Gas up - Let's Go! Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 So whats your thoughts on this ?? http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technolo...000/7886427.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 GREAT idea IMHO. These are already used by professional motorcycle riders in races and have proved to be EXTREMELY effective. I did a research project 2 years ago into motorcycle safety and in my paper i included the effectiveness of these jackets. Honda Goldwings already have airbags built into them Im not sure why you think its "nanny state" though because anything that helps save a life and/or limb in the event of an accident can only be a good thing. I would prefer to roll down the road on airbags and potentially walk away rather than roll down the road on every bone in my body which may prove fatal........................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gas up - Let's Go! Posted February 13, 2009 Author Share Posted February 13, 2009 Im not sure why you think its "nanny state" though because anything that helps save a life and/or limb in the event of an accident can only be a good thing. That's very true, but when things become complusory, it errodes an individuals choice. Where something can protect a 3rd party then that's good, after all it's not thier fault if they are involved (OK , so some idiot steps out in front of yuo without looking is, but you know what I'm getting at), but falling off and rolling down the road is going to hurt YOU, it is unlikely to hurt the truck/car/lampost etc that stops you rolling. Personally, I like to cover al angles and reduce the risk as best I can - but there are two sides to risk reduction, prevention and protection, and often over protection can lead to a loss in prevention. Here's a very extreme example, but it shows the point I'm trying to make :-> If you tell a new motorcycle rider to wear top to toe body armour, neck brace, knee braces etc, then ask him to carry out an emergency manouver, such as the one in the new motorcycle test he is going to find it much more difficult than if he had free moving clothing. Another example, ABS - since it's introduction how many drivers know how to avoid a skid in a non-ABS vehicle ?? Not controll a skid, but avoid. When safety devices are introduced it's human nature to push the limits a bit more, relying on the device to 'save' you. When these sort of things become compulsary, the prices become less competative, the only loosers are the motorcyclist. I have no issue with this type of equipment, and if the quality was right (such as keeping me dry, warm and comfortable) then I would consider it, my beef would be when someone in Whitehall decided it was what I should do, based on statistics (Lies, dammed lies and statistic - Wiston Churchill). Hence, Nanny State ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 Ahhhh gotcha - i couldnt see that in your OP! I agree with you though -it should be a choice, not compulsory. Theres also the flip side - inflating these things when you're spinning through the air and you neck happens to be at a funny angle can also have dire conseqeunces. They have been proven to be effective in REDUCING potential fatalities, but yes, you are quite right, it should be personal choice. Incidentally, riding a motorcycle in a knee brace and neck brace is THE most uncomfotable thing ever lol, even the ones they supply for motocross aren't great. And if you have a brace of any sort you need to know that its the right one for the injury/protection you need , and to make sure it fits properly else it will end up causing more, often irreversible damage - had a lecture on bracing yesterday *yawn* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator mervin Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 Fed Hill got rest his soul is spinning in his grave i reckon, here we come mr bibendum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ttaskmaster Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I salute Gas Up for so concisely voicing an opinion that I feel reflects the absolute truth!! "I was doing about 130mph (210km/h), the rear wheel suspension failed on my motorcycle and I came off" 130mph, eh......... Guess how much I care? Im not sure why you think its "nanny state" though because anything that helps save a life and/or limb in the event of an accident can only be a good thing. Like the 'safety cameras'? Like the myriad road signs, such as the ones telling you the maximum speed you can take a corner at? Like the leg-protector panels, the seat belts, the roll cages and all the other insane add-ons that MAG successfully campaigned against? If Da Guv'mint has their own way, the easiest way to make motorcycling safe is to ban them altogether. The ONLY thing that causes so many crashes out there, regardless of vehicle type, is the human in control of the vehicle(s) concerned. Rarely does an accident happen where the human(s) could not have done something to prevent or avoid it. The occasional unpredictable mechanical failure or freak incident. The rest will have been preventable by the driver(s). The best way to make road use a lot safer and reduce casualties is to remove ALL safety features and teach people how to drive/ride properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 Like the 'safety cameras'? Like the myriad road signs, such as the ones telling you the maximum speed you can take a corner at? Like the leg-protector panels, the seat belts, the roll cages and all the other insane add-ons that MAG successfully campaigned against? Nope - cos none of them have been tested to the hilt - so much so that its a FACT that these do actually help prevent fatalities and serious injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ttaskmaster Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I'm sure that, if the government wants to enforce something, it will have been 'scientifically proven' in 'tests' that 'show' a 'significant reduction' in fatalities...... .....Just like that Mayor's Report that 'showed' how letting bikes in bus lanes actually increased dangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 I'm sure that, if the government wants to enforce something, it will have been 'scientifically proven' in 'tests' that 'show' a 'significant reduction' in fatalities...... .....Just like that Mayor's Report that 'showed' how letting bikes in bus lanes actually increased dangers. Having researched this myself for 2 years - i can safely say it is effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gas up - Let's Go! Posted February 13, 2009 Author Share Posted February 13, 2009 so much so that its a FACT that these do actually help prevent fatalities and serious injuries. Under test conditions. The human body cannot survive a dead stop at any speed greater than, I'm going to say 30mph, but it's fractionally less (OK in a former live I worked in an enviroement with a dynamic rigg, the thing they test seatbelts on) as your insided will exude through your rib cage. So these will act like a sort of crumple zone in certain acidents, but the statistics are just a blanket view and don't cover off the different sorts of acidents, when are we going to see these expanded out? then we can begin to make statements about what will and what will not work. These jackets aren't going to work when the truck runs over you, when you go head first into the side of the car that's pulled out, when you go through a hedge etc etc I'd like to see some opening up of the stats to say how many of the 20% of the road acidents would be have reduced effect with these jackets - the truth is we never will. I'm getting out of my depth with this one, but in my youth I rode moutain bikes, properly - up and down mountain (well you can't ignor them around here!) and in my many falls, the ones where you are tensed up hurt the most, when you fall ragdole fashion you normally walk away laughing - So why is it good to basically immobilise the whole body with these jackets ? I think what I'm trying to say is one size does not fit all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 These jackets aren't going to work when the truck runs over you, when you go head first into the side of the car that's pulled out, when you go through a hedge etc etc They significantly REDUCE the risk of serious injury and/or death - take the story of a rider in Pensylvannia being saved by his air bag jacket. Joseph McPhatter was wearing an "Impact Jacket" while riding on the interstate. He was hit by a car while travelling at speeds and reportedly went 100 feet through the air before hitting the ground. He walked away with only minor injures and no broken ribs. STORY HERE I'm getting out of my depth with this one, but in my youth I rode moutain bikes, properly - up and down mountain (well you can't ignor them around here!) and in my many falls, the ones where you are tensed up hurt the most, when you fall ragdole fashion you normally walk away laughing - So why is it good to basically immobilise the whole body with these jackets ? I think what I'm trying to say is one size does not fit all. You are not immobilising the body - merely providing a cushion for it upon impact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ttaskmaster Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I'm sure the airbags are a good idea, but there's no substitute for driving skill. Secondly, I can't afford a jacket like this. Heck, I only just have an armoured jacket because it was reduced from £180 to £30 as End Of Line stock. As Gas said, if these become law then I'm hanging up the bike leathers (except for special nights with the other half) and getting a nice, safe, protected APC. I won't be able to afford to ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 I'm sure the airbags are a good idea, but there's no substitute for driving skill. Secondly, I can't afford a jacket like this. Heck, I only just have an armoured jacket because it was reduced from £180 to £30 as End Of Line stock. As Gas said, if these become law then I'm hanging up the bike leathers (except for special nights with the other half) and getting a nice, safe, protected APC. I won't be able to afford to ride. The we need to do something Like this: Click HERE Enter your postcode. Copy and past the letter below, putting in the correct names. Dear Mr XXXX, This morning there was an article on the radio about new airbag jackets that are available for motorcyclists. I have put the details of the article and jackets at the end of this letter for your information. As someone who regularly commutes by motorcycle, I was very interested in this article, but when I investigated the jackets I was shocked to discover that they cost around £600! At this price, it is obvious that there will be few people who will actually buy and use them, and many people will simply be unable to afford one. My current jacket, which will protect me from abrasion, and contains a back protector, elbow and shoulder armour, cost a mere £75. Based on the information contained within the article, if every motorcyclist was to wear such a jacket, then there would be a dramatic reduction in serious injuries and associated deaths. This reduction would be noticed by the NHS as a major cost saving. Therefore, simply based on the cost saving to the NHS, never mind the saving in human suffering and deaths, I feel that it would make sense for the government to subsidise the cost of these jackets in order to encourage motorcyclists to make use of this wonderful safety device. As the jackets are a valuable safety item, at the very least, they should be made exempt from VAT. I would be very grateful if you would raise these points with the relevant people and departments, and push for a government subsidy, along with a VAT exemption. Yours sincerely, XXXXXXXXX Details of the article and jackets: The jackets are the equivalent of car air bags and inflate if the rider is thrown off during a crash. The Department of Transport said it had no plans to make them compulsory but said it welcomed anything to improve safety. Although motorcyclists make up just 1% of road users, they account for 20% of fatalities. Figures for 2007 show that 561 bikers died on the roads, according to the BBC. Andy Parfitt, an A&E doctor at St Thomas' Hospital in London, said: "There is a shocking number of deaths of motorcyclists on the roads. I think dozens of lives could be saved if these jackets were made compulsory." Dr Parfitt, a keen biker, said: "There's no question that what the jackets do afford is, they protect a motorcyclists' vital organs, neck and spine over and above the level that a normal jacket would do. "A majority of deaths in motorcycle accidents are due to injuries to these vital organs that should be protected by these jackets." The BBC article is available here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technolo...000/7886427.stm Details of jackets are here: http://www.heliteuk.co.uk/index.html http://www.grandprixlegends.com/motorcycle...cket-black.html http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/new...ble-from-march/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator drewpy Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 I've just averted being killed on the roads today, by not riding my bike or going outside at all! now that can be a proven fact and is 100% effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 I've just averted being killed on the roads today, by not riding my bike or going outside at all! now that can be a proven fact and is 100% effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabby Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 personally i say to hell wi the lot of these so called statistics, i wanna ride my bike in a t shirt and trainers and nothing else so i can get loads of women ogling my botty as i go by. if i want to ride without a helmet i should be able to then it would be up to me, im absolutely sick to the back teeth of so called do gooders telling me what i can and cant do just because 'they' think its right. i'm an adult and as an adult i should be allowed to decide for myself. i choose to wear a helmet and all the rest but if i had the choice i'd feel a whole lot better. i pay tax on everything i earn and everything i purchase, i pay nat. insurance and i pay council tax so the nhs as far as i'm concerned should stop whining about having to do their job. so it costs money to treat me if i fall off but it costs a damn sight less than the amount of smoking related illnesses that clog up the hospitals and the gov are the ones who allow smoking in fact the reason they dont ban it is because of the revenue it provides them so they can pay themselves extortionate and obscene amounts of wages. when does it stop? when they ban bikes? f**ck*ng w*nk*rs can all go f*c* themselves as far as im concerned and theres no way i'm wearing an air bag government provided jacket if it comes to the point that its compulsary im going to give up biking, something i've been doing since i was 14. grrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 i pay tax on everything i earn and everything i purchase, i pay nat. insurance and i pay council tax so the nhs as far as i'm concerned should stop whining about having to do their job. What an absolutely ridiculous thing to say Its not about the NHS "whining about doing their job" its about people taking a step back and looking at the options. No one has said this WILL be compulsory - and i quote "The Department of Transport said it had no plans for a new law but said it welcomed anything to improve safety" The option is there if you want it - there is your CHOICE If you CHOOSE not to wear safety gear thats up to you but no one is forcing these jackets on anyone. Its not about costing money to treat you if you come off either -again its about showing you the choice you have. And if you wanna ride your bike in shorts and T-Shirt, then go for it - im sure you'll have plenty of time to reflect on you "choice" once you're either dead or looking at your prosthetic limbs............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabby Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 ha ha ha i thought that would've brought a deluge of comments but so far as i can tell everyone agrees with me. most of that was tongue in cheek goff but it was ridiculous, im all for anything that stops us getting killed or seriously maimed, hell, i dont want my boy growing up missing his dad but you have to admit some of the stuff 'they' come out with is far from sensible. in all fairness i saw the test of these jackets before on mcn and the bloke that ditched the bike to test it walked away, unharmed and still in one piece. not so much can be said about the nice bike he threw up the road though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Goff Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 ha ha ha i thought that would've brought a deluge of comments but so far as i can tell everyone agrees with me. most of that was tongue in cheek goff but it was ridiculous, im all for anything that stops us getting killed or seriously maimed, hell, i dont want my boy growing up missing his dad but you have to admit some of the stuff 'they' come out with is far from sensible. in all fairness i saw the test of these jackets before on mcn and the bloke that ditched the bike to test it walked away, unharmed and still in one piece. not so much can be said about the nice bike he threw up the road though. Thank fuck for that Im sorry but the t-shirt, jeans and trainers brigade REALLY piss me off lol = hence my reaction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator YamaHead Posted February 13, 2009 Moderator Share Posted February 13, 2009 If these Airbags are anything like the one's you see in cars.......they'll go off like a bomb when deployed. & more than likely cost a 2nd mortgage to get 'em re-packed. The day I quit riding is the day that some ridiculous governing body decides to require seat belts on a bike! Let's hope that day NEVER comes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts