A matter of urgency

[John Boucher]

Sorry... I do as I as I was taught and try to be proceduraly correct! Is the straight in approach normal for trike chaps or just all round?

It seems too many guys are satisfied with the "way things are" and "don't rock the boat" and "why should we conform, we've done it like this for ages"... sorry sir, cannot comply!

What is the purpose then of teaching pupils how to join overhead, do simulated forced / precautionary landings if it does not serve any purpose in the long run? What is the purpose then of having any form of procedure at any airfield for that matter if every incoming or outbound aircraft does his own thing or makes up the rules as he goes along.....

[John Boucher]

Sounds of Silence....

[Slabfish]

Ban Nav , I have seen airline and com. pilots do the straight-in and announce it nogal, at our reg. runway ,now that to me is a no no.Fullstops.I hope its not the guys without the radios on their microlights doing that ,although they are allowed to fly without,This is another thing I will try and get enforced together with the helmet issue,RADIO COMPULSORY ! .There is only one way to ensure safety in the sky , and that is to fly with a set of rules that apply to EVERY one. The law says join the circuit from the dead side overhead ,and if a pilot does not know why , let him re-write his theory exams , which looks like not a bad idea for some of us Rules are rules ,there are many examples we can pull out here , like, I'm flying at 7500 ft in my trike because there is a headwind down at 2500 ft and under a restricted airspace, so stuff every body , I make my own rules , like the one where i do a straight-in approach when I reach my airfield. Well ,I`ve got a surprise for you bud , "Jy is besig om vir you slegte vlieg gewoontes te kweek en ek hoop ek is nie daar die dag om jou van die grond af op te vee as daai gewoontes met jou gan opvang nie"

[John Boucher]

Thank you Slabfish & Tumbleweed.....

We live in a very variable society. Unmanned airfields (or country airfields with no human or animal control on the ground!) presents certain dangers and if we think about it are you really willing to risk the drama & tragedy by not complying to simple basics....

Think about the odd strandloper that thinks he can collect wood from your filed want ek kry mos koud in die nag my boss! Strolling along at a leisure on the runway that is about to have an aircraft land straight in - can't hear it because he is landing into the wind - can't see it because firstly it does not have a hooter or landing lights and besides the wood collector is looking on the ground - we are on a collision course!

The new affirmative previously disadvantaged farmers grazing is used up - to hell with the fence keeping them out - nee, ons trap hom plat and let our hungry cows in because grass is always greener on the other side - all of a sardine, out jumps a herd of cattle that is pissed off because of this big fly buzzing around upstairs - lets off a fart and strolls across the runway - poor approaching straight in fly - a serious collision course!

Then of course we have the spoilt brats broom brooming around on their quads - lekker straight stretches of open spaces to blast up and down - next thing his head is taken off by this approaching missile that was busy talking to his pax explaining the fine art of straight in approaches without checking whats going on on the ground - another stupid statistic! (This really has happened albeit different aircraft, happier result and less R 20 000 for the prop strike repairs....)

Then we have the local driving school which thinks it to be the perfect place to teach siblings how to drive in a straight line and still get the chance to change gears - radio Sesotho blaring, windows closed because it's cold and totally ignorant to the signboards clearly stating in 2 official languages that the Space Shuttle may land at that airfield at any moment - and out of the blue pops Mr. Straight In and does a daring act of landing on the roof rack of the Toyota Corolla 1800 Cripple S....

You only check it in the movies they say....

[Arnulf]

Ban Nav , I have seen airline and com. pilots do the straight-in and announce it nogal, at our reg. runway ,now that to me is a no no.Fullstops.I hope its not the guys without the radios on their microlights doing that ,although they are allowed to fly without,This is another thing I will try and get enforced together with the helmet issue,RADIO COMPULSORY ! .There is only one way to ensure safety in the sky , and that is to fly with a set of rules that apply to EVERY one. The law says join the circuit from the dead side overhead ,and if a pilot does not know why , let him re-write his theory exams , which looks like not a bad idea for some of us Rules are rules ,there are many examples we can pull out here , like, I'm flying at 7500 ft in my trike because there is a headwind down at 2500 ft and under a restricted airspace, so stuff every body , I make my own rules , like the one where i do a straight-in approach when I reach my airfield. Well ,I`ve got a surprise for you bud , "Jy is besig om vir you slegte vlieg gewoontes te kweek en ek hoop ek is nie daar die dag om jou van die grond af op te vee as daai gewoontes met jou gan opvang nie"

It boils down to AIRMANSHIP, or in normal terms common sense.

If you do an straight in approach and land at an unmanned airfield you are looking for k@k, regardless of the type licence you hold and regardless of the price of fuel etc.
On a frequently used tarred airfield, eg. Kitty Hawk, normal joining procedure overhead will probably suffice to observe windsock and other traffic.
On an unfamiliar rarely used bush strip maybe up to three runway inspections until you are happy to land, or divert.
It boils down to common sense. Think about it. If you visit a crapper outside your home, don't you have a careful look before you sit down? In the 5 star hotel in Zürich that may be a very short look, however at the market in Nairobi you will probably have a very careful inspection, an then in all probability divert to another alternate. BUT DEFINATELY NEVER A STRAIGHT IN APPROACH!
Oh, and I nearly forgot, how about if you landed at this crappy bush strip, walking the strip before you take off. You will be surprised to see what you missed doing the runway inspection, and whilst taxi-ing in with all this adrenalin pumping during the landing at this dodgy strip.

