Re: Lightspeed with Foggles question

[Rod Madsen]

I just bought the Hood Lamb and had to send them back. They simply would
not clamp to my David Clark H10-13.4 which have a narrower than usual band.
To their credit, they acknowledge this problem with DC's and suggest
friction tape to increase the girth of the band. Didn't work...to
rinky-dink for me. I replaced them with the kind with a head band. Not
sure they'll work with glasses, but I think they will.

Rod
"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> OK, I'd like to tap into the ingenuity of the group here.
>
> We have Lightspeed headsets. We use Foggles for simulated
> instrument training.
>
> I don't like it, because the earpieces of the Foggles create
> a sound gap.
>
> I saw a cool product for IFR training which clipped onto
> the band of a headset with tiny little bands, and flipped
> up and down to limit one's view or move out of the way.
> It's called the Hood Lamb (for example:
> http://www.pilotshop-usa.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1530&DEPARTMENT_ID=78
>
> Unfortunately, it only fits on headsets with steel bands,
> like DC's or Sigtronics.
>
> It looked like something a clever chap ought to be able
> to duplicate with a bit of ingenuity, given the requisite
> parts -- some kind of swivel, and some kind of clamp which
> would fit the wider plastic band of the Lightspeed headsets.
>
> There is a clever chap in our house.
>
> Can anyone suggest a source of little clamps and the like?
> (ie a widget catalog?)
>
> Thanks!
> Sydney

[Jim]

Hi Sydney,
I've got Lightspeeds and although the noise was never a problem, the way
they press the bows of the foggles into my brain starts to bother me after
awhile. I've often thought about buying a cheap pair of wire frame
sunglasses and cutting the bows off them, then also cutting most of the bows
off the foggles, leaving the corner pieces of course. Then I thought of
drilling several holes in the side pieces of the foggles and weaving the
wire frame bows or attaching them to the foggles somehow. Just an idea that
admittingly needs some work but it would make the space between the earcup
and your head smaller.

--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Snowbird > wrote:
>
>We have Lightspeed headsets. We use Foggles for simulated
>instrument training.

Jeppshades work with Lightspeed headsets and there's nothing to
interrupt the ear seal.

If you figure out a way to hook a hoodlamb to LS, let me know.
I was inspired by the hoodlamb and made something similar out of
a folded piece of cardboard and some rubber bands with home-made
clips to attach to the headset. I used it for my private but it
lacked the easy flip-up/flip-down you'd get with a real hoodlamb.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Gary L. Drescher]

That looks like a cool device. Thanks for posting the pointer!

I've been dissatisfied with Foggles too, both because of the discomfort of
putting the stems under the headset (I wear contacts instead of glasses, and
use Shields sunglasses that have a string instead of stems, so only Foggles
present this problem for me), and also because they don't really limit my
outside vision adequately.

I'd been meaning to try to find or devise some alternative, but so far this
year I've been able to stay current just by shooting approaches in benign
IFR, so I've kind of forgotten about the foggles.

(Sorry, no idea about the widget catalog.)

--Gary

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
> OK, I'd like to tap into the ingenuity of the group here.
>
> We have Lightspeed headsets. We use Foggles for simulated
> instrument training.
>
> I don't like it, because the earpieces of the Foggles create
> a sound gap.
>
> I saw a cool product for IFR training which clipped onto
> the band of a headset with tiny little bands, and flipped
> up and down to limit one's view or move out of the way.
> It's called the Hood Lamb (for example:
> http://www.pilotshop-usa.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1530&DEPARTMENT_ID=78
>
> Unfortunately, it only fits on headsets with steel bands,
> like DC's or Sigtronics.
>
> It looked like something a clever chap ought to be able
> to duplicate with a bit of ingenuity, given the requisite
> parts -- some kind of swivel, and some kind of clamp which
> would fit the wider plastic band of the Lightspeed headsets.
>
> There is a clever chap in our house.
>
> Can anyone suggest a source of little clamps and the like?
> (ie a widget catalog?)
>
> Thanks!
> Sydney

[Paul Mennen]

I also have the Hood Lamb. I think it is the greatest view
limiting device I have ever tried.

I also have two Sennheiser ANR headsets which like your Lightspeeds
will not work with the Hood Lamb.

May I suggest a very low tech but pragmatic solution?

What headsets did you have before getting the ANRs? If you are like
me and many others you probably had David Clarks are similar
work alikes. Just reserect on of those and use it for IFR training.
(Older ones are also available cheap because of the great movement
towards ANRs). Like most people, I don't do hood flying for more
than an hour or two at a stretch, so the slightly higher noise
of the passive headsets is not really a problem.

~Paul

> We have Lightspeed headsets. ...

> I saw a cool product for IFR training which clipped onto
> the band of a headset with tiny little bands, and flipped
> up and down to limit one's view or move out of the way.
> It's called the Hood Lamb

> Unfortunately, it only fits on headsets with steel bands,
> like DC's or Sigtronics.

[Ray Andraka]

I've had a hoodlamb since the early '90s, and I love it. It doesn't fit on my
DC headset (don't recall the number, but it is the one with a wide plastic
toothed thing instead of stirrups). When I go for training, I just pull out one
of the better pairs of sigtronics S20's and use them with the Hoodlamb. Figure
I can put up with the headset for the couple of hours of training a year. I got
the white hoodlamb, didn't care for the black one, got too dark inside. I also
cut the horns off the bottom of the view port, it was too hard to read charts
with them there.

"Gary L. Drescher" wrote:

> That looks like a cool device. Thanks for posting the pointer!
>
> I've been dissatisfied with Foggles too, both because of the discomfort of
> putting the stems under the headset (I wear contacts instead of glasses, and
> use Shields sunglasses that have a string instead of stems, so only Foggles
> present this problem for me), and also because they don't really limit my
> outside vision adequately.
>
> I'd been meaning to try to find or devise some alternative, but so far this
> year I've been able to stay current just by shooting approaches in benign
> IFR, so I've kind of forgotten about the foggles.
>
> (Sorry, no idea about the widget catalog.)
>
> --Gary
>
> "Snowbird" > wrote in message
> om...
> > OK, I'd like to tap into the ingenuity of the group here.
> >
> > We have Lightspeed headsets. We use Foggles for simulated
> > instrument training.
> >
> > I don't like it, because the earpieces of the Foggles create
> > a sound gap.
> >
> > I saw a cool product for IFR training which clipped onto
> > the band of a headset with tiny little bands, and flipped
> > up and down to limit one's view or move out of the way.
> > It's called the Hood Lamb (for example:
> > http://www.pilotshop-usa.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1530&DEPARTMENT_ID=78
> >
> > Unfortunately, it only fits on headsets with steel bands,
> > like DC's or Sigtronics.
> >
> > It looked like something a clever chap ought to be able
> > to duplicate with a bit of ingenuity, given the requisite
> > parts -- some kind of swivel, and some kind of clamp which
> > would fit the wider plastic band of the Lightspeed headsets.
> >
> > There is a clever chap in our house.
> >
> > Can anyone suggest a source of little clamps and the like?
> > (ie a widget catalog?)
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Sydney

--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950
email
http://www.andraka.com

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, 1759

[Robert Henry]

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...

I use the ASA clip to sunglasses, folding up/down view limiting device
(overcasters). Light and cheap (though more expensive than they need to be
for a piece of plastic - the joy of aviation), easy to flip on or off. And
yes, I have an old frame with no lenses for "low light" flights.

--

Bob
PP-ASEL-IA, A/IGI

[Snowbird]

Stan Gosnell > wrote in message >...
> My personal device is a flip-up type, which attaches to my glasses the way
> flip-up clipon sunglasses do.

Yeah, I'm really tempted by these, but I prefer to wear contact lenses
when flying for better peripheral vision.

