Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

FAST, Formation Flight, Safety
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

MarkWDavis

Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 104
Location: Syracuse, KS

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:53 am Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

I jam a cold bottle of water between the side bulkhead and the flap 

handle.  The knob on the handle holds it in place well as long as the flap 

handle is in the up position.  It won't come out even with negative g.  I 

always carry the thin sidewalled bottles.  Before I put the flaps down I 

stuff the empty in a leg pocket in my flight suit if I'm wearing one or 

smash it flat and stick it in my chest strap on my chute.  I would have like 

to have had some place carry about three more this summer for the Front 

Range Airshow.  It was 95 degrees at showtime.  That bottle disappeared 

pretty fast holding for our turn in the show riding around in the slot with 

no cloud cover.



Mark Davis

N44YK



---

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:53 am Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

You know a camelback with hook around the back of our seats. Does cause a

lump to lean back on (the buckles). It is a pain to take out of a 52 but

easy in a 50. 

Doc



--

MarkWDavis

Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 104
Location: Syracuse, KS

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:50 am Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

Doc,

     I thought about that last summer.  My son has one for his motorcycle 

that I thought I might try to see if I can make it fit securely behind the 

seat before I buy one.



Mark Davis

N44YK



---

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:51 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

Craig, I agree....You're right.  That was not the question.  (To wear,

or not to wear)  



You said: 

"So when at an RPA event (or for me flying for CAP), follow the

guidelines.  Otherwise, this is America - do what you want as long as it

doesn't violate FARs."



Excuse me Craig.. But as Drew pointed out, what it ACTUALLY says is

this: 



"A Flight Suit will be worn by the pilots flying in a training/display

formation sortie at RPA events/clinics. Flight Leads will enforce this

policy with their Wingmen"



In English a slash or slant or solidus or virgule [ / ] (take your pick

of names) is used to indicate a choice between the words it separates,

so you can take what is written above and rewrite it legally as this: 



"A Flight Suit will be worn by the pilots flying in a training formation

sortie at RPA clinics. Flight Leads will enforce this policy with their

Wingmen"



AND THAT IS WHAT I TAKE EXCEPTION TO.  Is that the policy you think is

fair?  



Actually what you have been implying (IMHO) is this: 



"A Flight Suit will be worn by the pilots flying in a display formation

sortie at RPA events. Flight Leads will enforce this policy with their

Wingmen"



And Craig, I have NO PROBLEM WITH THAT AT ALL!  



The truth is in the details. 



Mark

--

ChangDriver

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 266

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:10 pm Post subject: Re: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

Mark:



I did a cut and paste directly from the RPA web site.  Go take a look at the FAQs on the site. 



Below is from the "What to Bring to an RPA Clinic or Fly-in Page....



2. Flight Suit - Yep, this ain't the Bonanza Club, we wear flight suits for a lot of reasons, safety, FOD receptacle, standardization, public awareness, respect. Nomex or other fire retardant material is your call, but a cheap investment to help save your skin when getting out of a burning aircraft.



3. Parachutes - Up to you, but we get mighty close together in formation. Extended Trail often meets the definition of aerobatics, so if you have a backseater, FARS says ya gotta provide one with a current repack date. Lots of people share in the RPA.



I'll let Drew clarify what he wrote.



Then, I think it is up to Darrell to decide.  From an organization standpoint, I do understand the RPA wanting its members to look "the part" at events.  Be it nomex or another material the pilot chooses.



Craig

GreasySideUp

Joined: 24 Oct 2007
Posts: 44

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:49 pm Post subject: Re: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

"I jam a cold bottle of water between the side bulkhead and the flap 

handle. The knob on the handle holds it in place well as long as the flap 

handle is in the up position. It won't come out even with negative g."



