What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Safety value of a helicopter helmet?

prkaye

Well Known Member
The recent fatal accident in Ottawa has been very sobering for me, because I knew the builder/pilot. His hangar was right across from mine at Smiths Falls, and I was speaking to him in front of his plane last week. As my airplane will be flying this coming summer/fall, it has me thinknig again seriously about safety.

I definatley plan on investing in nomex for fire protection, but I am still undecided about a helmet. I understand that only helicopter helmets offer proper crash protection. I wonder how often in a small plane crash a helmet could have prevented a death. Cyclists and motorcyclists wear helmets and these save lives all the time, but I wonder if a plane crash is a different animal, being more totally destructive? Any thoughts?

Also, how much headroom do you need to fit a helicopter helmet? There isn't a whole lot of space between the top of my head and the canopy, especially with the beefy Classic Aero seats I have.
 
Neck injury

A helmet may offer some protection in an airplane but if you are wearing a 5 point harness, the real problem is physics. In a sudden deceleration your head keeps going and causes spine damage. The added weight of the helmet might make it worse. Auto racers have gone to this technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HANS_device with good results. The real decision you have to make is what makes you comfortable? The level of protection compared to comfort and utility. Personally, in 45 years of flying, I have adopted a few simple rules. Natural fabrics, (polyester is ugly in a fire) long pants, leather shoes, natural fabric or Nomex socks and a serious on board fire extinguisher. As a "car guy" I also have a full kit of nomex, a full coverage helmet and a HANS Device. The thought of flying for several hours in that gear on a hot summer day? Forget it, you would probably suffer heat stroke. Not to mention looking like a complete geek at the pancake breakfast. :eek:

Do some risk/reward analysis and make you own decision.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
Most people where helmets on motorcycles and they are legally required in some places. I recently found NTSB and NHTSA data that clearly shows GA airplanes have a higher fatality rate, on an hourly basis, than motorcycles. My insurance agent verified, from his own industry data, that flying is more dangerous.

I wear a helmet on my motorcycle, bicycle, rollerblades, skis etc. I also wear one when I fly an ultralight or hang glider. Why not in the RV? It makes perfect sense when you think about it... and yet there seems to be some type of stigma against it.

I know someone personally who went down in trees and his head was lacerated by plexiglass and branches. I've also seen a tail-dragger nose-over and I think I'd rather be wearing a helmet for that too.

The Germans did a detailed study on bailing out of sailplanes. They mounted a fuselage on top of a moving car and tried to jettison various canopy designs. One of the things they learned is that pilots are easily injured during the bail-out process. Perhaps one should wear a helmet with their parachute?

Hopefully a helmet will be in my budget down the road. I'd probably go for a lightweight helmet like the HGU-55 (size large, 2.37 pounds). I've heard some complaints that helmets generally don't offer as much noise reduction as a quality headset so I might plan on an ANR upgrade.
 
It is right to think seriously about safety

Phil,
Andrew's accident is very sobering for me as well, as it is the first experience that I have of the loss of someone I personally knew well (my hanger mate) in an RV accident.
All of us see the sad posts notifying our community of the loss of fellow RV builders and pilots. It is very sad. And it has caused me to question what we are doing, and whether it can be justified, to ourselves and to our families. It is natural to look for causes, and to try to explain what has happened in a way that allows us to convince ourselves that whatever it was couldn't happen to us. I think we all know that is just wishful thinking.
I know this is not responsive to your question about the value of a helmet, but I think your real question is whether, by whatever manner, the risks can be managed or reduced to where we feel that we can justify continuing to build and fly these things.
I think that they can.
I have as my computer "background" that old photo of a Jenny in a tree, with the caption "Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
Not at all suggesting that every loss is a result of carelessness, incapacity or neglect, and certainly not suggesting that of Andrew - we have no idea what happened. But it does provide me with a justification to carry on. I will be as careful, cautious and capable in my building and flying as I can be.
I don't think that for me that would include a helmet, but it does include a five point harness in an aircraft of excellent and conservative design with a relatively low stall speed, that has a substantial and positive track record, built with quality components and with the benefit of the experience of this list. That is my justification for carrying on.
Bill Brooks
Ottawa, Canada
RV-6A finishing
 
FYI, safety helmet was previously required to fly UL in Norway. (European UL class is more like a "light" US light sport category). This has been relaxed, and helmets are now only required for open types of UL. I don't know the exact reason, but I think heat, loss of view and general discomfort was more of a danger than protection by a helmet was a safety aspect.
 
