High Vis Markings

I searched this thread and did not see an actual study referenced, only urban legend, that bright colors not found in nature somehow act to "work as camouflage because they erode the edge of the plane's outline/silhouette". Is this not the same ilk as "we only use 10% of our brain" or "it is improper English in end a sentence in a preposition"? BTW, all three urban legends have no basis in science, fact, or English structure. If you think so, you do not have a leg to stand on. Perhaps you do not know what you speak of. What are you talking about? Just three examples of one urban legend mentioned above. Autonomous processes of the body take more than 10% of brain function alone. Military uses high visibility paint on training aircraft, because it works. If you travel Russia you will also find most Russians do not wear seatbelts because they all know someone, who knew someone that was friends with someone that was saved because they were thrown free in an auto accident. Of course no one knows anyone first hand that was so saved, but they all believe the BS legends. Hmm... I wonder why hunters wear high visibility clothing? Is it to be seen so they are not shot... no I am sure the orange would just blur they edges so it would be difficult for a center shot.

France mandated high vis markings for a reason, they saw a statistically significate difference. France mandated Flarm for the same reason, it works.

I am not a fan of the big sky theory, have had way too many close calls, from the airport environment, to the middle of nowhere, thus the only possible conclusion is the theory is bunk. Sure, most aircraft do not collide, but the theory that only works 98% of the time is not really a theorem, is it.. Then it just becomes probability, fate, vicissitudes of life, karma... Imagine if the theory of relativity only worked 98% of the time. What if the laws of physics only worked 99% of the time.

Four times in the airport environment, under tower control, I have been place directly in the path of another aircraft, and this is by trained professionals. Too many times to count out in "the Big Sky", I have only had time to flench as another aircraft streaked by, once so close I did not even see an aircraft, just a grey blur filling the entire windscreen as I heard the roar of jet engines. And this was over the roar of my own jet engine and through noise cancelling headset.

Not intending to offend anyone, just to solicit thought, not rote acceptance. Show me the beef. (by way of full disclosure, I not not eat beef).

On Wednesday, 27 January 2016 09:29:58 UTC+2, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
I searched this thread and did not see an actual study referenced, only urban legend, that bright colors not found in nature somehow act to "work as camouflage because they erode the edge of the plane's outline/silhouette".

The fact that this topic re-appears every couple of years and generates a lot of debate suggests that not enough scientific research has been done to validate or invalidate the argument for or against anti-collision markings.

In certain situations such as a glider against a snow covered mountain, high visibility orange DayGlo certainly does help but it may also camouflage the glider in other conditions.

The RAF held glider conspicuity trials at Bicester in June and October 2002..
It evaluated 3M Mirror Film and DayGlo markings.
The summary was "We conclude that the DayGlo patches did not improve conspicuity." while the mirror film greatly increased sighting range if sunlight was present.
Source: http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/Data/gl...uity-study.pdf

A German flavoured study: https://www.streckenflug.at/index.php?p=technikwarn
Summary: "The use of colour markings as an anti-collision aid is questionable. In particular when two aircraft are on a constant-bearing (collision) course, it is the size and shape of the other aircraft which is seen first, not any colour pattern. The use of colour seems obvious at short range and on the ground but this is often not the critical case in the air in a collision situation." Position reporting, pilot scan technique and strobe lights were deemed to be far more effective than colour markings.

As a glider owner who is planning to repaint his glider this year in a country that doesn't mandate anti-collision markings and doesn't experience snow fall (where I fly), I am very interested in what the best solution is.
My personal conclusion is that FLARM, mirror film and strobe lights facing all directions would be a much better solution than just DayGlo markings. Unfortunately the power requirements and drag created by multiple strobe light housings retro-fitted to a glider prevents me going this route so mirror film and FLARM is probably the best bet?

"France mandated high vis markings for a reason, they saw a statistically
significate difference. France mandated Flarm for the same reason, it
works."


FRANCE mandated hi viz marking to help see gliders in the snowy backdrop of
the alps.

They also mandated FLARM for the alps as FLARM can see round corners in the
mountains and the eye can not.


Bright colour markings do nothing. If you wish to improve visibility put
silver reflective tape on each of your control surfaces.

On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 2:29:58 AM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
I searched this thread and did not see an actual study referenced, only urban legend, that bright colors not found in nature somehow act to "work as camouflage because they erode the edge of the plane's outline/silhouette". ..

