Manifold

Maybe it's time to close the thread. Trolling is causing wastage of a lot of people's time, everyone's opinions seem to have been heard, and nothing further is likely to be learned beyond the information already shared. PCA's decision to require use of an HNR is unlikely to change (nor should it), and I suggest that PCA give careful consideration to clarify the definition and application of the "equal restraints" policy.

Otto Mechanic

Not a bad question. A good idea is one that promises to solve a problem you have. "I have this problem. Every time I hit something hard and immovable at high speeds, my head comes off or my neck breaks". That's a problem. Someone comes along and says "I can fix that with this!" and you're overjoyed. Maybe you don't look under the covers. Maybe you don't have the big picture. But it sure looks like a solution, so you buy it.

A good rule is a bit different. It's generally applicable. A rule works over a large group. Instead of "I have a problem" it begins with "We have a problem". I. We. Big difference.

General solutions are hard to come by. They tend to take time to prove. HANS is a good idea and it may be a good rule, but we don't know yet.

Manifold

Taking a step back, this thread illustrates that extremist ideology and safety don't mix well. Such ideology can blind people to facts which are extensive, clearly documented, universally agreed upon by experts, and easily seen by non-experts if they just open their eyes. That can lead to bad judgments and decisions. We've seen some extreme examples of that in this thread (and watch for how at least one such person is likely to respond to this post - ad hominem, childish insults, ignoring real facts, fake facts, etc.).

In my professional engineering career of three decades so far, I've been involved in countless safety decisions, and while my colleagues surely had ideological views spanning a wide spectrum, I've never detected ideology influencing any of their safety judgments and decisions. Real professionals just don't operate that way.

With regard to HNR, the facts are quite clear, and there's nothing to debate. The only positive things this thread is accomplishing are to share the information which shows why PCA's decision regarding the HNR requirement is the right decision, and to bring up the need to clarify and properly implement the equal restraints rule.

hacker-pschorr

Enough with the personal insults guys, a few posts have been removed, this thread has mostly stayed somewhat on topic. We are all adults (I'm assuming), lets try and keep it on topic.

Streak

^^ Darnit Hacker! How are we supposed to get to 25 pages if you're removing posts!

I got money on this!

dgrobs

Smart money has you and the over as a lock!!

Burger

Has the PCA published an approved HNR list?

Curious if the helmet support options are approved. They are SFI rated and have been used for years. Cheap, too!

hacker-pschorr

This is still only 8 pages on my screen, change your settings to load more posts per page.

Streak

I'm going to post a bunch of pictures of my cat to get us over the hump!

Streak

Approved. Everyone wore those before Hans.

mglobe

That is not a HNR.

If you care to read the definition of an SFI/FIA approved HNR, here it is: https://www.sfifoundation.com/wp-con...8.1_031615.pdf

Streak

I don't think he meant that as a replacement for HNR.

mglobe

Let's hope not!

True story: When I was running TWS's DE program, I had a guy approach me and say he was an instructor for another organization and wanted to instruct with us. We gave him a test ride (instructor role playing) which he failed miserably. Later that day he said he wanted to race with WRL (I also did some work for WRL back then), but he didn't have HANS anchors on his helmet. He wanted to know if WRL required that the HANS be connected to the helmet, or if he could just put it on and cinch down the harnesses. I probably should have told him to not drive on the track at all.

Burger

Yeah, kind of my point. Have they actually published the new rules? Does it in fact say SFI 38.1?

The PCA site still does not say they are mandatory:

"an approved Head and Neck Restraint System (HANS) device are strongly encouraged and highly recommended."

It does go to say they should meet SFI 38.1, but if the above collar isn't an official HNR, they should be fine since they aren't limited by the standard.

stownsen914

I've been working on the assumption that PCA and other organizations institute safety minimum standards like helmets, HANS, etc. for various reasons. The most obvious is to keep us safe. But also to keep insurance companies happy and willing to insure the event, because no liability insurance = no trackdays. If my assumption is correct, then it's not just PCA arbitrarily making up some safety standards, but doing what needs to be done so they can get affordable insurance so our trackdays don't cost $1000/day or not exist at all due to unavailability of liability insurance.

Is there anyone knowledgeable about this who can fill us in?