Statistics

Most people where helmets on motorcycles and they are legally required in some places. I recently found NTSB and NHTSA data that clearly shows GA airplanes have a higher fatality rate, on an hourly basis, than motorcycles. My insurance agent verified, from his own industry data, that flying is more dangerous.

I don't doubt those statistics, but there is a big factor missing. A large number of motorcycle deaths involve another party, mainly people not seeing the bike and turning into the bike's path. Not much of that in flying. We need to look very hard at our own attitude, training and proficiency to change the numbers. I'm not going to knock any kind of safety equipment, but we need to remember that the real answer it to avoid needing it in the first place.

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
I'd probably go for a lightweight helmet like the HGU-55

Just be aware that those fighter helmets are not designd for crash protection. In a fighter crash, if you don't eject a helmet will be pointless. Those helmets are designed to protect you from windblast during ejection, and from your head impacting the canopy during flight.
Helicopter helmets are designed for crash protection.
Anybody know how far above your head the outside shell of a helicpter helmet sits? I still don't know if I could fit in my RV with one on.
 
Different mission

When I'm flying at work, I wear a Nomex flight suit, cotton T shirt and socks and leather shoes. We also where a Helicopter helmet with clear and tinted visors. This is for crash protection. Unless it is a CFIT most helicopter accidents are at a low speed and the helicopter comes apart. The helmet provides protection from that as does the other goodies.

In a fixed wing you are going only forward and generally much faster, even in the landing phase. As John mentioned, unless you have a completely restrained head system your head is going forward and likely cause death or injury. The helmet might be an enemy there.

If it makes you feel better, go for it. As far as any conclusive data on protection, I doubt it exists.

Having responded to lots of plane crashes, the grim truth is, not much is going to protect you. Even low altitude, low speed crashes are often fatal from the impact and resulting trauma. Then throw in the fire potential and the numbers go up.

The Nomex and dressing smart might help you if you made it through the impact and a fire occurs.

We are involved in a dangerous indulgence.
 
helmets et al

It is sobering to hear of another fatality in our, or any other, community.
Now with over 6000 of us in RV's alone, what can we do to reduce our risk?
Lots of minds greater than mine have already commented.

I'd like to see a safety archive started here, where ideas, photos, and good data are available to help us reduce nose-overs, trauma on impact etc. etc.
True that a/c accidents vary widely, but I think the killers may follow a recurrent theme.
Our kitbuilder can help by improving the design of the restraint system, and we can contribute by removing deadly cockpit items etc. New builders/pilots should be aware of problem areas before they make the same mistakes.

Another huge factor is our decision-making, and then, piloting skills.

We can be better, safer, and live to be old pilots.
 
We use the MSA Gallet helmet here at work. I just went out and measured the difference and it appears to add 7/8 to 1 inch of thickness. The front visor cover adds just a little too, but that is centered towards the front. You probably don't care about the mount for the ANVS-9 NVG mount, although if you have a cool 10 grand lying around, I have to admit it is THE thing to have for flying at night.
I have seen people attach "bumper" pads on their helmets to keep from scratching the plexi from inadvertant contact. The visor cover,mic boom, visor knobs,etc. do stick out some from the helmet. Like Darwin said, the helmet for helicopters are pretty much for protection from banging your head against the stuff there inside the aircraft. Most light helicopters have tight quarters and it doesn't take much movement before your head is striking something. With all that said, I will probably get a helmet for my RV, although I'll probably not use it exclusively. Hope this helps.
 
Campbell Aero Classic Helmets

Made in New Zealand and used all over the world:

Campbell Aero Classic Helmets

These are excellent helmets and in my opinion look better than helicopter helmets. They are expensive, but how much is your head worth?
 
Last edited:
...These are excellent helmets ... They are expensive, but how much is your head worth?

Not much, if you suffer a fatal spinal injury from your head/neck whipping forward. This is more likely to happen with the added mass of a helmet on your head in a fixed wing crash with significant forward velocity, as others have pointed out. So for this application, a helmet alone may not do you much good, or may actually make things worse. Without evidence to the contrary, that's a very expensive security blanket.
 