This scares me to death.  Please Please Please don't do acro with anything in the cockpit not bolted down or zipped in a pocket.  It will be there under negative G until it isn't and the isn't could put you in a world of hurt.  I know 3 people who jumped out of 2 perfectly good planes because of FOD and another who was almost killed doing a simple loop because of a fuel strainer that came out of the pocket and lodged in the elevator.  We watched him pull out of a 60 degree dive at about 100 feet when he started up at 2000.  If it is not secured it has a very real chance of coming dislodged no matter how secure it may seem or has seemed in the past.  Unfortunately too many accidents have proven that fact over the years.



Very interesting conversation regarding Flight suits...  Heated topics since my first post!



-j

brian-1927(at)lloyd.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:07 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

On Nov 2, 2007, at 6:10 PM, Craig Winkelmann, CFI wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   2. Flight Suit - Yep, this ain't the Bonanza Club, we wear flight  

 suits for a lot of reasons, safety,


	


Well, we have already determined that Nomex provides little  

protection from fire but increases the risk of hyperthermia so it  

appears that safety is not a particularly good reason to wear Nomex.



 	  Quote: 	
		   FOD receptacle,


	


Yes, this is useful.



 	  Quote: 	
		   standardization,


	


Huh. I thought that the procedures manual ensured this. It's the  

suit? OK.



 	  Quote: 	
		   public awareness,


	


"Daddy, daddy! Look at the men in the funny green suits!" There was  

once a time when I cut a dashing figure in Nomex. Not anymore. I am  

more likely to hear, "daddy, is that man going to have a baby like  

mommy?" Sorry but I just can't fake it anymore with the poopy suit on.



 	  Quote: 	
		   respect.


	


Huh. I always thought respect had to be earned on the basis of  

knowing your airplane inside and out, flying it better than anyone  

else (or at least trying to), and then helping others to reach that  

pinnacle. But hell, if all it takes is a $90 nomex suit ... well,  

count me in!



 	  Quote: 	
		   Nomex or other fire retardant material is your call, but a cheap  

 investment to help save your skin when getting out of a burning  

 aircraft.


	


If it really provided me more protection then I would go along with it.



I just have two beefs with it:



1. it is my airplane and this being a country of self-determination,  

I should get to wear what I want to in my own aircraft, even at an  

RPA event;



2. I think it detracts from safety as hyperthermia is a much greater  

risk than fire in the cockpit.



Well, it's been interesting.



--

Brian Lloyd                         3191 Western Drive

brian HYPHEN 1927 AT lloyd DOT com    Cameron Park, CA 95682

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

— Antoine de Saint-Exupéry



PGP key ID:          12095C52A32A1B6C

PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0  CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C

l39parts(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 8:00 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

Craig,

  

 Your e-mail got cut off after you mentioned "the FARs" and before you quoted it.  Seems to happen a lot, people quote FARs they've never read.  For the record  91.307 (c) says "

 

(c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft 

is wearing an approved parachute, 

no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any 

person (other than a crewmember) may 

execute any intentional maneuver that 

exceeds— 

(1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to 

the horizon; or 

(2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude 

of 30 degrees relative to the horizon.  

 so that means 1) you are never required by the feds to wear a chute when flying alone, and 2) neither person is required to wear a chute if both are "required crewmembers".  It sounds like the feds think the required crewmembers are capable of making their own decisions on the merits of safety equipment.  If only the feds had the wisdom of FAST...  Did that sound cynical?  It was supposed to. 

 



  	  Quote: 	
		    Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:12:13 -0500

From: capav8r(at)gmail.com

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety



 I have read the jabs at FAST posted here.  I am new to formation flight and the RPA.  I have had the distinct opportunity to fly with Drew Blahnick and proofread the new RPA formation manual.  I also helped provide the student perspective as I was learning formation while proofreading the documents. 

  

 Flying has some inherent risks to it.  Formation flying adds to those risks.  Drew has spent countless hours writing and rewriting the manual.  He has used manuals from the Air Force, Navy, former formation manuals, etc, etc to draft the new version.  It is an excellent work.  The chapter on tactical formation is in the works. 

