Advertisement

Development of Crash Injury Protection in Civil Aviation

  • Richard F. Chandler

Abstract

It was not until the late 19th century that manned flight in heavier-than-air craft became a reality. One of the leading aeronauts of that time was Otto Lilienthal, a German engineer, who designed and built several manned gliders between 1891 and his death in a glider crash in 1896. He made over 2,000 gliding or soaring flights, mostly from a specially constructed hill at Lichterfelde, near Berlin. Lilienthal authored several works on the theory and practice of flight. These provided important data and guidance for aspiring aeronauts. Octave Chanute, a railway and bridge engineer and mentor of several hopeful aviators in the United States, provided extensive details of Lilienthal’s work in his book Progress in Flying Machines.28 Lilienthal’s belief in quick escape in case of emergency was presented as a rule: “The aviator must be so affixed to his apparatus that he can detach himself instantly should the machine take a sheer.”28 When Chanute sponsored glider tests, he followed Lilienthal’s advice, specifying:

The operator should in no wise be attached to the machine. He may be suspended by his arms, or sit upon a seat, or stand on a running board, but he must be able to disengage himself instantly from the machine should anything go wrong, and be able to come down upon his legs in landing.34

Keywords

Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Restraint System Safety Belt Passenger Seat 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Acker LW, Black DO, Moser JC. Accelerations in fighter airplane crashes. NACA RM E57G11, NACA Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory, Cleveland, OH, 1957.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alfaro-Bou E, Fasanella EL, Williams MS. Crashworthy design considerations for general aviation seats. SAE 850855, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1985.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anon (1944) The shoulder harness. Air Surgeon's Bulletin 1: 8 - 9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anon (1951) The dangerous safety belt. Sci Am V: 185 - 186.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Armstrong HG. Principles and Practice of Aviation Medicine. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, 1939.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Army. Air Service Medical. War Department, Washington DC, 1919.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Army. Aviation Medicine in the A.E.F. Document No. 1004, Office of the Director of Air Service, War Department, Washington DC, 1920.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Army. Handbook of instructions for airplane designers. 4th ed. Engineering Division, Army Air Service, Dayton, Ohio, 1925.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Army. Military Specification: General Specification for Seat System: Crash Resistant, Non-Ejection, Aircrew. Mil-S-58095 (AV), 1971.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Army. Military Standard: Light Fixed and Rotary Wing Aircraft Crashworthiness. MilSTD-1290 (AV), 1974.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    189-D-22A thru E. U.S. Army Aviation Research and Technology Activity, Ft. Eustis, VA, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bauer LH. Aviation Medicine. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD, 1926.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bilezikjian V (1989) Aft facing transport aircraft passenger seats under 16G dynamic crash simulation. SAFE J, Winter Quarter, 19: 6 - 10.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Black DO. Facilities and methods used in full scale airplane crash fire investigation. NACA RM E51L06, NACA Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory, Cleveland, OH, 1952.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brinkley JW. Development of aerospace escape systems. Air University Review, July/ August, pp 34 - 39, 1968.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    CAA. Air commerce regulations effective December 31, 1926, U.S. Department of Commerce, Aeronautics Branch, Washington DC, 1926.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    CAA. Airworthiness requirements of air commerce regulations. Aeronautics Bulletin No. 7-A, Effective July 1, 1929, Department of Commerce, Aeronautics Branch, Washington DC, 1929.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    CAA. Airworthiness requirements for aircraft: Aeronautics Bulletin No. 7-A, effective October 1, 1934. Bureau of Air Commerce, Washington DC, 1934.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Carden HD. Full scale crash-test evaluation of two load-limiting subfloors for general aviation airframes. NASA Technical Paper 2380, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, 1984.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chandler RF, Trout EM. Evaluation of seating and restraint systems and anthropomorphic dummies conducted during fiscal year 1976. FAA-AM-78-6, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1978.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chandler RF, Trout EM. Evaluation of seating and restraint systems conducted during fiscal year 1978. FAA-AM-79-17, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1979.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chandler RF. Dynamic test of joint Army/ Navy crashworthy armored crew seat. Memorandum Report AAC-119-80-2. Protection and Survival Laboratory, FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute, Oklahoma City, OK, 1980.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chandler RF. Crash injury protection research at CAMI. SAE 830746, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1983.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chandler RF, Gowdy RV. Loads measured in passenger seat tests. Memorandum report AAC-119-81-8A, Protection and Survival Laboratory, FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute, Oklahoma City, OK, 1985a.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chandler RF. Data for the development of criteria for general aviation seat and restraint system performance. SAE 850851, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1985b.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chandler RF. Draft advisory circular: dynamic testing of seat/restraint and occupant protection for transport airplanes. Memorandum No. AAM-119-88-1, Protection and Survival Laboratory, FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute, Oklahoma City, OK, 1988.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chandler RF. Occupant crash protection in military air transport. AGARD-AG-306, North Atlantic Treaty Organization Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, Neuilly-Sur-Seine, France, 1990.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chanute O. Progress in flying machines, New York, 1894. (Republished by Lorenz and Herweg, Long Beach, CA, 1976.)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Child L. Memorandum for file: crash injury research and development. W-146, 1949.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Clark JC. Summary report on the national transportation safety board's general aviation crashworthiness project findings. SAE 871006, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1987.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Coltman JW. Design and test criteria for increased energy-absorbing seat effectiveness. FAA-AM-83-3, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1983.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Coltman JW, Bolukbasi AO, Laananen DH. Analysis of rotorcraft crash dynamics for development of improved crashworthiness design criteria. DOT/FAA/CT-83/48, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1984.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Coltman JW, Neri LM. Analysis of U.S. civil rotorcraft accidents for development of improved design criteria. B-86-SE-26-H000. Proceedings of the Meeting on Crashworthiness Design of Rotorcraft, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 1986.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Crouch TD. A Dream of Wings. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington DC, 1989.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    De Haven H (1941) Miraculous safety, air facts. 4 (3): 21 - 26.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    De Haven H. Report on crash injury research project. April 1st to May 1st 1942, to Dr. Eugene F. Du Bois, Cornell University Medical School, NY, 1942.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    De Haven H. Injuries in thirty light-aircraft accidents: medical data and crash details from field investigations of the civil aeronautics board. NRC Report 230, National Research Council Committee on Aviation Medicine, Washington DC, 1943.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    De Haven H. Relationship of injuries to structure in survivable aircraft accidents. NRC Report 440, National Research Council, Washington DC, 1945.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    De Haven H (1946) Research on crash injuries. JAMA 131 (6): 524.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    De Haven H. The rare occurrence of internal abdominal injury from safety belts or other causes in serious aircraft accidents. N.R.C. Crash Injury Research, Cornell University Medical College, New York, NY, 1947.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    De Haven H, Hasbrook AH. Use and effectiveness of shoulder harnesses in surplus military aircraft flown by civilian pilots. AFTR No. 6461, United States Air Force, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, 1951a.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    De Haven H. Crash injury research: semiannual progress report. Cornell University Medical College, NY, 1951b.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    De Haven H. Current safety considerations in the design of passenger seats for transport aircraft. Cornell University Medical College, New York, NY, 1952a.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    De Haven H. Accident survival-airplane and passenger car. Society of Automotive Engineers, Detroit, MI, 1952b.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    De Haven H. Development of crash survival design in personal, executive and agricultural aircraft. Cornell University Medical College, NY, 1953.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    De Haven H, Tourin B, Macri S. Aircraft safety belts: their injury effect on the human body. Crash Injury Research, Cornell University Medical College, New York, NY, 1953.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    De Haven H. Beginnings of crash injury research. 13th Stapp Car Crash Conference. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1969.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Dille JR, Harraway A. Index to FAA office of aviation medicine reports, 1961 through 1980. FAA-AM-81-1, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1981.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Domzalski L. Crashworthy military passenger seat development. Eighteenth Annual Symposium of the Survival and Flight Equipment Association. SAFE, Canoga Park, CA, pp 209 - 215, 1981.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    DuBois EF (1952) Safety belts are not dangerous. Br Med J 2: 685 - 686.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Eiband AM, Simpkinson SH, Black DO. Accelerations and passenger harness loads measured in full scale light airplane crashes. NACA TN 2991, NACA Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory, Cleveland, OH, 1953.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Eiband AM. Human tolerance to rapidly applied accelerations: a summary of the literature. NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH, 1959.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Fasanella EL, Alfaro-Bou E. NASA general aviation crashworthiness seat development. SAE 790591, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1979.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Follis RH Jr. Memorandum to the AAF Air Surgeon: Geohegan inertia lock for shoulder harness. Hq AAF Flight Control Command, Winston-Salem, NC, 1943.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Foret-Bruno JY, Hartemann P, Thomas C, Payon A, Tarriere C, Got C, Patel A. Correlations between thoracic lesions & force values measured at the shoulder of 92 belted occupants involved in real accidents. SAE 780892, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1978.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Fox RG. Relative risk, the true measure of safety. 28th Corporate Safety Seminar. Flight Safety Foundation, Arlington, VA, 1983.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Fox RG. Realistic civil helicopter crash safety, B-86-SE-24-H000. Meeting on Crashworthiness Design of Rotorcraft. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 1986.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Fryer DI. Aircraft passenger-seat design and crash survival. FPRC 1055, Flying Personnel Research Committee, Air Ministry, London, 1958.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Fulton JF. Measures for increasing safety of flying personnel in crashes: a memorandum to the committee on aviation medicine. NRC Committee on Aviation Medicine Report No. 34, National Research Council, Washington DC, 1941.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Geertz A. Limits and special problems in the use of seat catapults. Air Documents Division, Wright Field, OH, 1944.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gilson JG, Stewart WK, Pekarek Z. Prevention of injury in aircraft crashes. Report No. 556, Flying Personnel Research Committee, Air Ministry, London, 1943.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Hasbrook AH. Design of passenger "tie-down". AvCir-44-0-66, Aviation Crash Injury Research of Cornell University, Flushing, NY, 1956.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Hasbrook AH, Garner JD, Snow CC. Evacuation pattern analysis of a survivable commercial aircraft crash. FAA-AM-62-9, Federal Aviation Agency, Washington DC, 1962.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hass G. An analysis of relations between force, aircraft structure and injuries to personnel involved in aircraft accidents with recommendations for safer principles in design of certain types of aircraft. Report No. 1, Project No. 187, The School of Aviation Medicine, Randolph Field, Texas, 1943.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Holbrook HA. Civil Aviation Medicine in the Bureaucracy. Banner Publishing Company, Bethesda, MD, 1974.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Kubokawa CC (1974) The NASA Ames integral passenger seat concept. SAFE J 4 (4): 18 - 23.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    NTSB. Safety report-general aviation crash-worthiness project: phase one. NTSB/SR-83/ 01, National Transportation Safety Board, Washington DC, 1983.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    NTSB. Safety report-general aviation crashworthiness project: phase two-impact severity and potential injury prevention in general aviation accidents. NTSB/SR-85/01, National Transportation Safety Board, Washington DC, 1985a.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    NTSB. Safety report-general aviation crash-worthiness project: phase three-acceleration loads and velocity changes of survivable general aviation accidents. NTSB/SR-85/02, National Transportation Safety Board, Washington DC, 1985b.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Olcott JW. Proposal on enhanced crash tolerance. Proposal No. 518, V.2, pp. 263-268, Regulatory Review Program, Part 23, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1984.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Parks DL, Twigg DW. Attendant restraint system technical evaluation and guidelines. Boeing Document D6-44779TN-0, The Boeing Company, Seattle, WA, 1978.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Perrone N, Saczalski K. A survey of current government sponsored research & Development programs in vehicle crashworthiness in related biomechanics areas. Office of Naval Research, Washington DC, 1973.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Pinkel II, Rosenberg EG. Seat design for crash worthiness. NACA TN 3777, NACA Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory, Cleveland, OH, 1956.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Pinkel II. A proposed criterion for the selection of forward and rearward-facing seats. ASME Paper No. 59-AV-28, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, 1959.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Preston GM, Preman GJ. Accelerations in transport airplane crashes. NACA TN 4158, NACA Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory, Cleveland, OH, 1958.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Rathgeber RK, Parker PE. Preliminary design research for the caravan 1 crew seat. SAE 850856, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1985.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Reed WH, Robertson SH, Weinberg LWT, Tyndall LH. Full scale dynamic crash test of a Douglas DC-7 aircraft. FAA-ADS-37, Federal Aviation Agency Aircraft Development Service, Washington DC, 1965a.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Reed WH, Robertson SH, Weinberg LWT, Tyndall LH. Full scale dynamic crash test of a Lockheed Constellation model 1649 aircraft. Federal Aviation Agency Aircraft Development Service, Washington DC, 1965b.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Reilly MJ. Crashworthy troop seat investigation. USAAMRDL-TR-74-93, U.S. Army Air Mobility Research and Development Laboratory, Ft. Eustis, VA, 1974.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Reilly MJ. Crashworthy troop seat testing program. USAAMRDL-TR-77-13, U.S. Army Research and Technology Laboratories, Ft. Eustis, VA, 1977.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Singley GT III. Test and evaluation of improved aircrew restraint systems. USAAVRADCOMTR-81-D-27, U.S. Army Research and Technology Laboratories, Ft. Eustis, VA, 1981.Google Scholar
  82. 81a.
    Siahaya O, Jarrett W, Iteffield T. A retrofit crash protection installation in two models of general aviation airplanes, SAE 871008 Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, April 1987.Google Scholar
  83. 82.
    Snyder RG. A case of survival of extreme vertical impact in seated position. FAA-AM62-19, Federal Aviation Agency, Washington DC, 1962.Google Scholar
  84. 83.
    Snyder RG. Human survivability of extreme impacts in free fall. FAA-AM-63-15, Federal Aviation Agency, Washington DC, 1963.Google Scholar
  85. 84.
    Snyder RG. Survival of high velocity free falls in water. FAA-AM-65-12, Federal Aviation Agency, Washington DC, 1965.Google Scholar
  86. 85.
    Snyder RG, Snow CC, Crosby WM, Fineg J, Chandler R. Impact injury to the pregnant female and fetus in lap belt restraint. FAAAM-68-24, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1968.Google Scholar
  87. 86.
    Snyder RG, Crosby WM, Snow CC, Young JW, Hanson P. Seat belt injuries in impact. FAA-AM-69-5, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1969a.Google Scholar
  88. 87.
    Snyder RG, Snow CC, Young JW, Crosby WM, Price GT. Pathology of trauma attributed to restraint systems in crash impacts. FAA-AM-69-3, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1969b.Google Scholar
  89. 88.
    Snyder RG, Young JW, Snow CC. Experimental impact protection with advanced restraint systems: preliminary tests with air bag and inertia reel/inverted-y yoke torso harness. FAA-AM-69-4, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington DC, 1969.Google Scholar
  90. 89.
    Stapp JP. Tolerance to abrupt deceleration. Chapter 14. In Collected Papers on Aviation Medicine. AGARDograph No. 6, Butterworths Scientific Publications, London, 1955.Google Scholar
  91. 90.
    Swearingen JJ. Design and construction of crash dummy for testing shoulder harness and Safety Belts, Civil Aeronautics Administration, Washington DC, 1951.Google Scholar
  92. 91.
    Swearingen JJ, Morrow DJ. Motions of the head and trunk allowed by safety belt restraint during impact. Project No. 53-204, Civil Aeronautic Administration, Washington DC, 1956.Google Scholar
  93. 92.
    Swearingen JJ, McFadden ER, Garner JD, Blethrow JG (1960) Human voluntary tolerance to vertical impact. Aerospace Medicine 31: 989 - 998.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 93.
    Teare D (1951) Post-mortem examinations on air-crash victims. Br Med J 707 - 708.Google Scholar
  95. 94.
    Thompson RG, Carden HD, Hayduk RJ. Survey of NASA research on crash dynamics. NASA Technical Paper 2298, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, 1984.Google Scholar
  96. 95.
    Trimble EJ. Report on the accident to Boeing 737-400 G-OBME near Kegworth, Leicestershire on 8 January 1989. Aircraft Accident Report 4/90, HMSO, London, 1990.Google Scholar
  97. 96.
    Underhill B, McCullough B. An energy absorbing seat design for light aircraft. SAE 720322, Society of Automotive Engineers, New York, 1972.Google Scholar
  98. 97.
    Villard HS. Contact! Bonanza Books, New York, 1968.Google Scholar
  99. 98.
    Watson-Jones R. Fractures of the spine sustained by RAF pilots and the relationship of these injuries to the Sutton harness, parachute harness, and other equipment. Report No. 274, Flying Personnel Research Committee, Air Ministry, London, 1941.Google Scholar
  100. 99.
    Watts DT, Mendelson ES, Kornfield AT. Human tolerance to accelerations applied from seat to head during ejection seat tests. TED No. NAM 25605, Report No. 1, Naval Air Material Center, 1947.Google Scholar
  101. 100.
    Weaver ER. Report of the static and dynamic tests of the Fokker C2-A cabin floor, seat and safety belt. Report A.D.M. 1046, Airplane Branch, Air Corps Material Division, Dayton, Ohio, 1929.Google Scholar
  102. 101.
    Weber Aircraft. (1986) Weber aircraft seat survives 16g forces in structural test. Aviation Week and Space Technology, pp 38-39, January 6, 1986.Google Scholar
  103. 102.
    Webster JL Sr, McGrew JA, Shook WH. Results of the AIA/ATA/FAA dynamic seat testing program. SAE 881375, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1988.Google Scholar
  104. 103.
    Weick FE, Hansen JR. From the ground up. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London, 1988.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard F. Chandler

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations