardened type (with
visor(s), etc.) is out of the question. I wear the cloth type just to keep
my headset in place, because that is the ONLY way I can communicate with my
instructor... he's on the ground you see.
Just to really make some people shudder... a parachute is pretty much out
too. I have a spare YAK-50 seat and am working on a way to try and redesign
the whole thing to enable tall people to fly the airplane AND wear a
parachute, but as yet.... no chute. The FAA is very clear about parachutes
(by the way) when you are carrying a passenger. They are NOT so clear about
it when it is only you, yourself, and no one else. So, I called them.
Their answer was that by strict interpretation, no chute is necessary or
REQUIRED if you are single place, or single operator. That's the way it is,
no matter how "stupid" you think I may be for flying without one.
So, question number one:
Are there actually folks out there that would advise me, and people like me
that they can not fly aircraft like the YAK-50? Or that if they do, they
can not do any aerobatics? What about formation? What about ACM?
Here's something to contemplate. A person wants to earn his or her FAST
qual. That person has already flown a lot of form, but wants to get better.
He or she wants formal training. They want the knowledge that the FAST qual
gives. However, due to their size, they can not wear a chute in their
aircraft. So, they are denied the training? Do you think this will stop
them from continuing formation flight on their own? I think not. Or does
this mean you just do not care because they will no longer be "your"
problem? Insurance or otherwise? Just for grins... has anyone looked at
the stats for crashes where two aircraft hit each other in flight? Which
ones of them had pilots who were wearing chutes and which ones actually made
it out? Just curious. Bottom line... Do you deny that specific person
training, fully well knowing that they are going to go out and try to teach
it to themselves anyway? Or do you say: "Well, they won't be doing it near
any air show or performance *I* attend, so ergo...it's not MY problem".
The military requires flight suits too (obviously). They also require: the
proper type of underwear be worn, the proper type of hard toe and fire
resistant leather boots, nomex gloves, hardened helmet, sleeves ROLLED DOWN
ALL THE WAY, not to mention the survival gear that they also carry, ... the
list goes on... and on, and ON. But.... we're not the military either... so
instead you have a set of rules that:
Require a nomex flight suit (ok, $250 for a custom made job for Mr.
Huge).... but a cloth or leather helmet is ok? Not much logic to that one.
Is anyone checking to see if the flight suit is actually "nomex" and not
just enriched cotton? I doubt it.
How about the guy with the OLD flight suit that has been washed so often
that the nomex quality is pretty much long gone? Checking for that too?
No leather or safety type shoe required... just no "open toe" types? So...
sneakers are A-OK? SNEAKERS?
Interesting that neither the IAC, nor any local or world Aerobatic Competion
requires a flight suit.
Some folks say that there is nothing wrong with ADDING safety requirements
to those already in place by the FAA. In fact, doing so is a really good
thing and is something that should be applauded and not questioned. Ok...
well then.....
In the YAK-50, there is about 30 gallons of fuel that tickle my toes when I
sit in the seat. What about a Halon fire-extinguishing system? Shouldn't
that be required? Failing that, how about just having one mounted in the
cockpit? After all, *I* have one. My thoughts being.... with a real fire,
actually bailing out even WITH a chute would be next to impossible given my
size. So... I'd like to have something potent that has a real chance of
putting a fire OUT. HALON is pretty darn good at that...as long as you hold
your breath... or else it will put you "out" too! Let's add that to the
list....
But when it comes to all this other safety gear... the overall goal seems
rather chaotic. Must have flight suit, but no mention of underwear... don't
laugh... it IS important. Can wear SNEAKERS.... but no mention of the right
SOCKS? Must wear helmet... but it can be cloth.... which is really about
worthless for anything except keeping your hair and headset in place. Must
wear chute, even if it then REALLY restricts movement of flight controls.
There is safety, and there is "feel good" safety. If you are going to beat
your chest and compare wearing a flight suit to doing a proper pre-flight,
or pulling the prop through, then be prepared to carry that requirement
through COMPLETELY, unless you are saying that it is A-OK to burn your feet
off, half your arms with your rolled up sleeves, and most of your
head/face/eyes with a cloth helmet, not to mention the nylon underwear that
is melted into your skin, right along with no requirement for any kind of
fire extinguisher, when one of them costs less than the flight suit you
require.
In my opinion, ........ no,....... I do not agree that "something" is better
than "nothing". I believe enforcement of the FAR's is absolutely necessary,
which happen to include by the way: "Preflights, checklists, etc." But
when you start "adding" to the list of what the FAR's require in order to
perform types of flight that the FAR's already specifically address... when
these things are MANDATORY and not simply "recommended", I really start to
question the logic, and the fairness of these added "requirements".
I am not necessarily talking about AIR SHOWS here.... I am talking
specifically about just receiving the training itself.
Here's one for you all... my belief is that every pilot performing in any
kind of competition or air show where the public is going to be
present...... be part of a continuous and on-going drug monitoring program.
Or is everyone unaware of the fact that there are many pilots out there that
wear a chute, put on a flight-suit and gloves, and go home and smoke dope
all night until the sun comes up the next morning?
What I am getting at here is that wouldn't it be better to help protect the
public against us, than to try and protect us from ourselves? To that end,
if you are going to provide a method to train pilots... then train them,
but when it comes time to set REQUIREMENTS on what it takes to fly an
airplane I suggest that you render unto Caeser that which is Caesers.
NOW is probably the time to wear that nomex fllight suit.... :-) I am ready
for the flames.... so please.... have at it.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: Barry Hancock [mailto:barry@flyredstar.org]
Subject: Yak-List: Re: helmets
--> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <barry@flyredstar.org>
On Feb 21, 2005, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
> Don't need a helmet.
> Don't need a flight suit, However, some folks will complain or make
> comments.
> Save your money for gas.
You are so right! You don't need to strain your fuel before you fly,
or do a preflight for that matter. You don't need to pull your engine
through before start. Heck you don't even *need* a checklist.
However, if you've ever seen a pressurized fuel line spring a leak and
know how easy it would be for that leak to be directed at the exhaust,
formation and other flying activities with added risk don't even need
to be considered.
The RPA and other FAST organizations have a duty to set a professional
standard for their activities if they are going to be a "signatory"
organization. If you don't subscribe to that set of standards, that's
fine. However, to criticize an organization for creating a safety
conscious environment is irresponsible, at best.
Consider for a second that most of the people that are so adamant about
the use of personal safety gear are intimately acquainted with both
safety gear that has saved lives and the lack of it that cost same.
There is always rationalization for behavior, heck, I do it all the
time. However, if you need to save money for gas get the T-bone
instead of the prime rib!
Cheers,
Barry
Barry Hancock
Western Regional Coordinator
RedStar Pilots Association
(949) 300-5510
www.flyredstar.org
"Communism - Lousy Politics, Great Airplanes"
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
Mark,
You wont get any flames from me. I agree one must take every safety
precautions available at the time. I have a portable Halon fire
extinguisher in each cockpit, I wear my Nomex (2 years old) wear glove,
boots, my parachute. I even carry a survival kit on cross country. What I
don't agree with (kinda like you) is when my association imposes further
restrictions on me. I understand some of those are imposed onto them by
other power and such is life. I also understand and appreciate the need for
the RPA to demonstrate a high level of professionalism.
At home, I regularly fly formation with other guys that do not wear a
parachute. They are under the (false) impression that they need to be much
higher for it to be of any use. Guess what? I think they are dead wrong,
but it is their choice and I respect it. I wear mine and if you want to
jump in my back seat, you will also.
If the only additional requirement for RPA ACM is to wear a helmet, I'll put
a string on my baseball cap ;-)
My 2 cents.
Dan
>From: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>Reply-To: yak-list@matronics.com
>To: "'yak-list@matronics.com'" <yak-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Yak-List: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. Date:
>Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:39:19 -0500
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
><BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>
>May I ask the list readers for comments please? And yes... I ADMIT.......
>I
>am stirring the pot, but hopefully in a way to make us all think things
>through, and not just to pull chains.
>
>There are people in this world that are big. Some are also tall. Some are
>actually both. I sadly fall into the latter category. I can not fit into
>a
>Sukhoi 26 or 31. A Pitts is out of the question. So is a YAK-52.
>Possibly, an aircraft could be custom build for my size if I happened to
>have a large amount of AT&T stock... sadly, I do not.
>
>I purchased a YAK-50. With great care, my friends and I managed to move
>the
>seat about 3 inches to the rear and add some more "tilt" to the seat. With
>that mod, I can get in.... barely. My shoulders are actually wedged in
>place by the fuselage itself. Even with all that, I can not QUITE get full
>aileron throws because of interference with my legs. With just a David
>Clark headset on, the top of the headset rubs the canopy. A cloth or
>leather helmet is "do-able", however the thicker hardened type (with
>visor(s), etc.) is out of the question. I wear the cloth type just to keep
>my headset in place, because that is the ONLY way I can communicate with my
>instructor... he's on the ground you see.
>
>Just to really make some people shudder... a parachute is pretty much out
>too. I have a spare YAK-50 seat and am working on a way to try and
>redesign
>the whole thing to enable tall people to fly the airplane AND wear a
>parachute, but as yet.... no chute. The FAA is very clear about parachutes
>(by the way) when you are carrying a passenger. They are NOT so clear
>about
>it when it is only you, yourself, and no one else. So, I called them.
>Their answer was that by strict interpretation, no chute is necessary or
>REQUIRED if you are single place, or single operator. That's the way it
>is,
>no matter how "stupid" you think I may be for flying without one.
>
>So, question number one:
>
>Are there actually folks out there that would advise me, and people like me
>that they can not fly aircraft like the YAK-50? Or that if they do, they
>can not do any aerobatics? What about formation? What about ACM?
>
>Here's something to contemplate. A person wants to earn his or her FAST
>qual. That person has already flown a lot of form, but wants to get
>better.
>He or she wants formal training. They want the knowledge that the FAST
>qual
>gives. However, due to their size, they can not wear a chute in their
>aircraft. So, they are denied the training? Do you think this will stop
>them from continuing formation flight on their own? I think not. Or does
>this mean you just do not care because they will no longer be "your"
>problem? Insurance or otherwise? Just for grins... has anyone looked at
>the stats for crashes where two aircraft hit each other in flight? Which
>ones of them had pilots who were wearing chutes and which ones actually
>made
>it out? Just curious. Bottom line... Do you deny that specific person
>training, fully well knowing that they are going to go out and try to teach
>it to themselves anyway? Or do you say: "Well, they won't be doing it near
>any air show or performance *I* attend, so ergo...it's not MY problem".
>
>The military requires flight suits too (obviously). They also require:
>the
>proper type of underwear be worn, the proper type of hard toe and fire
>resistant leather boots, nomex gloves, hardened helmet, sleeves ROLLED DOWN
>ALL THE WAY, not to mention the survival gear that they also carry, ... the
>list goes on... and on, and ON. But.... we're not the military either...
>so
>instead you have a set of rules that:
>
>Require a nomex flight suit (ok, $250 for a custom made job for Mr.
>Huge).... but a cloth or leather helmet is ok? Not much logic to that one.
>
>Is anyone checking to see if the flight suit is actually "nomex" and not
>just enriched cotton? I doubt it.
>How about the guy with the OLD flight suit that has been washed so often
>that the nomex quality is pretty much long gone? Checking for that too?
>No leather or safety type shoe required... just no "open toe" types? So...
>sneakers are A-OK? SNEAKERS?
>
>Interesting that neither the IAC, nor any local or world Aerobatic
>Competion
>requires a flight suit.
>
>Some folks say that there is nothing wrong with ADDING safety requirements
>to those already in place by the FAA. In fact, doing so is a really good
>thing and is something that should be applauded and not questioned. Ok...
>well then.....
>
>In the YAK-50, there is about 30 gallons of fuel that tickle my toes when I
>sit in the seat. What about a Halon fire-extinguishing system? Shouldn't
>that be required? Failing that, how about just having one mounted in the
>cockpit? After all, *I* have one. My thoughts being.... with a real fire,
>actually bailing out even WITH a chute would be next to impossible given my
>size. So... I'd like to have something potent that has a real chance of
>putting a fire OUT. HALON is pretty darn good at that...as long as you
>hold
>your breath... or else it will put you "out" too! Let's add that to the
>list....
>
>But when it comes to all this other safety gear... the overall goal seems
>rather chaotic. Must have flight suit, but no mention of underwear...
>don't
>laugh... it IS important. Can wear SNEAKERS.... but no mention of the
>right
>SOCKS? Must wear helmet... but it can be cloth.... which is really about
>worthless for anything except keeping your hair and headset in place. Must
>wear chute, even if it then REALLY restricts movement of flight controls.
>
>There is safety, and there is "feel good" safety. If you are going to beat
>your chest and compare wearing a flight suit to doing a proper pre-flight,
>or pulling the prop through, then be prepared to carry that requirement
>through COMPLETELY, unless you are saying that it is A-OK to burn your feet
>off, half your arms with your rolled up sleeves, and most of your
>head/face/eyes with a cloth helmet, not to mention the nylon underwear that
>is melted into your skin, right along with no requirement for any kind of
>fire extinguisher, when one of them costs less than the flight suit you
>require.
>
>In my opinion, ........ no,....... I do not agree that "something" is
>better
>than "nothing". I believe enforcement of the FAR's is absolutely
>necessary,
>which happen to include by the way: "Preflights, checklists, etc." But
>when you start "adding" to the list of what the FAR's require in order to
>perform types of flight that the FAR's already specifically address...
>when
>these things are MANDATORY and not simply "recommended", I really start to
>question the logic, and the fairness of these added "requirements".
>
>I am not necessarily talking about AIR SHOWS here.... I am talking
>specifically about just receiving the training itself.
>
>Here's one for you all... my belief is that every pilot performing in any
>kind of competition or air show where the public is going to be
>present...... be part of a continuous and on-going drug monitoring program.
>Or is everyone unaware of the fact that there are many pilots out there
>that
>wear a chute, put on a flight-suit and gloves, and go home and smoke dope
>all night until the sun comes up the next morning?
>
>What I am getting at here is that wouldn't it be better to help protect the
>public against us, than to try and protect us from ourselves? To that end,
>if you are going to provide a method to train pilots... then train them,
>but when it comes time to set REQUIREMENTS on what it takes to fly an
>airplane I suggest that you render unto Caeser that which is Caesers.
>NOW is probably the time to wear that nomex fllight suit.... :-) I am
>ready
>for the flames.... so please.... have at it.
>Mark Bitterlich
>N50YK
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Barry Hancock [mailto:barry@flyredstar.org]
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Yak-List: Re: helmets
>
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <barry@flyredstar.org>
>
>
>On Feb 21, 2005, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
>
> > Don't need a helmet.
> > Don't need a flight suit, However, some folks will complain or make
> > comments.
> > Save your money for gas.
>
>You are so right! You don't need to strain your fuel before you fly,
>or do a preflight for that matter. You don't need to pull your engine
>through before start. Heck you don't even *need* a checklist.
>
>However, if you've ever seen a pressurized fuel line spring a leak and
>know how easy it would be for that leak to be directed at the exhaust,
>formation and other flying activities with added risk don't even need
>to be considered.
>
>The RPA and other FAST organizations have a duty to set a professional
>standard for their activities if they are going to be a "signatory"
>organization. If you don't subscribe to that set of standards, that's
>fine. However, to criticize an organization for creating a safety
>conscious environment is irresponsible, at best.
>
>Consider for a second that most of the people that are so adamant about
>the use of personal safety gear are intimately acquainted with both
>safety gear that has saved lives and the lack of it that cost same.
>
>There is always rationalization for behavior, heck, I do it all the
>time. However, if you need to save money for gas get the T-bone
>instead of the prime rib!
