Page 1 of 5
A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:27 am
by Slabfish
After the unfortunate incident with Ranger

,I was thinking about the days I was biking and how upset all of us bikers were when the wearing of crash helmets were made compulsory by law. We soon all learned to except it and it has saved many lives since. Now my personal feeling is that we should go this way with Microlighting as well . I urge our safety comity in Misasa to get the ball rolling on this one .I am awaiting an urgent response from our Misasa safety guys.
Clem
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:33 am
by Sox
Agree 100% ... were Ranger and Ingrid not wearing any helmets?
They are both in our prayers.

Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:46 am
by cobra
Slabfish wrote:... I urge our safety comity in Misasa to get the ball rolling on this one .I am awaiting an urgent response from our Misasa safety guys.
Clem
Agreed
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:52 am
by Slabfish
I am not implying that they did not wear helmets as I don`t know whether they did or not ..I also wish them a speedy and full recovery

Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 11:00 am
by ICEMAN
Helmets are the last line of defense/ protecion during a crash- by this stage all of the other "systems" have failed (eg training, preparations, preflights, weather considerations, mechanical/ structural failure, fuel, pilots limitations etc etc) ........
Head injuries are very serious injuries- i would support the unconditional wearing of helmets.
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 11:20 am
by Tumbleweed
Unfortunately don't have a pic of what my helmet looked like after a tumble, but it would have convinced any sceptic.
If your helmet's heavy, uncomfortable, loud, waters your eyes then contact Zulu1.
If you really feel the need to go free, fly without jocks and socks on.

Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 11:37 am
by Arnulf
Fully agree about wearing helmets.
Post from a previous accident:
.... Please inform others of you intentions when taking a passanger for a little flight as this could have been disasterous .
Helmets , ask Boris if they hadnt worm em they wouldnt have made it , CAA are busy investigating .
Leprachaun.
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 4:22 pm
by Slabfish
This is the kind of response I was hoping for , so lets hope we can get the decision makers on board and have it made compulsory . It won`t help us talking about it every time something dreadful happens to one of our friends or even family. The only way to get every body to wear helmets is to write it into the laws of CAA .
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:47 pm
by The Agent
I SECOND THAT 100% IT MIGHT LOOK K@K IN SOME ERRIES but IF YOU HAVE A TWO DOLLAR HEAD THEN WEAR A TWO DOLLAR HELMET.
Sorry did not mean to shout.
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:50 pm
by walla
Im sorry to be the one to go against the idea..
why do you have to force people to wear a helmet ? because if you do you need to "force" them to do other things like put a ballistic parachute on their trike or "force them to only use 4 stroke engines or what about full body protective clothing like on the bikes ?... and the list goes on.
I dont fly with a helmet and i dont want to. I am sure I dont want to be forced to do it.There are plenty of rules we need to follow in this game and so we should, lets concentrate on proper training and proper maintenance instead on adding irrelevant laws.
i do know of people that a helmet help in an emergency and i appreciate what it can do and i say who ever wants to fly with it can. but in a trike you dont have too.
I dont.
Walla
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:20 pm
by TranSky
Here's one for a debut.
Save our sport from over legislation.
I understand the idea that laws insisting on a minimal ceiling height of 1000 ft cross country, balistic parachutes, crank replacement every x hours, in house policing at clubs and strips, wearing of helmets etc etc WILL save lives.
But we don't need it enforced.
I respect the person who says "in light of the above I will now wear a helmet and insist that my passenger does like wise".
Maybe the Swiss have it right with only 4 types of microlights being deemed fit for legal flight (no helmets).
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:39 pm
by John Boucher
Please ellaborate on the term Microlight? Is a Microlight - Trike / 2axis / 3axis / open type aircraft falling within a weight category..... Are you going to enforce the blik guys to wear one as well? Also parachuters, paragliders, power paragliders etc must also wear helmets? Who is going to police the skies and "k@k" on your kop when you have not complied? Next we have to have Transponders & TCAS fitted.... compounding the drama within our sport!
If you want to wear a helmet by all means be my guest, if you want to fit a ballistic shute - go right ahead....
Personally I think there are seriously more serious issues to be addressed than enforcing "a must wear a helmet campaign"

Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:50 pm
by Morph
Agreed,
Fact, if he was wearing a helmet he would have been walking around now. Fact, it he was flying slightly higher...., If he had flown straight instead of turning....
Helmets are a personal choice and should be left as such. In 3-axis you have a far better seatbelt/harness system, over the shoulders, and a cage/fuselage protecting your head. If
I was flying a trike,
I would choose to wear a helmet, like I did when I flew a Skyfox, that only had rudimentry lap belts, and a very exposed cockpit. Personal choice
I understand the law regarding motorcycles. Here the predominance of accidents resulted in head injuries, even from minor incidences you should have walked away from. The risk of hitting your head on a bike far outways the risk in a trike especially if you have shoulder harnesses, as the GT450 has
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 7:01 pm
by Wargames
I must agree with morph. I fly a trike, and will rather prefer to have a helmet as a option, rather than compulsory. You need to make a couple of mistakes, whether flying or judging, in a trike before the need of a helmet will be handy. I saw rangers trike today, and I still cannot believe that 2 people survived that crash. We are only debating this because of accidents, but most is sadly pilot error. Lets rather spent our efforts to create a safe flying enviroment for all to enjoy before we put emphasis on a helmet, and then miss the point.
When one has a engine out, how many of us will land safely?? Most will, because our training will kick in. I would rather see our training kicking in in normal flight.
Touch wood.
Re: A matter of urgency
Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:31 pm
by Slabfish
I new this was going to become a debate

Of course everybody has the right to their own opinion.I see to many "if`s" and "but`s" in most of the opposed answers. If my son or your wife sits in the pax side with you as P.I.C and the inevitable happens , your engine cuts , your training kicks in , you find a perfect landing spot , you land and your one wheel hits that erdvakgat you couldn`t see under the grass , the a/c swing to one side and cartwheels, while you see oil,dust,grass and sh!t flying you think to yourself . O shit I hope my wife is going to be alright in the back !! . Everything gets quite and you call out for her ---------- silence !

Come on guys and ladys,get real and sit and think for a while . the above scenario is a very possible reality !!
Sorry to say ,but sadly it seems to me that some of us have to be protected against ourselves

As for what kinds of micro`s and how it is going to be policed, well lets not jump the gun here and first get a show of hands on the idea.
Just an afterthought , think of the impact it takes to break a wrist or a leg , if that gets inflicted on one`s skull, well i think I have said enough, for now at least.