Regards, Arnulf

[John Boucher]

Sanity prevails............!

Too many variables at an unmanned / bush strip just to do a straight!

Precautionary approaches important!

[Uncle Spud Murphy]

Greetings,

Got too say this, slabfish is right. Helmet or no helmet, that is the question.

Family Life Insurance is intangible until your Family needs it and then it is rarely enough. Same as pension contributions. You may not want too wear a helmet (Make sure softness wears one though) until you need too and then it will be too late my son

Alles van die beste

PS: Yes I know Haven't got a licence, haven't got a Trike or anything else that flies and I don't even live there yet(SA). But I have a plan. When I do all those things, I will wear a helmet. Think of the medi-care bills I will save. hah!!!

[Biggles]

Just my two cents worth:

Never flown without a helmet. "Incase of an accident" when they are invalable, even a slow speed rollover could result in a head injury.

Appart from that the visor keeps the wind out of your face, positions your headset and stops in wandering around your face. Visor keeps wind noise off of the mike. keeps your head warm. look cool;) , also when dodging around the airie before and after flights I have caught the helmet on the control bar and flying wires preventing head lumps. I find them quite comfortable

[Morph]

I'm going to throw a curveball in here

In light of the latest discovery of Ranger's injuries, i.e. the fractured skull, across the front of the face between eye sockets and around the right temple, and looking at his scars, now looking at the pic of the helmet, I would say that there is NO facial protection from this helmet. In fact the presense of visor further adds to the danger with risks of impalement and cutting. He's impact was taken on the right hand side of the face, the earphones completely destroyed.

I like biking and hate open face helmets. Not enough protection. I would definately look at a full face option rather.

[Wargames]

I'm going to throw a curveball in here

In light of the latest discovery of Ranger's injuries, i.e. the fractured skull, across the front of the face between eye sockets and around the right temple, and looking at his scars, now looking at the pic of the helmet, I would say that there is NO facial protection from this helmet. In fact the presense of visor further adds to the danger with risks of impalement and cutting. He's impact was taken on the right hand side of the face, the earphones completely destroyed.

I like biking and hate open face helmets. Not enough protection. I would definately look at a full face option rather.

Had the same thoughts this week. I am starting to wire up my bike helmet. I do not like these microlight helmets. Have flown with them, and felt more unsafe than without.

[Dre'man55]

I tend to agree with regards to the Ml helmets and protection level. I have been in offroad race cars and crystal clear comms with a 6l twin tubo v8 right behind your head.

Difference though in Ml helmet around R1200. Good bike Helmet R5k- R12k.

Perspactive is a wonderful thing. Won't ride my quad without my helmet (R5000) yet use cheapy when flying

[KFA]

I do not wear a helmet and choose to continue doing so. I agree with the above post. A microlight helmet is useless to say the least. I tried flying with a bike (BMW) helmet and for me it doesn't work. The angle of the cart puts my head in a backward position and my neck gets tired in a couple of minutes. It takes away the feeling of freedom when I fly. It is a calculated risk that I take. It is not the same as biking where there is a taxi arround every corner that wants to take you out. If you look after your aircraft and keep your skills levels high your chances of getting an engine out decraeses dramatically and in the case of an engine out you reduce your chances of getting seriousely injured.

[powerfly]

Pilot discretion. Fly with or without. Are you going to fly any different with a helmet on or off? I personally like to fly by feel.

[Biggles]

Rather some protection rather than none...

Was a passenger in a little microlight incident here in peru where a burst front tire caused the microlight to run off the narrow tarmac strip and onto a bunch of boulders. I recieved a crack to the back of the head that hurt through the helmet. This from a fairly slow speed roll over.

Another thing that helped was the 4 piont harness installed on this trike.

[Biggles]

I'm going to throw a curveball in here

In light of the latest discovery of Ranger's injuries, i.e. the fractured skull, across the front of the face between eye sockets and around the right temple, and looking at his scars, now looking at the pic of the helmet, I would say that there is NO facial protection from this helmet. In fact the presense of visor further adds to the danger with risks of impalement and cutting. He's impact was taken on the right hand side of the face, the earphones completely destroyed.

I like biking and hate open face helmets. Not enough protection. I would definately look at a full face option rather.

Agree that a full face helmet would be better, but microlight helmets, are as Zulu mentioned not designed to take the same hits as motorbike helmets. I find full face helmets restrict field of view, and while not in the "no helmet camp" I don't like to feel too restricted. As for the amount of protection offered by these helmets: while not directly covering the whole face, the region that Ranger got hit has raised areas all around it. And the fact that the headsets were trashed sounds like the impact was more to the side of the face.

One concern is how the visors would break up on impact. But less worried about my face than the grey matter who's natural protection was developed when the hardest likely impact was hitting a tree at sprint speed.