>
>Cheers,
>
>
>Barry
>
>Barry Hancock
>Western Regional Coordinator
>RedStar Pilots Association
>(949) 300-5510
>www.flyredstar.org
>"Communism - Lousy Politics, Great Airplanes"
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Herb Coussons <drc@wscare.com>
While I support the RPA and its requirements for being a FAST signatory
I think this is one of the most well thought out and written
commentaries on the safety of aerobatics and formation - for Mark. It
does not neccessarily apply to all pilots. I have spent time in the
NATA meetings (prior to my repentance and conversion !) and I have
heard alot of smug comments about safety equipment. Including some
lazy asses who just flat do not want to wear nomex, helmets etc. I
respect Marks comments and he is probably a safer pilot without all of
the stuff and he is right - in an airshow setting the safety of
everyone around you is something we don't always talk about.
I think we all have opinions on the topic of safety equipment and safe
flying practices. We have former military pilots and people who fly
for the airlines for a living. I also have flown as a civilian in the
Air Force flying clubs - way more strict currency, safety and
maintenance than the FAA - but the bottom line is we fly under the FAA
regs and if at an RPA event subject ourselves to its rules and thats
the facts that we should follow.
I will save Marks email because it is the best I have read on not using
safety equipment (unlike my snooty NATA friends who just think think
their too good for it)
Herb
On Feb 22, 2005, at 3:39 PM, Bitterlich GS11 Mark G wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>
> May I ask the list readers for comments please? And yes... I
> ADMIT....... I
> am stirring the pot, but hopefully in a way to make us all think things
> through, and not just to pull chains.
>
> There are people in this world that are big. Some are also tall.
> Some are
> actually both. I sadly fall into the latter category. I can not fit
> into a
> Sukhoi 26 or 31. A Pitts is out of the question. So is a YAK-52.
> Possibly, an aircraft could be custom build for my size if I happened
> to
> have a large amount of AT&T stock... sadly, I do not.
>
> I purchased a YAK-50. With great care, my friends and I managed to
> move the
> seat about 3 inches to the rear and add some more "tilt" to the seat.
> With
> that mod, I can get in.... barely. My shoulders are actually wedged in
> place by the fuselage itself. Even with all that, I can not QUITE get
> full
> aileron throws because of interference with my legs. With just a David
> Clark headset on, the top of the headset rubs the canopy. A cloth or
> leather helmet is "do-able", however the thicker hardened type (with
> visor(s), etc.) is out of the question. I wear the cloth type just to
> keep
> my headset in place, because that is the ONLY way I can communicate
> with my
> instructor... he's on the ground you see.
>
> Just to really make some people shudder... a parachute is pretty much
> out
> too. I have a spare YAK-50 seat and am working on a way to try and
> redesign
> the whole thing to enable tall people to fly the airplane AND wear a
> parachute, but as yet.... no chute. The FAA is very clear about
> parachutes
> (by the way) when you are carrying a passenger. They are NOT so clear
> about
> it when it is only you, yourself, and no one else. So, I called them.
> Their answer was that by strict interpretation, no chute is necessary
> or
> REQUIRED if you are single place, or single operator. That's the way
> it is,
> no matter how "stupid" you think I may be for flying without one.
>
> So, question number one:
>
> Are there actually folks out there that would advise me, and people
> like me
> that they can not fly aircraft like the YAK-50? Or that if they do,
> they
> can not do any aerobatics? What about formation? What about ACM?
>
> Here's something to contemplate. A person wants to earn his or her
> FAST
> qual. That person has already flown a lot of form, but wants to get
> better.
> He or she wants formal training. They want the knowledge that the
> FAST qual
> gives. However, due to their size, they can not wear a chute in their
> aircraft. So, they are denied the training? Do you think this will
> stop
> them from continuing formation flight on their own? I think not. Or
> does
> this mean you just do not care because they will no longer be "your"
> problem? Insurance or otherwise? Just for grins... has anyone looked
> at
> the stats for crashes where two aircraft hit each other in flight?
> Which
> ones of them had pilots who were wearing chutes and which ones
> actually made
> it out? Just curious. Bottom line... Do you deny that specific
> person
> training, fully well knowing that they are going to go out and try to
> teach
> it to themselves anyway? Or do you say: "Well, they won't be doing it
> near
> any air show or performance *I* attend, so ergo...it's not MY
> problem".
>
> The military requires flight suits too (obviously). They also
> require: the
> proper type of underwear be worn, the proper type of hard toe and fire
> resistant leather boots, nomex gloves, hardened helmet, sleeves ROLLED
> DOWN
> ALL THE WAY, not to mention the survival gear that they also carry,
> ... the
> list goes on... and on, and ON. But.... we're not the military
> either... so
> instead you have a set of rules that:
>
> Require a nomex flight suit (ok, $250 for a custom made job for Mr.
> Huge).... but a cloth or leather helmet is ok? Not much logic to that
> one.
>
> Is anyone checking to see if the flight suit is actually "nomex" and
> not
> just enriched cotton? I doubt it.
> How about the guy with the OLD flight suit that has been washed so
> often
> that the nomex quality is pretty much long gone? Checking for that
> too?
> No leather or safety type shoe required... just no "open toe" types?
> So...
> sneakers are A-OK? SNEAKERS?
>
> Interesting that neither the IAC, nor any local or world Aerobatic
> Competion
> requires a flight suit.
>
> Some folks say that there is nothing wrong with ADDING safety
> requirements
> to those already in place by the FAA. In fact, doing so is a really
> good
> thing and is something that should be applauded and not questioned.
> Ok...
> well then.....
>
> In the YAK-50, there is about 30 gallons of fuel that tickle my toes
> when I
> sit in the seat. What about a Halon fire-extinguishing system?
> Shouldn't
> that be required? Failing that, how about just having one mounted in
> the
> cockpit? After all, *I* have one. My thoughts being.... with a real
> fire,
> actually bailing out even WITH a chute would be next to impossible
> given my
> size. So... I'd like to have something potent that has a real chance
> of
> putting a fire OUT. HALON is pretty darn good at that...as long as
> you hold
> your breath... or else it will put you "out" too! Let's add that to
> the
> list....
>
> But when it comes to all this other safety gear... the overall goal
> seems
> rather chaotic. Must have flight suit, but no mention of underwear...
> don't
> laugh... it IS important. Can wear SNEAKERS.... but no mention of the
> right
> SOCKS? Must wear helmet... but it can be cloth.... which is really
> about
> worthless for anything except keeping your hair and headset in place.
> Must
> wear chute, even if it then REALLY restricts movement of flight
> controls.
>
> There is safety, and there is "feel good" safety. If you are going to
> beat
> your chest and compare wearing a flight suit to doing a proper
> pre-flight,
> or pulling the prop through, then be prepared to carry that requirement
> through COMPLETELY, unless you are saying that it is A-OK to burn your
> feet
> off, half your arms with your rolled up sleeves, and most of your
> head/face/eyes with a cloth helmet, not to mention the nylon underwear
> that
> is melted into your skin, right along with no requirement for any kind
> of
> fire extinguisher, when one of them costs less than the flight suit you
> require.
>
> In my opinion, ........ no,....... I do not agree that "something" is
> better
> than "nothing". I believe enforcement of the FAR's is absolutely
> necessary,
> which happen to include by the way: "Preflights, checklists, etc."
> But
> when you start "adding" to the list of what the FAR's require in order
> to
> perform types of flight that the FAR's already specifically
> address... when
> these things are MANDATORY and not simply "recommended", I really
> start to
> question the logic, and the fairness of these added "requirements".
>
> I am not necessarily talking about AIR SHOWS here.... I am talking
> specifically about just receiving the training itself.
>
> Here's one for you all... my belief is that every pilot performing in
> any
> kind of competition or air show where the public is going to be
> present...... be part of a continuous and on-going drug monitoring
> program.
> Or is everyone unaware of the fact that there are many pilots out
> there that
> wear a chute, put on a flight-suit and gloves, and go home and smoke
> dope
> all night until the sun comes up the next morning?
>
> What I am getting at here is that wouldn't it be better to help
> protect the
> public against us, than to try and protect us from ourselves? To that
> end,
> if you are going to provide a method to train pilots... then train
> them,
> but when it comes time to set REQUIREMENTS on what it takes to fly an
> airplane I suggest that you render unto Caeser that which is Caesers.
> NOW is probably the time to wear that nomex fllight suit.... :-) I am
> ready
> for the flames.... so please.... have at it.
