After re-reading MTV's account of his putting a 185 in the tundra (and years of procrastinating), I figure its about time to upgrade the stock shoulder harnesses in the 180. Wondering what options are out there? I know BAS is highly recommended and readily available, but for $1400/set I figured it would be worth a little research. Looks like aircraft spruce has some kits. I once had a PA-12 with a 5-point inertia reel system and a rotary buckle that I LOVED. Don't know what brand it was. Must not have been BAS as I don't see an STC for PA-12s.

Now I know some will say stop being cheap, just buy the BAS, price of your life and all that. But truth is you pay your money and take your chances. No shoulder harness will keep you from all harm. If we all wanted to be as safe a possible and price were not a consideration we would always wear Nomex, helmets, have a ballistic parachute, full TKS IFR twin turbine, and never leave the ground in the first place! Plus the only real wreck I've ever been in was with stock Cessna shoulder harness and neither me or the other front seater were scratched. Hate to change what you know works! Flame suit on.....

No flame suit necessary as far as I'm concerned. There is no question that the BAS systems are spendy.

But, there are a couple other issues you may want to consider, in addition to the protection they offer.

The BAS harness is, I believe, the only harness system that puts the inertial reel up inside the headliner, where is is kept relatively clean and thus function of the units in my experience is just superb, and it stays that way.

The BAS also has a "slot" plate that attaches to the headliner, which the belts thread through. This system also keeps the belts from getting folded over in the harness reel and jamming it, a common issue with some reel type systems.

BAS is the only manufacturer which offers two different buckle styles. I like the system where the left side shoulder belt is connected to the left side lap belt, and the right side shoulder belt is connected to the right side lap belt. You get in the seat, grab the left side buckle, and the right, and hook em up. It's really fast and easy. It also prevents belts from potentially dangling out a door, and from getting damaged by doors, and potentially damaging the side of the airplane with a stray belt.

My experience with the BAS harness in several airplanes is that they hold up and continue to function very smoothly over many years and thousands of hours of flight time. Most other harness systems I've used don't function as smoothly or well, and tend to deteriorate fairly rapidly due to wear.

But, there are other good harness systems out there, no doubt.

FWIW

MTV

BAS with seaplane buckle, easiest to get out of when you need to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the replies.

If I do go with the BAS I'll have to decide which buckle type to go with. I like the fixed type for ease of use, esp for pax, the seaplane type always take a demo and half the time you have to attach for them! But the seaplane type sure are nice to get out of the way when you have frequent loading and unloading of bulky cargo. The rotary type are the best in my opinion, but oh, that extra $500 will hurt.

MTV - no headliner to worry about, but that is a good consideration, and the sleeve that keeps them reeling nicely is nice. Like I said, I'll most likely end up ordering a set from BAS, but figured a bit of research wouldn't hurt. Just glad there are folks making this stuff.

I checked out Hooker harnesses and they have some nice options with regards to lockable inertia reels. This allows you to tighten the shoulder harness prior to a crash. I have no idea how well they hold up.

You can use a fixed shoulder harness and eliminate all of the moving parts and potential failure modes of an inertia reel system, and save a large amount of money in the process.

No matter what anyone says, the "experts" and the "pundits" and no matter what the people selling anything related to this issue (that includes me) says or doesn't say, the un-questionable fact remains that a fixed harness is as safe and perhaps occasionally safer than an inertia reel. No matter who benefits or does not benefit from that statement, it is true.

Mike's life was saved by the BAS unit, and he rightfully is an avid proponent of their product. It is a fantastic product by all reports I'd buy their product in a second if I were in the market for an inertia reel system. But a fixed harness would have saved his life too.

Depending on the type of aircraft you have, a fixed harness may be an equally convenient and less expensive solution than an inertia reel. There are other ergonomic and pilot interface issues which can also affect this and complicate the issue further (I hear the shotguns being cocked in the background....)

I'm also shopping for my 185.

There seems to be mixed opinions on the "standard" and "seaplane" buckles. I translate those options to be Standard = shoulder belt attached to each of the left and right lap belts vs. the Seaplane = rotary buckle with 3 of 4 attach points that release (both sholders and one lap connection; the other lap connection retains the buckle).

What about the Utility buckle? This is the standard lap belt but separate shoulder belts that have to be aligned with main buckle. I run similar setup in my N3N (standard military setup) and J3. It seems to be about a 1 min education for new passengers and repeat passengers seem to "get it" without further assistance.

Are there opinions of the Utility buckle?

On the BAS website, it is the "in the middle" option on the page. Perhaps that is truly it's role....it the "in-between" option of fully attached and fully release.

http://basinc-aeromod.com/cessna.php

I have a set of BAS harnesses with the utility buckle, and really like it.
Much more convenient IMHO for getting the shoulder straps out of the way when you need to.
Also much easier to pull the seats- no unbolting of the seatbelts from the floor required.
I sometimes pull the RH seat (and sometimes the door) when loading something bulky.
I also pull the seats pretty regularly to crawl under the panel.
That's assuming the seat belts go through a keeper strap on the side of the front seats, like most Cessnas seem to have.
Rotary buckles are kinda cool, but unless you're going for a crotch strap IMHO they're not worth the extra $545.
You might look into buying a seat belt / shoulder harness from Cub Crafters, for $359 a side-- less money than BAS but you might have to engineer your own attachment set-up.
http://store.cubcrafters.com/38-Shoulde ... _1281.html
FWIW shoulder harness installation does not require an STC or a field approval per FAA policy statement ACE 00-23.561-01
https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/har ... policy.pdf

Regarding BAS buckle choices:
If you go with the seaplane version, a small, flat, rare-earth magnet about the size of a hearing aid battery stuck between the metal tabs will hold the two shoulder straps together and make using them much easier. When you go to buckle up you only have to find three pieces, not four.

As I recall the BAS kit was very easy to install and mine has worked flawlessly for years. Ease of instillation is worth a lot to me.

I agree with EZ Flap regarding the effectiveness of fixed harnesses, with a caveat:

As he alluded to in his post, human factors play a much more significant role with fixed harness. Yes, they can be just as effective protection-wise as inertial harness IF (and this is a huge if) the wearer has the harness good and tight when the sh$& hits the fan. Unfortunately, most folks won't keep them as tight as they need to be for accident protection all the time, and relying on passengers (or pilots) to reef those harnesses up tight during an in flight emergency doesn't always work.

Full disclosure: My current airplane has fixed harnesses. I nearly always fly alone, and I do keep the harness pretty tight all the time. I've thought about inertial harness, but my experience with them in a Cub has not been great.

If I owned another Cessna, it'd have BAS harnesses, with the standard buckles.

MTV

What do seaplane buckles for BAS harnesses look like? Anybody have a picture? What's the advantages of one over the other?

I fly rotary buckles and 5-point harnesses at work. The rotary mechanism can get dirt/dust inside and then it's hard to get one or two of the straps to release. We also do dunker training every few years and I'd much rather have a utility buckle for opening underwater. My airplane has utility buckles on all seats and an inertia reel on the left front seat. My work belts have manually locking inertia reels which I'd prefer to have in my personal plane as well.

soyAnarchisto wrote:What do seaplane buckles for BAS harnesses look like? Anybody have a picture? What's the advantages of one over the other?

Seaplane buckles are the utility buckles, one in the same:




I would also recommend getting the belt protectors. I almost didn't, but I am glad I did. Keeps the belts from getting frayed by the moving seat, but they weigh an extra pound for the set

When I got my BAS belts, I got the standard buckle, thinking that it would be significantly easier to buckle than the seaplane/utility buckle. But when I took my SES training 2 years ago, the airplane (almost a clone of mine) had the seaplane/utility buckle. After only a few tries, I got so that if there was any time difference in buckling them, I couldn't tell it. It's just a matter of doing it until it becomes natural.

Unbuckling is similarly a non-event. The claim is that the seaplane/utility buckle is easier to get out of, especially for docking purposes. But quite honestly, I doubt that there's any real difference.

So you have to decide strictly on the "I want that" basis, not on any real criteria.

As for the ultra expensive rotary buckle that BAS offers, I think that's a real waste of good LL money, maybe 100 gallons worth or more. It's not a natural movement to unbuckle it, like lifting the tab on the other two, so a little more care with passenger training might be a good idea.

Cary

Cary wrote:When I got my BAS belts, I got the standard buckle, thinking that it would be significantly easier to buckle than the seaplane/utility buckle. But when I took my SES training 2 years ago, the airplane (almost a clone of mine) had the seaplane/utility buckle. After only a few tries, I got so that if there was any time difference in buckling them, I couldn't tell it. It's just a matter of doing it until it becomes natural.

Unbuckling is similarly a non-event. The claim is that the seaplane/utility buckle is easier to get out of, especially for docking purposes. But quite honestly, I doubt that there's any real difference.

So you have to decide strictly on the "I want that" basis, not on any real criteria.

As for the ultra expensive rotary buckle that BAS offers, I think that's a real waste of good LL money, maybe 100 gallons worth or more. It's not a natural movement to unbuckle it, like lifting the tab on the other two, so a little more care with passenger training might be a good idea.

Cary

Agreed 100%

MTV

Cary wrote:..... The claim is that the seaplane/utility buckle is easier to get out of, especially for docking purposes. But quite honestly, I doubt that there's any real difference....
Cary

Almost, but not quite, and the not quite part is exceptionally important to the seaplane and backcountry type alike...

'The claim' is that should you inadvertently find yourself upside down on terra firma, or in water, and in bulky clothing, you will just about have to cut your way out of a seatbelt that has the shoulder harness married to it. Having been there first hand, I can assure you it is a valid concern, and oddly enough I know more than one BCP'r who would concur...

Take care, Rob

CamTom12 wrote:I fly rotary buckles and 5-point harnesses at work. The rotary mechanism can get dirt/dust inside and then it's hard to get one or two of the straps to release. We also do dunker training every few years and is much rather have a utility buckle for opening underwater. My airplane has utility buckles and an inertia reel on the left front seat. My work belts have manually locking inertia reels which I'd prefer to have in my personal plane as well.

Good real world feedback. Thanks. I really liked the one rotary buckle I have used, but there is definitely the probability for more to go wrong with a more complex unit. I am leaning towards the utility buckle BAS offers.

Good discussion.

I'm in the midst of purchasing a '73 180J and am having the B.A.S. harnesses installed for the #1 & #2 seats.

Read on BCP and other sites about stock front shoulder harnesses being installed for the middle seats, but I'm looking for an "H" or "Y" harness for the youngsters. Prefer them having straps on both sides so they are held more firmly in place.

Has anyone installed the Hooker harnesses for the #3 & #4 seat positions?

Any other options for H or Y harnesses in those middle seats?

Thanks,

R

I've flown bas with the standard buckle and rotary. I like them both the same. I've flown one with the shoulder belt attached to the lap, it's a pain, especially when you pull the seats out to work on the airplane (annual or anything under the panel) they are always in the way.
My dad had the single Cessna shoulder harness for years, and when he was taking pictures out of his 172 he would take it off. Said if something happened he would throw the belt on and he was good to go. I got him the bas harness and he loves them. Never takes them off while he's flying anymore. Money well spent.

I would sure like more info on any brand of TSO'd lockable inertia reels. I couldn't find anything on Hooker's site.