Hahns-like devices and DE
11-03-2005, 11:10 AM
#76
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Originally Posted by Dirt Track Racer
Hey Bull, the Yugo and the Volvo sedan both passed the same safety standards certifications to be sold in the US. Does that mean the Yugo is as safe as the volvo sedan?............................
Volvo - 97% are still on the road.
Yugo - 97% are still by the side of the road.
I have friends that are Neurological Surgeons........
11-03-2005, 11:40 AM
#77
Originally Posted by gbaker
The performance level called for in SFI Spec 38.1 is a yawn. In fact, we kicked butt on that sled on Tuesday.
Specification 38.1 - Head and Neck Restraint Systems
Hubbard-Downing HANS Device
LFT Technologies R3 Device
Safety Solutions Hutch-II Device - new member!
???
11-03-2005, 11:48 AM
#78
I suggest a subsidy from clubs that run DE for their regular instructors to buy H & N device.
They used to sell communicators at a reduced price to encourage instructors to use them. Why not H & N devices!
I think most clubs use profit from DE to help out other functions. Now that we are teaching students with faster cars and H & N devices that might give us a shot at surviving a bad crash, I think some of the profit should go to help instructors getting H & N devices.
They used to sell communicators at a reduced price to encourage instructors to use them. Why not H & N devices!
I think most clubs use profit from DE to help out other functions. Now that we are teaching students with faster cars and H & N devices that might give us a shot at surviving a bad crash, I think some of the profit should go to help instructors getting H & N devices.
11-03-2005, 01:21 PM
#79
Originally Posted by ZBlue996Kam
I suggest a subsidy from clubs that run DE for their regular instructors to buy H & N device.
They used to sell communicators at a reduced price to encourage instructors to use them. Why not H & N devices!
I think most clubs use profit from DE to help out other functions. Now that we are teaching students with faster cars and H & N devices that might give us a shot at surviving a bad crash, I think some of the profit should go to help instructors getting H & N devices.
They used to sell communicators at a reduced price to encourage instructors to use them. Why not H & N devices!
I think most clubs use profit from DE to help out other functions. Now that we are teaching students with faster cars and H & N devices that might give us a shot at surviving a bad crash, I think some of the profit should go to help instructors getting H & N devices.
I'm all for that.....
Next...what to do about students with unsfe/improperly installed "safety" equipment...?
11-03-2005, 02:02 PM
#81
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 1,262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by David K.
Your not listed on the SFI web site...???
Because we have not applied for SFI membership, which we won't do until the Spec is changed. It's dangerous.
Long story, and folks probably don't want to go that OT.
11-03-2005, 02:10 PM
#82
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Man...
Some of you guys are really full of crap. Alan asked a legitimate question, in an effort to get some further dialogue, and you geniuses are spitting down his throat. Nice job! If you have a differing opinion you can say so without resorting to personel rebuke. The Professor has a strong opinion, and is not interested in conversing on points that are painfuly obvious, but he wasn't quite rude. After that, it went downhill. I didn't bother reading past the 2nd page.
I offered what I thought was a clarification and quanitifcation of what Alan was getting at, to stir the pot. Guess it worked.
How many of you clowns have gotten in a students car only to find you could not use the reatraints provided? I have! I am then not inclined in the slightest to use a 3-point belt while they strap in nice and secure in their harness. 3-point belts don't hold me in a car for squat! I use most of my concentration and energy trying to stay in the GD seat. God forbid we hit anything. Anyone who does not think that someone will drive differently with a harness -vs- a 3-point forgot the Vaseline behind their ears. That would of course be the point of the harnesses in the first place, eh? Equipment beyond that? No, I don't think it has a dramatic effect.
OF COURSE no one in their right mind would expect a car owner to provide them with an H&N device. What a completely assinine notion, and how would that have any effect on the price of tea in China?
Safety equipment is a personal choice. Most of the time it is down to ignorance or denial that someone does not maximize their safety. Calling them "cheap" is just that; cheap. I don't think people necessarily drive "differently" with a lot of equiment on. Then again, for those accustomed to harnesses and H&Ns... do you feel as secure when you go out without them? I don't. I bet you might even drive differently? I know that I do. That small percentage of subconscious change may reflect itself in someone driving slightly under their personal threshold, and this might make the difference between a good solid session, and an off. If you think for more than 10 seconds before typing, you might have a deeper insight like this for a change.
H&N Performance - The HANS and Issac devices are the pinacle of H&N protection, both testing to a very high level of neck tension reduction. The R3 is significantly lower in this regard, but well within the range considered surviveable. The HANS device is the most demanding in terms of equipment setup to optimize it. The Isaac devices do not appear to require anything beyond a harness to make them work right. The R3 is the most versatile by far and probably would work to some degree even with a 3-point.
If you are an instrcutor wanting some protection no matter what car you get into, you will buy an R3.
Some of you guys are really full of crap. Alan asked a legitimate question, in an effort to get some further dialogue, and you geniuses are spitting down his throat. Nice job! If you have a differing opinion you can say so without resorting to personel rebuke. The Professor has a strong opinion, and is not interested in conversing on points that are painfuly obvious, but he wasn't quite rude. After that, it went downhill. I didn't bother reading past the 2nd page.
I offered what I thought was a clarification and quanitifcation of what Alan was getting at, to stir the pot. Guess it worked.
How many of you clowns have gotten in a students car only to find you could not use the reatraints provided? I have! I am then not inclined in the slightest to use a 3-point belt while they strap in nice and secure in their harness. 3-point belts don't hold me in a car for squat! I use most of my concentration and energy trying to stay in the GD seat. God forbid we hit anything. Anyone who does not think that someone will drive differently with a harness -vs- a 3-point forgot the Vaseline behind their ears. That would of course be the point of the harnesses in the first place, eh? Equipment beyond that? No, I don't think it has a dramatic effect.
OF COURSE no one in their right mind would expect a car owner to provide them with an H&N device. What a completely assinine notion, and how would that have any effect on the price of tea in China?
Safety equipment is a personal choice. Most of the time it is down to ignorance or denial that someone does not maximize their safety. Calling them "cheap" is just that; cheap. I don't think people necessarily drive "differently" with a lot of equiment on. Then again, for those accustomed to harnesses and H&Ns... do you feel as secure when you go out without them? I don't. I bet you might even drive differently? I know that I do. That small percentage of subconscious change may reflect itself in someone driving slightly under their personal threshold, and this might make the difference between a good solid session, and an off. If you think for more than 10 seconds before typing, you might have a deeper insight like this for a change.
H&N Performance - The HANS and Issac devices are the pinacle of H&N protection, both testing to a very high level of neck tension reduction. The R3 is significantly lower in this regard, but well within the range considered surviveable. The HANS device is the most demanding in terms of equipment setup to optimize it. The Isaac devices do not appear to require anything beyond a harness to make them work right. The R3 is the most versatile by far and probably would work to some degree even with a 3-point.
If you are an instrcutor wanting some protection no matter what car you get into, you will buy an R3.
11-03-2005, 02:56 PM
#84
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RedlineMan
The HANS device is the most demanding in terms of equipment setup to optimize it. The Isaac devices do not appear to require anything beyond a harness to make them work right.
As far as an R3, I recently did the Richard Petty Experience and they use R3 for all drivers probably because it is easy to move from driver to driver. It was comfortable but didn't feel as "protective" as my HANS.
11-03-2005, 04:12 PM
#85
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
John
I don't know which clowns and which idiots and which spitting you are refering to.
I do think this discussion has evolved a bit, and some of it in light-hearted satire. But it's getting at an even bigger issue.
How do you protect the instructors? And what could be done to insure that the student, who in many cases none of the organizers have any idea of the students skill level or mindset. We do know how much horsepower the student has under his right foot. We do know that some the cars they show up in are very unforgiving.