> Mark Bitterlich
> N50YK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barry Hancock [mailto:barry@flyredstar.org]
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: helmets
>
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <barry@flyredstar.org>
>
>
> On Feb 21, 2005, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
>
>> Don't need a helmet.
>> Don't need a flight suit, However, some folks will complain or make
>> comments.
>> Save your money for gas.
>
> You are so right! You don't need to strain your fuel before you fly,
> or do a preflight for that matter. You don't need to pull your engine
> through before start. Heck you don't even *need* a checklist.
>
> However, if you've ever seen a pressurized fuel line spring a leak and
> know how easy it would be for that leak to be directed at the exhaust,
> formation and other flying activities with added risk don't even need
> to be considered.
>
> The RPA and other FAST organizations have a duty to set a professional
> standard for their activities if they are going to be a "signatory"
> organization. If you don't subscribe to that set of standards, that's
> fine. However, to criticize an organization for creating a safety
> conscious environment is irresponsible, at best.
>
> Consider for a second that most of the people that are so adamant about
> the use of personal safety gear are intimately acquainted with both
> safety gear that has saved lives and the lack of it that cost same.
>
> There is always rationalization for behavior, heck, I do it all the
> time. However, if you need to save money for gas get the T-bone
> instead of the prime rib!
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Barry
>
> Barry Hancock
> Western Regional Coordinator
> RedStar Pilots Association
> (949) 300-5510
> www.flyredstar.org
> "Communism - Lousy Politics, Great Airplanes"
>
>
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Herb Coussons <drc@wscare.com>
Dan -
Surely your red bandana to protect from the sun counts as a helmet -
you don't need a baseball cap.
On Feb 22, 2005, at 4:01 PM, Daniel Fortin wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin"
> <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
>
> Mark,
>
> You wont get any flames from me. I agree one must take every safety
> precautions available at the time. I have a portable Halon fire
> extinguisher in each cockpit, I wear my Nomex (2 years old) wear glove,
> boots, my parachute. I even carry a survival kit on cross country.
> What I
> don't agree with (kinda like you) is when my association imposes
> further
> restrictions on me. I understand some of those are imposed onto them
> by
> other power and such is life. I also understand and appreciate the
> need for
> the RPA to demonstrate a high level of professionalism.
>
> At home, I regularly fly formation with other guys that do not wear a
> parachute. They are under the (false) impression that they need to be
> much
> higher for it to be of any use. Guess what? I think they are dead
> wrong,
> but it is their choice and I respect it. I wear mine and if you want
> to
> jump in my back seat, you will also.
>
> If the only additional requirement for RPA ACM is to wear a helmet,
> I'll put
> a string on my baseball cap ;-)
>
> My 2 cents.
>
> Dan
>
>
>> From: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>> Reply-To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> To: "'yak-list@matronics.com'" <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Yak-List: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my.
>> Date:
>> Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:39:19 -0500
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
>> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
>>
>> May I ask the list readers for comments please? And yes... I
>> ADMIT.......
>> I
>> am stirring the pot, but hopefully in a way to make us all think
>> things
>> through, and not just to pull chains.
>>
>> There are people in this world that are big. Some are also tall.
>> Some are
>> actually both. I sadly fall into the latter category. I can not fit
>> into
>> a
>> Sukhoi 26 or 31. A Pitts is out of the question. So is a YAK-52.
>> Possibly, an aircraft could be custom build for my size if I happened
>> to
>> have a large amount of AT&T stock... sadly, I do not.
>>
>> I purchased a YAK-50. With great care, my friends and I managed to
>> move
>> the
>> seat about 3 inches to the rear and add some more "tilt" to the seat.
>> With
>> that mod, I can get in.... barely. My shoulders are actually wedged
>> in
>> place by the fuselage itself. Even with all that, I can not QUITE
>> get full
>> aileron throws because of interference with my legs. With just a
>> David
>> Clark headset on, the top of the headset rubs the canopy. A cloth or
>> leather helmet is "do-able", however the thicker hardened type (with
>> visor(s), etc.) is out of the question. I wear the cloth type just to
>> keep
>> my headset in place, because that is the ONLY way I can communicate
>> with my
>> instructor... he's on the ground you see.
>>
>> Just to really make some people shudder... a parachute is pretty much
>> out
>> too. I have a spare YAK-50 seat and am working on a way to try and
>> redesign
>> the whole thing to enable tall people to fly the airplane AND wear a
>> parachute, but as yet.... no chute. The FAA is very clear about
>> parachutes
>> (by the way) when you are carrying a passenger. They are NOT so clear
>> about
>> it when it is only you, yourself, and no one else. So, I called them.
>> Their answer was that by strict interpretation, no chute is necessary
>> or
>> REQUIRED if you are single place, or single operator. That's the way
>> it
>> is,
>> no matter how "stupid" you think I may be for flying without one.
>>
>> So, question number one:
>>
>> Are there actually folks out there that would advise me, and people
>> like me
>> that they can not fly aircraft like the YAK-50? Or that if they do,
>> they
>> can not do any aerobatics? What about formation? What about ACM?
>>
>> Here's something to contemplate. A person wants to earn his or her
>> FAST
>> qual. That person has already flown a lot of form, but wants to get
>> better.
>> He or she wants formal training. They want the knowledge that the
>> FAST
>> qual
>> gives. However, due to their size, they can not wear a chute in their
>> aircraft. So, they are denied the training? Do you think this will
>> stop
>> them from continuing formation flight on their own? I think not. Or
>> does
>> this mean you just do not care because they will no longer be "your"
>> problem? Insurance or otherwise? Just for grins... has anyone
>> looked at
>> the stats for crashes where two aircraft hit each other in flight?
>> Which
>> ones of them had pilots who were wearing chutes and which ones
>> actually
>> made
>> it out? Just curious. Bottom line... Do you deny that specific
>> person
>> training, fully well knowing that they are going to go out and try to
>> teach
>> it to themselves anyway? Or do you say: "Well, they won't be doing
>> it near
>> any air show or performance *I* attend, so ergo...it's not MY
>> problem".
>>
>> The military requires flight suits too (obviously). They also
>> require:
>> the
>> proper type of underwear be worn, the proper type of hard toe and fire
>> resistant leather boots, nomex gloves, hardened helmet, sleeves
>> ROLLED DOWN
>> ALL THE WAY, not to mention the survival gear that they also carry,
>> ... the
>> list goes on... and on, and ON. But.... we're not the military
>> either...
>> so
>> instead you have a set of rules that:
>>
>> Require a nomex flight suit (ok, $250 for a custom made job for Mr.
>> Huge).... but a cloth or leather helmet is ok? Not much logic to
>> that one.
>>
>> Is anyone checking to see if the flight suit is actually "nomex" and
>> not
>> just enriched cotton? I doubt it.
>> How about the guy with the OLD flight suit that has been washed so
>> often
>> that the nomex quality is pretty much long gone? Checking for that
>> too?
>> No leather or safety type shoe required... just no "open toe" types?
>> So...
>> sneakers are A-OK? SNEAKERS?
>>
>> Interesting that neither the IAC, nor any local or world Aerobatic
>> Competion
>> requires a flight suit.
>>
>> Some folks say that there is nothing wrong with ADDING safety
>> requirements
>> to those already in place by the FAA. In fact, doing so is a really
>> good
>> thing and is something that should be applauded and not questioned.
>> Ok...
>> well then.....
>>
>> In the YAK-50, there is about 30 gallons of fuel that tickle my toes
>> when I
>> sit in the seat. What about a Halon fire-extinguishing system?
>> Shouldn't
>> that be required? Failing that, how about just having one mounted in
>> the
>> cockpit? After all, *I* have one. My thoughts being.... with a real
>> fire,
>> actually bailing out even WITH a chute would be next to impossible
>> given my
>> size. So... I'd like to have something potent that has a real chance
>> of
>> putting a fire OUT. HALON is pretty darn good at that...as long as
>> you
>> hold
>> your breath... or else it will put you "out" too! Let's add that to
>> the
>> list....
>>
>> But when it comes to all this other safety gear... the overall goal
>> seems
>> rather chaotic. Must have flight suit, but no mention of underwear...
>> don't
>> laugh... it IS important. Can wear SNEAKERS.... but no mention of the
>> right
>> SOCKS? Must wear helmet... but it can be cloth.... which is really
>> about
>> worthless for anything except keeping your hair and headset in place.
>> Must
>> wear chute, even if it then REALLY restricts movement of flight
>> controls.
>>
>> There is safety, and there is "feel good" safety. If you are going
>> to beat
>> your chest and compare wearing a flight suit to doing a proper
>> pre-flight,
>> or pulling the prop through, then be prepared to carry that
>> requirement
>> through COMPLETELY, unless you are saying that it is A-OK to burn
>> your feet
>> off, half your arms with your rolled up sleeves, and most of your
>> head/face/eyes with a cloth helmet, not to mention the nylon
>> underwear that
>> is melted into your skin, right along with no requirement for any
>> kind of
>> fire extinguisher, when one of them costs less than the flight suit
>> you
>> require.
>>
>> In my opinion, ........ no,....... I do not agree that "something" is
>> better
>> than "nothing". I believe enforcement of the FAR's is absolutely
>> necessary,
>> which happen to include by the way: "Preflights, checklists, etc."
>> But
>> when you start "adding" to the list of what the FAR's require in
>> order to
>> perform types of flight that the FAR's already specifically
>> address...
>> when
>> these things are MANDATORY and not simply "recommended", I really
>> start to
>> question the logic, and the fairness of these added "requirements".
>>
>> I am not necessarily talking about AIR SHOWS here.... I am talking
>> specifically about just receiving the training itself.
>>
>> Here's one for you all... my belief is that every pilot performing in
>> any
>> kind of competition or air show where the public is going to be
>> present...... be part of a continuous and on-going drug monitoring
>> program.
>> Or is everyone unaware of the fact that there are many pilots out
>> there
>> that
>> wear a chute, put on a flight-suit and gloves, and go home and smoke
>> dope
>> all night until the sun comes up the next morning?
>>
>> What I am getting at here is that wouldn't it be better to help
>> protect the
>> public against us, than to try and protect us from ourselves? To
>> that end,
>> if you are going to provide a method to train pilots... then train
>> them,
>> but when it comes time to set REQUIREMENTS on what it takes to fly an
>> airplane I suggest that you render unto Caeser that which is Caesers.
>> NOW is probably the time to wear that nomex fllight suit.... :-) I am
>> ready
>> for the flames.... so please.... have at it.
>> Mark Bitterlich
>> N50YK
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Barry Hancock [mailto:barry@flyredstar.org]
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Yak-List: Re: helmets
>>
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <barry@flyredstar.org>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2005, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
>>
>>> Don't need a helmet.
>>> Don't need a flight suit, However, some folks will complain or make
>>> comments.
>>> Save your money for gas.
>>
>> You are so right! You don't need to strain your fuel before you fly,
>> or do a preflight for that matter. You don't need to pull your engine
>> through before start. Heck you don't even *need* a checklist.
>>
>> However, if you've ever seen a pressurized fuel line spring a leak and
>> know how easy it would be for that leak to be directed at the exhaust,
>> formation and other flying activities with added risk don't even need
>> to be considered.
>>
>> The RPA and other FAST organizations have a duty to set a professional
>> standard for their activities if they are going to be a "signatory"
>> organization. If you don't subscribe to that set of standards, that's
>> fine. However, to criticize an organization for creating a safety
>> conscious environment is irresponsible, at best.
>>
>> Consider for a second that most of the people that are so adamant
>> about
>> the use of personal safety gear are intimately acquainted with both
>> safety gear that has saved lives and the lack of it that cost same.
>>
>> There is always rationalization for behavior, heck, I do it all the
>> time. However, if you need to save money for gas get the T-bone
>> instead of the prime rib!
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> Barry
>>
>> Barry Hancock
>> Western Regional Coordinator
>> RedStar Pilots Association
>> (949) 300-5510
>> www.flyredstar.org
>> "Communism - Lousy Politics, Great Airplanes"
>>
>>
>
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
Herb,
Now there is a solution that will fit both my head and my CJ...+ its the
same color then my helmet...;-)
D
>From: Herb Coussons <drc@wscare.com>
>Reply-To: yak-list@matronics.com
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my.
>Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:30:47 -0600
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: Herb Coussons <drc@wscare.com>
>
>Dan -
>Surely your red bandana to protect from the sun counts as a helmet -
>you don't need a baseball cap.
>
>
>On Feb 22, 2005, at 4:01 PM, Daniel Fortin wrote:
>
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Daniel Fortin"
> > <fougapilot@hotmail.com>
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > You wont get any flames from me. I agree one must take every safety
> > precautions available at the time. I have a portable Halon fire
> > extinguisher in each cockpit, I wear my Nomex (2 years old) wear glove,
> > boots, my parachute. I even carry a survival kit on cross country.
> > What I
> > don't agree with (kinda like you) is when my association imposes
> > further
> > restrictions on me. I understand some of those are imposed onto them
> > by
> > other power and such is life. I also understand and appreciate the
> > need for
> > the RPA to demonstrate a high level of professionalism.
> >
> > At home, I regularly fly formation with other guys that do not wear a
> > parachute. They are under the (false) impression that they need to be
> > much
> > higher for it to be of any use. Guess what? I think they are dead
> > wrong,
> > but it is their choice and I respect it. I wear mine and if you want
> > to
> > jump in my back seat, you will also.
> >
> > If the only additional requirement for RPA ACM is to wear a helmet,
> > I'll put
> > a string on my baseball cap ;-)
> >
> > My 2 cents.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> >> From: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
> >> Reply-To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >> To: "'yak-list@matronics.com'" <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >> Subject: Yak-List: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my.
> >> Date:
> >> Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:39:19 -0500
> >>
> >> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
> >> <BitterlichMG@cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
> >>
> >> May I ask the list readers for comments please? And yes... I
> >> ADMIT.......
> >> I
> >> am stirring the pot, but hopefully in a way to make us all think
> >> things
> >> through, and not just to pull chains.
> >>
> >> There are people in this world that are big. Some are also tall.
> >> Some are
> >> actually both. I sadly fall into the latter category. I can not fit
> >> into
> >> a
> >> Sukhoi 26 or 31. A Pitts is out of the question. So is a YAK-52.
> >> Possibly, an aircraft could be custom build for my size if I happened
> >> to
> >> have a large amount of AT&T stock... sadly, I do not.
> >>
> >> I purchased a YAK-50. With great care, my friends and I managed to
> >> move
> >> the
> >> seat about 3 inches to the rear and add some more "tilt" to the seat.
> >> With
> >> that mod, I can get in.... barely. My shoulders are actually wedged
> >> in
> >> place by the fuselage itself. Even with all that, I can not QUITE
> >> get full
> >> aileron throws because of interference with my legs. With just a
> >> David
> >> Clark headset on, the top of the headset rubs the canopy. A cloth or
> >> leather helmet is "do-able", however the thicker hardened type (with
> >> visor(s), etc.) is out of the question. I wear the cloth type just to
> >> keep
> >> my headset in place, because that is the ONLY way I can communicate
> >> with my
> >> instructor... he's on the ground you see.
> >>
> >> Just to really make some people shudder... a parachute is pretty much
> >> out
> >> too. I have a spare YAK-50 seat and am working on a way to try and
> >> redesign
> >> the whole thing to enable tall people to fly the airplane AND wear a
> >> parachute, but as yet.... no chute. The FAA is very clear about
> >> parachutes
> >> (by the way) when you are carrying a passenger. They are NOT so clear
> >> about
> >> it when it is only you, yourself, and no one else. So, I called them.
> >> Their answer was that by strict interpretation, no chute is necessary
> >> or
> >> REQUIRED if you are single place, or single operator. That's the way
> >> it
> >> is,
> >> no matter how "stupid" you think I may be for flying without one.
> >>
> >> So, question number one:
> >>
> >> Are there actually folks out there that would advise me, and people
> >> like me
> >> that they can not fly aircraft like the YAK-50? Or that if they do,
> >> they
> >> can not do any aerobatics? What about formation? What about ACM?
> >>
> >> Here's something to contemplate. A person wants to earn his or her
> >> FAST
> >> qual. That person has already flown a lot of form, but wants to get
> >> better.
> >> He or she wants formal training. They want the knowledge that the
> >> FAST
> >> qual
> >> gives. However, due to their size, they can not wear a chute in their
> >> aircraft. So, they are denied the training? Do you think this will
> >> stop
> >> them from continuing formation flight on their own? I think not. Or
> >> does
> >> this mean you just do not care because they will no longer be "your"
> >> problem? Insurance or otherwise? Just for grins... has anyone
> >> looked at
> >> the stats for crashes where two aircraft hit each other in flight?
> >> Which
> >> ones of them had pilots who were wearing chutes and which ones
> >> actually
> >> made
> >> it out? Just curious. Bottom line... Do you deny that specific
> >> person
> >> training, fully well knowing that they are going to go out and try to
> >> teach
> >> it to themselves anyway? Or do you say: "Well, they won't be doing
> >> it near
> >> any air show or performance *I* attend, so ergo...it's not MY
> >> problem".
> >>
> >> The military requires flight suits too (obviously). They also
> >> require:
> >> the
> >> proper type of underwear be worn, the proper type of hard toe and fire
> >> resistant leather boots, nomex gloves, hardened helmet, sleeves
> >> ROLLED DOWN
> >> ALL THE WAY, not to mention the survival gear that they also carry,
> >> ... the
> >> list goes on... and on, and ON. But.... we're not the military
> >> either...
> >> so
> >> instead you have a set of rules that:
> >>
> >> Require a nomex flight suit (ok, $250 for a custom made job for Mr.
> >> Huge).... but a cloth or leather helmet is ok? Not much logic to
> >> that one.
> >>
> >> Is anyone checking to see if the flight suit is actually "nomex" and
> >> not
> >> just enriched cotton? I doubt it.
> >> How about the guy with the OLD flight suit that has been washed so
> >> often
> >> that the nomex quality is pretty much long gone? Checking for that
> >> too?
> >> No leather or safety type shoe required... just no "open toe" types?
> >> So...
> >> sneakers are A-OK? SNEAKERS?
> >>
> >> Interesting that neither the IAC, nor any local or world Aerobatic
> >> Competion
> >> requires a flight suit.
> >>
> >> Some folks say that there is nothing wrong with ADDING safety
> >> requirements
> >> to those already in place by the FAA. In fact, doing so is a really
> >> good
> >> thing and is something that should be applauded and not questioned.
> >> Ok...
> >> well then.....
> >>
> >> In the YAK-50, there is about 30 gallons of fuel that tickle my toes
> >> when I
> >> sit in the seat. What about a Halon fire-extinguishing system?
> >> Shouldn't
> >> that be required? Failing that, how about just having one mounted in
> >> the
> >> cockpit? After all, *I* have one. My thoughts being.... with a real
> >> fire,
> >> actually bailing out even WITH a chute would be next to impossible
> >> given my
> >> size. So... I'd like to have something potent that has a real chance
> >> of
> >> putting a fire OUT. HALON is pretty darn good at that...as long as
> >> you
> >> hold
> >> your breath... or else it will put you "out" too! Let's add that to
> >> the
> >> list....
> >>
> >> But when it comes to all this other safety gear... the overall goal
> >> seems
> >> rather chaotic. Must have flight suit, but no mention of underwear...
> >> don't
> >> laugh... it IS important. Can wear SNEAKERS.... but no mention of the
> >> right
> >> SOCKS? Must wear helmet... but it can be cloth.... which is really
> >> about
> >> worthless for anything except keeping your hair and headset in place.
> >> Must
> >> wear chute, even if it then REALLY restricts movement of flight
> >> controls.
> >>
> >> There is safety, and there is "feel good" safety. If you are going
> >> to beat
> >> your chest and compare wearing a flight suit to doing a proper
> >> pre-flight,
> >> or pulling the prop through, then be prepared to carry that
> >> requirement
> >> through COMPLETELY, unless you are saying that it is A-OK to burn
> >> your feet
> >> off, half your arms with your rolled up sleeves, and most of your
> >> head/face/eyes with a cloth helmet, not to mention the nylon
> >> underwear that
> >> is melted into your skin, right along with no requirement for any
> >> kind of
> >> fire extinguisher, when one of them costs less than the flight suit
> >> you
> >> require.
> >>
> >> In my opinion, ........ no,....... I do not agree that "something" is
> >> better
> >> than "nothing". I believe enforcement of the FAR's is absolutely
> >> necessary,
> >> which happen to include by the way: "Preflights, checklists, etc."
> >> But
> >> when you start "adding" to the list of what the FAR's require in
> >> order to
> >> perform types of flight that the FAR's already specifically
> >> address...
> >> when
> >> these things are MANDATORY and not simply "recommended", I really
> >> start to
> >> question the logic, and the fairness of these added "requirements".
> >>
> >> I am not necessarily talking about AIR SHOWS here.... I am talking
> >> specifically about just receiving the training itself.
> >>
> >> Here's one for you all... my belief is that every pilot performing in
> >> any
> >> kind of competition or air show where the public is going to be
> >> present...... be part of a continuous and on-going drug monitoring
> >> program.
> >> Or is everyone unaware of the fact that there are many pilots out
> >> there
> >> that
> >> wear a chute, put on a flight-suit and gloves, and go home and smoke
> >> dope
> >> all night until the sun comes up the next morning?
> >>
> >> What I am getting at here is that wouldn't it be better to help
> >> protect the
> >> public against us, than to try and protect us from ourselves? To
> >> that end,
> >> if you are going to provide a method to train pilots... then train
> >> them,
> >> but when it comes time to set REQUIREMENTS on what it takes to fly an
> >> airplane I suggest that you render unto Caeser that which is Caesers.
> >> NOW is probably the time to wear that nomex fllight suit.... :-) I am
> >> ready
> >> for the flames.... so please.... have at it.
> >> Mark Bitterlich
> >> N50YK
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Barry Hancock [mailto:barry@flyredstar.org]
> >> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: Yak-List: Re: helmets
> >>
> >>
> >> --> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <barry@flyredstar.org>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Feb 21, 2005, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
> >>
> >>> Don't need a helmet.
> >>> Don't need a flight suit, However, some folks will complain or make
> >>> comments.
> >>> Save your money for gas.
> >>
> >> You are so right! You don't need to strain your fuel before you fly,
> >> or do a preflight for that matter. You don't need to pull your engine
> >> through before start. Heck you don't even *need* a checklist.
> >>
> >> However, if you've ever seen a pressurized fuel line spring a leak and
> >> know how easy it would be for that leak to be directed at the exhaust,
> >> formation and other flying activities with added risk don't even need
> >> to be considered.
> >>
> >> The RPA and other FAST organizations have a duty to set a professional
> >> standard for their activities if they are going to be a "signatory"
> >> organization. If you don't subscribe to that set of standards, that's
> >> fine. However, to criticize an organization for creating a safety
> >> conscious environment is irresponsible, at best.
> >>
> >> Consider for a second that most of the people that are so adamant
> >> about
> >> the use of personal safety gear are intimately acquainted with both
> >> safety gear that has saved lives and the lack of it that cost same.
> >>
> >> There is always rationalization for behavior, heck, I do it all the
> >> time. However, if you need to save money for gas get the T-bone
> >> instead of the prime rib!
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >>
> >> Barry
> >>
> >> Barry Hancock
> >> Western Regional Coordinator
> >> RedStar Pilots Association
> >> (949) 300-5510
> >> www.flyredstar.org
> >> "Communism - Lousy Politics, Great Airplanes"
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
I don't want to sound ignorant but we don't have an RPA here in Aust but the
term "FAST" has had me scratching my head for some time now.....can anyone
enlighten me please.
Lance Robb
NQ Warbirds Aust
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Drew Blahnick
Subject: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
Folks,
In Jan 2004 we reduced the mandatory personal equipment list required at RPA
sponsored flight training events to:
Nomex Flight Suits
No open toed shoes ("protective footwear")
Parachutes (note the FAR requirements concerning repack and both cockpits
equipped for aerobatic flight)
Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them required for
RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of helmet has come up
in the past and the model/type/material construction is left up to the
aviator; some folks use leather helmets that secure the headsets well,
others use hard helmets, 55Ps, etc.
There are other aircraft systems requirements concerning compliance with
FARs in regards to inoperative instruments and communications requirements
for the back seat instructor/occupant.
All of these can be downloaded from www.flyredstar.org in "operations" via
the Formation Room.
Hope this helps,
Drew
---------------------------------
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Stephen Fox <jsfox@adelphia.net>
On 2/22/05 8:05 PM, "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> I don't want to sound ignorant but we don't have an RPA here in Aust but the
> term "FAST" has had me scratching my head for some time now.....can anyone
> enlighten me please.
>
> Lance Robb
>
> NQ Warbirds Aust
Actually you do have the RPA in Australia with nine members. Go to
http://www.flyredstar.org
All the best,
Steve Fox
Yak-52
N3043R
http://homepage.mac.com/steve.fox/PhotoAlbum5.html
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Vance Cochrane <vec@ecochrane.com>
Formation And Safety Training
--
Vance Cochrane Email: vec@ecochrane.com
President Voice: (415) 412-3062
Cochrane Consulting, Inc. Fax: (415) 651-9364
PO Box 854 Belmont, CA 94002 Web: http://www.ecochrane.com
> From: Lance Robb <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
> Reply-To: "yak-list@matronics.com" <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:05:42 +1000
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
>
> I don't want to sound ignorant but we don't have an RPA here in Aust but the
> term "FAST" has had me scratching my head for some time now.....can anyone
> enlighten me please.
>
> Lance Robb
>
> NQ Warbirds Aust
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Drew Blahnick
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
>
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
>
>
> Folks,
>
> In Jan 2004 we reduced the mandatory personal equipment list required at RPA
> sponsored flight training events to:
>
> Nomex Flight Suits
> No open toed shoes ("protective footwear")
> Parachutes (note the FAR requirements concerning repack and both cockpits
> equipped for aerobatic flight)
>
> Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them required for
> RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of helmet has come up
> in the past and the model/type/material construction is left up to the
> aviator; some folks use leather helmets that secure the headsets well,
> others use hard helmets, 55Ps, etc.
>
> There are other aircraft systems requirements concerning compliance with
> FARs in regards to inoperative instruments and communications requirements
> for the back seat instructor/occupant.
>
> All of these can be downloaded from www.flyredstar.org in "operations" via
> the Formation Room.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Drew
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
> advertising on the Matronics Forums.
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
Steve,
I did check...and we actually don't.........your RPA could have 9 Australian
members but there is no mention that I can find of one here.......and I
still don't know what "FAST" stands for!!
Regards,
Lance
NQ Warbirds Aust
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Fox
Subject: Re: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
Actually you do have the RPA in Australia with nine members. Go to
http://www.flyredstar.org
All the best,
Steve Fox
Yak-52
N3043R
http://homepage.mac.com/steve.fox/PhotoAlbum5.html
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
Thanks Vance.
Lance Robb
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vance Cochrane
Subject: Re: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
--> Yak-List message posted by: Vance Cochrane <vec@ecochrane.com>
Formation And Safety Training
--
Vance Cochrane Email: vec@ecochrane.com
President Voice: (415) 412-3062
Cochrane Consulting, Inc. Fax: (415) 651-9364
PO Box 854 Belmont, CA 94002 Web: http://www.ecochrane.com
> From: Lance Robb <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
> Reply-To: "yak-list@matronics.com" <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:05:42 +1000
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
>
> I don't want to sound ignorant but we don't have an RPA here in Aust
> but the term "FAST" has had me scratching my head for some time
> now.....can anyone enlighten me please.
>
> Lance Robb
>
> NQ Warbirds Aust
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Drew
> Blahnick
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
>
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick
> --> <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
>
>
> Folks,
>
> In Jan 2004 we reduced the mandatory personal equipment list required
> at RPA sponsored flight training events to:
>
> Nomex Flight Suits
> No open toed shoes ("protective footwear")
> Parachutes (note the FAR requirements concerning repack and both
> cockpits equipped for aerobatic flight)
>
> Helmets are non-mandatory for FAST. The policy does have them
> required for RPA organized Simulated Air Combat events. The type of
> helmet has come up in the past and the model/type/material
> construction is left up to the aviator; some folks use leather helmets
> that secure the headsets well, others use hard helmets, 55Ps, etc.
>
> There are other aircraft systems requirements concerning compliance
> with FARs in regards to inoperative instruments and communications
> requirements for the back seat instructor/occupant.
>
> All of these can be downloaded from www.flyredstar.org in "operations"
> via the Formation Room.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Drew
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
> advertising on the Matronics Forums.
>
>
>
>
>
>
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | FLIGHT SUITS AND HAIR GEL |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
Mark
You're wasting your breath. RPA isn't going to change the rules. You
see, it's more of an image "I'm a fighter Jock" kind of thing. You can
argue all you want but you can't argue against safety and that is the
stick they use to beat you over your pointed head.
You would do better arguing for even more safety and then beat them over
their own pointed heads with it. Of course you will see them compromise
on your suggestions...you'll hear them say "we don't really need all
"THAT STUFF". Start demanding "military type" safety rules for all RPA
activities as, after all, SAFETY is paramount and we all know a flight
suit alone just doesn't cut it.
I might suggest you start by demand the following.....for safety of
course:
1. Nomex Underwear (wear dated and inspected before flight, nose clip
optional)
2. Nomex boots
3. Nomex socks (no holes and must not stand up by themselves)
4. Automatic fire suppression system
5. Ejection seats (approved models only, with automatic opening chutes)
6. Primeacord fired canopy ejection
7. Hard helmet for all activities, not just ACM or FAST (safety, safety,
safety!)
8. Survival Kit to include:
a: water (flavor packets optional)
b: fish hook with string
c: personal emergency locator (two way radio model recommended)
d: first aid kit
e: emergency blanket
f: Swiss army knife (bone-saw and toothpick model required)
g: freeze dried rations (vegetarian selection)
h: sun-glasses (for that really cool look)
i: hair styling gel (see "h" above)
j: nail file
k: breath assure
l: deodorant
m: toilet paper
n: sanitary napkins
9. Flare Gun
10. M9 pistol
11. Canopy smashing tool
12: Nomex gloves (wouldn't want to pick up any germs)
13: Atropine (you never know)
14: Pain killers - Heroine
15: Ear plugs (to drown out the bull after postings like this one)
16: No Mexican food before flight (to maintain integrity of the Nomex
underwear)
17: Inflatable raft (inflatable rubber doll might suffice, Barry? Any
experience here?)
18: flashing beacon (so we can find you despite your OD green flight
suit)
19: shark repellant (nothing worse than a half-assed CJ driver)
20: Ambulance crews on full standby at any event (oooh, that's a good
one!)
21: "G" suit (no sense loosing your mind just to have some fun)
Barry, Drew......remember, you stress safety! Right? You're looking out
for your guys...right? Then explain your lack of "HIGH VALUE" safety
regulations that include more than just a flight suit and helmet? Don't
you care about us RPA members?
Frank
N9110M
YAK-52
L71
:)
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
In a message dated 2/22/2005 10:38:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, lrob4783
Lance,
F.A.S.T. stands for Formation Air Safety Team. It is a group of signatories
that set standards for formation training and procedures. With out a FAST
card you are not able to fly in a formation in wavered airspace, (airshow).
The FAA recognizes this card.
It sets the minimum standard for 'Wingman" and 'Lead' ratings. A Lead
ratings allows a pilot to lead a formation, train, and recommend pilots for a
Wingman patch. That's the skinny of it.
Pappy
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
I don't want to sound ignorant but we don't have an RPA here in Aust but the
term "FAST" has had me scratching my head for some time now.....can anyone
enlighten me please.
