Zhao

I don't know about others but I've done my own risk assessment on it and figure there is very little risk. The primary purpose of me being in the car is to use my experience and knowledge to keep them safe. I'd never crash a car doing 60-80% around a course so the odds of my student doing so is almost non existent. My thought process is this:

It comes down to who I instruct, how i instruct, and where I instruct. It's mostly green students and our goals with them are very different than a red student. We're teaching tools in green so someday they can go fast, but we don't need to run maximum attack laps to get there. If i'm doing my job right we're not near the edge when there is any risk from track layout, and we're pushing and learning techniques on the edge where it's fine to go off. We've likely had a good talk before we got into the car. We're likely going to work on emergency maneuvers so they understand how and can catch a car, and I'm going to likely know if something is wrong before they do based off experience and be able to say brake brake brake before it's a problem more than just blowing their apex. We up the pace as their comfort and skills increase which may be really quick for some students or may be not at all at their current event. As for where, the tracks I pick to instruct at are modern tracks with most spots on them being zero risk; all the high speed straightaway tracks I started out driving are gone around me and replaced with stuff that is less risky 30 seconds of WOT for a straight with a wall at the end changed to maybe 10 seconds with a fast sweeper.

And finally I need to be in control and it's not open for debate. If they don't listen to me when i give them a clear command there is a big problem. The only real way we're going to be in trouble in green or yellow group is if the student thinks i'm an idiot and ignores me thinking they know best, or their brain doesn't work right and can't process simple commands like brake brake brake. That's why guys like cayman2024 are so dangerous to instruct. The attitude, the misplaced arrogance/hubris, the disrespect for people's experience and knowledge. That's a nasty combo. So if I feel I'm not in control of their driving we're going to have to remedy that one way or another.

Almost 2 decades of track tells me a green group student with an instructor in control has virtually no risk at the tracks I instruct at. Where the incidents happen is in red group, or the instructor group, or with a freshly signed off student who probably shouldn't have been signed off. Honestly though I'll probably pick one up in the next couple years because there isn't much downside to running one. Losing a bit of situational awareness and the cost being the negatives for running one as an instructor. I personally think even with one I'd probably leave it off from green group just because being able to move around for added situational awareness probably is of greater value for safety than having one on and limiting my vision to dead ahead.

steveP911

[QUOTE=nineball;18895512]as posted no one instructs for the money and the hybrid s is quiet expensive. given your logic one may wonder why ALL drivers using 3-point belts do not own and use a hybrid s - it's a personal, and expensive, choice. harnesses are safer than 3-point so one may wonder why every car on track does not have them - same reason - cost.

Actually, I do often wonder why all 3-point belt HPDE drivers don't own a Hybrid S, at least once they determine they want to do more than dip their toe in the track water. Once I got one, before I went to seats/harnesses, I felt so much safer in my three-point belt. I realized that my helmet could potentially represent a risk to me if an impact did not involve as much head contact as it did neck strain. In fact, the helmet makes your neck more vulnerable without a HANS. Maybe it protects your head (which is of course very important), but it adds loading to your neck due to added head weight. As far as cost is concerned, $1200 to save your life is cheap. A simple upgrade to a street car that could make a big difference. And, it graduates perfectly into a harness setup. I guess I don't see an issue here when you consider the cost of a Porsche.

steveP911

Sorry but again, ideally, I cannot see why an instructor wouldn't have a Simpson Hybrid. Yes, I know it is expensive. Maybe that is just my own perspective, but I can't see getting into a stranger's car with 3-point belts and having no restraint for my neck/head. I just checked and I see the Hybrid S available from a number of sources. I'm not knocking the instructor who says they don't need one, I just could never see myself doing it. In my region, many Green cars these days are very fast vehicles - way faster than my White Group car. Novice plus speed.....

Glyndellis

Once I got a car with harnesses, I bought a Schroth Flex. When I started instructing, I upgraded to a Hybrid S. Cars aren't getting slower, and regardless of the abilities of the instructor to control the student's pace, there's always the risk of fluid being dropped on the track or a car failure. I'm happy with my decisions.

Mahler9th

DFU = directions for use.

I got curious and looked back at some "information" on the WWW about the adoption of HANS. I remember watching the accident at Daytona (#3)... bad memory. I do not remember reading press accounts about subsequent investigations and activities, and at least one lawsuit. Sobering.

The first time I wore my HANS, I was in my 911 race car at Fernley. I think around 2005 or 2006. It was a Friday and about 100F. Test session. I had needed new belts at that time and I decided to buy some Schroth hybrids with the then pretty novel 2 " shoulder belts. Left the pits and within a couple of corners I could not breathe. So I loosened my belts and headed back in. I touched base with my friend Mat, an ex-IMSA racer he immediately informed me that I should have followed the DFUs with respect to the angle of the shoulder belts. My angle was too steep.

I could not use my HANS device that weekend. When I got home I spoke with Hubbard Downing and HMS (Schroth importer... more specifically Joe Marko) and got smarter on the topic. As a result I lowered my seat a bunch-- weekend fab project. This brought my angle within range.

Again, this was a race car.

I remember HMS had developed a bracket set up that folks could have welded to bars and cages to achieve a higher should belt attachment point.

Winders' car has s set up like this. It too is a race car.

I wonder about the use of HANS in street cars with harness systems... I suspect there are a lot more of them out there these days. I wonder about whether, for example, most, many or just some have proper implementations with respect to the shoulder angle. For both seats.

I think I read somewhere that there was speculation or perhaps a claim or two about shoulder angle and the #3 accident.

I also think about the safety choices we make and sometimes discuss in Forums like these. For example some folks will claim that others doing DE's in street cars should do this or that because "you never know."

I have never seen a street car with a proper set up for HANS (perhaps a roll bar, harnesses, proper seat et cetera) that also had racing fire system installed...

My biggest safety advice is always this:

Consider making sure your healthcare provider knows about your hobby even if you don't race or need a racing-style physical. Especially if you have any cardiac issues.

Does not matter whether you race.... I suggest at least a conversation.

Zhao

For a street car it's just to save the car. Fire suspension on a stock street car doesn't offer any measurable value safety wise. You light on fire, you pull over and you get out. 10-15 second process. Cars do not light on fire in accidents either, like it can happen but that would be a freak occurrence. Also, the burn rate for fire starting to penetrate the cabin of a normal street car is 10 minutes +. That's also why I think in stock street cars race suits offer no value or actually reduce safety (more likely to fatigue a driver from heat exhaustion).

Ya, realistically if my car lit up on fire, i'd like to save it, but barring total incompetence at the track recovery will be there in about 60 seconds and i'd be <30 seconds away from a marshall station who will have their own fire equipment as well. Routing lines throughout the car and mounting that in a stock street car just doesn't make sense for how little risk there is.

chudson

I too am very surprised how much chatter this one topic has created.

I've had a Simpson Hybrid since I was PCA white group. As an instructor, I love that I can get into the right seat wearing my Hybrid and no equal restraint rules are broken. Expensive? Not in my opinion. Price some nice wheelchairs or a decent funeral... We have fought this in the performance world for decades - all the money goes to horse power and next to none for safety. As tech director I see it at the track. A car shows up with thousands upon thousands worth of under hood mods, the total of which MIGHT give a novice driver 2 tenths on a good day, but he's got a set of generic no-name harnesses and the cheapest helmet they could find.

For real...

Cliff

ExMB

But those will not work on cars where only the driver's seat has a multipoint harness and the passenger seat a factory 3 point.
Not everybody, diver or instructor, install equal on both sides. This open up a can of worms for those expecting the extra financial outlay from either group as we have seen in this thread.

docwyte

I was teching at the track last month and had to turn away a guy who showed up with some cheap non snell/dot open faced helmet. It was 12 years old too. He told me he’d used it on track with another organization recently. Had to tell him different rules for different organizations and sent him up to the registration desk to borrow one of the clubs loaner helmets. Thankfully the club has them, otherwise he would’ve been driving home.

38D

The OP's scenario was a car with equal seats and harness. And for those that want to use one with 3 points belts, it will set you back a whopping $650...still way less than claimed 1-2k (link)

I still think you'd have to be a complete moron to get in a student's car without some form or head & neck device.

zedcat

I believe this is the model that has been tested with 3 pt belts Simpson Hybrid HYSMED11PA Simpson Racing Hybrid S (simpsonraceproducts.com)

docwyte

That's not the correct one to use with 3 point belts. You need the hybrid s, which costs more like $1200

Locker537

I believe Schroth's SHR FLEX aims to help with those issues as well - https://www.schroth.com/en/racing/ra...hr-flex-large/

NaroEscape

Interesting thread - sorry I missed it from the start! But hey, it's Sunday night so why not just read through a whole thread with people arguing back and forth, calling each other names, and acting arrogant and confident in things they know nothing about ...ah how I love Rennlist!!

Anyway, Couple things:
- Colin (38D), the only HNR (head and neck restraint) that supports the use of a OEM 3 point harness is the Simpson Hybrid S (not the Sport)- approx $1200 plus the anchors. None of the Schroth, HANS, Stand 21 or any other manufacturers HNR is for use with 3 pt harnesses, and NOT any of the other Simpson Hybrids, Only the S model.
Our number 1 customer who buys one are instructors. Number 2 are students that decide they want to be safe, but don't want to change the OEM seats and add harnesses in their cars.

- a LARGE number of instructors are NOT racers and do NOT have race seats and harnesses in their car, and as such would otherwise have no reason to own a HANS/Stand 21/Schroth HNR device. Hybrid S is their only choice.

- As stupid as it may sound, as per the PCA rules... YES, If both sides have harnesses and the passenger DOES NOT have a HNR, then BOTH sides cannot wear their harnesses. If that situation occurred, it is more likely that the organizer/chief instructor would work to adjust the instructor than force the driver to step down in safety, BUT THAT IS THE WAY THE RULE IS WRITTEN. Part of the theory behind it (right or wrong) is that if the driver is in a full Harness set up, they are more securly buckled in and will drive faster vs. sliding around a bit with 3 pt. Don't argue with me, I didn't make the rules, but trust me, this is the rule. Between being a PCA Region President, Zone Rep, instructor, DE chair, racer, etc. I know the rules and have questioned them numerous times (hence why I'm not on the national board anymore.) Now, as a supplier of safety gear, and having learned about the value of it all, I wear ALL my safety gear EVERY time I'm on the track. And I no longer instruct (that's a story for another time)

- The idea of having spare HNR is sometimes complicated since the 'borrower' has to have anchors in their helmet. So they would need to buy them and have them installed to borrow the HNR. We sell a lot of anchors at the track just for that reason. Luckily...every single anchor is the same EXCEPT Schroth's because....who knows why. They're German I guess...

No rule can cover every single scenario that will occur. PCA as a whole is VERY conservative on most things when it comes to safety. Are there use cases that aren't specifically addressed in some rules? Of course. But there is always a work around with a little communication.

In the end, every driver and instructor should take safety VERY seriously. We do this as a hobby. It's supposed to be fun and you're supposed to go home at the end of a weekend and kiss your spouse/kids/family/dog/goldfish... That guardrail or tree doesn't know whether you're "just in a HPDE event" or are racing IMSA.

Be safe.

Now back to our regularly scheduled bantering....

Mahler9th

A few more points:

Some head and neck restraint products have both SFI and FIA cert./homologation. Some have only one. This may merit some consideration by prospective users/purchasers or it may not.

The Schroth SHR Flex is an example.

It is also an example of a product marketed as having some potential benefits from features that may not be part of SFI or FIA standards. This may merit some consideration by prospective users/purchasers or it may not.

Cursory review of the Flex DFUs compared to a different (more traditional?) Schroth product suggest required and/or recommended shoulder harness mounting and angles are the same.

Folks should also note that SFI and or FIA standards for head and neck restraints may not include any considerations for a 3 point belt implementation-- I have not reviewed the standards in several years. However we can conclude that a product designed for a 3 point belt implementation or a harness implementation can meet SFI and/or FIA standards... when used with a harness implementation. Simpson product is an example.

Simpson's marketing language is interesting-- it mentions Federal Motor Vehicle safety standards:

https://www.simpsonraceproducts.com/...rts/HYSSML11PA

"Simpson's Hybrid S model is currently the only Frontal Head Restraint proven effective for 3-point harnesses, and it is also FIA and SFI approved. Additionally, in a partnership with Detroit auto manufacturers, the Hybrid S is third party tested to FMVSS208. The Hybrid S allows high-performance driving instructors, auto manufacturing test engineers, and other drivers with 3-point harnesses access to the advantages of head restraint safety. The FIA Hybrid Head Restraint, in conjunction with a Snell or FIA rated helmet and a 3-point harness, reduced neck tension significantly when compared to a test with only a helmet and 3-point harness. While we can offer head restraint protection for use with 3-point seatbelts, Simpson's top concern is driver and instructor safety. We suggest a Full Containment Cockpit System that includes a Full Containment Seat, Snell or FIA rated Helmet, FIA or SFI approved Frontal Head Restraint, and a 5 to 7-point seatbelt harness system for the best protection while on the track."

Of course one key question is whether those Fed standards have any relationship to the race track use case (versus public roads).

And I am curious the testing details...

As a capitalist I am also curious about whether there is a competing product, and if not, why not.