Stupid helmet question

It has nothing to do with feeling secure. It has everything to do with
understanding how hard the ground is when you hit it in something like a
P51.
I flew a Mustang for many hours with a baseball cap. Hard helmets are a REAL
pleasure at altitude with the sun pouring in on them. It's like having your
head in a pizza oven. You wear them in the military because that's where
they put the avionics and O2 crap.
In fast airplanes, If you dig a hole at the speeds your airplane is capable
of handling, it won't matter much what you have on your head. Your head AND
the helmet will probably end up on some tree branch dangling in the wind
anyway. On a bike you have a nice breeze to cool off your bean. In a 51,
you're under a magnifying glass on a hot sunny day!
Bob Hoover uses a soft plantation hat that he sits on enroute, then puts on
after he lands to keep the sun out of his eyes while he taxies in. I did the
same on more than one occasion.
A helmet WILL save you from the occasional "bump" on the head, but
everything considered, many of us opt not to wear one if we have the option.
It has nothing to do with overconfidence and everything to do with quality
of life! :-)
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)

Greasy Rider© @invalid.com wrote in message
...
I was browsing a newsgroup just now and saw a gentleman flying a P-51
Mustang with what appears to be just a common ball cap. I got to
wondering if he is that secure in his abilities and crash worthiness
of the air frame to simply wear a ball cap?

As a motorcyclist I feel very strange if I'm not wearing the very best
helmet that I can afford. Why would a pilot operate a high performance
aircraft with anything less?

I know that a high dollar helmet and other protective gear has no
guarantees whether it's a car, motorcycle, pony or aircraft.

Am I missing something? Is the pilot simply exercising his freedom to
take his chances? (The law won't let me do that in some states.)

Greasy wrote:
I was browsing a newsgroup just now and saw a gentleman flying a P-51
Mustang with what appears to be just a common ball cap. I got to
wondering if he is that secure in his abilities and crash worthiness
of the air frame to simply wear a ball cap?

As a motorcyclist I feel very strange if I'm not wearing the very best
helmet that I can afford. Why would a pilot operate a high performance
aircraft with anything less?

I know that a high dollar helmet and other protective gear has no
guarantees whether it's a car, motorcycle, pony or aircraft.

Am I missing something? Is the pilot simply exercising his freedom to
take his chances? (The law won't let me do that in some states.)

My guess is that he has probabably taken off the helmet and secured it
in the cockpit for take-offs and landing? Might even have a special
place for it, would have to in that limited space?

Some pilots and motorcycle jock's I know utterly lack imagination and
have no conception of getting hurt. It may be due in part to extreme
self-confidence and perhaps a little ego boost at not being a pussy.

Oopps, didn't put a smiley face after "pussy". Someone is going to get
their feelings hurt so here it is. :-)

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:32:09 -0500, old hoodoo
postulated :

Some pilots and motorcycle jock's I know utterly lack imagination and
have no conception of getting hurt. It may be due in part to extreme
self-confidence and perhaps a little ego boost at not being a pussy.

Been riding since the early 50s and by the grace of God only had one
serious rag doll. I'd have to disagree with the "utterly lack
imagination and have no conception of getting hurt" part in my case.
As I cruise down the concrete ribbon I am more than aware of the
delicacy and insanity of my position. Just inches from some very hard
and abrasive substance not to mention the brain dead cagers talking on
their cell phones. I’ve never talked to a motorcyclist who didn’t know
he was skating on the edge of survival and most will tell you that in
almost any event the motorcyclist will have his life forever changed.
The freedom that removing the state mandated helmet and simply
enjoying the breeze is almost intoxicating. Kinda like cruising in an
open helocopter two feet AGL.

Don’t think I’ve ever considered the ego aspect of not being a pussy
but I hear that you are what you eat.


Greasy

"old hoodoo" wrote in message
news:NfF4e.33$fn5.19@okepread01
| Oopps, didn't put a smiley face after "pussy". Someone is going to
| get their feelings hurt so here it is. :-)



A smiley face after pussy is assumed.



--

Cheers


Dave Kearton

Dave Kearton wrote:

A smiley face after pussy is assumed.

:-)
--
Noah

"Dave Kearton" wrote:

"old hoodoo" wrote in message
news:NfF4e.33$fn5.19@okepread01

| Oopps, didn't put a smiley face after "pussy". Someone is going to
| get their feelings hurt so here it is. :-)



A smiley face after pussy is assumed.

Of course...some just smile, others smile AND smoke...
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message

| "Dave Kearton" wrote:
|
|| "old hoodoo" wrote in message
|| news:NfF4e.33$fn5.19@okepread01
|
||| Oopps, didn't put a smiley face after "pussy". Someone is going to
||| get their feelings hurt so here it is. :-)
||
||
||
|| A smiley face after pussy is assumed.
|
| Of course...some just smile, others smile AND smoke...
| --
|
| -Gord.
| (use gordon in email)




Gord, you've got to slow down ......



--

Cheers


Dave Kearton

Nope. Instant acceleration and deccelerations occur, and then the time tends
to zero and the forces tends to infinite. It's called percussion in physics.
Classic example are the snooker balls. Also hitting a golf ball. No time
between the club hits the ball and it goes flying.
By definition the percussion is a sharp impact, where time is zero and force
infinite.

"hoarse with no name" escribió en el mensaje
...

With all vehicle crashes it is worth remembering that deceleration is
equivalent to acceleration and that it takes an infinite amount of force
to accelerate instantly. This means we never accelerate/decelerate
instantly. When a vehicle crashes the time necessary to decelerate is
bought, so to speak, through the deformation of the structure. When an
unhelmeted body is thrown from the cycle and the head meets the ground
time for deceleration is bought the same way, through deformation of the
structure. I also believe that some of the velocity is redirected, often
perpendicular to the pavement. This is why the advantage goes to the
helmeted rider whose head decelerates by compressing the cushioning in
the helmet.

J.A.M. wrote:
Nope. Instant acceleration and deccelerations occur, and then the time tends
to zero and the forces tends to infinite. It's called percussion in physics.
Classic example are the snooker balls. Also hitting a golf ball. No time
between the club hits the ball and it goes flying.
By definition the percussion is a sharp impact, where time is zero and force
infinite.


Not in real life but as an approximation. The golf ball will
deform (can be seen in high speed films) and it will take a
finite time for the deformation front to move trough the ball.
If not, we would have an infinite stiff ball with an infinite
speed of sound in the ball and no internal loss of energy
and that is unphysical. Percussion
is just a tool used to simplify calculations and not something
you will find in nature.

/Per