The Invisible Bike Helmet: An Airbag On The Go
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
It is now so common for skydivers to use automatic activation devices (deploys one's reserve canopy if he passes below a certain altitude traveling at least a certain velocity) that many dropzones refuse to allow the use of "rigs" without them installed. I recall being told that, when the Cypres (www.cypres-usa.com) was first introduced, a major marketing feature was that it is not visible to those casually observing the skydiver or his rig. So, a user could avoid the stigma associated with choosing to reduce the risk of death from skydiving. Over time, the culture reversed so that those not using a Cypres were deemed foolhardy.
I should note that I stopped jumping a few years ago, so my information is somewhat out-of-date.
Did you feel that the Cypres encouraged skydivers to become more complacent?
tl;dr; Skydivers traded increased safety levels for newly-found risks.
Glancing at Wikipedia, the higher-performance ones sound like paraglider wings -- more cells, elliptical shape. I guess paragliding wing optimization has come full circle back to skydiving parachutes.
"Are high-performance canopies restricted to certain levels of licensed proficiency?"
Circa 2004 (when my knowledge ends), rules were informal and largely enforced on a case-by-case basis by dropzone owners who didn't want the bad publicity of an inept person splattering himself into the ground. "No Bob, you're not going to jump with that canopy here!"
I do recall the wingsuit manufacturers at least having minimum standards and then asking questions when someone called to purchase one. It also helped that most wingsuits were sold at skydiving conventions where the manufacturer was on-site and could directly assess the buyer's competence. This sort of regulation is quite prevalent in the BASE jumping community where it's even frowned upon for individuals to sell used gear to someone without first assessing competence (or at least the existence of a mentor).
The same happened in motor- and bi-cycle culture.
Obviously, if your reason for doing something (cycling, diving, etc), it to intentionally taunt death, you will eschew safety equipment.
Bike Helmets are reliable and inexpensive. This thing isn't. How about putting it on the bike itself, or on other parts of the wearer's body, so that it works in coordination with the helmet.
So if even one person who won't wear a bike helmet uses this instead, consider it a success.
But then you're messing with natural selection.
Helmets give you helmet hair.
Where do you put them when not using?
Most dead bikers aren't at fault. That's part of the point of the helmet.
Where are you drawing the boundary of Amsterdam? It has ~0.1 the population of NYC, and 0.5 the bike helment death rate.
So, maybe helmets would save lives in Amsterdam (not to mention non-death casualties like paralysis)
I want more people on bikes on the road - makes it safer for me. If they want to ride without helmets, so be it.
(I ride, I wear a helmet, but I'm a dude in lycra, I have no shame)
As to why they chose Helium for this application, it's hard to say. It might mean that they are compressing the gas to very high pressures which would result in liquifaction of other gases, but that's just speculation.
There are no crumple zones in your head. Yes, you do often fall forward or sideways onto the ground, allowing for time to sense the new orientations... but not always. Would it inflate if I broadside a bus (like if the bus ran a red)?
Below quote courtesy http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1824 :
"At the same time, she jerks the manual release on her cervical collar and goes into full Michelin Man mode as tiny gas cartridges detonate in several strategic locations around her bod. The biggest one goes off like an M-80 at the nape of her neck, unfurling the coverall's collar into a cylindrical gasbag that shoots straight up and encases her entire head. Other airbags go off around her torso and pelvis, paying lots of attention to that spinal column."
In most crashes, the forehead and top front of the head strike first. Experts recommend buying a helmet that sits low on the forehead, about one finger-width above the brow.
I can personally attest that even those won't protect your face in certain circumstances. No helmet is perfect.
(here are pics of me. WARNING: blood http://imgur.com/a/UgGTI )
If there's data to prove it's just as safe as regular helmets (which right now aren't tested very well either, if memory serves me correctly the only test required is to drop a weight on the helmet at height) then I might be less critical, but I still think the forehead protection looks a little shoddy on the surface.
I took one to the hand once, I can't imagine taking one to the face or a full on crash.
You don't wear a helmet on your nose, and nose gets a third hole.
EDIT: A quick Googling comes up with a whole suit system by Alpinestars, reported on 2 years ago, and another airbag system made by Dainese from 4-5 years ago, which I think is what I saw. I always wondered if these ever made it into the mainstream, or if they were too expensive or were otherwise unavailable/undesirable for the average motorcyclist.
I'd be much more interested if the system was a fully body airbag that provides additional protection above and beyond a standard helmet.
Looking at a few pictures of these systems inflated (harder to find than you'd think), it doesn't look like they are really "full body". I've always been amused by the idea of an airbag suit that, when triggered, resulted in something like what the Mars rovers used (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbag#Airbag_landing_systems).