Flying With Doors Off

[RTR]

As far as electrical tape around the release mechanism goes, what happens in the event of an emergency, and you can now not release the belt in order to extricate yourself or your passenger in time?

 

The locking/ release mechanism is a safety device. Don't alter it's intended function. It's not there to just hold you secure, it's there to allow you quick escape as well.

 

'nuff said.

 

RTR

[Icewind]

As far as electrical tape around the release mechanism goes, what happens in the event of an emergency, and you can now not release the belt in order to extricate yourself or your passenger in time?

 

The locking/ release mechanism is a safety device. Don't alter it's intended function. It's not there to just hold you secure, it's there to allow you quick escape as well.

 

'nuff said.

 

RTR

 

The electrical tape is used because it is stretchy enough to allow a good hard pull to open the buckle in the event of an emergency but prevents the accidental opening when your jacket cuff unlatches it.

 

One circumstance where you don't want to use duct tape!

[MMike]

This thread is causing my friend at amsafe to feel a great disturbance in the force.

[R22Captain]

The electrical tape is used because it is stretchy enough to allow a good hard pull to open the buckle in the event of an emergency but prevents the accidental opening when your jacket cuff unlatches it.

 

One circumstance where you don't want to use duct tape!

 

for me personally.......my pax are never going to be in a situation where all their weight/security of life will be in the hands of a standard lap belt. Anything that involves leaning out a door is going to be in a climbing/utility harness attached to hard points. NO TYING of ropes. I wasn't that good of a boy scout. Metal on metal attachments only when things need to be connected together.

 

But hot days, door off, point A to B type situation, if a belt comes undone, the pax isn't going to be in a situation where they going to fall out

 

my technique....

[MMike]

Maybe I'm just a nervous nelly, but all this talk of belts coming undone is a little worrisome!

 

I'm pretty sure the USFS (at one point anyway) would mandate the lift-lever type harnesses for fire contracts. But I think in recent years they have relaxed that requirement, and are moving to push-button style...which you would think are less prone to getting caught on gloves, sleeves etc...

 

But that is of course only one data point......

[Max Continuous]

I've used the tape on the seat belt and I agree it's just for inadvertent release and can be over powered easily. I started doing it when I first hung out the door swinging bags. Sweaty palms and a little wipe on the leg and ....oops! the watch unbuckled me!

I agree with using a full harness for filming or cone sampling in the back.

Max

[Over-Talk]

MMike, your questions lose a lot of credibility when you start quoting American Aviation Regulations to a Canadian audience.

Maybe you could look-up the relevant Canadian Regs before posting.

 

And your point about pilots knowing all the Regulations (pertinent to their country) is well heard.

But the varied interpretation of Parliamentary Legislation is what makes billions of dollars a year for lawyers. And it is why Judges even agree that they can't even agree with each other....

and so the matter eventually goes all the way to the Supreme Court.

 

.....and it provides us with several pages of useful discussion as to how pilots are interpreting this particular Regulation.

 

Only one thing is absolutely positively certain for sure.......GO CANUCKS.

[Heliian]

It's rare for people to inadvertently fall out of a/c and most incidents are associated with work in the door unrestrained or bre-ex. One has to also remember that workplace safety laws for working from heights apply too and I would be more worried about them than TC.

 

Our company has a proper harness that can attach to hardpoints for doors off photogs so it's not really a bother nor was it an expensive investment.

 

there are even some tour operators that offer the "doors off" experience.

 

Cheers

[MMike]

MMike, your questions lose a lot of credibility when you start quoting American Aviation Regulations to a Canadian audience.

Maybe you could look-up the relevant Canadian Regs before posting.

 

And your point about pilots knowing all the Regulations (pertinent to their country) is well heard.

But the varied interpretation of Parliamentary Legislation is what makes billions of dollars a year for lawyers. And it is why Judges even agree that they can't even agree with each other....

and so the matter eventually goes all the way to the Supreme Court.

 

.....and it provides us with several pages of useful discussion as to how pilots are interpreting this particular Regulation.

 

Only one thing is absolutely positively certain for sure.......GO CANUCKS.

 

you ARE aware that the numbering (and subject matter) between the Canadian CARS and US FAR's are the same (99% of the time).....you just add a 5 to the front.

 

Canadian AWM Ch 527

http://www.tc.gc.ca/...749.htm#527_785

527.785 Seats, Berths,[Litters], Safety Belts, and Harnesses

 

http://www.flightsimaviation.com/data/FARS/part_27-785.html

 

It is common shorthand (in my world) to refer to the FAR chapter instead of the Canadian AWM......because as I said, they are usually the same. Much like Boeing employees will refer to the '4-7 or the '6-7 or the '8-7....you see where I'm going with this.

 

Apologies for omitting the "5"

[Over-Talk]

MMike,

Thank you for pointing out those numbers.

However they apply to design and maintenance criteria of seat belts in the AWM.

This discussion is about the use of seat belts. CAR 605.22 - 605.28.

 

Can you please find the American Regulations for digging yourself deeper into a hole by trying to back-pedal out of a previous one ???