is there a purpose to wearing a flight suit in GA?

I was talking to two pilots at OSH wearing flight suits. They had patches and matching hats and everything. I asked them what there were flying expecting F-16, F-XXX, something really cool and fast? Nope, they flew Ercoupes. :rofl::rofl::rofl:

Not that there is ANYTHING wrong with that! :nono:


:rofl:
 
I don't own a flightsuit, but sometimes wish I did. I think there are plenty of good reasons to wear one. Pockets in the right places, pockets have zippers, keeps nonflying things (keys, wallets, loose change) in the pockets of your clothes underneath from falling out (and getting lost, interfering with controls, or going out the door), keeps your clothes clean if you crawl on the ground for your preflight, fire protection to some extent, keeps loose clothing from getting in the way in flight or getting caught on something (could be helpful in a tight cockpit or during egress), prevents sunburn if flying something with no shade but you've got on t-shirt and shorts for your destination. I'm sure the list goes on.

Flight suits are just another tool. Sometimes the wearer is too, but I imagine that would still be the case without the flightsuit.
 
They allow you show the perfect amount of chest hair.

Actually, I find polo shirts perfect for that, just leave 'em unbuttoned. If you want pockets, there's always cargo shorts. For working on the plane, keep an old shirt in the hangar, you won't have to take your shoes off before and after work.
 
Forgive the perhaps silly question, but it's a real question, not a troll/argument starter. Not being involved in acro, I don't know - is there a reason an acro flight would be more likely to have an onboard fire?

Not an in-flight fire so much as an increased risk of crashing followed by flames. Same reasoning as parachutes.
 
Not an in-flight fire so much as an increased risk of crashing followed by flames. Same reasoning as parachutes.

The thing is FR (flame resistant) clothing is tested for resistance to flash fires, not continuous flame. As Ken Ibold suggested some research is in order.

My field guys have it because there is some small risk of flash fires on the job. I caution them that FRs are not bunker suits and offer no particular benefit other than the circumstances for which they are tested which is flash fire.
 
I hated wearing the Nomex flight suits, but I would sure like to find a pair of jeans with leg pockets. The pockets in cargo shorts are pretty close to useless in a tight cockpit wearing a 5pt and a parachute. I could easily reach the leg pockets. I have actually considered finding someone to sew some into a couple of pair of jeans.

Edit: and a negative G water bottle holder would be really nice.
 
I am referring to the one piece flight suit/coverall. I understand in the military they are uniform and likely have fire retardant properties etc., but for everyday GA pilots, is there a reason to wear one? Is it for warmth? extra pockets?

Its how "those guys" self identify themselves to everyone else...
 
Yep, wear cotton/wool, avoid synthetics.

My family wears as much cotton/wool, all leather shoes as possible on our trips. I wore a "pickle suit" for five years. Unfortunately we were never told to wear cotton clothing underneath for maximum protection. I wore one during my initial flight testing on the RV.
 
My son raves about his under armor stuff in this hot humid climate we live in. I have not tried it yet....

Columbia makes some nice fishing shirts with many pockets and a neat little rod holder velcro flap that is great for baiting the hook.
 
If you want the fire retardant properties without the dork look, you can get fire resistant clothing (treated cotton or nomex) in other styles. Cargo pants are available from multiple retailers but you can also get blue-jeans, straight work-pants and polo shirts in FR ratings.
 
My son raves about his under armor stuff in this hot humid climate we live in. I have not tried it yet....

Columbia makes some nice fishing shirts with many pockets and a neat little rod holder velcro flap that is great for baiting the hook.

I'm pretty sure the Under Armor stuff I have is synthetic, great for playing in the snow, turns into burning plastic melting into your flesh in a fire.
 
I'm pretty sure the Under Armor stuff I have is synthetic, great for playing in the snow, turns into burning plastic melting into your flesh in a fire.
Exactly. I guarantee you that Amanda Franklin would still be with us if she was wearing Nomex instead of the Under Armor suit she wore for her routine.

Nomex is by no means on the level with turnout gear that firefighters wear(that is a whole science in itself), but it is a heck of alot better than the nylon/polyester crap that most modern clothing contains.
 
I'm pretty sure the Under Armor stuff I have is synthetic, great for playing in the snow, turns into burning plastic melting into your flesh in a fire.


Yep. Figured that.

Nomex is great, but it's hot. I was an electrical lineman for over two decades, and 100% cotton was all we wore unless procedure called for nomex. Cotton will char and not stick.

You're still going to get the **** burned out of you either way.....nomex too. Heat can transfer through it to the skin but the material stays in tact. Asbestos is still the best... you can't beat old PCB and chemicals technology. :wink2:
 
Cotton you get second and third degree burns, synthetics you get third and fourth.
 
Learn a little more about nomex and you may change your mind about its merit in a GA aircraft for fire protection.

I am fully aware of its flame retardant and heat transfer properties. It is great for getting OUT of the fire with less burns than you would have had had your clothing caught fire. You sit in the flames you still cook.

That's a big part of why I don't wear it (often, I do have a FR ACU set and have worn the jacket flying, just because it was already on) flying around in my 182.
 
I saw plenty of pictures in flight school that showed pilots with burns in areas where the skin wasn't covered with Nomex. Pilots flying without gloves with burnt hands but a distinct line where their flight suit was. One pic showed the back of a guys neck where it was burned just above the collar. It's excellent for flash burn protection. Still, while I wear it for work, I just don't feel the need in personal flying. Same reason I don't wear one while driving my car. I think blunt force injuries are more to be worried about than burns.
 
Last edited:
No flight suit here but I also don't fly in shorts and sandals. I do always try to wear 100% cotton to avoid having my clothes melt into my skin in a fire.
If fire resistance is a priority, Carhartt has a line of fire resistant work / casual wear. You don't have to look like a fighter pilot wannabe to be safe.

I do too, even when flying the aluminum tubes.
 
My son raves about his under armor stuff in this hot humid climate we live in. I have not tried it yet....

Columbia makes some nice fishing shirts with many pockets and a neat little rod holder velcro flap that is great for baiting the hook.

I just discovered those Columbia shirts. Lots of pockets, and the Velcro thingie is good to clip my headset cord to.
 
I just discovered those Columbia shirts. Lots of pockets, and the Velcro thingie is good to clip my headset cord to.

I favor Cabela's shirts. Maybe just a regional thing but plenty of pockets, all cotton, and excellent quality. The long torso is just about right for me which is a big plus.
 
This is why I love POA so much... where else can debate over flight line fashion rage on for three pages? And I'll bet it hits ten by the end of the week.

I gotta go squeeze some rivets.
 
I think the biggest reason for wearing them is 1) Fire Retardant Properties and 2) Pockets.

I think any pilot that flies something where there is a reasonable chance of screwing the pooch and becoming a human tiki torch, can get some benefit out of them thats why military pilots wear them. only application I've seen in the GA world is with CAP missions and airshow pilots. I think they are probably incredibly handy and comfortable but no way am I wearing one on the $100 hamburger run. If its pockets I want I'll wear cargo pants. I think it makes GA pilots look like tools to wear them.

If it's comfortable and meets the pilot's needs, who cares how it looks to other pilots?
 
Couple notes:

- CAP authorizes a number of flying uniforms. Some doofus Wings have superseded the National regs for no particularly good reason and go all Nomex. Most Wings don't. The one guy I saw flying in Blues probably had to throw the shirt away afterward from the sweat damage.

- Mist folks I know who wear the zoom bags in CAP do it because slightly oversized, they'll fit over damn near anything you're wearing in Civilian clothes and then you're "in uniform". Toss a zoom bag and black shoes and socks in the trunk of the car and you're able to show up at any moment's notice and not have to worry about the more detailed uniforms.

- Case in point: Murphy said grey jeans. The reg technically doesn't allow jeans. It says slacks. Since its the other popular non-USAF style uniform, the CAP polo shirt combo is the most abused uniform on the planet. Pants aren't right. Black tennis shoes are seen. Etc. National wimps out on describing the thing properly but the photos in the regulation sure ain't showing jeans and tennis shoes. Definitely never was how it was intended. HOWEVER: I'd rather see someone in cotton jeans than freaking nylon polyester slacks. So whatever.

I don't own nor want a zoom bag. And I'll carry proper Colorado winter clothing and put it on over the top of ANY of the CAP uniforms since NONE are proper cold weather gear.

Frankly if someone feels like flying in the mountains around here in winter without real clothes on, they're an idiot. Losing limbs to frostbite after a crash or dying of exposure is really really stupid, especially if your winter clothes are back in your car where you changed out of them to get into a uniform. No thanks. Cite me for a uniform violation and we'll have some pointed words. Surviving in the mountains isn't a game. Feel free to freeze to death in your perfect uniform.

The hardest thing in CAP uniform is proper footwear. The zoom bag at least allows for boots and if you go get good ones instead of mil-surplus crap boots, you can hike your ass out if you need to. The polo uniform is low soles and black leather. That's gonna suck hiking in three feet of snow. So that's another reason for the zoom bag. Not so much your body but what you can put on your feet.

I think BDUs are authorized flight uniforms. That's probably the best way to go in winter. Well except for being frigging camouflaged when you're trying to be found. Stupid stupid stupid.

Best uniform ever was the unauthorized Colorado Ground Team uniform that National nixed and various people's heads rolled. Bright orange flannel shirt from a hunting store and OD green pants with a web belt, and real hiking boots mil-spec or not. They added blue name tapes and a few patches to at least give some sense they were a uniform. Your own real winter parka authorized over it.

Looked fine to me. Smarter for cold weather than anything officially authorized. Also kept hunters from shooting ground teams, a side benefit, shall we say.

CAP doesn't have a proper cold weather uniform. Unofficially, you do what you feel you need to do. John johns and therms silks under a zoom bag will keep you from freezing to death rapidly. You'll freeze to death slowly but by then you've set the remains of the aircraft on fire to garner some attention. ;)
 
The only reason it's not comfortable is because along with my flight suit, I insist on wearing my authentic replica WWII bomber jacket and I find the fake fleece collar to be very itchy.

Thanks for the Columbia recommendation, that seems like a winner.
 
No flight suit here but I also don't fly in shorts and sandals. I do always try to wear 100% cotton to avoid having my clothes melt into my skin in a fire.

This.
I've worn coveralls over nice clothes when I need to make sure business clothes are still clean when I get there.
 
Some doofus Wings have superseded the National regs for no particularly good reason and go all Nomex.

My recollection is that California Wing's mandate for nomex for mission flying other than CD is based on a Pacific Region directive, due to the prevalence of mountainous terrain.
 
Alot of CFI tools at the school wear those. Bunch of big shots as if they flew fighter jets in the morning and was done and now hanging at the school
 
Alot of CFI tools at the school wear those. Bunch of big shots as if they flew fighter jets in the morning and was done and now hanging at the school

Could this be a silly uniform requirement from the schools owner ?

What really cracks me up are flight-suits made from ripstop nylon.
 
Could this be a silly uniform requirement from the schools owner ?

What really cracks me up are flight-suits made from ripstop nylon.

I can't think of a single worse material to make a flight suit out of.:nonod:
 
My recollection is that California Wing's mandate for nomex for mission flying other than CD is based on a Pacific Region directive, due to the prevalence of mountainous terrain.

We have no such silly mandate here, and plenty of mountainous terrain. Do zoom bags magically repel trees coming into contact with Cessnas? Heh.

California inside CAP does odd things, which pretty much matches what California does in the real world also. Texas also does some odd things also.

As long as they seem to be getting their Congressional mandate done, it probably isn't causing anyone outside the Region even a minute's heartburn. The rest of us do reserve the right to scoff from afar.

Doesn't really make it any less dumb, but hey, they like zoom bags, whatever...
 
Yeah, what he said.

I wear flight suit and hang my vest over the copilot's seat in the 150.

Do you have a 4-point harness and wear a helmet? If you wear the flight suit for safety reasons, it will do you no good without the other 2.
 
Back
Top