I've been doing track stuff on and off for 15 years. I can't remember a year with this many fatalities.
I know instructors who are talking about giving it up.
These people are volunteers.
Shouldn't their safety be paramount?
I don't think you should get into a car that only has 3 point on your side. I don't think you should ask your volunteers to either.
(FWIW, Chicago region only allows three points to run in the green (lowest) section. I believe it's true for either seat)
I don't know which clowns and which idiots and which spitting you are refering to.
I do think this discussion has evolved a bit, and some of it in light-hearted satire. But it's getting at an even bigger issue.
How do you protect the instructors? And what could be done to insure that the student, who in many cases none of the organizers have any idea of the students skill level or mindset. We do know how much horsepower the student has under his right foot. We do know that some the cars they show up in are very unforgiving.
I've been doing track stuff on and off for 15 years. I can't remember a year with this many fatalities.
I know instructors who are talking about giving it up.
These people are volunteers.
Shouldn't their safety be paramount?
I don't think you should get into a car that only has 3 point on your side. I don't think you should ask your volunteers to either.
(FWIW, Chicago region only allows three points to run in the green (lowest) section. I believe it's true for either seat)
11-03-2005, 04:33 PM
#86
Mr. Excitement
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
From the first post…
“I know that the answer we came up before is that we should not discourage anyone from wearing the safety equipment that they purchased -- that said, personally I would rather the driver assumed the same risk that I am assuming since they asked me to ride in their car.”
This is the part that I had a problem with and I suspect the part that others had problems with as well. I also think that the responses were less guarded as this question was asked recently by the same person in the same forum.
As in the first thread Alan sounds as if he wants the driver to assume the same risk as he is by not using an on hand personal safety device. “I don’t have one so you don’t get one ether” I read his post more than once and have a hard time seeing it any other way. Alan is a good guy, a friend of mine and I have been driving on track with him for years but if this is the case, I feel it is a counterproductive mind set to the student body as a whole. Yes, some of the responses to his volatile question were also volatile or not well though out or productive but they never are in a public forum. Disregard the unsubstantiated and or unproductive posts and look at the good responses that folks posted.
I don’t think many of the regulars around here will disagree about the relative levels of safety obtained from various devices. The fact is that Alan has a choice other than “You take yours off” Regardless of what one race gear seller said and the tenuous reasoning Alan weaves from it, the fact is he has a choice of devices that will enhance his safety in students cars.
He has commented on his discomfort with regards to this very situation in the past and has had ample time to get a device if he chose to. He has not and rather goes on to pen a post that would lead someone to think he is asking for students to remove a personal safety device for no reason other than to be "even".
First time it is a legitimate question. The second time the question itself might need to be questioned…
“I know that the answer we came up before is that we should not discourage anyone from wearing the safety equipment that they purchased -- that said, personally I would rather the driver assumed the same risk that I am assuming since they asked me to ride in their car.”
This is the part that I had a problem with and I suspect the part that others had problems with as well. I also think that the responses were less guarded as this question was asked recently by the same person in the same forum.
As in the first thread Alan sounds as if he wants the driver to assume the same risk as he is by not using an on hand personal safety device. “I don’t have one so you don’t get one ether” I read his post more than once and have a hard time seeing it any other way. Alan is a good guy, a friend of mine and I have been driving on track with him for years but if this is the case, I feel it is a counterproductive mind set to the student body as a whole. Yes, some of the responses to his volatile question were also volatile or not well though out or productive but they never are in a public forum. Disregard the unsubstantiated and or unproductive posts and look at the good responses that folks posted.
I don’t think many of the regulars around here will disagree about the relative levels of safety obtained from various devices. The fact is that Alan has a choice other than “You take yours off” Regardless of what one race gear seller said and the tenuous reasoning Alan weaves from it, the fact is he has a choice of devices that will enhance his safety in students cars.
