Sorry, hemlets again

Tony Raven said:

Actually the best solution is to wear one to protect against minor
knocks and scratches but to use those moments in an big accident where
everything goes into slow motion to take your helmet off and throw it
clear. That's my new strategy anyway ;-)

ROFLMAO!

pk

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 09:54:02 +0100, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

anonymous coward said:

The way I resolve this problem is to wear a helmet 50% of the time.
I'm not sure that this is the best-thought-out solution, though.

Actually the best solution is to wear one to protect against minor
knocks and scratches but to use those moments in an big accident where
everything goes into slow motion to take your helmet off and throw it
clear. That's my new strategy anyway ;-)

You need a helmet ejector system based on airbag technology.

Colin

"Colin Blackburn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:20:54 +0100, Dr Curious <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

With bikes they can't. Bikes are the AK47's of mobility and of
society generally, because for one thing they don't generate
any tax revenues.

I've paid VAT on all the bikes and bike accessories I have bought.

Colin

People who use AK47's only ever need the one.

Excepting for tyres and tubes and the like they may well buy
most of their spares off of Ebay.

What the vendors may chose to factor in, into their minumum
price is up to them. But it isn't particularly noticeable.

The very fact that Future Publishing a leader in the consumer
magazine field chose to launch "Cycling Plus" pays testament
to the fact that cycling is in the midst of a "consumer boom"
at the moment. But that needn't necessarily always be the case
and Future will be the first to cut and run. It also happens to
be rather inconvenient for all concerned, that a well made steel
alloy frame can last for decades, if not centuries. Yet another
twist in the tail.

Curious

....

Nick Drew said:

Quoted message said:

Can I just point out firstly that it's 'helmets'....

Clearly, it /ought/ to be hemlets, and it probably will be here for a while.

Colin Blackburn said:

You need a helmet ejector system based on airbag technology.

As always, Sheldon has the answer:
<url:http://www.sheldonbrown.com/airbag-helmet.html>

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

Dr Curious said:

You missed the point in other words.

ITYM "pointless".

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

burt wrote:

<snipped!>

Excellent work, much appreciated! I've just printed that off to show to
my Dad who insists that I CANNOT buy a mountain bike unless I wear a
helmet. Despite the fact that I'm now 21 😄 !

I guarantee this won't outwardly change his opinion (he's incredibly
stubborn) but it will give him something to think about 🙂 .

Moorish said:

burt wrote:

<snipped!>

Excellent work, much appreciated! I've just printed that off to show to
my Dad who insists that I CANNOT buy a mountain bike unless I wear a
helmet. Despite the fact that I'm now 21 😄 !

I guarantee this won't outwardly change his opinion (he's incredibly
stubborn) but it will give him something to think about 🙂 .

Heh! Not just yours then! My P's are trying to tell me I shoudl go
back to pottering for a couple of miles on my bike, I think, rather than
stonkingly good 50 mile rides (they may have a point, but I'm waiting to
see what the doc reckons to a slight oddity in HR sometimes when I'm out
cycling first!)

--

Velvet

Moorish said:

burt wrote:

<snipped!>

Excellent work, much appreciated! I've just printed that off to show to
my Dad who insists that I CANNOT buy a mountain bike unless I wear a
helmet. Despite the fact that I'm now 21 😄 !

I guarantee this won't outwardly change his opinion (he's incredibly
stubborn) but it will give him something to think about 🙂 .

Oh, I found re helmets and parents (I wear one, but through choice not
pesterization from the P's) it was interesting to see their reactions as
I explained that they actually pretty innefective.

Quite clear they didn't believe me, but then I showed them my helmet (a
specialized) and went through the different materials it was made from
and demonstrated just how thin the 'hard outer layer' is (mere
millimeter, if that) and they realised then just *why* they're likely to
be no help at all... my mother used to ride horses, and knows very well
how decent riding hats are constructed - the outer shell on those is
much thicker and made of hard plastic rather than a very thin skin
(which is flexible, by the way, but the sort that flexes a bit then
shatters) just to make it look nice and give it the appearance of being
hard..

Also, dunno if anyone's aware, but modern horse riding hats are worn
with a cover over them? Not just to make them look pretty apparently,
but if it impacts with a turning force - rotational, I guess, the
surface grips the cover and NOT the hat, the cover being only slipped on
over the hat and not attached to it all over, the idea being I think to
help remove some of the forces involved from acting on the helmet
directly - the cover is ripped off before the helmet shell itself
contacts the ground.

--

Velvet

anonymous coward said:

The way I resolve this problem is to wear a helmet 50% of the time.
I'm not sure that this is the best-thought-out solution, though.

Indeed, it depends which 50% of the time. As 100% of my head injuries
requiring a hospital visit occurred when I was asleep, I'd recommend
wearing one in bed.

A

Colin Blackburn said:

Dr Curious said:

With bikes they can't. Bikes are the AK47's of mobility and of
society generally, because for one thing they don't generate
any tax revenues.

I've paid VAT on all the bikes and bike accessories I have bought.

I see you've not bought a helmet in the last 3 years, then.

A

Nick Drew said:

I'm intrigued - how can helmets be positively dangerous? Are you suggesting
they exacerbate injuries to the head? I agree with the OP in principle that
for kids helmets are not really going to help too much - they're much more
likely to be hit by cars than come a cropper landing head first.

Helmets can easily be positively dangerous. First they increase the
mass of the head making neck injuries from differential accelerations
and rotations more serious. Second they increase the size of the head
making it more likely that the "enlarged head" will hit something and
the increased size means that the contact point exerts a longer lever
arm on the head, increasing the rotation of the head about the neck.
Finally the surface of the helmet, especially with lots of vents, is
more likely to grab on the surface.

Quoted message said:

However, in mtbing I can say that helmets are important. You're much more
likely to, for example, go over the handlebars. A friend of mine did and
landed square on his head. I shudder to think what damage would have been
done had he not had a helmet; as it was he only broke 2 vertebrae.

Landing head first is rarely landing square on your head and actually if
you do the skull protects extremely well and it is an impact that causes
relatively little injury - the so called contra coup injury. Even when
people think they have landed on their head it is almost always a
rotational impact and rotational injuries, to the neck and the brain,
are far more serious. It sounds like your friend may have had exactly
this problem because pile driver effect breaking of vertebrae is much
less likely than breaking from an excessive head/neck rotation.

Quoted message said:

Anyway, as a kind of halo effect, I wear my helmet when just heading round
town, too. Although obviously if I were convinced by reading these posts
that it was ineffective at best, I'd probably stop....

What you do is your decision but if you are riding off road the helmet
does help prevent minor scratches and scrapes from branches etc..

Tony

Colin Blackburn said:

You need a helmet ejector system based on airbag technology.

As usual, Sheldon to the rescue -
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/airbag-helmet.html

Tony

On 16 Jul 2004 12:17:03 +0100, Ambrose Nankivell <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Colin Blackburn said:

Dr Curious said:

With bikes they can't. Bikes are the AK47's of mobility and of
society generally, because for one thing they don't generate
any tax revenues.

I've paid VAT on all the bikes and bike accessories I have bought.

I see you've not bought a helmet in the last 3 years, then.

Ah, I lied it seems. Last week I would have been able to say yes to that.
I did, however, buy a helmet last week as I'm doing this urban adventure
race in Edinburgh this weekend and a helmet is required---my old appears
to have been eaten by a mildew monster. In fact two helmets are required,
cycling and climbing. So, I have bought a zero-rated VAT helmet, probably.
I borrowed a climbing helmet.

Colin

"Ambrose Nankivell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

anonymous coward said:

The way I resolve this problem is to wear a helmet 50% of the time.
I'm not sure that this is the best-thought-out solution, though.

Indeed, it depends which 50% of the time. As 100% of my head injuries
requiring a hospital visit occurred when I was asleep, I'd recommend
wearing one in bed.

Were you still in bed when you acquired your injuries, or did you end up
with the same problem as me? - there's no box for 'injuries sustained while
sleep walking' in the hospital form.

cheers,
clive

Quoted message said:

the idea being I think to
help remove some of the forces involved from acting on the helmet
directly - the cover is ripped off before the helmet shell itself
contacts the ground.

I like. That's clever.

Clive George said:

"Ambrose Nankivell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

anonymous coward said:

The way I resolve this problem is to wear a helmet 50% of the time.
I'm not sure that this is the best-thought-out solution, though.

Indeed, it depends which 50% of the time. As 100% of my head injuries
requiring a hospital visit occurred when I was asleep, I'd recommend
wearing one in bed.

Were you still in bed when you acquired your injuries, or did you end up
with the same problem as me? - there's no box for 'injuries sustained while
sleep walking' in the hospital form.

No, I was out bivouaccing and someone trod on it. I don't think it was
a risk I'd forseen when I was doing the risk assessment, but I wasn't
in charge of the expedition, and the person who was was in complete
deriliction of duty, but still feels the need to lecture on it when
the urge takes her.

A

in message <[email hidden]>, Nick Drew

(') said:

I'm intrigued - how can helmets be positively dangerous? Are you
suggesting they exacerbate injuries to the head?

Yes, they _can_. Whether, and how often, they _do_ is unknown. The
mechanism is increased effective head diameter leading to increased
rotational acceleration leading to rotational injury of the brain.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; When all else fails, read the distractions.

Velvet said:

Also, dunno if anyone's aware, but modern horse riding hats are worn
with a cover over them? Not just to make them look pretty apparently,
but if it impacts with a turning force - rotational, I guess, the
surface grips the cover and NOT the hat, the cover being only slipped on
over the hat and not attached to it all over, the idea being I think to
help remove some of the forces involved from acting on the helmet
directly - the cover is ripped off before the helmet shell itself
contacts the ground.

There is a guy who has designed a motorbike helmet which has an outer
skin that can slide over the inner skin for exactly the same reason.
Can't find a link to it at the moment though

Tony

Stoatboy said:

Quoted message said:

the idea being I think to
help remove some of the forces involved from acting on the helmet
directly - the cover is ripped off before the helmet shell itself
contacts the ground.

I like. That's clever.

Me too. But I can't comment on whether it actually provides any
measureably benefit, not having had time to look into the relevent
physics and try and dig up if any studies have been done.

I've often thought that a cover for a helmet with mesh panels where the
vents are could be a) scotchlight and very visible at night, b) prevent
stinging things entering the vents, and c) might help for the above
reason in an accident. Of course, it might also lead to d) snagging on
branches if you happen to be a MTBer, which would be a Bad Thing, but
possible not as bad as if you snag a helmet vent on a branch.

--

Velvet