The study you mention that disputed the effectiveness of day-glo patches on the wings was reported in Sailplane and Gliding Magazine for December, 2000. The tests conducted for the report were conducted during June, 2000 at RAF Bicester.

Another study, on mirrored surfaces, was "Glider Conspicuity Trials Held at RAF Bicester in June and October 2002", carried out under the direction of Dr. Tony Head, then of the Human Factors Group, School of Engineering, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University. It as this study that, to some degree, suggested that mirrored control surfaces did improve conspicuity. although the report does include several dislaimers, based on weathser conditions during the testing. I have a copy of THAT report (but not the 2000 study) if anyone's interested (jim at kellett cot com)

At 09:01 27 January 2016, Justin Craig wrote:

"France mandated high vis markings for a reason, they saw a
statisticall
significate difference. France mandated Flarm for the same
reason, i
works."


FRANCE mandated hi viz marking to help see gliders in the snowy
backdrop o
the alps.

They also mandated FLARM for the alps as FLARM can see round
corners in th
mountains and the eye can not.


Bright colour markings do nothing. If you wish to improve visibility
pu
silver reflective tape on each of your control surfaces.

The "Big Sky" theory only works if all aircraft are evenly distributed
over the airspace. The restrictions and requirements of gliding
means that they are far from evenly distributed.

High vis markings (dayglo) do work with gliders against some
backgrounds if they are above or below. In the most dangerous
area, the same level they do not work too well at all as the area is so
small that the "benefit" is cancelled out.

Silver reflective tape, or mirror tape only works in sunshine. Gliders
spent a lot of time in shade, under clouds, and again at the same
level the effect is minimal. Something that requires the sun to shine
is not likely to be too effective for most of the time in the UK.

The Royal Air Force did a study which concluded that the best
colour to provide the best chance of being seen was black, which is
why all RAF training aircraft, except the GRP ones, are painted
black. From my limited experience in seeing these aircraft in the air
they certainly seem to be more easily picked out from most
backgrounds.

It would seem that what is needed is a colouring that absorbs
visible light but reflects ultra violet and infra red. So there is the
challenge.

I'm pretty sure FLARM cannot see round Alpine corners.

Adding mirror foil to control surfaces certainly works if it's
sunny but your friendly engineer or glider manufacturer might
view adding weight to the control surfaces in a different light?
I've seen it suggested that this might affect flutter?

David Walsh

The Royal Air Force did a study which concluded that the best
colour to provide the best chance of being seen was black, which is
why all RAF training aircraft, except the GRP ones, are painted
black. From my limited experience in seeing these aircraft in the air
they certainly seem to be more easily picked out from most
backgrounds.

Canadian Air Force trainers are also painted black. Best contrast against sky, clouds, snow, and prairie. Unfortunately, not possible for most gliders, and rather warm to the touch for ground handling.

Well, I stand corrected. However, if you google military high visibility markings you will find formations of aircraft with and without high vis markings. One can really see the high vis aircraft better. Ever noted how all the roadside workers wear orange vests, certainly improves their visibility, same for hunters, crosswalk monitors, school buses, fire trucks, bicycle riders...etc. Out west I have only see two gliders with high visibility markings, one in blue, which did not improve my ability to spot it in the sky, but another glider had fluorescent orange markings and it stood out like a sore thumb! Not a statistically significant sample size, nor a controlled experiment, but I could spot that glider against any background even out of the corner of my eye. Vanity kept me from using the same color scheme as I thought it was too "in your face" and on the ground the color appeared to hurt my eyes it was so bright.

Thanks for the studies, glad I have an LED strobe, Flarm and good eyes!

On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 6:51:28 AM UTC-5, Jim Kellett wrote:

Another study, on mirrored surfaces, was "Glider Conspicuity Trials Held at RAF Bicester in June and October 2002"

This study also tested orange and found no benefit.

Here is the .pdf

http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/Data/gl...uity-study.pdf

On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 7:00:07 AM UTC-5, Don Johnstone wrote:

Silver reflective tape, or mirror tape only works in sunshine. Gliders
spent a lot of time in shade, under clouds, and again at the same
level the effect is minimal.

Nothing is going to work from all directions and under all conditions. But some combination would improve the odds.

LED lights for the shade and mirror for sunlight would be complementary.

A forward facing LED strobe is a big payback even though it works on only one axis.