AttmfC

Yep I agree. I remember that D3O article you linked to. Empirical data would be the real test here. Here's a video of impact in hockey helmets but again, it's just visual with no data associated. And the 2 helmets tested have different geometries, which I think could result in one cracking independent of the foam. Apparently Poron is being used in multiple hockey and football helmets, but I haven't found any tests of these. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCRObBe3mZw

Anyone? Anyone? Shameless bump, I know. But here are some vid linx: Poron vs EVA foam w/ Forklift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dD0KcHj5NE Test w/ cinder blocks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wBetHX2dO4

I just noticed that Sky Systems is using Poron XRD foam in a couple of their helmets. See youtube vids on Poron XRD - looks pretty impressive. Anyone have personal experience with this foam or these helmets? Sky Systems Edge http://www.chutingstar.com/newgear_en/edge.html Sky Systems CamX http://www.chutingstar.com/newgear_en/camx.html

Nice job dude! And a good reminder to write serial #'s down. Gonna do that as soon as I get my rig back from my rigger. Now go offer a free skydive to the perp for their troubles and push em out of the plane

Sure, enabling theft isn't a good thing. However, if I was Anne (or whoever the rightful owner is) and I was out of communication, I'd sure appreciate any measures someone takes in getting my property back. That would include someone purchasing the property on my behalf or simply notifying everyone as is done here. Good one putting this up here and contacting Mirage. BTW, a "fence" is the middleman between a thief and a buyer - had to look that one up!

I've got a 150 with 4-500 jumps on it. It's never slammed me too hard and rolling the nose or not doesn't seem to make much difference. It's not a nice soft opening like a Spectre or anything, but if you test drive one that doesn't rock you too hard, I think it'd be a good 1st canopy.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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

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?