  

 FAST was a way to increase the safety of formation flight for members of the signatories, of which the RPA is one.  As a CFI, I try to make sure that my students are safe.  FAST is doing the same for those who wish to fly in formation.  Can you go learn formation from a former military pilot or someone who knows formation flight and never crack open a FAST document.  Sure.  But why would you?  How do you know, for instance,  if the hand and aircraft signals you learn are the same ones someone else knows?  What about recommended takeoff and landing intervals?  FAST standardized all this so that the folks flying T-6s, T-28s, P-51s, Yak-52s, CJs, L-39s, L-29, etc, etc all learn formation flight in a similar fashion.  This increases the safety of the learning process and formation flight.  Watch any Heritage Flight at an airshow and you'll see why this is important. 

  

 Additionally, if you don't want to wear a chute or nomex that is fine.  All FAST is saying is that for events where FAST rules apply, you must follow FAST guidelines.  As far as chutes are concerned, remember there is a FAR specifying when one is to be worn.  Some aspects of formation flight may venture into areas where the bank or pitch attitude of your aircraft will require you to wear one.  Are you less safe without a chute and not wearing nomex?  I think you are.  But it is your life and your skin.  You decide.  You want to break FARs, your choice. 

  

 All we need to do is keep bending aluminum and the FAA will start taking a look at the safety of warbird operation and could place restrictions on formation flight.  Then we all lose.

  

 Go read the new manual.  Keep an open mind.  I know for a fact that it was written with the key concept of safety of the pilots and our aircraft in mind.

  

 Fly often, stay safe,

  

 Craig Winkelmann, CFI

 Nanchang CJ-6

 

 	  Quote: 	
		  



et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

p://forums.matronics.com



	
	
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by today!  [quote][b]

l39parts(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 8:21 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

You make good points.  The debate is not about whether whether safety equipment is useful.  The debate is about whether I should mandate that you wear equipment that can't possibly affect my safety or mind my own busines.  I believe I should mind my own business.

  

 Do you think helmets and nomex suits save lives if all occupants of cars were required to wear them?  Of course they would.  Should they be required?  I don't think so.

  

 As for the value of nomex- It works great if you have people there to put out the fire and pull you out in 10-20 seconds like Nascar has.  It's far less useful if CAP shows a few days or weeks after the crash.



[quote] From: jorgen.nielsen(at)mweb.co.za

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Re: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

 Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 23:06:49 +0200

 

 --> Yak-List message posted by: "Jorgen Nielsen" <jorgen.nielsen(at)mweb.co.za>

 

 Interesting debate. Some thoughts...

 

 When evaluating risk / threat / likelihood, one should also consider the

 likelihood of needing that nomex esp. in a formo training sortie. My

 understanding, is that is when the wear thereof is mandatory as per RPA.

 

 What I am trying to say, is how does the fact that one is doing formo

 training going to result in a situation where nomex will help? What are the

 likely scenarios - will a "touch" result in a flash fire where the suit

 would be of value?

 

 I think some of the debate is fuelled (pun intended) by the cover your ass

 situation. Insurance and lawyers come into it then. Its that question

 asked in court after the accident, "so can you confirm you were NOT wearing

 any commonly accepted safety equipment?"

 

 Here in SA flying ex-mil jets, our authority mandate all safety equipment

 must be in place. Both with the aircraft and pilot. As far as the pilot is

 concerned, this means boots, nomex flightsuit and helmet. So the issue is

 clear, if you don’t wear these, you are breaking regs. On any and all

 flights.

 

 This does not apply to other aircraft. Here we see a mix, some pilots wear

 the flightsuits, gloves, helmets (on every flight), others go in shorts /

 t-shirt. This applies whether one is flying an Extra 300, Pitts, Zlin, Yak

 or whatever. Those that fly the Yaks etc tend more to the flightsuits. 

 

 I don’t think you will ever get agreement because its subjective.

 

 My personal feeling is that the flightsuit is better, not just for fire but

 also for general protection - some covering is better than bare skin. If I

 had jumped and was landing in trees, I would rather have a flightsuit,

 gloves and boots on than trainers, shorts and a t-shirt. Also if you

 dehydrating in the flightsuit, would you anyway not also be dehydrating in

 shorts, all other things being equal? I.e., does it make such a difference?

 

 There are 2 fire incidents I know of - one an L-29 catching fire in flight

 (battery) and one Yak that hit powerlines on landing, crashed and caught

 fire. In both these occasions the nomex suit was preferred and beneficial,

 hugely so in the case of the L-29. The Yak driver did not have one and

 sustained burns which would have been less severe had he worn a suit.

 

 Then again, I mostly fly my Yak in shorts & a T, whether doing formo, acro

 or just tooling around. Gets bl**dy hot in Pretoria!

 

 Jorgen

 

 

 

 

 --

l39parts(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 8:43 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

I agree- when flying at an RPA event in Rome wear nomex.  If you're in America at an RPA event then celebrate your Americanism and tell the tyrants to piss off.  As for voting on the matter, I guess we could vote on whether everyone should mind their own business, but tyrants are big on voting.

[quote] Subject: Re: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

 From: capav8r(at)gmail.com

 Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 05:14:52 -0700

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 --> Yak-List message posted by: "Craig Winkelmann, CFI" <capav8r(at)gmail.com>

 All:

 To nomex or not to nomex, that was not the question!!

 So...we have two camps - those that wear nomex and those that don't. GREAT.

 When is Rome do as the Romans. So when at an RPA event (or for me flying for CAP), follow the guidelines. Otherwise, this is America - do what you want as long as it doesn't violate FARs.

 Isn't it GREAT to fly communist country airplanes in a country where we have the freedom to do what we want (within reason).

 Now....GO READ the NEW RPA FORMATION MANUAL.

 I think we should move on to other topics......

 Enjoy the freedom of flight this weekend!!

 Craig

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143348#143348

=======

Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! Get 'em!   	  Quote: 	
		  [b]

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:19 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

Understood. 



Waiting on Drew.  



Mark

 



--

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:49 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

Brian, you may be missing THE point, although the ones you make are of course perfectly accurate, and you already know what I am about to say..... You were here last time as well.    



And Craig, Drew replied to me off line that Flight Suits are in fact still required for training in the RPA.  That is why I sat down and wrote the following email.  In my mind, this message ends the issue (at least from my perspective).   



There is a movie, the title of which is: "The 10 Things I Hate About You", and in that movie a "nerd" comes over to a table of "Cool Guys" in High School and gives one of the guys there some valuable information about how to score with his girlfriend.  The Cool Guy asks the Nerd, "Why are you telling me this, what do you get out of it?" and the Nerd answers: "Well hey, when I am walking down the hallway, and you see me, you say hello and speak to me like a buddy".  



The Cool Guy replies: "Yeah, I get it, you get to be COOL BY ASSOCIATION".  



When push comes to shove, anyone here who remembers this issue from the last time it came up will admit that when it came right down to it, the REAL issue is that some people who wear flight suits want to be "COOL BY ASSOCIATION".  The MAJORITY of people who wear the darn things when they don't HAVE to, will concur.  Although sometimes you have to beat it out of them with a freaking stick! Even in the MILITARY, there is a certain "Badge of Honor" that comes with those that wear the ole Poopie Suit or BAG as it is sometimes known.  



I have avoided being totally honest and candid about this whole Flight Suit issue.  Any old-timers that still read this list remember it all from before, where it took MONTHS to finally come to the truth.  



Folks, that truth is this:  The RPA likes to look good in front of the public. In fact they are very serious about how the public views them, because a lot of what they do INVOLVES performing in front of the public.  They also like to cast an image that has ties to that of the military.  The order, the discipline, the training, the professionalism, the elitism, all of which a lot of our military organizations have earned by centuries of tradition, the RPA would like to have as well, and hope to get by following some of the same guidelines and examples that the military has established.  The wearing of Flight Suits is just one example of this.  Sure, lots of other reasons are given for wearing it, and some members will fight until the death before admitting the central reason.  That's OK by me.  I have no problem with that.  It's their organization and they have every right to do with it as they will, explanations not required.  



However, here's the deal.  There are a lot of pilots on this planet that would like to fly formation.  They may fly a Cessna, or a P-51 Mustang, it really does not matter which.  They want to do it, and they want to do it in as safe a way as possible, but make no mistake THEY ARE GOING TO DO IT, one way or the other.  They don't really care about the image of the RPA, nor do they  necessarily want to participate in RPA events.  They would like to get the training, and they would like to have the FAST card that recognizes their achievements in this area.  Some of these people may eventually become strong RPA supporters and decide that they really like wearing Flight Suits, WHATEVER.  That's ok!  



But when it comes right down to it, the biggest safety issue that will ever be faced by pilots flying airplanes in formation, is their proximity to each other and how well they are trained to operate in that proximity.  



IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT.   



ANY pilot, or group of pilots that decide to try formation flying without any training at all increase the risk by a large margin.  Any sane person knows that.  RPA members should know that fact INTIMATELY.  



To DENY any person, or group of pilots FORMATION TRAINING, simply because they will not wear a Flight Suit (you name the reason why not) says something very bad about that organization.  VERY BAD.  In my personal and very strong opinion anyway.  



It defacto says: "We'd rather you go out and attempt formation flight on your own with no training what-so-ever, than to allow you to train with us without wearing a Flight Suit.  



THAT is the bottom line.  



Some folks have suggested that I should make formal inputs to the RPA through "proper channels".  I thought about that, and decided that if they don't get the idea from people who read and write regarding this issue on this List Server, then writing them in a more formal fashion will have the same chance of changing anything as me wearing my Flight Suit while participating in formation flight.   



Mark Bitterlich

N50YK



--

brian-1927(at)lloyd.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:21 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

On Nov 5, 2007, at 4:49 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,  

MALS-14 64E wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>



 Brian, you may be missing THE point, although the ones you make are  

 of course perfectly accurate, and you already know what I am about  

 to say..... You were here last time as well.


	


And still am here. I beat around the bush this time.



 	  Quote: 	
		   And Craig, Drew replied to me off line that Flight Suits are in  

 fact still required for training in the RPA.  That is why I sat  

 down and wrote the following email.  In my mind, this message ends  

 the issue (at least from my perspective).



 There is a movie, the title of which is: "The 10 Things I Hate  

 About You", and in that movie a "nerd" comes over to a table of  

 "Cool Guys" in High School and gives one of the guys there some  

 valuable information about how to score with his girlfriend.  The  

 Cool Guy asks the Nerd, "Why are you telling me this, what do you  

 get out of it?" and the Nerd answers: "Well hey, when I am walking  

 down the hallway, and you see me, you say hello and speak to me  

 like a buddy".



 The Cool Guy replies: "Yeah, I get it, you get to be COOL BY  

 ASSOCIATION".



 When push comes to shove, anyone here who remembers this issue from  

 the last time it came up will admit that when it came right down to  

 it, the REAL issue is that some people who wear flight suits want  

 to be "COOL BY ASSOCIATION".  The MAJORITY of people who wear the  

 darn things when they don't HAVE to, will concur.  Although  

 sometimes you have to beat it out of them with a freaking stick!  

 Even in the MILITARY, there is a certain "Badge of Honor" that  

 comes with those that wear the ole Poopie Suit or BAG as it is  

 sometimes known.


	


Yup. I suppose I could repost my humorous message from a couple of  

years back on the topic but those who laughed last time would still  

laugh and those who found it offensive would still find it offensive.  

Nothing gained.



 	  Quote: 	
		   I have avoided being totally honest and candid about this whole  

 Flight Suit issue.  Any old-timers that still read this list  

 remember it all from before, where it took MONTHS to finally come  

 to the truth.



 Folks, that truth is this:  The RPA likes to look good in front of  

 the public. In fact they are very serious about how the public  

 views them, because a lot of what they do INVOLVES performing in  

 front of the public.  They also like to cast an image that has ties  

 to that of the military.  The order, the discipline, the training,  

 the professionalism, the elitism, all of which a lot of our  

 military organizations have earned by centuries of tradition, the  

 RPA would like to have as well, and hope to get by following some  

 of the same guidelines and examples that the military has  

 established.  The wearing of Flight Suits is just one example of  

 this.  Sure, lots of other reasons are given for wearing it, and  

 some members will fight until the death before admitting the  

 central reason.  That's OK by me.  I have no problem with that.   

 It's their organization and they have every right to do with it as  

 they will, explanations not required.



 However, here's the deal.  There are a lot of pilots on this planet  

 that would like to fly formation.  They may fly a Cessna, or a P-51  

 Mustang, it really does not matter which.  They want to do it, and  

 they want to do it in as safe a way as possible, but make no  

 mistake THEY ARE GOING TO DO IT, one way or the other.  They don't  

 really care about the image of the RPA, nor do they  necessarily  

 want to participate in RPA events.  They would like to get the  

 training, and they would like to have the FAST card that recognizes  

 their achievements in this area.  Some of these people may  

 eventually become strong RPA supporters and decide that they really  

 like wearing Flight Suits, WHATEVER.  That's ok!



 But when it comes right down to it, the biggest safety issue that  

 will ever be faced by pilots flying airplanes in formation, is  

 their proximity to each other and how well they are trained to  

 operate in that proximity.



 IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT.



 ANY pilot, or group of pilots that decide to try formation flying  

 without any training at all increase the risk by a large margin.   

 Any sane person knows that.  RPA members should know that fact  

 INTIMATELY.



 To DENY any person, or group of pilots FORMATION TRAINING, simply  

 because they will not wear a Flight Suit (you name the reason why  

 not) says something very bad about that organization.  VERY BAD.   

 In my personal and very strong opinion anyway.



 It defacto says: "We'd rather you go out and attempt formation  

 flight on your own with no training what-so-ever, than to allow you  

 to train with us without wearing a Flight Suit.



 THAT is the bottom line.



 Some folks have suggested that I should make formal inputs to the  

 RPA through "proper channels".  I thought about that, and decided  

 that if they don't get the idea from people who read and write  

 regarding this issue on this List Server, then writing them in a  

 more formal fashion will have the same chance of changing anything  

 as me wearing my Flight Suit while participating in formation flight.


	


I understand Mark and I concur with your analysis. This is why I made  

the not-so-subtle comments about how it is the flight suit that  

receives the respect, not the pilot's performance.



But you and I seem to be the die-hard libertarians of the group. And  

as a die-hard libertarian we all get to do a couple of things:



1. I get to choose what I wear in my cockpit.



2. You get to choose whether or not you want to fly with me, on my  

wing, or let me fly on your wing.



3. The RPA gets to choose how people play in their sandbox.



So Mark, as a libertarian, don't you agree that they have the right  

to determine with whom they will associate and for what reason? They  

have chosen to discriminate on the basis of dress code and I support  

that. We already have too many people telling us with whom we must  

associate and I am not one to force my beliefs on anyone else. So  

they get to enforce their dress code and I get to decide if I want to  

put on the poopy suit and play with them or not put on the poopy suit  

and go play somewhere else. Welcome to freedom of choice.



You know, a reasonable approach to this would be for us to stage a  

training session where you get to wear anything you want in your  

cockpit. We can teach from the RPA formation manual and get people  

signed off for their FAST cards (if they want 'em) but definitely  

ensure that they have the requisite knowledge and fear-of-god  

required for safe formation flying. It wouldn't be RPA because we  

might not be wearing a bag but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a  

duck, and flies like a duck ...



