A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

another crash



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old September 12th 19, 04:04 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie Quebec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default another crash

Once again 2G claims his own infallibility, and ignores the evidence of his eyes.
  #82  
Old September 14th 19, 06:03 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie Quebec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default another crash

An update on the bun fight at the headrest corral.
5 days later the airworthiness people still will not decide whether removing the headrest is legal or not.
Luckily, my wonderful club officials managed to bring the issue to the attention of the most experienced senior airworthiness person in the country, who is a CASA rated specialist on glider modifications,
and is responsible for the issue of engineering orders for such mods.
Below is his response to the inquiry re legality. Of particular note is the statement regarding reports of this headrest striking pilots heads during ejection.

“Your DG200 was certified by the German LBA under “ LFSM 1975 Airworthiness Requirements for Sailplanes and Powered Sailplanes. ” Perusal of that document shows no mention of “Head Rests”. That means it was not needed for Certification. An optional extra if you like.

The current CS22 Design Requirements do have a mandatory fitment of Head Rests with strong emphasis being attached 2 or part of the seat.”

We also know that there are findings from accident reports that the original headrest may strike the pilot in the back of the head when the canopy is jettison. When Design Requirements are updated retrospectivity is not applied.

Based on all of the above, you can do what you like with the headrest. Being there, or not being there, has no influence on operations or airworthiness and the increased pilot safety is a key issue.

So it appears the pathetic bitter little person who reported me has failed utterly in their attempt to inconvenience me, however they have caused condiderable wasted time for the airworthiness authorities.
Stick that where the sun don’t shine.

  #83  
Old September 14th 19, 02:00 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie Quebec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default another crash

This article by GDale clearly recommends removing the headrest from this style of DG canopy. It very nearly killed him on the way off.
Quote:
“We are going down really fast. The canopy goes off. The headrest, as the canopy pivots upwards like this, because it [the headrest] is attached on the back [of the canopy] quite deliberately so that it can’t slide back, so it goes ‘boom’. The headrest hits me really hard on the back of the head and puts my lights out. And I’m out for seven or eight seconds. So now I’m going down through 1200 feet in the vertical, glider accelerating, unconscious.”
“If you have an old DG with the headrest here [pads back of his head] take it off and put a roll behind your head instead, because if the canopy does that [again shows a canopy rising nose first, swinging round a point at its back] it will swipe you [10:30] really hard.”
https://members.gliding.co.uk/wp-con...out-advice.pdf
  #84  
Old September 14th 19, 11:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Nick Gilbert[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default another crash

The conversation wasn’t about bailing out - it was about accident impact. Completely different thing.

Nick.
  #85  
Old September 16th 19, 03:20 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie Quebec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default another crash

Have you ever looked at the construction of the headrest Nick? 5mm ply with 50mm of soft foam attached to a steel plate would not meet even basic automotive standards.
It’s cannot possibly make any contribution to safety in a crash. I get you are trying to protect DG, but really, you are putting reputation ahead of safety, a stance that does you he credit at all.
I think you will find In the near future there will be an AN allowing the headrest to be removed. I have in writing the opinion of the most senior experienced airworthiness person in this country,
who has a CASA delegation to approve mods, that there is no legal reason the headrest cannot be removed.
Quote from email:

Your DG200. VH-CQV was certified by the German LBA under “ LFSM 1975 Airworthiness Requirements for Sailplanes and Powered Sailplanes. ” Perusal of that document shows no mention of “Head Rests”. That means it was not needed for Certification. An optional extra if you like.

The current CS22 Design Requirements do have a mandatory fitment of Head Rests with strong emphasis being attached 2 or part of the seat.

We also know that there are findings from accident reports that the original headrest may strike the pilot in the back of the head when the canopy is jettison. When Design Requirements are updated retrospectivity is not applied.

Based on all of the above, you can do what you like with the headrest. Being there, or not being there, has no influence on operations or airworthiness and the increased pilot safety is a key issue.

Pretty conclusive.
  #86  
Old September 16th 19, 03:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie Quebec
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default another crash

t the construction of the headrest Nick? 5mm ply with 50mm of soft foam attached to a steel plate would not meet even basic automotive standards.
It’s cannot possibly make any contribution to safety in a crash. I get you are trying to protect DG, but really, you are putting reputation ahead of safety, a stance that does you he credit at all.
I think you will find In the near future there will be an AN allowing the headrest to be removed. I have in writing the opinion of the most senior experienced airworthiness person in this country,
who has a CASA delegation to approve mods, that there is no legal reason the headrest cannot be removed.
Quote from email:

Your DG200. was certified by the German LBA under “ LFSM 1975 Airworthiness Requirements for Sailplanes and Powered Sailplanes. ” Perusal of that document shows no mention of “Head Rests”. That means it was not needed for Certification. An optional extra if you like.

The current CS22 Design Requirements do have a mandatory fitment of Head Rests with strong emphasis being attached 2 or part of the seat.

We also know that there are findings from accident reports that the original headrest may strike the pilot in the back of the head when the canopy is jettison. When Design Requirements are updated retrospectivity is not applied.

Based on all of the above, you can do what you like with the headrest. Being there, or not being there, has no influence on operations or airworthiness and the increased pilot safety is a key issue.

Pretty conclusive.
  #87  
Old September 16th 19, 09:37 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Nick Gilbert[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default another crash

You suggested the deceased pilot was killed by his headrest.

Cheers,
Nick.
  #88  
Old September 17th 19, 04:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default another crash

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 5:16:38 PM UTC-7, Charlie Quebec wrote:
I can’t find it now, but there was one report that did say the pilot in another incident WAS killed by the headrest.
My detractors are suffering from “Burns” right now.


"I can’t find it now"

That seems to be a pretty common phrase in your posts...

Tom
  #89  
Old September 18th 19, 02:04 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Nick Gilbert[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default another crash

Dave - what you're saying may be true. Getting back to the original question, do you have anything to back it up other than your own gut feeling? Bearing in mind your original comments regarding the headrest being the cause of the fatality in question has nothing to do with bailing out.

Cheers,
Nick.
  #90  
Old September 20th 19, 11:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
David Sherrill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default another crash

In his bailout lecture posted by the BGA, G Dale says that when he bailed out of his DG the impact of the headrest made him blackout briefly. That remark comes soon after 4:30 in the video.

https://youtu.be/cDXIxHAmSX0

Cheers,
...david

On Tuesday, September 17, 2019 at 9:04:54 PM UTC-4, Nick Gilbert wrote:
Dave - what you're saying may be true. Getting back to the original question, do you have anything to back it up other than your own gut feeling? Bearing in mind your original comments regarding the headrest being the cause of the fatality in question has nothing to do with bailing out.

Cheers,
Nick.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ASG-29 Crash [email protected] Soaring 0 September 27th 16 03:59 PM
UPS 747-400 crash D Ramapriya Piloting 0 September 4th 10 04:04 AM
Anyone know anything about this crash? [email protected] Soaring 2 July 28th 08 01:44 PM
vampire or venom crash pic - wx904 crash.jpg (1/1) [email protected] Aviation Photos 4 January 1st 07 07:30 PM
vampire or venom crash pic - wx904 crash.jpg (0/1) [email protected] Aviation Photos 0 December 30th 06 05:57 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.