Our CFI doesn't like pilots he flies with to use hoods. Apparently
he had a near-miss involving the blind spot they create. Can't argue
with that.

> I know of one pilot who has made foggles
> from some wrap-around safety glasses

That's what mine are: old scratched-up safety glasses with an
area of the lens taped over, then attacked w/ sandpaper and a dremel
tool.

> For clamps, check the local home-improvement
> store or Sears hardware store. You'd be surprised at the stuff you can
> find there, if you spend some time looking.

Didn't see anything juicy at Home Depot, but I'll check Sears
and yeah, I coulda looked more and harder at Home Depot.

Thanks for input, Stan.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Snowbird]

"Paul Mennen" > wrote in message >...

> May I suggest a very low tech but pragmatic solution?
>
> What headsets did you have before getting the ANRs?

Flightcom Eclipse. Even wider band and less chance of
fitting than Lightspeed. So afraid your pragmatic solution
won't work for me :(

> If you are like
> me and many others you probably had David Clarks

I have a broad head (some might say "fat" heh heh) and
Dave Clarks are "Dave Clamps" to me. I know people who
own Dave Clamps but I don't think I could stick 'em,
even for an hour :(.

They'd make a good distraction though.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Stan Gosnell]

(Snowbird) wrote in
om:

> Yeah, I'm really tempted by these, but I prefer to wear contact lenses
> when flying for better peripheral vision.

I can't put anything in my eyes. Plus, I only need the glasses for close-
up work like reading approach plates. Contacts wouldn't work anyway. Ever
since I saw the results of the mating of a seagull with a BH206, I always
wear something over my eyes. The pilot would be dead now if he hadn't been
wearing sunglasses.

> Our CFI doesn't like pilots he flies with to use hoods. Apparently
> he had a near-miss involving the blind spot they create. Can't argue
> with that.

Oh, well...........
Have you considered a different CFI?

>> I know of one pilot who has made foggles
>> from some wrap-around safety glasses
>
> That's what mine are: old scratched-up safety glasses with an
> area of the lens taped over, then attacked w/ sandpaper and a dremel
> tool.

That's extreme. :-) Easier to mask the bottoms, & use some black spray
paint. They're still too thick for me, though. The earpieces on my
glasses are very thin wire, & anything thicker just doesn't cut it.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Roger Halstead]

On 18 Aug 2003 19:40:43 -0700, (Snowbird)
wrote:

>Stan Gosnell > wrote in message >...
>> My personal device is a flip-up type, which attaches to my glasses the way
>> flip-up clipon sunglasses do.
>
>Yeah, I'm really tempted by these, but I prefer to wear contact lenses
>when flying for better peripheral vision.
>
>Our CFI doesn't like pilots he flies with to use hoods. Apparently
>he had a near-miss involving the blind spot they create. Can't argue
>with that.
>
>> I know of one pilot who has made foggles
>> from some wrap-around safety glasses

Foggles appear to be nothing more than the inexpensive clear plastic
safety glasses that have been sandblasted, or bead blasted on the
sides and areas where you want to block vision.

Based on that, the equivalent is quite easy to make, or even
duplicate.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)
>
<snip>

[Snowbird]

Stan Gosnell > wrote in message >...
> (Snowbird) wrote in
> om:
> > Our CFI doesn't like pilots he flies with to use hoods. Apparently
> > he had a near-miss involving the blind spot they create. Can't argue
> > with that.

> Oh, well...........
> Have you considered a different CFI?

How would that help? The blind spot created by the hood would
still be there. And frankly, the hoods I've tried allowed waaaaaay
too much cheating. Obviously I haven't tried them all, your favorite
may be perfect in this regard.

> > That's what mine are: old scratched-up safety glasses with an
> > area of the lens taped over, then attacked w/ sandpaper and a dremel
> > tool.

> That's extreme. :-) Easier to mask the bottoms, & use some black spray
> paint.

Easier for whom? I can attack something w/ sandpaper or even a dremel
tool on the porch while I'm watching my daughter. Spray paint requires
clearing and masking an area to catch overspray, then clean up afterwards.
The "clearing" is non-trivial in any domecile "Mr. Clutter" (aka my
husband) inhabits. Then I have to wait several weeks for enough of the
solvent to out-gas that I can stand to be in the same closed space
with something that's been painted (it's an asthmatic trigger for me).

> They're still too thick for me, though. The earpieces on my
> glasses are very thin wire, & anything thicker just doesn't cut it.

Concur, hence my interest in mfr a Hood Lamb equivalent for Lightspeeds.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Leland Vandervort]

On 19 Aug 2003 06:09:48 -0700, (Snowbird)
wrote:

>How would that help? The blind spot created by the hood would
>still be there. And frankly, the hoods I've tried allowed waaaaaay
>too much cheating. Obviously I haven't tried them all, your favorite
>may be perfect in this regard.
>
>> > That's what mine are: old scratched-up safety glasses with an
>> > area of the lens taped over, then attacked w/ sandpaper and a dremel
>> > tool.
>

Imagine the blind spots in the UK for I/R students since the only
artifical visual inhibitors allowed in the UK for I/R training are IF
Screens (louvered blinds over the pilot side windows)... LOTs of blind
spots generated by those.

For the IMC rating, foggles or hoods are acceptable, but for I/R it
must be screens so the student can't "cheat" by peeking out the corner
of his eye.

Leland

[Stan Gosnell]

Roger Halstead > wrote in
:

> Foggles appear to be nothing more than the inexpensive clear plastic
> safety glasses that have been sandblasted, or bead blasted on the
> sides and areas where you want to block vision.

Nope, one more modification - the price is jacked way up.

> Based on that, the equivalent is quite easy to make, or even
> duplicate.

For a fraction of the price. Anything targeted at aviation & pilots is
very expensive, because all those pilots have lots of money. ;-)

I never buy anything sold as being for aviation if I can help it. My
flight bag is a fishing tackle bag I bought on clearance at KMart. Just
about the only thing I own that's sold to pilots is the mike for my
headset. I recently had to replace the cord on my headset, & thought I was
getting ripped off by the electronics supply place for $20, but if you buy
one specifically designed for an aviation headset you'll pay close to $100
for a lower-quality equivalent.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Snowbird]

Roger Halstead > wrote in message >...

> Foggles appear to be nothing more than the inexpensive clear plastic
> safety glasses that have been sandblasted, or bead blasted on the
> sides and areas where you want to block vision.

Concur. As I said in a previous post, that's exactly what mine
are (well, I sanded and used a dremel tool, I didn't bead blast
them).

Cheers,
Sydney

[Roger Halstead]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:22:12 +0100, Leland Vandervort
> wrote:

>On 19 Aug 2003 06:09:48 -0700, (Snowbird)
>wrote:
>
>>How would that help? The blind spot created by the hood would
>>still be there. And frankly, the hoods I've tried allowed waaaaaay
>>too much cheating. Obviously I haven't tried them all, your favorite
>>may be perfect in this regard.
>>
>>> > That's what mine are: old scratched-up safety glasses with an
>>> > area of the lens taped over, then attacked w/ sandpaper and a dremel
>>> > tool.
>>
>
>Imagine the blind spots in the UK for I/R students since the only
>artifical visual inhibitors allowed in the UK for I/R training are IF
>Screens (louvered blinds over the pilot side windows)... LOTs of blind
>spots generated by those.

Man, but that sure sounds like an accident waiting for a place to
happen.

>
>For the IMC rating, foggles or hoods are acceptable, but for I/R it
>must be screens so the student can't "cheat" by peeking out the corner
>of his eye.

Sure sounds like a bit of overzealous bureaucracy trading safety for
accuracy. You sure it didn't come from this side of the pond?

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)

>
>Leland

[Roger Halstead]

On 19 Aug 2003 19:32:12 GMT, Stan Gosnell >
wrote:

>Roger Halstead > wrote in
:
>
>> Foggles appear to be nothing more than the inexpensive clear plastic
>> safety glasses that have been sandblasted, or bead blasted on the
>> sides and areas where you want to block vision.
>
>Nope, one more modification - the price is jacked way up.

I notice that too...Actually a very important modification to the
safety glasses.

>
>> Based on that, the equivalent is quite easy to make, or even
>> duplicate.
>
>For a fraction of the price. Anything targeted at aviation & pilots is
>very expensive, because all those pilots have lots of money. ;-)

Not for long<:-))

>
>I never buy anything sold as being for aviation if I can help it. My
>flight bag is a fishing tackle bag I bought on clearance at KMart. Just
>about the only thing I own that's sold to pilots is the mike for my

I use my old briefcase I had at work...before I retired.

>headset. I recently had to replace the cord on my headset, & thought I was
>getting ripped off by the electronics supply place for $20, but if you buy
>one specifically designed for an aviation headset you'll pay close to $100
>for a lower-quality equivalent.

I'm not sure I paid that much for my first pair of headsets. Course
they were Sigtronics passive headsets and that was almost 15 years
ago.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)

[Stan Gosnell]

(Snowbird) wrote in
om:


> Can you give specifics of what you bought? I'd like to make
> a set of headset cord extensions (need stereo though)

It's a curly cord, a little shorter than most headset cords, & larger in
diameter. It has 3 conductors plus a shield, which gives 4 conductors in
all - 2 for the mike, 2 for the speakers. I don't have a particular part
number, because I threw the packaging material away after I bought it.
Radio Shack used to carry what I needed; they had a CB microphone
replacement cord, which had 5 conductors, more than I needed but exactly
what you would need for stereo, but they no longer stock it. I had to go
to a real electronics supply store. Any curly cord with 5 or more
conductors will work for your stereo extension, if you're using a mike, and
3 or more if it's listen only. Or if you can live without the curl, you
can get some straight cord with the same number of conductors cheaper.
Radio Shack should have that. The plugs & jacks may be harder to find -
check the electronics supply place, & if they don't have it, try an
avionics shop. The earphone plug is a standard 1/4" stereo plug & jack,
but the mike is a different size. I don't often need these, since
helicopters use a single U174 plug for both mike & speakers.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Stan Gosnell]

Roger Halstead > wrote in
:

>
>>Imagine the blind spots in the UK for I/R students since the only
>>artifical visual inhibitors allowed in the UK for I/R training are IF
>>Screens (louvered blinds over the pilot side windows)... LOTs of blind
>>spots generated by those.
>
> Man, but that sure sounds like an accident waiting for a place to
> happen.
>
>>
>>For the IMC rating, foggles or hoods are acceptable, but for I/R it
>>must be screens so the student can't "cheat" by peeking out the corner
>>of his eye.
>
> Sure sounds like a bit of overzealous bureaucracy trading safety for
> accuracy. You sure it didn't come from this side of the pond?

The other side makes this side look positively liberal. They don't even
allow GPS approaches at all. They're still depending mostly on NDB's. GPS
is a U.S. innovation too new & undependable for use in the UK. There are
some instructive threads on PPRuNe forums, particularly Rotorheads on this
subject.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Roger Halstead]

On 20 Aug 2003 15:51:14 GMT, Stan Gosnell >
wrote:

>Roger Halstead > wrote in
:
>
>> I'm not sure I paid that much for my first pair of headsets. Course
>> they were Sigtronics passive headsets and that was almost 15 years
>> ago.
>
>You got a good deal. I build my own headsets from David Clark hearing
>protectors & parts, & it costs me almost that much just for parts, & the
>only aviation parts I use are the mike and boom, earseals, & plug, and I
>generally recycle as much of that as I can. My boom is one I liberated
>from a military headset over 20 years ago, as is the plug.

I've built a lot of stuff over the years, both electronic and
mechanical...Quite often I could purchase something new for the price
of the parts...some times less. NOw that was not the case when surplus
parts were available.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)