He has commented on his discomfort with regards to this very situation in the past and has had ample time to get a device if he chose to. He has not and rather goes on to pen a post that would lead someone to think he is asking for students to remove a personal safety device for no reason other than to be "even".
First time it is a legitimate question. The second time the question itself might need to be questioned…
11-03-2005, 04:43 PM
#87
Addict
Rennlist
Lifetime Member
Rennlist
Lifetime Member
Thread Starter
Thanks for the clarification. I can see where I might have confused some with what I said. I never said that person should remove their safety equipment. This was not a student's car but an upper run group instructor's car. The first time that I posted a similar question, it was speculative, the second time was experiential.
11-03-2005, 04:59 PM
#88
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Alan Herod
I appreciate all the well thought out comments. I have been vacillating between one approach and another and the last comment is something that I had heard before. As far as the original story goes, to the point. I said I felt uncomfortable when the driver donned his helmet equipped with his Hahns device. To finish the story -- my discomfort went away as we began the session and the driver demonstrated the advanced skill, poise, and judgement commensurate with his run group (Red). He only increased my confidence in his ability.
I know where you're coming from. At a DE this summer, an out of region instructor asked me to go out with him to work on a couple of corners. When we got into his car, I put on my helmet, and he put on helmet + Hans. When I was sitting there next to the driver, and he's wearing a piece of safety gear I don't have, I was feeling a little under dressed. Not that I didn't trust his driving (it was a very safe and enjoyable run), but it did feel a little weird. Although I would never have asked the driver to remove the Hans, it did get me to get my butt in gear and to review my safety gear/setup. I had an Isaac by the next event (and thanks to Gregg for answering all of my questions about the installation).
11-03-2005, 05:09 PM
#89
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Alan Herod
Thanks for the clarification. I can see where I might have confused some with what I said. I never said that person should remove their safety equipment. This was not a student's car but an upper run group instructor's car. The first time that I posted a similar question, it was speculative, the second time was experiential.
I'm not trying to be a smartass, I just don't really see where you're going with this. Perhaps you were just relaying your feelings about that ride.
11-03-2005, 05:26 PM
#90
Pro
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: DC/Boston
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you guys have swayed me to go and do some H&N research... compared to a wheelchair, cost is obviously not going to be an issue but still a matter of how much of my current equipment i'll have to modify/replace
Some people would view "equal" restraints as a courtesy. I've done that plenty of times in my car while driving in town. When a passenger has a hard time figuring out the belts etc, and we're only driving a few blocks, I leave mine off too. It's stupid and a game of chance, but I feel that it makes them more comfortable and relaxed knowing that I will probably drive with a substantially increased awareness and safety margin.
I think the point was that this particular "red" group session was supposed to be educational in nature, to show the line, where Alan may not have imagined that a driver looking for instruction would be planning on driving at 11/10ths.
A similar approach is taught in motorcycle riding classes. When riding w/ a passenger, it was stressed that they should be dressed *at least* in as much protective gear as the rider, and not in a thong, miniskirt, and high heels. The reasoning is that if the rider is not wearing leathers/gloves/boots, he is as exposed and vulnerable as the passenger and it *will* change his riding style to embrace safer behavior.
Some people would view "equal" restraints as a courtesy. I've done that plenty of times in my car while driving in town. When a passenger has a hard time figuring out the belts etc, and we're only driving a few blocks, I leave mine off too. It's stupid and a game of chance, but I feel that it makes them more comfortable and relaxed knowing that I will probably drive with a substantially increased awareness and safety margin.
I think the point was that this particular "red" group session was supposed to be educational in nature, to show the line, where Alan may not have imagined that a driver looking for instruction would be planning on driving at 11/10ths.
A similar approach is taught in motorcycle riding classes. When riding w/ a passenger, it was stressed that they should be dressed *at least* in as much protective gear as the rider, and not in a thong, miniskirt, and high heels. The reasoning is that if the rider is not wearing leathers/gloves/boots, he is as exposed and vulnerable as the passenger and it *will* change his riding style to embrace safer behavior.