![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bert,
As I lay awake this morning before getting up, I began to understand your reasoning, and you might be quite right. A thin layer of foam or rubber could provide enough friction across the whole back or the 'chute and against all of the slippery surface of the seat pan/back rest and grip enough to prevent sliding. This would probably work if the straps are really snug. It is not a matter of spacing but of a large area of friction. My notion was to put the entire force against the shoulders and straps; if this were the case the strap attach points would have to be lower and/or a fifth attach point in the crotch area to prevent strap movement aft. Best, Nyal At 08:00 20 October 2006, Bert Willing wrote: Nyal, I do have read this thread. If the attachment point of the shoulder straps are too high, a thin layer of foam or rubber on the seat pan is all what's needed. Having double attachment points on the shoulder straps is big means to solve an easily solved problem - you go through a certification loop, you need to think about egress restrictions and all this stuff. 'Nyal Williams' wrote in message ... Bert, I think you must not have read all this thread; it was pointed out that shoulder strap connections are too high and, while preventing the upper body from going forward, do not prevent an upward and aft movement. With current setups, no amount of tightening will prevent this for short/small persons. At 14:42 19 October 2006, Bert Willing wrote: I guess we just need to secure the shoulder straps properly ? ... 'Nyal Williams' wrote in message ... This is somewhat analagous to reported accidents by Cessna pilots on takeoff; if the adjustable seats are not properly locked in their rails the seat can slide backward, making it impossible to push the yoke forward. Perhaps we need a two-point attachment for each of the shoulder straps -- the one above the shoulders that already is in place and which keeps the body from being thrown forward, plus a second one from be bottom of the seat pan, and which would prevent the body from moving upward and aft. This second strap could also protect against cranial collision with the canopy. Anyone for seven-point harness? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've been following this thread with interest. Sholder straps anchored high
on the seat back prevent the pilot from moving up and forward but are less effective in preventing up and back movements as might be encountered in a winch launch or turbulence. I like Nyal's original suggestion of two additional vertical straps located between the pilots sholders and the sholder strap anchor points holding down the sholder straps. The next time I have my glider out of the trailer, I'm going to look carefully at this possibility. I think it would only require straps and buckles attached to the landing gear frame - simple, cheap and likely to be highly effective. Thanks Nyal! Bert's suggestion of a "friction pad" behind the pilots's back to anchor the additional straps is somewhat problematic since I would want the solution to work for both winch launch and for negative G "bumps" encountered in turbulence. In a negative G scenario the friction pad idea is less likely to provide an anchor. Bill Daniels "Nyal Williams" wrote in message ... Bert, As I lay awake this morning before getting up, I began to understand your reasoning, and you might be quite right. A thin layer of foam or rubber could provide enough friction across the whole back or the 'chute and against all of the slippery surface of the seat pan/back rest and grip enough to prevent sliding. This would probably work if the straps are really snug. It is not a matter of spacing but of a large area of friction. My notion was to put the entire force against the shoulders and straps; if this were the case the strap attach points would have to be lower and/or a fifth attach point in the crotch area to prevent strap movement aft. Best, Nyal At 08:00 20 October 2006, Bert Willing wrote: Nyal, I do have read this thread. If the attachment point of the shoulder straps are too high, a thin layer of foam or rubber on the seat pan is all what's needed. Having double attachment points on the shoulder straps is big means to solve an easily solved problem - you go through a certification loop, you need to think about egress restrictions and all this stuff. 'Nyal Williams' wrote in message ... Bert, I think you must not have read all this thread; it was pointed out that shoulder strap connections are too high and, while preventing the upper body from going forward, do not prevent an upward and aft movement. With current setups, no amount of tightening will prevent this for short/small persons. At 14:42 19 October 2006, Bert Willing wrote: I guess we just need to secure the shoulder straps properly ? ... 'Nyal Williams' wrote in message ... This is somewhat analagous to reported accidents by Cessna pilots on takeoff; if the adjustable seats are not properly locked in their rails the seat can slide backward, making it impossible to push the yoke forward. Perhaps we need a two-point attachment for each of the shoulder straps -- the one above the shoulders that already is in place and which keeps the body from being thrown forward, plus a second one from be bottom of the seat pan, and which would prevent the body from moving upward and aft. This second strap could also protect against cranial collision with the canopy. Anyone for seven-point harness? |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The only solution for "negative g-bumps" are properly located and secured
lap straps. "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message ... I've been following this thread with interest. Sholder straps anchored high on the seat back prevent the pilot from moving up and forward but are less effective in preventing up and back movements as might be encountered in a winch launch or turbulence. I like Nyal's original suggestion of two additional vertical straps located between the pilots sholders and the sholder strap anchor points holding down the sholder straps. The next time I have my glider out of the trailer, I'm going to look carefully at this possibility. I think it would only require straps and buckles attached to the landing gear frame - simple, cheap and likely to be highly effective. Thanks Nyal! Bert's suggestion of a "friction pad" behind the pilots's back to anchor the additional straps is somewhat problematic since I would want the solution to work for both winch launch and for negative G "bumps" encountered in turbulence. In a negative G scenario the friction pad idea is less likely to provide an anchor. Bill Daniels "Nyal Williams" wrote in message ... Bert, As I lay awake this morning before getting up, I began to understand your reasoning, and you might be quite right. A thin layer of foam or rubber could provide enough friction across the whole back or the 'chute and against all of the slippery surface of the seat pan/back rest and grip enough to prevent sliding. This would probably work if the straps are really snug. It is not a matter of spacing but of a large area of friction. My notion was to put the entire force against the shoulders and straps; if this were the case the strap attach points would have to be lower and/or a fifth attach point in the crotch area to prevent strap movement aft. Best, Nyal At 08:00 20 October 2006, Bert Willing wrote: Nyal, I do have read this thread. If the attachment point of the shoulder straps are too high, a thin layer of foam or rubber on the seat pan is all what's needed. Having double attachment points on the shoulder straps is big means to solve an easily solved problem - you go through a certification loop, you need to think about egress restrictions and all this stuff. 'Nyal Williams' wrote in message ... Bert, I think you must not have read all this thread; it was pointed out that shoulder strap connections are too high and, while preventing the upper body from going forward, do not prevent an upward and aft movement. With current setups, no amount of tightening will prevent this for short/small persons. At 14:42 19 October 2006, Bert Willing wrote: I guess we just need to secure the shoulder straps properly ? ... 'Nyal Williams' wrote in message ... This is somewhat analagous to reported accidents by Cessna pilots on takeoff; if the adjustable seats are not properly locked in their rails the seat can slide backward, making it impossible to push the yoke forward. Perhaps we need a two-point attachment for each of the shoulder straps -- the one above the shoulders that already is in place and which keeps the body from being thrown forward, plus a second one from be bottom of the seat pan, and which would prevent the body from moving upward and aft. This second strap could also protect against cranial collision with the canopy. Anyone for seven-point harness? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Crouch Strap story | Ed Byars | Soaring | 43 | September 23rd 13 05:43 PM |
Air Force launches new ad campaign | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 14th 04 09:41 PM |
Vandenberg AFB Rocket Launches | Brian Webb | Military Aviation | 1 | September 5th 04 06:13 PM |
Vandenberg AFB Rocket Launches | Brian Webb | General Aviation | 0 | September 4th 04 11:42 PM |
NOTAMs for non-US space launches? | Allen Thomson | Military Aviation | 0 | September 25th 03 04:01 PM |