Lance Robb
NQ Warbirds Aust
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Drew Blahnick
Subject: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
In a message dated 2/22/2005 10:49:00 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
cjpilot710@aol.com writes:
--> Yak-List message posted by: _cjpilot710@aol.com_
(mailto:cjpilot710@aol.com)
OOooops Formation And Safety Training.
In a message dated 2/22/2005 10:38:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, lrob4783
Lance,
F.A.S.T. stands for Formation Air Safety Team. It is a group of
signatories
that set standards for formation training and procedures. With out a FAST
card you are not able to fly in a formation in wavered airspace, (airshow).
The FAA recognizes this card.
It sets the minimum standard for 'Wingman" and 'Lead' ratings. A Lead
ratings allows a pilot to lead a formation, train, and recommend pilots for
a
Wingman patch. That's the skinny of it.
Pappy
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
I don't want to sound ignorant but we don't have an RPA here in Aust but the
term "FAST" has had me scratching my head for some time now.....can anyone
enlighten me please.
Lance Robb
NQ Warbirds Aust
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Drew Blahnick
Subject: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Re: Re: helmets, and flight suits and bears... oh my. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: D Zeman <curious_wings@yahoo.com>
Mark,
Is one of your aliases "Paul Walter"? Tonight I read
the Mail Call section of the new WB magazine and it is
suspiciously similar - LOL!!!
Zeman
BTW, I agree with your thoughts on the subject which
keeps me and many other folks far away from more
"rules" and RPA.
__________________________________
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Cliff Umscheid <netmaster15@juno.com>
Ernie,
Perhaps I am the person whose e mail you are unable to find in your
archives. I have earlier expressed interest in attending the clinic and
would again confirm attendance at Leeward in my Yak 50. Thanks for your
efforts, hope it all comes to pass.
Cliff Umscheid, Phone 386 345 1861 in Oak Hill, FL. . .
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:36:55 -0500 Ernest Martinez <erniel29@gmail.com>
writes:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Ernest Martinez <erniel29@gmail.com>
>
> I havent received a serious show of hands for the mini clinic here
> at
> Leeward Air Ranch on Mar 17-20. But there are several people that
> are
> showing interest.
>
> Right now I have
>
> Craig Payne
> Pappy (tentative)
> Rich Langer
> Charlie Ball
> Drew (I think)
> Deon expressed interest
> and one more person who I cant find in my email archives.
>
> This is a final call for a show of hands, if it remains this small,
> then I will not bother renting a van and will just give a ride to
> the
> local rental place so someone can just rent a car and you guys can
> split it amongst yourselves. Unfortunately there are big horse
> shows
> between Jan and April and hotel space is sparse. The local La
> Quinta
> is getting $150.00 + tax per night.
>
> If you guys are still interested please let me know and I will
> reserve
> a block. There are some smaller cottages near me, but I cant find
> there number so I am going to have to drive there, but please those
> who WILL need rooms please let me know if you are definately
> planing
> on attending so I dont jump through hoops for nothing.
>
> Ernie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | FLIGHT SUITS AND HAIR GEL |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
Hey Frank.......I like item 8.F hahahahahaha
Lance Robb
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frank Haertlein
Subject: Yak-List: FLIGHT SUITS AND HAIR GEL
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
--> <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
Mark
You're wasting your breath. RPA isn't going to change the rules. You see,
it's more of an image "I'm a fighter Jock" kind of thing. You can argue all
you want but you can't argue against safety and that is the stick they use
to beat you over your pointed head.
You would do better arguing for even more safety and then beat them over
their own pointed heads with it. Of course you will see them compromise on
your suggestions...you'll hear them say "we don't really need all "THAT
STUFF". Start demanding "military type" safety rules for all RPA activities
as, after all, SAFETY is paramount and we all know a flight suit alone just
doesn't cut it.
I might suggest you start by demand the following.....for safety of
course:
1. Nomex Underwear (wear dated and inspected before flight, nose clip
optional)
2. Nomex boots
3. Nomex socks (no holes and must not stand up by themselves) 4. Automatic
fire suppression system 5. Ejection seats (approved models only, with
automatic opening chutes) 6. Primeacord fired canopy ejection 7. Hard helmet
for all activities, not just ACM or FAST (safety, safety,
safety!)
8. Survival Kit to include:
a: water (flavor packets optional)
b: fish hook with string
c: personal emergency locator (two way radio model recommended)
d: first aid kit
e: emergency blanket
f: Swiss army knife (bone-saw and toothpick model required)
g: freeze dried rations (vegetarian selection)
h: sun-glasses (for that really cool look)
i: hair styling gel (see "h" above)
j: nail file
k: breath assure
l: deodorant
m: toilet paper
n: sanitary napkins
9. Flare Gun
10. M9 pistol
11. Canopy smashing tool
12: Nomex gloves (wouldn't want to pick up any germs)
13: Atropine (you never know)
14: Pain killers - Heroine
15: Ear plugs (to drown out the bull after postings like this one)
16: No Mexican food before flight (to maintain integrity of the Nomex
underwear)
17: Inflatable raft (inflatable rubber doll might suffice, Barry? Any
experience here?)
18: flashing beacon (so we can find you despite your OD green flight
suit)
19: shark repellant (nothing worse than a half-assed CJ driver)
20: Ambulance crews on full standby at any event (oooh, that's a good
one!)
21: "G" suit (no sense loosing your mind just to have some fun)
Barry, Drew......remember, you stress safety! Right? You're looking out for
your guys...right? Then explain your lack of "HIGH VALUE" safety regulations
that include more than just a flight suit and helmet? Don't you care about
us RPA members?
Frank
N9110M
YAK-52
L71
:)
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RPA Clinic Equipment |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
Thanks Pappy,
Here in Aust we need to be "Formation Endorsed" which covers wingman and
lead........and can only be trained by a CASA ( same as your FAA) approved
person. With this endorsement we are eligible to fly at airshows and
displays......without the patches :))
Thanks,
Lance Robb
NQ Warbirds Aust
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cjpilot710@aol.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
In a message dated 2/22/2005 10:38:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, lrob4783
Lance, F.A.S.T. stands for Formation Air Safety Team. It is a group of
signatories
that set standards for formation training and procedures. With out a FAST
card you are not able to fly in a formation in wavered airspace, (airshow).
The FAA recognizes this card.
It sets the minimum standard for 'Wingman" and 'Lead' ratings. A Lead
ratings allows a pilot to lead a formation, train, and recommend pilots for
a
Wingman patch. That's the skinny of it.
Pappy
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Lance Robb" <lrob4783@bigpond.net.au>
I don't want to sound ignorant but we don't have an RPA here in Aust but
the term "FAST" has had me scratching my head for some time now.....can
anyone enlighten me please.
Lance Robb
NQ Warbirds Aust
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Drew Blahnick
Subject: Yak-List: RPA Clinic Equipment
--> Yak-List message posted by: Drew Blahnick
--> <lacloudchaser@yahoo.com>
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Schrick" <schrick@pacbell.net>
Mike,
I paid but have not received my card for this year.
Also, I flew in the 7 ship formation in Deer valley but not sure if anyone
filled out the form for the formation. How can that be used for the 2005
season? Looking for some feed back. Thank you.
********************************************************************
Mark Schrick
966 Wallace Drive
San Jose, Ca 95120-1848
Hm/Fax 408-323-5150
Cell 408-391-6664
Email schrick@pacbell.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MFilucci@aol.com
Subject: Yak-List: FAST Cards
--> Yak-List message posted by: MFilucci@aol.com
Fellow RPA Warbird Drivers,
The 2005 FAST card decals have arrived and I will begin sending out the new
cards after the holidays. I will automatically send the cards out to all of
you who meet the following qualifications:
1. RPA 2005 dues paid in full.
2. RPA FAST qualified and current.
3. FAST card fee ($10.00 ) paid for 2005
The RPA 2005 membership form is available on the website.
The FAST database, updated through November, 2004 is also on the website. I
will be updating the database in the next week or so to bring it up to date
with the FPRs I've received in the last few weeks.
Best wishes to all for the new year.
Mike Filucci
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Schrick" <schrick@pacbell.net>
The sender would like to recall the message, "Yak-List: FAST Cards".
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|