And if someone really wants a FAST card signed by the RPA they can  

train however they want to get competent, put on the bag, and go get  

a check-ride at an RPA function.



Freedom of choice.



But please folks, don't tell me that I should wear a Nomex flight  

suit for safety reasons. That is horse-hockey and we all know it. You  

want me to wear a flight suit for the reasons Mark has so clearly and  

eloquently elucidated.



And I am personally done with this topic. No more shall anyone hear  

from me on this in this forum.



Anybody in the vicinity of SAC want to go fly some form? I have  

Tyson's Yak-52 I have promised to fly and I could use some practice.  

If its warm I will probably wear shorts and a light shirt. If its  

cold I might put on the ol' bag over my long undies. But the emphasis  

will be on the flying.



--

Brian Lloyd                         3191 Western Drive

brian HYPHEN 1927 AT lloyd DOT com    Cameron Park, CA 95682

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

— Antoine de Saint-Exupéry



PGP key ID:          12095C52A32A1B6C

PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0  CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C

shinden33

Joined: 02 Nov 2007
Posts: 39

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

I don't usually join these melee's but what Mark stated is correct:



The RPA's rule says "We'd rather you go out and attempt formation flight on 

your own with no training what-so-ever, than to allow you to train with us 

without wearing a Flight Suit."



In the adoption of this rule the RPA states that it prioritizes flight suits 

over providing safety training.   (Flight suits do not provide for safety in 

this environment.  Data shows that.)   Furthermore, you can't go down to the 

local FBO and get formation training.  For most folk outlets for this sort 

of training are few a far between so freedom of choice isn't the best 

arguement either.



Better question:  has anyone actually been denied training because they 

weren't wearing a flight suit?



S

---

cpayne(at)joimail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:17 am Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

>

 >  > Better question: has anyone actually been denied training because they 

 > weren't wearing a flight suit?

 >

  

 Well maybe not denied training, but I'm not sure who will give a check ride without the applicant wearing one...no patches required. More than 1 guy had to borrow a suit, and a 'chute for a check hop.



  

  

 Craig Payne

 cpayne(at)joimail.com (cpayne(at)joimail.com)

  

  

 

  [quote][b]

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:45 pm Post subject: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

That’s how we get dictators! The apathetic refrain.  

Doc  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Davis

 Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 12:43 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Re: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety  

  

  

   

I agree- when flying at an RPA event in Rome wear nomex.  If you're in America at an RPA event then celebrate your Americanism and tell the tyrants to piss off.  As for voting on the matter, I guess we could vote on whether everyone should mind their own business, but tyrants are big on voting.

 

 > Subject: Re: FAST, Formation Flight, Safety

 > From: capav8r(at)gmail.com

 > Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 05:14:52 -0700

 > To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 > 

 > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Craig Winkelmann, CFI" <capav8r(at)gmail.com>

 > 

 > All:

 > 

 > To nomex or not to nomex, that was not the question!!

 > 

 > So...we have two camps - those that wear nomex and those that don't. GREAT.

 > 

 > When is Rome do as the Romans. So when at an RPA event (or for me flying for CAP), follow the guidelines. Otherwise, this is America - do what you want as long as it doesn't violate FARs.

 > 

 > Isn't it GREAT to fly communist country airplanes in a country where we have the freedom to do what we want (within reason).

 > 

 > Now....GO READ the NEW RPA FORMATION MANUAL.

 > 

 > I think we should move on to other topics......

 > 

 > Enjoy the freedom of flight this weekend!!

 > 

 > Craig

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > Read this topic online here:

 > 

 > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143348#143348

 > 

 >=======

 > 

 > 

 >       

  

Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! Get 'em!    	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/contribution 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9 	  Quote: 	
		  	
0 	  Quote: 	
		  	
1 	  Quote: 	
		  	
2 	  Quote: 	
		  	
3 	  Quote: 	
		  	
4

       [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum