Ski/snowboard helmets
Discussion
Just noticed Gary Hartstein, (@formerf1_doc), pushing for changes in ski helmet design.
Key comment for me
"Ski helmets, on the other hand, are designed and homologated (WHEN they’re homologated) almost solely to prevent skull fractures. While this provides an easy method of evaluation in testing labs, we know that this has VERY little (if anything) to do with the actual mechanisms of brain injury."
Key comment for me
"Ski helmets, on the other hand, are designed and homologated (WHEN they’re homologated) almost solely to prevent skull fractures. While this provides an easy method of evaluation in testing labs, we know that this has VERY little (if anything) to do with the actual mechanisms of brain injury."
Gary Hartstein said:
Now, the FIA Institute has done remarkable applied research in helmet design, and the helmet Felipe was wearing reflects that research. This helmet was designed specifically with very demanding requirements for impacts with objects having rounded edges as well as those having sharp edges, and equally for penetration resistance. These requirements were based on known mechanisms of injury in the sport concerned, and the levels of energy seen.
Ski helmets, on the other hand, are designed and homologated (WHEN they’re homologated) almost solely to prevent skull fractures. While this provides an easy method of evaluation in testing labs, we know that this has VERY little (if anything) to do with the actual mechanisms of brain injury. And unfortunately, Michael is a living demonstration of this.
Therefore, I’d like to throw a few ideas out there:
the Federations responsible for skiing, from recreational to competitive, should convene a working group of experts to look at the epidemiology of head injury in the sport
conclusions should be drawn about the kind of head protection likely to mitigate the injuries ACTUALLY SEEN
Jean Todt should offer the full resources of the FIA Institute (data, expertise, etc) to help design this helmet, to make it affordable, and to make sure it is used as widely as possible.
Michael’s injury is no more tragic than those of every patient who suffers severe head trauma. If, however, his public persona spurs action that goes on to significantly improve the safety of skiing, it will be another of his many remarkable accomplishments!
http://formerf1doc.wordpress.com/2014/01/24/some-f...
Ski helmets, on the other hand, are designed and homologated (WHEN they’re homologated) almost solely to prevent skull fractures. While this provides an easy method of evaluation in testing labs, we know that this has VERY little (if anything) to do with the actual mechanisms of brain injury. And unfortunately, Michael is a living demonstration of this.
Therefore, I’d like to throw a few ideas out there:
the Federations responsible for skiing, from recreational to competitive, should convene a working group of experts to look at the epidemiology of head injury in the sport
conclusions should be drawn about the kind of head protection likely to mitigate the injuries ACTUALLY SEEN
Jean Todt should offer the full resources of the FIA Institute (data, expertise, etc) to help design this helmet, to make it affordable, and to make sure it is used as widely as possible.
Michael’s injury is no more tragic than those of every patient who suffers severe head trauma. If, however, his public persona spurs action that goes on to significantly improve the safety of skiing, it will be another of his many remarkable accomplishments!
http://formerf1doc.wordpress.com/2014/01/24/some-f...
Without wishing to prod a hornet's nest, there's a side of me that would hope that mountain sports don't become buried under an avalanche of EU safety standards and certifications.
Whilst I completely understand the concerns of those who wish to use helmets and would never suggest that they shouldn't, I can't help but worry that more rigorous certification is a stepping stone to making them compulsory.
When I learned as a child (in the 80's) nobody but racers wore them and that was fine. It was part of the reason I fell in love with the mountains. To quote AC/DC - "no stop signs, speed limits"...it represented freedom to me. A dangerous environment where one must take ultimate responsibility. You assess the risks and you decide what level of safety you're comfortable with.
It feels a little as though the explosion in popularity of mountain sports has resulted in that usual collective human desire to bring rules into play to normalise safety down to the most base level and I think that's a shame. I don't want skiing to be 'completely safe' as then there will nothing to put off people who are a bit scared if danger, and the mountains are busy enough already.
In fact, I've even bought a helmet for putting on to descend at the end if the day, as resorts are now so busy I reckon the chances of being clattered by an out of control beginner are too high to risk.
Sorry for going a bit O/T but was something I was thinking about.
From a more relevant to the OP perspective, I agree that it's a bit odd that they don't test on sharp rocks and trees. Likewise, the focus on avoiding fractures seems somewhat irrelevant to how head injuries work.
Whilst I completely understand the concerns of those who wish to use helmets and would never suggest that they shouldn't, I can't help but worry that more rigorous certification is a stepping stone to making them compulsory.
When I learned as a child (in the 80's) nobody but racers wore them and that was fine. It was part of the reason I fell in love with the mountains. To quote AC/DC - "no stop signs, speed limits"...it represented freedom to me. A dangerous environment where one must take ultimate responsibility. You assess the risks and you decide what level of safety you're comfortable with.
It feels a little as though the explosion in popularity of mountain sports has resulted in that usual collective human desire to bring rules into play to normalise safety down to the most base level and I think that's a shame. I don't want skiing to be 'completely safe' as then there will nothing to put off people who are a bit scared if danger, and the mountains are busy enough already.
In fact, I've even bought a helmet for putting on to descend at the end if the day, as resorts are now so busy I reckon the chances of being clattered by an out of control beginner are too high to risk.
Sorry for going a bit O/T but was something I was thinking about.
From a more relevant to the OP perspective, I agree that it's a bit odd that they don't test on sharp rocks and trees. Likewise, the focus on avoiding fractures seems somewhat irrelevant to how head injuries work.
I wore a helmet for the first time last week after 30 years of skiing without one.
It was noticeable that over the last five year, those wearing helmets have gone from grunge snowboarders only to the vast majority on any kind of snow traversing equipment.
Best of all, my helmet keeps my ears and expanding forehead warm in ways my hair used to!
I'm not sure most people could cope with wearing a helmet offering the kind of protection some seem to think is necessary (or desirable, at least), so I guess some protection is better than none.
I've just investigated and seems mine's a Class A.
M.
It was noticeable that over the last five year, those wearing helmets have gone from grunge snowboarders only to the vast majority on any kind of snow traversing equipment.
Best of all, my helmet keeps my ears and expanding forehead warm in ways my hair used to!
I'm not sure most people could cope with wearing a helmet offering the kind of protection some seem to think is necessary (or desirable, at least), so I guess some protection is better than none.
I've just investigated and seems mine's a Class A.
M.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff