helmet theory

[AttmfC 0]

I haven't seen this discussed in detail so I thought I'd bring it up.

In a sport with such a large number of safety standards, gear and protocols, why is helmet popularity driven by performance over safety?

In my opinion, it's clear that bulky (ugly) and heavily padded helmets offer more noggin protection than sleek composite lids with fuzzy linings. I.e., thick padding = safer when your head contacts an object. Unless of course, the bigger profile would lead to a reasonably increased risk of snags.

An argument against more protection could certainly be that few fatalities are due to massive head trauma, but an extra measure of protection is an extra measure after all.

I know that many of our decisions are based on ration, many are not. Is this one based on irrational thought?

Whatcha think?

[Remster 24]

Quote

I haven't seen this discussed in detail

It has been. Several times. Over and over.

Remster

[AttmfC 0]

link? maybe my searching skillz aren't as good as yours?

[phoenixlpr 0]

Got ahead and jump a certified helmet. You might get the nickname of Lord Helmet .

[dorbie 0]

A key measure of helmet performance is safety. Now if you had said aesthetics....

[AttmfC 0]

Quote

A key measure of helmet performance is safety. Now if you had said aesthetics....

I guess what I meant by performance is mostly aerodynamics, # audible pockets / camera mount spots, how quiet it is, etc. But yep, aesthetics too. Things that don't really factor in to protecting your head if you hit something.

[AttmfC 0]

Quote

Got ahead and jump a certified helmet. You might get the nickname of Lord Helmet .

certified? are any of the popular jump helmets certified? i don't think i've ever noticed a dot or snell or whatever cert sticker on any, at least not the sweet expensive composites i've had.

[Olmed 0]

Quote

I haven't seen this discussed in detail so I thought I'd bring it up.

In a sport with such a large number of safety standards, gear and protocols, why is helmet popularity driven by performance over safety?

In my opinion, it's clear that bulky (ugly) and heavily padded helmets offer more noggin protection than sleek composite lids with fuzzy linings. I.e., thick padding = safer when your head contacts an object. Unless of course, the bigger profile would lead to a reasonably increased risk of snags.

An argument against more protection could certainly be that few fatalities are due to massive head trauma, but an extra measure of protection is an extra measure after all.

I know that many of our decisions are based on ration, many are not. Is this one based on irrational thought?

Whatcha think?

Sounds like you are even more bored than I am...Blue skies!

[Remster 24]

Quote

link? maybe my searching skillz aren't as good as yours?

Your search-fu is weak, grasshopper. This is the last ones I can remember... But there are more.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3675890;search_string=3do;#3675890

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4111596;#4111596

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3805206;search_string=3d0;#3805206

Remster

[AttmfC 0]

Gracias, those links help.

But I guess the question I'm really getting at is is why we are choosing what we choose. Does the fact that composites are (arguably) the most popular mean that in general we aren't as worried about major hits to the head and would rather sacrifice protection for other factors?

For example, I use different motorcycle or bike helmets depending on my perceived risk (and usually these helmets aren't as expensive, so I have the luxury of having many) - I generally use a more protective helmet if I think the risk of needing more protection is greater. But every now and then I use a less protective one even when the risk is greater, simply because I choose performance/aesthetics/comfort over protection. Mostly, my decisions are rational, but sometimes not.

Seeing a couple guys with brand new protecs at the DZ got me thinking about tossing the Mindwarp and settling for the less desirable, if "safer" alternative...

What do you use? What is your decision based on?

[Remster 24]

Quote

But I guess the question I'm really getting at is is why we are choosing what we choose. Does the fact that composites are (arguably) the most popular mean that in general we aren't as worried about major hits to the head and would rather sacrifice protection for other factors?

This is exactly what is discussed in some the the treads we had before.

Remster

[Tatetatetate 0]

Meh I use a hang gliding helmet, it has all sorts of EC numbers on it and compared to Protecs which I was using before it is MASSIVE and adds about half an inch to my already melon on a tooth pick sized head...

But I'm ok with it esp when I bounced off the side of the plane and it left a fairly deep scratch in the side.

[peek 20]

Quote

But I guess the question I'm really getting at is is why we are choosing what we choose. Does the fact that composites are (arguably) the most popular mean that in general we aren't as worried about major hits to the head and would rather sacrifice protection for other factors?

It is the "cool-factor", and skydiving has a lot of it. Yes, people are willing to give up better protection to be more cool. I have no idea why.

Me, I'm on my third ProTec. I get a new one when the inside of the older one gets so disgustingly dirty that people comment on it.

Actually, I lost my last one because after 30 years of remembering to always snap the chin strap, I forgot once. (But it was getting dirty anyway.)

[JerseyShawn 0]

I wear a Protec, can't see paying for more for something doing the same protection wise or less.

Anyone ever add the http://www.paragear.com/templates/parachutes.asp?group=4&level=1 para rescue liner to theirs? Worth it? More comfortable? Decrease the inside volume?(scroll down the link)

[ripcord4 0]

Better to be cool-looking with no/marginal "helmet" and brain-damaged/dead than to be caught wearing a real helmet that will do you some good in the event of a serious head-banging.

[floormonkey 0]

I jump an Icaro Fly. After much research, it seems to be the best helmet for protection outside of a motorized sport helmet. Weighs ~12 grams, not too bulky.

http://www.icaro2000.com/Products/Helmets/Free-flight-models.htm

It wasn't cheap ($~180), but it's cheaper than most of the "cool" skydiving helmets. I ordered it from them directly because I found the only US dealer to be unresponsive.

The next best helmet is probably the Simpson Pole Vaulting Helmet, but I couldn't really get any reviews or info on it. It also has no vents, making warm plane rides even warmer.

http://simpsonraceproducts.com/products/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=578_579&products_id=9146

Previous to this helmet, I jumped a Burton Trace Red helmet.

Different helmets for different sports have protection in different areas of the helmet. Downhill skiing has full 360 protection.

A $20 Protec will give you more impact protection than most (if not all) of the high-end skydiving helmets.

PS-it's not the thickness of the padding but rather the substance of the padding.

[floormonkey 0]

about hang gliding/paragliding helmets: Some very experienced people believe the ones with the wierd shape at the back (for increased aerodynamics) can actually make the helmet less safe in some instances. The idea is any rotational event would accelerate or increase due to the increased profile. On the Icaro page linked in the post before, some examples of this style are the 4fight and Cut3.

[DBlank 0]

No helmet: closed casket;
Standard Skydiving helmet: open casket;
pro-tec: possibly no casket;

"Do you really want to take advice from the guy we call Tarmac?"

[LouDiamond 1]

Cut and pasted from OTHER threads on this topic:




The bigger issue here that is probably an unknown to the average skydiver is that in order to build a helmet that does what you are asking from it, requires that it be bigger/bulkier than what people want because they want to look cool. It also involves a fairly large amount of money on the mfgrs part to conduct the required testing to actually produce a helmet that meets the safety standards commonly used for helmets designed against impacts. That cost alone outweighs the money that would be made in selling everyone in the USPA that skydives one of those helmets after the certification.


The other fact is that the incident of TBI related to skydiving specifically is probably non existent to extremely low. There are helmets out there that can provide a level of protection but the gritty reality of it is that most incidents where skydivers are impacting the ground, deceleration of the brain is not the only trauma being suffered by the body. A pro-tec is a good choice and if you want to get a level higher,an HGU-55 Gentex helmet does have a styrofoam crush liner in it and is considered both noise and impact attenuating. But , as I said earlier, most people don't want to look like Marvin the Martian.


If you want to make the average pro-tec better, you can buy an upgrade kit from Oregon-Aero that increases the protection/impact better than the OEM foam. However, it doesn't dramatically increase the protection and it pretty much blows for comfort when it is hot/cold as the temperature affects the pads.



And one more:


To give you an idea of what some of the difficulties are in producing a helmet the size and shape of the common skydivers helmet that is impact attenuating, take a look at a recent study for padding used in Military and pro football helmets and the issues they are attempting to overcome. It is quite dry but if you read just the executive summary you might get the jist. For those who want more info, it's further in the report and a table of contents is included at the front of the document. Enjoy.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/53423453/PadReport-Final


PS: yes, it does address impacts and not just IED/explosive TBIs.



Snip:



I'll say it again, it's economics primarily with style coming in closely behind that is preventing skydiving helmet manufacturers from developing(certifying) and selling an impact attenuating helmet. It is cost prohibitive for the manufacturer and the consumer both.

If we were seeing head injuries like we are seeing canopy collisions in this sport I am sure people's attitudes would change about what was a "cool" helmet and what they are willing to pay for a helmet that protected them. Unfortunately, that's not the case and most people want a helmet for small bumps in the aircraft,an occasional foot to the head in freefall as well as a platform to hold cameras/Neptunes or against cold weather.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[AttmfC 0]

floormonkey - thanks for the links. The Icaro Fly wasn't even on my radar til now.

LouDiamond - thanks for the snips. A few years ago you mentioned in a post that you give high props to the M3T or Oregon Aero upgrade kits for existing helmets. Latest thoughts on those?

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

floormonkey - thanks for the links. The Icaro Fly wasn't even on my radar til now.

LouDiamond - thanks for the snips. A few years ago you mentioned in a post that you give high props to the M3T or Oregon Aero upgrade kits for existing helmets. Latest thoughts on those?

The M3T has changed significantly so given the model in which I believe you are referring to as with all the current helmets out there, to include approved helmets, if your head is hitting the ground hard enough, you have other trauma induced injuries to your body to be more concerned with. The Oregon Aero does increase the protection of ProTecs but the comments about it that I mentioned above still apply.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Mickochet 0]

Last year I broke my femur and pelvis on a jump. I was wearing my Oxygen helmet which ended up with several cracks in it from the impact of hitting the ground. I also knocked one of my front teeth out. While skydiving helmets don't offer the same level of impact protection as a motorcycle or similar helmet I firmly believe that I would have sustained some kind of head trauma if I had not had my helmet on.

If you never fall down you aren't trying hard enough.