Hood suggestions?

Pi1otguy

Pi1otguy

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
2,463
Location
Fontana, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Fox McCloud
Pi1otguy said:
My foggles broke some time ago. Just plain old age and heat made the plastic brittle after almost 2 years. I liked them alot but I'm considering my options. Even though I pay >$90/hr to fly I'm still a cheapskate and want to pay under $19 plus S&H.

I'm leaning towards this: http://www.mypilotstore.com/MyPilotStore/sep/5347
or the standard foggles: http://www.mypilotstore.com/MyPilotStore/sep/3670

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

1) Don't be a cheapskate - This is one of the items that will save your life. A crappy view-limiting device will prepare you poorly for actual. Any visual information will allow you to cheat, even if you're trying hard not to.

2) I went through the whole gamut of view-limiting devices. None are perfect, but two stand out from the rest:

- The Frances Hood. It looks like a black pair of lab goggles with a mini-hood in front. This is certainly the best at view limiting, but it does a bit too well - I have to turn my head just to scan engine gauges. I keep thinking about taking my Dremel tool and modifying this one slightly so I can get the necessary visibility, but until I get that round tuit, I'll keep using my...

- Viban. Allows for an easier scan than the Frances, but also allows just a hair of cheat on the left. I attached a post-it note to the left side to block that out, and it works pretty well.

As for what doesn't work... Well, Foggles truly suck. They're so close to your eyes that when you look down at the bottom row of gauges you can see over the glareshield, and when you look up at the top row you see half of them. The line between the "fog" and the clear part messes with your vision because it's so close too. Finally, they fit close enough to my face that I'd often make the clear part steam up.
 
My $.02 I like Jepp Shades. They fit well under headsets and over sunglasses. I like that I can flip them up and get a pretty normal view. That is a nice part about finishing the approach and actually landing. For my face they do a pretty good job of really limiting my vision, much better than foggles did.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
As for what doesn't work... Well, Foggles truly suck. They're so close to your eyes that when you look down at the bottom row of gauges you can see over the glareshield, and when you look up at the top row you see half of them. The line between the "fog" and the clear part messes with your vision because it's so close too. Finally, they fit close enough to my face that I'd often make the clear part steam up.
Click to expand...

I agree with Kent. In fact, my DE doesn't allow them during the checkride. If you show up with Foggles, she provides a cardboard hood. That said, if you want mine (presuming they're mine and not Leslie's; I'd need to check:D), send me a PM. Since I have an ASA hood, I'm not using them anymore!
 
Pi1otguy said:
My foggles broke some time ago. Just plain old age and heat made the plastic brittle after almost 2 years. I liked them alot but I'm considering my options. Even though I pay >$90/hr to fly I'm still a cheapskate and want to pay under $19 plus S&H.

I'm leaning towards this: http://www.mypilotstore.com/MyPilotStore/sep/5347
or the standard foggles: http://www.mypilotstore.com/MyPilotStore/sep/3670

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

I have the Hoodwink, haven't tried it yet. Sure looks goofy though. I got a good laugh from the wife when I tried it on. I use the super hood modified to fit tightly on the sides wearing a cap instead of the plastic one that comes with it. I like it better than jepps and such because I don't have to move my head around to scan the panel.

http://www.sportys.com/acb/showdetl.cfm?DID=19&Product_ID=1448
 
Last edited:
I prefer the hoods that extend out preventing any peripheral vision. I have the "Super Hood" through Sporty's but anything similar to one you show there is best for serious instrument work.
 
Most folks I've trained are very happy with the JeppShades, but like headsets, this is one where you have to fly before you buy, because differences in heads, ears, headsets, and eyewear will dramatically change the comfort and effectiveness of the device.

One word of caution on Foggles -- they can fog up big time (and that includes those who are sweating during training for reasons other than ambient heat/humidity), making the "clear" area just as "foggy" as the fogged-out area. The cutaway area of the JeppShades can't fog up.
 
I used the ASA Jiffy Hood for all my IR training. All the other view limiting 'glasses' made me have to turn my head to scan the gauges, not to mention they hurt the side of my head after wearing them under the headset.

I liked the Jiffy Hood b/c you can position it well enough that you really can't cheat unless you REALLY want to and it goes on OVER the headset, which makes for easy removal for the final approach/landing phase.

Oh yeah.. And it's cheap. $10.95 from Marv Golden. :)
 
I like my JeppShades, but I was tickled with Mike Schneider's hood, made from a ball cap and a file folder. Seemed to work very well.
 
gprellwitz said:
In fact, my DE doesn't allow them during the checkride. If you show up with Foggles, she provides a cardboard hood.
Click to expand...

flyingcheesehead said:
1) Don't be a cheapskate - This is one of the items that will save your life. A crappy view-limiting device will prepare you poorly for actual. Any visual information will allow you to cheat, even if you're trying hard not to.
Click to expand...

Strangely, none of my CFIIs gave mentioned this during my IR training. Considering that aviation thus far (non-comm pt 91) appears to be on the honor system, I assumed that trying hard not to cheat was just par for the course.

flyingcheesehead said:
Finally, they fit close enough to my face that I'd often make the clear part steam up.
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
One word of caution on Foggles -- they can fog up big time (and that includes those who are sweating during training for reasons other than ambient heat/humidity), making the "clear" area just as "foggy" as the fogged-out area. The cutaway area of the JeppShades can't fog up.
Click to expand...

This is partially why I'm considering my options. I kinda liked the foggles compactness but the fogging issues (which taught me to relax during approaches) kinda bugs me a little. Since I already have my IR, whatever I buy will probably see action every 2-4 months as flyable IMC can be difficult to find in SoCal with summer coming up soon.
 
Francis Hood, Viban, Jiffy Hood, Jepp Shades, Super Hood, & hoodwink. I'll give them a look over and see which one floats my boat.
 
Pi1otguy said:
Considering that aviation thus far (non-comm pt 91) appears to be on the honor system, I assumed that trying hard not to cheat was just par for the course.
Click to expand...
No one, including the DE who has a problem with Foggles, thinks that students are trying to cheat. It's just not conducive to a long life-span :no:. However, her contention is that you get more subliminal clues with the Foggles than other VLDs. She has anecdotal evidence that she's using for justification, and I have neither the desire nor a reason to challenge it.
 
Grant,
As a Foggles user for most of my IR training her contention makes complete sense to me. It took me a while to find the head position that limits the accidental peek at the ground. That said, the extensive use of any VLDs without actual (whether for training or currency) causes its own issues that require the mantra "There is no horizon" to stay safe.
 
Pi1otguy said:
This is partially why I'm considering my options. I kinda liked the foggles compactness but the fogging issues (which taught me to relax during approaches) kinda bugs me a little.
Click to expand...
In that case, I think you'll be very happy with JeppShades, which also allow you to flip up the visor to simulate breakout.
 
Ron Levy said:
I'd be interested to hear what the FSDO would say if an applicant objected to that.
Click to expand...
The Instrument PTS says "The applicant is required to provide an appropriate view limiting device that is acceptable to the examiner." So I don't see that they would have a problem with it, do you?
 
I'm a big fan of the Viban. I don't have the heart to cheat, and they were 2**1024 times more comfortable than foggles. I've never tried the dog-collar francis hood thing.

The IR was the most fun I've ever had as well as the most work. The reward is exponentially proportional to the effort.
 
gprellwitz said:
The Instrument PTS says "The applicant is required to provide an appropriate view limiting device that is acceptable to the examiner." So I don't see that they would have a problem with it, do you?
Click to expand...
Well, if it's some off-the-wall idea that nobody's seen before (I heard of one guy who showed up wearing a baseball cap and claimed that was enough to limit his view -- he'd keep his head down and not look to the side), I can see the examiner saying "no." But Foggles are accepted by the FAA everywhere, and if you trained with them, I think it's unreasonable for an examiner to demand without warning (or reasonable justification) that you switch to another device for the ride.
 
Orrrrr....

You could do like my CFI and I did on my last flight before going for my PP checkride. We were coming back from the practice area and he was reading through my logbook just to make sure everything was taken care of. He realized that I needed another .2 of instrument time. Of course we hadn't planned on it so neither of us had brought any type of hood. We took my sectional, folded it length-ways and I stuck it under my headset. Voila! Did some turns, unusual attitudes, even an impromptu ILS under the 'hood' to meet the requirements. Surprisingly enough, it worked pretty well for limiting outside view!
 
Ron Levy said:
Well, if it's some off-the-wall idea that nobody's seen before (I heard of one guy who showed up wearing a baseball cap and claimed that was enough to limit his view -- he'd keep his head down and not look to the side), I can see the examiner saying "no." But Foggles are accepted by the FAA everywhere, and if you trained with them, I think it's unreasonable for an examiner to demand without warning (or reasonable justification) that you switch to another device for the ride.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I can't say it without warning, though you obviously couldn't have known that. She's released videos of air safety meetings in which she goes over the process of checkrides, covering private/commercial, instrument, and multi-engine/ATP. In at least the first two she tells everyone that she doesn't find Foggles acceptable. From memory, she says that she has found that students who have trained with Foggles have a harder time with upset attitudes than those who used other view limiting devices. She also had an applicant who used Foggles before she instituted this rule and crashed and died afterwards in some sort of an IMC incident. As I said, her justification is anecdotal, but I think it's pretty compelling.

I don't remember all the details, but her videos are available at http://www.aandmaviation.com/resources_Multimedia.html. Note, however, that they are BIG. (I'm open to suggestions on how to make them smaller and/or more user friendly! -- send me a PM or let's take it to another thread.)

I mention this to illustrate that I don't think she's being capricious about this, and I think she has a good argument in the PTS. Note that it says acceptable to the "examiner", not the "administrator!"
 
If she's that worried about the safety, she should be working to make Foggles illegal. If not, I think she's being unreasonable in not accepting a device that is FAA-accepted (of course, no vision restricting device is FAA-approved). That said, I personally recommend against them for reasons of discomfort, eyewear incompatibility, and internal fogging -- I've never had a trainee switch from Foggles to JeppShades and not say, "Gee, this is a lot better."
 
Ron Levy said:
That said, I personally recommend against them for reasons of discomfort, eyewear incompatibility, and internal fogging -- I've never had a trainee switch from Foggles to JeppShades and not say, "Gee, this is a lot better."
Click to expand...

The blurb on JeppShades at Sportys says "Not for use with eyeglasses." Innacurate? My eyes have Old Timer's so reading glasses are a must. I pasted some of those drugstore stick-on readers to my Foggles which seems to work. New readers are in my future, though, so it might be appropriate to go with JeppShades instead of upgrading my "prescription Foggles."

Regards,
Joe
 
Joe B said:
The blurb on JeppShades at Sportys says "Not for use with eyeglasses." Innacurate? My eyes have Old Timer's so reading glasses are a must. I pasted some of those drugstore stick-on readers to my Foggles which seems to work. New readers are in my future, though, so it might be appropriate to go with JeppShades instead of upgrading my "prescription Foggles."

Regards,
Joe
Click to expand...
I have used Jepp Shades with sunglasses and they work fine.

BTW when I first tried foggles I could see so much around the periphery that I ended up using scotch tape to close up the the gaps. I eventually got them so they worked pretty well. But then I stopped because I like having the ability to remove the view limiting device easy to finish an approach and land. The JeppShades did that much easier than foggles.
 
Joe B said:
The blurb on JeppShades at Sportys says "Not for use with eyeglasses." Innacurate?
Click to expand...
I wear contacts, but I haven't heard any complaints from my trainees. I suspect that the big problem would be if you need bifocals, since with them on, you can only see out the reading portion, and that may not work reading the instruments.
My eyes have Old Timer's so reading glasses are a must. I pasted some of those drugstore stick-on readers to my Foggles which seems to work.
Click to expand...
I've heard of that being done. Of course, you're still susceptible to fogging problems.
 
smigaldi said:
Anyone use those Vibans yet?
Click to expand...

Yep... That's what I ended up settling on, since I was having problems with the Frances Hood being too restrictive. It ain't perfect, but it's comfortable and I added a post-it note to the left side to eliminate the last available view on the plane I was training on (Archer).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top