|
Post by nrp165 on Apr 23, 2015 21:07:17 GMT 12
Given my circumstances,I've given this a lot of thought. We have a unique problem-and it's onlt going to get worse.The nature of competition means we'll continue to build stronger,better handling cars with more powerful engines.........which increases the loads on the driver beyond safe limits. As far as I can see,the only options are to slow the cars down (control right rear tyre?) or bring the contact rules more in line with UK style racing.
|
|
|
Post by beachboy on Apr 23, 2015 21:15:25 GMT 12
SNZ need to select a range of drivers from stockcars, super stocks and mini stocks and supply them with the head-neck restraint product they want to make mandatory and lets all trial-research it for a season. Costs could be met by sponsorship from suppliers that have a point to prove about their product. It's no good continuing to push for NASCAR or FIA approved-used equipment as those forms of motor sport are completely different, they don’t have rigid solid steel cars being hit into solid concrete walls.
|
|
stevo
Full Member
Posts: 147
|
Post by stevo on Apr 23, 2015 21:34:31 GMT 12
My old car had a racetech seat an i always used a hans device. I had 2 bad kos in that car. The tank i race now has a old chesnut seat thats a big arm chair and i use a hans and a neckbrace. Ive had some massive and way bigger hits in this car and never had so much as a twinge from my head or neck. I say let the individual choose and look into getting rid oof full containment seats. Just my 10 cents worth. Steve gray, 981r
|
|
|
Post by midway on Apr 23, 2015 22:23:24 GMT 12
Experience you just cant buy in the yellow pages shows does it not ,by drivers like Wayne Hemi in superstocks for example after years of racing teams and titles he must get it right when out there racing. Too witness racers of there high standard says does it not how many times do they end up for months or years or come back from injuries received from racing if research is needed like you read on here well these boys show a good example and its not very often if at all they dont go home to there loved ones in one piece after a good nights racing in the sport they like .
|
|
|
Post by beachboy on Apr 24, 2015 9:35:30 GMT 12
If you ever wondered why the cost of our sport continues to spiral, here it is,one do gooder cost at a time, and thats what this is about, self serving do gooders .This so typical of NZ today, I believe therefore I will impose my opinion and my will on everyone else. Minorities rule. There is not one shred of impericle evidence that supports compulsory neck restraints in any class. If you choose to wear one good on you, but don't make it compulsory for everyone else. The horse has bolted on some classes, but leave the rest alone. I’m assuming you mean empirical, and I’m also assuming you have no idea what the word actually means based on your post. Your statement just comes off like rambling rubbish, very much like that raving “jeepers is our savour” lunatic who patrols central Auckland most days. There is actually a lot of empirical evidence that supports the use of head restraints in motorsport. You have all the dummy testing showing the large reduction in neck and head extension, the scientific medical journal from F1 doctors and other trauma specialists. We are globally seeing a large reduction in the injuries the head restraint helps to guard against. Seemly, however, what speedway in NZ is missing is research material that investigates the increased loading on the brain due to the lack of damping of the heads motion. Seemly trending injuries seems to demonstrate the head restraints and containment seats are saving the occasional unlucky driver from broken necks and/or death at the expenses of increase the number of brain injuries. That is going to be very hard material to ever attain by the way. The limit of movement from head restraints has been found to protect people from those injuries, you now have to allow some dangerous movement to help protect the brain from a lifetime of repeated impacts. You’re moving from stopping an injury (such a broken neck, basular skull fracture) to finding an acceptable compromise between the two extremes. That will envoke a lot of ethical issues by experts tasked to find that limit. You’re not going to have sufficient numbers of drivers to get meaningful statistics (which unfortunately would require a higher number of fatalities) to find cutoff point, and even then I heavily suspect the tolerance variation per person will be more than the effective swing between the two injuries. (Personally I think you guys are all nutters anyway ) this is full contact not F1 , F1 drivers might rely on this devise 2 times in there driving career, stock cars drivers 2 times every lap! the F1 research is not relevant to our sport we need to do our own before making changes.
|
|
|
Post by beachboy on Apr 24, 2015 10:39:42 GMT 12
That's all a bit like saying rugby players should start wearing helmets to stop getting KO'd because that's what they wear in the NFL and they have done the research. Yes the sports are similar but not the same.
Our own research needs to be done looking at drivers that do a lot of teams racing and are not getting hurt-injured and what they are using -wearing, We shouldn't be making every driver change what they have safely used year after year because that's what they use in F1 and Nascar. Only a "utter idiot" would do that!
|
|
wiobi
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by wiobi on Apr 24, 2015 12:51:37 GMT 12
What part don’t people understand? The research has been done. Millions of dollars have been spent. It has had conclusive results. No one has died from a basular skull fracture since the introduction of compulsory head restraints in international motorsport. Fact, not opinion.
Yes people have successfully used foam neck braces for many years, but they’re just playing a risky game. A foam neckbrace is simply not a safety device, it is a support device. Look it up. Fact, not opinion.
Impacts – they’re all the same. Yes stockcars don’t have crumple zones, and I agree the impacts are enormous (arguably the biggest in the world), but the same principles apply. You’re being exposed to enormous impulse forces and decelerations, but it’s the same physical action, just to different magnitudes. Fact, not opinion.
Someone who hasn’t got the intelligence to comprehend these facts will just never learn, almost no point trying.
Go SNZ, you’re doing great.
Yours sincerely,
Passionate supporter of science.
|
|
|
Post by sonjahickey on Apr 24, 2015 15:56:33 GMT 12
Wiobi it would appear you are very new to this forum. Just to query, and l stand to be corrected, but l understand that whilst nobody may have died from a basal skull fracture l believe that at least two of the last four competitors who died as a result of an injury on SNZ tracks did so of a brain injury and were wearing head and neck restraints. Also there's been a couple of serious brain injuries recently also who were wearing head and neck restraints. Heavy car helmets, full containment seats, head and neck restraints and more concussion injuries than ever? ? Sonja h
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2015 18:06:22 GMT 12
What part don’t people understand? The research has been done. Millions of dollars have been spent. It has had conclusive results. No one has died from a basular skull fracture since the introduction of compulsory head restraints in international motorsport. Fact, not opinion. Yes people have successfully used foam neck braces for many years, but they’re just playing a risky game. A foam neckbrace is simply not a safety device, it is a support device. Look it up. Fact, not opinion. Impacts – they’re all the same. Yes stockcars don’t have crumple zones, and I agree the impacts are enormous (arguably the biggest in the world), but the same principles apply. You’re being exposed to enormous impulse forces and decelerations, but it’s the same physical action, just to different magnitudes. Fact, not opinion. Someone who hasn’t got the intelligence to comprehend these facts will just never learn, almost no point trying. Go SNZ, you’re doing great. Yours sincerely, Passionate supporter of science. If you were truly interested and passionate about the science you would prefer to invest more time and money into the research required before mandating a certain type of product for our sport. YES - millions have been spent on research and development - but at the same time NO - that research and development has NOT INCLUDED DELIBERATE CONTACT. therefore using my admittadly shakey logic - you cannot use soley the information gathered as it has not included all circumstances and situations that will arise in thier use during deliberate contact racing. I would like to know this - Im reading F1 this and F1 that... is this Brisca F1 you are refferring to or formula 1? if Brisca F1- you guys know they use a mix of devices and braces etc right? They are the closest you can get to our style of racing in the world, the safety gear they use should be the starting point of whats legal here. THEN we research more!
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 24, 2015 19:14:40 GMT 12
A worthy discussion if there ever was one but please focus on the topic not sniping at each other or referring to particular incidents.
|
|
dodge
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by dodge on Apr 25, 2015 7:18:31 GMT 12
Would it be fair to say we have plenty of research happening every weekend, every race, by many driver's. Maybe more time is required to talk to all of these guy's about their take on safety gear, what they use and their reasoning why to get a better understanding first. After going to one of Bernie's seminar's listening to what he had to say and show about seats, helmets, neck restraints, head nets and seat belts and then taking time to evaluate previous experience's in teams and individual racing I have been better equipped to make smarter choices around what gear suits my shape size and weight in the car. This also is not a one size fits all for the chassis type's out there, as they all have different characteristic's in how force is transferred to the driver. After using both, neck collar and restraint on their own and feeling the impact on my body I have my own thought's on what's best for me, but that's me only not what others must do. More education equals better decision making around safety not stipulation.
|
|
|
Post by midway on Apr 25, 2015 9:41:37 GMT 12
In realistic terms in todays world i dont think Snz can come up with a compulsory head and neck restraint from one certain manufacturer ,regardless of the research as quoted needed in many posts What cease,s to amaze some of us is we as a sport allow the best of engineering skills by trades men to build these high tensile rockets ships of many dollars spent ,but hear we are concerned over the safety of those who wish to drive these in teams racing with no holes barred as well in competition The sport has been very unguarded in respect of certain safety for many years ,weve seen and witnessed the results ,but as long as the status quo allow it to continue i see no restrictive remits of great extent ,to contain the growth of faster machinery to hit the track ,the old saying the faster you go the bigger the mess . That is the price you pay ,whether you have the steel sturgeon car seat or a Charlie tractor seat the option should and always be yours as long fits the bill , A compulsory head and neck brace, Is for those who want to race , so if you dont want any pain, Make sure it fits properly and protects the brain,
|
|
|
Post by brendanlucas on Apr 25, 2015 10:59:43 GMT 12
Early on in racing these high impact vehicles, those that tinker with there cars would likely come to realise if you have you're battery placed on the very front of the car, or very rear of the car, you will likely suffer from 'often broken battery syndrome'. Place that battery nearer the centre of the car, & by 'n' large, the problem goes away, no more broken batteries. As we get more powerful cars, we also find the more rear weight we can muster makes the car more driveable, & more often then not the driver finds himself sitting further back to become that added balast. Why would it not be different that the driver is more likely to absorb energy in the same way the battery (or anything) mounted away from the centre of the car. This is one of several reasons I can think of where the relevance of comparing our sport with F1 & NASCAR etc is watered down somewhat. I do believe we would be leading people up a false sense of security path by mandating the neck supports as suggested, & I do not believe the problem will be fixed by its use. BL
|
|
|
Post by nrp165 on Apr 26, 2015 19:17:19 GMT 12
Hi again I firmly believe some form of head restraint should be mandatory..........to prevent overextension of the neck (which by personal experience I can confirm leads to basal skull fracture). Foam neck collars-and I believe the Leatt brace-don't prevent this. I agree that research needs to be done on the best type for our racing..........but needs to be done SOON Vic Neal
|
|
wiobi
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by wiobi on Apr 27, 2015 14:15:04 GMT 12
Rhodsta, please tell me the difference between deliberate contact, and contact, in regards to forces? You cant. Contact is contact, deliberate or not. As I've explained earlier, Impacts – they’re all the same. Yes stockcars don’t have crumple zones, and I agree the impacts are enormous (arguably the biggest in the world), but the same principles apply. You’re being exposed to enormous impulse forces and decelerations, but it’s the same physical action, just to different magnitudes. Fact, not opinion.
Sonja, it's very hard to argue incidents without being able to name the certain incidents. But some of our most recent brain injuries have come after an individual has raced a fair number of consecutive meetings, including teams meetings. Do not under estimate the dangers of cumulative concussions, these drivers are taking huge forces to their brains. No amount of neck restraints will stop this from occurring, but it will help, more so than a $20 piece of foam. I'd also like to see people stop making major modifications to professionally designed and engineered seats. The majority of these people making modifications have no clue about how they should be sitting in their seat, an an incident of late highlighted the dangers of home made modifications.
I do wish SNZ publicly released and highlighted serious incidents, including potential causes, injuries etc. This would give us more of an insight.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2015 15:53:50 GMT 12
Rhodsta, please tell me the difference between deliberate contact, and contact, in regards to forces? You cant. Contact is contact, deliberate or not. As I've explained earlier, Impacts – they’re all the same. Yes stockcars don’t have crumple zones, and I agree the impacts are enormous (arguably the biggest in the world), but the same principles apply. You’re being exposed to enormous impulse forces and decelerations, but it’s the same physical action, just to different magnitudes. Fact, not opinion. ... At what point did you differentiate between deliberate contact and accidentaly contact? You did not. But that is beside the point - I agree in regards to the forces involved being the same - if not greater in deliberate contact, to accidental contact. However the fact remains that there are large gaps in the R&D that has produced the head and neck restraints currently being used. They are developed for non contact racing - this being the most prominent form of racing worldwide - and while they take into account a large number of angles of impact and forms of impact in regards to accidents they do NOT take into account constant deliberate and repeated impacts over a large period of time as is found in OUR racing. F1 drivers throw away their devices after an incident of get them recertified... so do Nascar drivers so do V8 supercar drivers So do many other forms of racing.. yet in major accidents we do not - not because we cant but because of what we deem to be a major accident. on hansdevice.com/FAQ.html i found this = When should I replace my HANS Device?
Unless it saves your life in a major wreck you may never have to replace your HANS Device.
Keep the device away from sunlight as this attacks the high performance resins used.
How do I care for my HANS device?
HANS Devices need almost no maintenance but should be kept clean and dry.
Tethers are dated. Replace every 5 years, after major impacts or sooner if wear is observed.
Extreme hot or cold environments should be avoided and they should be kept away from petroleum products and other corrosives as these can affect even the strongest composite materials and resins.
To protect them, HANS Devices should be stored out of direct sunlight. They may be cleaned with soapy warm water.
What if my HANS Device is in an impact?
HANS Devices are one of the strongest parts of your safety gear but should be inspected periodically or after major impacts. Tethers should be replaced after any major impact.
Examine your HANS Device visually and run your finger around the edges. Any sign of de-lamination or surface cracking and exposed composite material means the device has served its purpose and should be replaced.
Even the most thorough inspection can fail to detect damage. This is one of the reasons that we do not resell used devices, and we do not recommend that anyone buy a used device. If in doubt about the integrity of a HANS Device it should be replaced.So judgng by that lot - after every teams race every HANS device should be re-inspected by the driver and tethers replaced regardless. And the same goes everytime we have a rollover or a serious impact with the wall. These being considered serious accidents in any other form of racing! How often does this happen in our sport? ... No amount of neck restraints will stop this from occurring, but it will help, more so than a $20 piece of foam. I'd also like to see people stop making major modifications to professionally designed and engineered seats. The majority of these people making modifications have no clue about how they should be sitting in their seat, an an incident of late highlighted the dangers of home made modifications. agreed - never seen a neckbrace for $20 before - would like to know where you did! and agreed.
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Apr 27, 2015 17:41:11 GMT 12
Hi again I firmly believe some form of head restraint should be mandatory..........to prevent overextension of the neck (which by personal experience I can confirm leads to basal skull fracture). Foam neck collars-and I believe the Leatt brace-don't prevent this. I agree that research needs to be done on the best type for our racing..........but needs to be done SOON Vic Neal Re Leatt, my studies of these and others in consultation with my Dr's opinions (as I suffered a c2/c3 accident) led us to using the moto R and now have 3. Have been in a rear end write off wearing one, with no drama to previous neck injury what so ever (the impact was enough to split my bladder) I will vouch for these all the way.
|
|
|
Post by nrp165 on Apr 27, 2015 18:53:46 GMT 12
Fair enough,tank.......but if it doesn't prevent neck overextension,an impact like mine will break your neck (which is one way of describing a basal skull fracture)
|
|
|
Post by bigsparknz on Apr 27, 2015 19:30:24 GMT 12
not sure you can still get the leatt moto r (I wish I had not sold mine) any more as they stopped making it they were upgraded before they stopped had straps which attached to the helmet like a hans, but it has now been replaced by the MRX Pro which looks very similar to a hans
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Apr 28, 2015 7:50:19 GMT 12
not sure you can still get the leatt moto r (I wish I had not sold mine) any more as they stopped making it they were upgraded before they stopped had straps which attached to the helmet like a hans, but it has now been replaced by the MRX Pro which looks very similar to a hans Yes ours have the tethers, and no none for sale.
|
|