And it has caused me to question what we are doing, and whether it can be justified, to ourselves and to our families

you're right Bill, and I've had exactly these same thoughts over the last couple of days. Since our baby girl was born last year, I've started to think about risk in new light.
I too want to carry on with this, but I realize that rationally it's very hard to justify, especially with a child now the potential implications go far beyond me.
 
But why ...?

This observation is directed toward no one in particular. All comments have validity and are worthy of consideration in determining our own personal levels of comfort.

That said, the first question that popped into my head was, "How many spam-can drivers don Nomex flight suits and helmets before flying?"
I've never, ever seen a flight instructor or student head out to a C-150 with helmets. Never seen a businessman slip into a Nomex suit and tighten the chin strap of an HGU-55 as he's cranking up his Baron. And I doubt a Mooney has the headroom for a helmet.

The real question is, other than initial flight testing of a new plane, why is flying an RV any more dangerous than flying a Bonanza? Is it?

[Disclaimer: I have a really cool HGU-33P -- with oxygen mask -- and would wear it after Smokey is painted ... but I'd feel like a dork.]
 
Last edited:
Came to think of it. Several pilots have died while doing a nose over during emergency landings etc. - broken neck. Making sure your head has no chance of touching the ground when upside down on the ground is probably more important than a helmet. A helmet will not protect your neck.
 
The look

After the recent training accident South of Dallas, killing two people, I got "the look" and a statement/question: "Maybe we ought to get a parachute." No one can predict what's going to happen, but at some point there's a level of overprotection. It may be different for each individual, but you can reach the point where your precautions defeat the purpose.

I sold my motorcycle when I realized that I was going to continue to ride without a helmet and that riding on the freeway like a commuter just wasn't that much fun. For me, the risk/reward coefficient came out too much on the risk side, and I quit. For some, the same is true with aviation, but I haven't reached that point, yet, and I don't expect to. When the precautions you feel are necessary defeat the whole purpose, you need to think about giving it up. But, if you are willing to accept a degree of risk while still taking all reasonable precautions, it can still be fun and reasonably safe. You need to assess for yourselves whether these precautions are really necessary, and, if you feel like they are, you need to take them. If you can't accept the precautions reason tells you are necessary, however, then you need to quit -- as I did with the motorcycle. After all, everything you do -- even staying inside and trying to keep the world away -- has risk. It's what level of risk you are willing to accept.

I'm not planning to buy a parachute (I don't do aerobatics). If I am worried that much about the risk, I'll quit, instead.
 
Not much, if you suffer a fatal spinal injury from your head/neck whipping forward. This is more likely to happen with the added mass of a helmet on your head in a fixed wing crash with significant forward velocity, as others have pointed out. So for this application, a helmet alone may not do you much good, or may actually make things worse. Without evidence to the contrary, that's a very expensive security blanket.

roee, I had read the other posts and fully understood them. The point of my post was to bring Campbell helmets to the attention of the Vans community.
For me, the value of my head is priceless. I want to protect it from smashing into the panel in the event of a sudden deceleration. That, means a 5 point harness and a helmet.

Whiplash injuries are mainly caused by being in a car that is rear ended causing the head to snap back and then forward. This scenario in my opinion, though not impossible, is very unlikely in a GA plane. We as pilots, have to assess and accept the risk of pursuing our pastime. This risk can be mitigated by:

  • Training and continued assessment of our flying skills.
  • Practice and keeping current.
  • Correct decision making in adverse situations.
  • Wearing the appropriate clothing.

The first three items in the list above are probably of more value than a good helmet. As a former flying instructor, who has taught over 20 people to fly, I know the value of practice and keeping current. Practice and currency will hopefully keep the pilot away from the low speed low level stall which is generally fatal. In the event of an engine failure, this practice and currency will enable the pilot to choose the best place to put the plane down. Then, correct choice of clothing and safety apparel will help protect the pilot in the event of low speed collisions with trees or other fixed objects at the end of the landing run.

There is a speed threshold that once past, helmets and other safety apparel become useless in the event of a sudden stoppage. It is up to all of us to try and avoid sudden stoppages above this threshold.

To all the friends of the Canadian pilot who was killed, I understand and sympathise with your loss. The examiner who initially checked me out as a flying instructor and subsequently tested and re validated my ratings, was killed flying a display.
 
Well OK, since Mike Gray brought it up, why not a BRS? There are a bunch of models to choose from on the BRS Aerospace website...even one for an aircraft that weighs 1,800 pounds travelling at up to 175 mph. This would suit most applications in the RV world and would only offer a weight penalty of 40 pounds or so.

I know that a bunch of you may be rolling your eyes, but think of the past few accidents that were posted on VAF. I'm betting the deployment of a chute in almost all of them would have saved the pilot. I'm just thinking of solutions outloud here...I don't think a helmet is going to do much for you at all, so rather than look at a solution after your airplane has impacted the ground, why not look for a way to prevent it from impacting the ground at a fatal speed or attitude?
 
Interesting questions...

I fly in the back of a helicopter for part of my professional life, and I wear an SPH-5, with ANVIS/NVG, full nomex, and the like for my day to day work operational flying, and can't fathom that there once was a time when we didn't.

Having said that, I don't for my personal flying. I've not sat in an RV with an SPH-5 on, but I can't imagine there is much room no matter what your size. I think there is much to be said about thing about a helmet, but I honestly don't.

I think the issues of worsening neck injury with a helmet on are probably overblown. I'd have to do a little digging in the literature, of which I doubt there is much, but I doubt that having a helmet on by itself will make a cervical spine injury worse. I'd be more worried about doing a face plant into the panel, which many, many people have done and re-arranged their face (with and without shoulder and/or crotch straps). Our operational flying also had to take into account the fact that equipment may strike you (even as we do our best to secure it) or your head may strike the airframe as was mentioned above.

The Corvair guy, William Wynne, makes a comment on his web site about always wearing nomex, as he had to learn the hard way about burns without it on when his Pietenpol crashed years ago. I've personally taken care of people with really bad burns who survived aviation crashes, which makes me think about wearing nomex even in my fun flying.

So everything is about stratifying risk, for me personally, I think nomex on and a good 5 point harness without a helmet is a reasonable compromise...

But the weakest link is between the pilots ears...

Ryan
 
idea***

maybe you could have a nice light weight kevlar helmet handy in the cockpit for an emergency. put it on and crash. problem solved. :D genius
 
Memory Items?

maybe you could have a nice light weight kevlar helmet handy in the cockpit for an emergency. put it on and crash. problem solved. :D genius

Do you deploy the helmet or the BRS 'chute first? :rolleyes:

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
oh yea....

have the helmet attached to the roof where the brs handle is. check list together. :D genius again!!!!!!!
 
Just another consideration, most of the brain buckets have a fairly stout visor. I have an HGU55 which is really comfortable with ANR, but look at it as some protection against some of the really big birds we have up here in this area (Seattle) as I've come way too close to more than one Bald Eagle! It's not only the ground impacts that you need to worry about sometimes. :eek:
 
To reinforce some statements made earlier about helicopter helmets, one of their benefits is their impact protection from "stuff" flying around on impact. A former work colleague had a tailrotor gearbox seize up and depart the helicopter he was flying. The subsequent autoration and landing in rough terrain wasn't pretty. My colleague survived but was pretty debilitated for quite a while. His helmet saved him as the main rotor blade flexed downward on impact and came through the cabin, grazing his helmet. The passenger in the left seat wasn't so lucky and was decapitated. Suffice it to say helicopter helmets are designed for somewhat different circumstances than may be appropriate in many fixed-wing applications.

Having worn helmets for a good bit of my military helicopter flying, particularly in hot, humid Alabama, I can say they do nothing to help with the effects of overheating of the human body. We lose an incredible amount of heat through the top of our head. If you regularly fly in hot conditions the risk of decreased mental alertness caused by heat stress may very well outweigh any safety gain provided by the helmet.

As an aside, I owned the wreck of an aircraft very similar to my own. The dent made by the pilot's noggin as it smacked into the instrument panel was still visible, and we all know how hard it is to bend .063 aluminum. This test pilot thought he got off lucky because he wasn't hit by the fire extinguisher which broke its plastic (??) mounting bracket and flew forward into the windshield like a rocket-propelled projectile. We need to make sure we think about the massive forces of impact and pack our cockpits accordingly. Obviously plastic fire extinguisher mounting brackets are a no-no. Good cargo tie-downs are an important point of consideration, as is the mounting of "portable electronics" where they might be struck by your head as it bobs around on impact. Even a pen in a shirt pocket can, under the right circumstances, inflict a critical wound.
 
Andrew, thanks for the link. No prices on the website. In rough terms, how much do they cost?

Hello Dan,

It is Anthony by the way....

I had some prices but I appear to have lost them. I will find out and get back to you.

Cheers
 
Most of the points have been made...

As an aside, I "tend" now to wear an Alpha Helmet, not just for "protection", but built in ANR / visor and does not move under 'g'. Configured for use in Yaks / Extras as well.

Some more food for thought - both recent UK Accident Reports:
Christen Eagle
Both occupants were dressed in normal, casual clothing and wore cloth flying helmets.....
The ....in the rear seat was declared dead at the scene of the accident. A post-mortem examination showed that he had died of a head injury. The ..... survived the accident with multiple injuries, including serious head injuries, fractures and burns. Of these, his head injuries were the most critical, and included those typically caused by abnormally large deceleration forces. After a period in intensive care, it became clear that, whilst he was expected to recover from the lesser injuries, he had suffered severe and irreparable brain damage. A decision to withdraw life support was made 22 days after the accident. He died two days later
The Report makes no further comment or analysis as to whether helmets would have made a difference...

Extra 300
The pilot?s helmet exhibited a number of areas of substantial impact damage and the visor had fractured in two. Red smears on the front left of the helmet corresponded with the colouring of the canopy release handle, which had broken off. Cuts in the leather sheath on the diagonal bracing tube at the left forward corner of the cockpit were consistent with the effects of a strike by the helmet and visor. Impact markings on the left rear of the helmet indicated that it had forcibly contacted a vertical steel tubular A-framework located just behind the normal head position.

Survivability issues

Advice was obtained from a biomedical specialist from the Royal Air Force (RAF) Centre for Aviation Medicine (CAM) at RAF Henlow, who examined the aircraft after its removal from the site and who provided a report on occupant crash injury aspects.

The pilot in the rear cockpit was wearing a HISL Alpha helmet; the passenger in the front cockpit was not wearing a helmet.

G‑IIEX?s pilot sustained a fractured left wrist and a cut to the forehead. The specialist concluded that the pilot had initially flailed forwards and to the left, causing the helmet strike on the canopy release handle and the left bracing tube. He then flailed backwards, causing the helmet strike on the A-frame. The specialist noted that the helmet was designed to conform to British Standard BS6658 (with reservations), which is similar to that worn by UK military fast-jet aircrew and affords the same protection standard. He judged that, while the impacts may have caused the pilot to lose consciousness, the helmet had prevented significant head injury.

Rearward flailing probably caused her head to strike the hard, rigid, plastic rear coaming of the cockpit, resulting in skull fracture. Impact with the detached GPS unit may have contributed to this fracture. The specialist judged it likely that the skull fracture would have been less serious, or even prevented, had the passenger been wearing a helmet

The CAM report concluded that:
?if similar injuries are to be prevented in similar circumstances in future accidents, it should be recommended that protective helmets should be worn by both the front and rear seat occupants and consideration be given to fitting energy attenuating foam cushions to the front and rear cockpit seats.?
This second report expands in this area about impact protection measures within the cockpit environment, not unique to the Extra I would suggest ;)

My conclusion is that wearing a helmet provides a significant safety enhancement, and that some helmets are clearly more designed for crash protection than others. However, clearly, and as exhibited in both reports above, anything one could do to avoid the crash in the first place is going to be more significant :eek:

Andy
RV-8 G-HILZ

PS Mine is an Alpha 900, single visor, built in ANR, great and v comfortable but expensive.
PPS It works very well in the RV-8. It is not so good when teaching in the SBS RVs :( The SBS canopy is low profile for low drag, and if you are not to bash the canopy, then you need to sit rather low - not conducive to formaiton flying cross cockpit... but then this isn't supposed to be a SBS v Tandem debate :D
 
This second report expands in this area about impact protection measures within the cockpit environment, not unique to the Extra I would suggest...

Thanks for posting that report, it's a good read - the recommendations on airbags are noteworthy. I surfed out to the AmSafe website, they're the company that makes GA airbags for Cessna, Cirrus, Diamond, etc. But they also have applications for Zenith and Lancair, including use on 5-point harnesses....

http://tinyurl.com/ycbyjsp

I wonder if anyone has approached them about RVs?

Dave
 
I just got my wife to sit inthe plane with me and measure my head clearance. I have less than an inch and a half between the top of my head and the canopy. So I doubt I could wear a helmet even if I wanted to.
 
Helicopter helmet

I didn't read the whole thread, I was getting a headache. If this wasn't answered, the helmet extends about an inch (more or less) above the scalp. btw, I'm a Coast Guard Pilot. In the lasting discussion about crash protection, we have discussed this in our own "fire side" talks occasionally. Most guys hate wearing them, mostly becuase they're cumbersome and heavy for long flights. Civilians don't bother with em. I imagine, that if the 5 point harness is worn like a harness and not a "lap belt" you'll get all the protection one needs in a crash. The real protection of the helmet comes from the visor being down in the event of a bird strick to the windshield. If you don't plan to use it with a visor, skip the helmet entirely. my 2 cents
 
Analysis of the risks and benefits will vary according to your own experiences.

I never used to wear a helmet when I was skiing, but have done so for the past 4 years or so after seeing a nasty accident in a lift line (boarder vs skier, the latter stationary, and dead at the scene from her head injury).

I had previously read the accident reports that Andy Hill noted and thought that it seemed sensible to wear a helmet when I was flying. If I have a midair collision, fire or structural failure, I'm probably going to die. if I have an engine failure - which I think is a more likely scenario - and have to make a forced landing - I don't want a serious head injury in a (relatively) slow speed accident on the ground. If you've ever had a head on collision with a truck when in your car (I have) you will know that even at <10 mph its an amazing BANG and be grateful for your seatbelt and airbag.

I have been told (and my own research suggests) that in general helicopter helmets will offer better impact protection than helmets like the HGU55.

The MSA Gallet LH050, which is what I chose, weighs about 900 grammes, and sits no higher on my head than my Telex headset (just under an inch), so I don't need to lower my seating position. The helmet is heavier than the headset but shouldn't fall off under high Gs. The visor is built in so I don't have to fiddle with sunglasses in changing light conditions. I don't think that the presence of a helmet impedes lookout otherwise military pilots would have an issue with them, and anyway I suspect that most of us have more basic issues with our lookout skills and practise. Being too hot has not been an issue in the UK for about 9 months now.....

Basic price in Europe is 617 Euros ex taxes, coms, earcups etc etc.

http://www.helicopterhelmets.com/HH_5103nb_5103.asp is where I got mine.

Maybe not the perfect answer and I hope to need the protection it offers, but it seems sensible to me. I suspect most GA pilots don't wear a helmet, not out of active, considered choice but because of the cost and habit.

Chris
 
There have been some interesting posts here. My own thoughts centred on forced landings and bailing out.

When bailing out many reports suggest survivors banged their head on some part of the aircraft on the way out. Therefore, if wearing a parachute, it seems to me a sensible precaution to wear a helmet to ensure sufficient consciousness to pull the rip cord (although I'm aware of the debate about bailing out of RVs - I don't wear a parachute in an RV very often).

So that leaves forced landings - I guess it depends on your view on the likelihood of a forced landing. I don't wear a helmet in an RV very often, and when I do it is a boarding/cycling helmet with a Halo headset (although I might take alook at the link Chris posted).

Pete
 
A helmet brought home to me the Law of Unintended Consequences once during my ultralight days: At about 5 degrees F, I closed the face shield, firewalled the engine, rotated and exhaled. I went full IMC at about 5' agl from the frost.

Like everything, there are pluses and minuses to helmets, depending on the situation at the moment.

Bob Kelly
 
I would like a helmet to be useful, but how often would it help? It wouldn't help in every accident, that's for sure. 2 crashes at my airport since about 1995, both fatal, a helmet wouldn't have helped in either case.

So when considering risk / reward, I just don't know. Even the BRS is no guarantee. A Cirrus hit a mountain here a few years ago; the BRS was standard equipment. And the national forest district I used to work on had 3 or 4 sites where planes hit mountains and one where a plane hit tree tops. By the way, in all cases, if they had just been a couple hundred feet higher or off to one side, they would have been OK.

Maybe a good EFIS with synthetic vision would be a better investment?
 
Back
Top