gbaker

(Slighly OT, for which I apologize a priori.)

10 years from now all harnesses will come standard with a belt connector for a H&N restraint, and all helmets will come standard with a complimentary connector. No one "wears" anything. You get in, you hook up and you go.

The 3-point belt is another matter, though.

MJR911

Kam, Getting the club to pay for H&N restraints is right up there with the "kool aid drinkers" that once took club money to buy a camcorder... citing it as an instructional tool. It was then used to just tape themselves b/c they're too cheap. Why should I pay more for a DE event b/c an instructor is too cheap to buy a restraint? Sort of like guys showing up in a pickup for the tech day to balance tires.

Ok i'm done. Off to the 13 hour.

RJay

Perfectly reasonable. Heres the opposite problem. I bought a Hans for this season and I would be very uncomfortable getting into a car without it now. Its actually kind of wierd as when I first got it, I didn't like wearing it. Now I feel somewhat naked and exposed without it. Fortunately all the instructors I've ridden with lately have harnesses so at least I have the illusion that my Hans is useful in the event of an incident. Not sure I really want to be on track in three points anymore.

RedlineMan

Hey All;

I feel better now. I don't pretend to know who is tryng to throw stones or perhaps just struggling with their phrasing a tad. I didn't catch the previous thread on this topic mentioned. I think it is clear that - regardless of Alan's motivation or point of view - the underlying points that this brings up are quite worthy indeed. They have inspired some good thought here, and that is NEVER a bad thing.

In the end, we obviously need to take care of our instructors. In the same breath, and perhaps on the other side of that coin, our instructors SHOULD be dedicated and intelligent enough to set a good example for the student group as a whole. To be honest, that is the primary reason I got my HANS. After the fact, man... I feel safe with that thing on!

Larry Herman

My view about the H&N device is simple. It's not a permanent piece of safety equipment in the car, so like a helmet or drivers suit, it is up to the individual to decide exactly how "safe" they want to be. The equal restraints rule does not apply to the stuff you bring on your own.

cooz

if i may say....this debate seems silly.
the bottom line here is COMMON SENSE.
we all want to stay safe.

if a driver is concerned enough about his own safety to purchase and use a Hans, he's probably concerned about his car and his passenger as well.

if an instructor is not comfortable with a student, he should make things comfortable or bail out.

if an instructor who normally wears a Hans is driving the students car or his own car with a student passenger aboard....should the instructor leave his Hans in the pits?

the things that determine how fast I'm driving or how fast I'm trying to drive do NOT include Hans. i started wearing a Hans this season, and it doesn't make me drive faster or less safe.

ZBlue996Kam

Mitch:

I'm not suggesting clubs should pay in full for H&N device for instructors.

DE programs in general makes good profit for the clubs. They should be able to help regular instructors to get the device at a reduced price without increasing fees for students.

I think more instructors would buy H&N device if clubs would subsidize like they do with communicators years ago.

Cheap Kam ( I purchased the R3 system with my hard earned money, Woo Hoo)

fatbillybob

I think the question goes beyond HNR's. I think the bar should be raised for general rules to pass tech especially as the horsepower of cars is increasing. I still see race groups that do not require window nets, DE's run with 5 point subs running in front of the OE seat, bolted cages with very questionable hardware,chafed seatbelts, bad cage welds, etc... Personally, I don't like to get into some instructor's dual use cars. I think if you do this stuff you need to "invest" in a certain level of commitment past your first event or two after you see if you like the sport. I can't tell you the number of groups I have run with and how little even the "techs" know about how to safely set-up a car. You would learn more here on the pages of Rennlist about cheap simple safety devices like sidenets etc. than you would at 90% of DE's and that is a shame. I hope you instructors out there would also be confident enough to tell a student that the next safety device they need to look into is a ???? window net, sidenet, HNR etc. I think it is O.K. for an instructor to tell a student, the next event try to get a dedicated race seat so you can properly mount your harness. When you get in a car with 4 year old 5 point belts tell the student next time raise the bar a bit and think about buying a 6 point since your belts expire next year. Many Students do not know what the next level of safety is because the tech rules are minimum standards. Safety is an evolving process for each individual but we need help too and you instructors are usually the highest authority the student has contact with. It took me years to get to the safety level I am now because the information is difficult to find. I think back to what I first did...I was lucky.

mitch236

Here's the rub. Two problems exist.

1) there is a lack of definative information about safety devices as witnessed on these pages.

2) no club, and very few individuals are willing to stick their legal necks out and devise a proper minimum safety requirement that is realistic.

Alpine951

I went through the mail last night and perused through my regions monthly newsletter/magazine. Since this thread is about safety I thought I would post this. Here are 2006 changes by NER PCA for DE:

"In the past we have strongly recommended that appropriate “race seats” (those with proper holes for the pass through of all harness belts) be installed when using 5/6 pt. harnesses. Beginning with the 2006 DE season it is now required that when using 5/6 pt. harnesses proper “race seats” must also be used. This will be incorporated within the pre-tech form. Remember that the “equal restraint” requirements still apply.

Referring to the tech sections above, we allow cabriolets to run with tops down if 5/6 pt. harnesses and arm restraints are used. (In some cases a roll bar is also required.) If those of you with cabs wish to continue driving with your tops down, it is now necessary to install proper “race seats” to accommodate your 5/6 pt. harnesses."


Apparently in the past some have showed up with the sub strap going down over the front of the seat, which was always questionable.

Also SA95 helmets are no longer allowed.

kurt M

It could be argued that this will cause some people to stay with 3 point and not add a 6 point as then the stock seats would have to be removed from the daily driver.

I myself don't like stock seat and 5 or 6 point setups and don't recommend them. 6 point systems don't require the sub hole and I bet when installed well with a stock seat they work better in an impact than the stock 3 point. If we reason that this is the case the rule will produce less safety overall unless the race seat and 6 point system were required not just recommended. Adding a 6 point system is not too hard to do. Driving to and from work every day sitting in a race shell for an hour is.

Again this leads us back to "What is a good limited system?" We can't mandate full systems in DE as then there would be no more DE.

sjanes

Personally, I will not use a harness with a stock seat, 6pt or not. The problem for me is that the seat back forces the shoulder harnesses too far apart. I have narrow shoulders, so the harnesses sit too far out to be of any use. I'm pretty sure they would just dislocate my shoulders as I'm heading out through the windshield.

mitch236

This is wrong. The sub belt is only half the problem, the shoulder harness will NOT be properly located if they have to go around the headrest. Now if the car has a seperate headrest, then an argument could be made about how safe it is.

Just as an aside, why is a 6-point sub better than a 5-point sub if they are coming around the front of the seat and not through a proper race seat hole?

}{arlequin

The first point, in reality, depends on the actual size of the headrest more than anything. If it's a Lay-z-boy seat, then of course it's not located properly. If it's the kind of headrest that sits on two metal prongs then those sometimes can allow shoulder belts to sit even closer together than through harness slots.

RJay

Which is exactly what we in NER intended! I'll preface the followng remarks with all the standard stuff about not knowing what I'm talking about. So feel free to take the following with a grain of salt. However it has been made absolutey clear to me by them that claims to know that using shoulder belts over a stock seat that does not provide guides to position the belts is far worse than retaining the stock safety equipment. In an impact as the drive moves forward the belts will slide downward over the side of the seat, off the shoulders of the driver, who then, in all likely hood will attempt to go through the windshield. So yes, the absolute point of this rule is to retain the stock equipment as, while it might not hold you in the seat in corner, it is designed to properly contain you in the event of an accident. We've been reliably informed that adding 4, 5, or 6 point belts without proper positioning increases the danger, not decreases it and so forthwith, this has been banned. As I'm the incoming VP of Activities for the Region, and given the tragedies we've experienced this year, the decision of our TC has my full support.