Good thing we're all friends here, Doug...LOLOriginally Posted by Doug Carter
When this gets to the point of fighting, time to move on.
Good thing we're all friends here, Doug...LOL
When this gets to the point of fighting, time to move on.
Fuel cells adding 0.005% to safety.
When was the last time one saw a major fire fire in a race car. Most have been caused by swaged fittings. To quote a previous post.
It is that mentality that causes the rest of us to suffer from the consequences of the behavior of a small group. Such as those who ride a motorcycle with no helmet.
It doesn't take much of a bump on the head to do serious damage.
It doesn't take much of a bump to bust a metal tank so that it leaks and Kaboom.
Why are there so few major race car fires. Could it be because of the mandate for fuel cells and the containment of the fuel they provide.
Look at how many Indy Car and NASCAR and SCCA racers were seriously burned or died from major fuel fires when the tanks ruptured.
And look at Scott Brayton, Jovy Marcelo and Gonzalo Rodriguez (sp).
All died in what should have been walk away accidents. The just right impact at just the right angle and Basal Skull fracture or in simple terms the neck stretches to the point that the blood vessels feeding the brain rupture and instant death. Pne does not have to be traveling 200mph head on into a solid object to get that injury. I seem to recall reading that about 30mph at the right conditions could do the trick.
Can anyone name a driver at any level who has died from a basal skull fracture in a series that mandated HNR's.
Can anyone name a driver who burned to death since fuel cells were mandated?
Anyone remember anybody suffering serious lower arm injuries from arms flailing about since arm restraints were mandated (Mac McClellan did in a sprint car race at IRP years ago, but he by his own admission had very old ones on and had a new set in the trailer).
Point is: Racing can get you hurt. But that does not mean that all possible reasonable measures to prevent / minimize the posssibility should not be taken.
Just one major injury could easily cost many many dollars given the litigous society we live in and who do you think would pay for that?
Rant over
AGREE with your rant.
Last bad one I was 'involved' with as a worker was 2 years ago.
RX-7 driven by a 40 year vetern of the sport went up a bank, hit a tree stump and flew 20 feet in the air over a downhill section. Came down HARD on his tail rupturing the ATL fuel cell (almost folded it in half), went up in the air and did 2 endos coming down on his nose. Slid down the track on his roof stopping smack in front of a turn station ON FIRE big time. Worker were on the fire in a flash and E-crew showed up fast. Lead E-crew guy crawled into the upside down cockpit to help the driver while flaming gasoline was still flowing down into the cockpit.
Driver was extracted unconscious and Life Flighted out within 20 minutes of the crash with EXCELLENT aid prior to departure.
ALL of us workers agree that a KEY to the drivers survival in this horrific crash was his HANS device (no question of it). Injury's were bad but no basal skull fracture.
P.S.
If the fuel cell foam hadn't kept the flow of gas to a 'reasonable' level there's NO way we could have suppressed a complete dump of fuel with hand extinguishers. Went through 3 water bottles and 4 chemicals fighting it and keeping it knocked down before fire suppression truck arrived. The drivers behind the incident stopped and helped with their chem bottles.
P.P.S.
Before we could even restart the event, one of our starters had a heart attack. He wasn't wearing a HANS but did survive after being resusitated twice at the track by our exceptional E-crew personel before his ambulance ride.
After that day, I concluded that the best place to have a heart attack is at an ICSCC race. We have about 1 or 2 a year and EVERYONE has survived!
Last edited by rickb99; 12.25.09 at 1:29 AM.
CREW for Jeff 89 Reynard or Flag & Comm.
For clarification Doug, the SFI doesn't test HNR's. So, HANS are not mandatory and SFI doesn't test HNR's.
ISAAC was around before the members of the SFI, which include competitors of the ISAAC company, drafted the 38.1 standard. Standards which, by specifying the design parameters instead of soley performance standards, excluded the ISAAC device from being approved.
ISAAC could either join them and work to change the standard, or join them and change their device, or do neither and try to change the system.
I think your thin patience for the "ISAAC drones" and your differences with Gregg Baker have clouded your ability to see how the SFI works and what it does and doesn't do for its' members.
I do agree with you that this new rule shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. The writing has been on the wall for some time. I sold my ISAAC more than a year ago, when I felt I could do so in good faith and still get a decent price. Knowing the buyer could likely use it for at least a couple of seasons, while at the same time should have been aware of the writing on the wall.
I'm disapointed that ISAAC didn't work harder to affect a change in the system.
I'm disapointed that there isn't an unbiased third party who would write the standards AND test the devices. Instead we have to rely on the foxes to watch the henhouse.
Time for me to get ready to take Grandma to church. Merry Christmas to all!!!
Joe,
Unfortunately, for all of us who wish to make informed decisions, we must rely on data supplied by the manufacturers themselves (including ISAAC LLC). This isn't in defense of the ISAAC or accusatory towards anybody else, it's a statement of facts. Jim Lil has done a tremendous job getting much of the information out there in one area for all of us study. Unfortunately, it's still data supplied by the manufacturers selling us devices, not, unbiased third parties.
Okay, now I really need to get ready to take Grandma to church. Merry Christmas!!
There is not doubt that ISAAC is a good functional idea, but there is no way I want my head attached to the car, when I am unconscious, some corner worker is frightened trying to get me out (car on fire/etc), and they have to fumble around with two additional releases they are likely to not realize are present at first.
Great idea, but need to have a way out of the car with one press of the button.
As a physician, I can say H&R is a good idea. Seen an autopsy of someone with a basilar skull bleed? Not pretty. It happens. I happens to people like us. I would much rather put on my H&N R over my arm restraints, but I am putting on everything and more that I can to protect myself.
Luckily H&N R as now as cheap as a transponder (or that transponders have become so expensive). (Now that is a monopoly!).
Jim
FWIW
My back and neck hurt like hell EVERY DAY ! Why? We didn't have HANS devices 20 years ago, and I crashed into the gear box of another Super Vee that was spinning to a stop in front of me. ESPN showed it in slow motion, twice. My neck hyperelongated, and my head broke the steering wheel, tho my shoulder harness held my body back. It tore up the muscles, ligaments, and tendons from the middle of my shoulder blades, to my neck.
I wish to hell that we had the HANS device, and that it was mandated.
Mike McHugh
I know what you're saying. I think we've had this talk a number of times and know that we both just want unbiased reports to come out. But until then, we have to trust that the mfrs. are giving us actual numbers from results and not just numbers they've come up with. The test are still done by unbiased third parties. But even then we still find issues (see tied arm in the HANS test released by Isaac.). Until someone can pony up roughly 1 million dollars we're going to have to rely on numbers that the mfrs. release and realize that they may be statistically insignificant thanks to such a low number of tests. Noone is immue to that issue, Isaac, HANS, SafetySolutions, Johnny's Duct Tape your head to the seat service....
Still the arm-waving that the pro Isaac users do is just as bad as the anti-Isaac guys are doing. It's a lot of pot meet kettle, when in reality every device has it's benefits and every device has it's negatives. Once people sit down and make an unbiased opinion regarding their entire safety system then the world of HNR will be better. Sadly most people are too hung up on hatred towards a brand or a specification to think big picture.
There are a lot of good choices out there that didn't exist 10 years ago and right now the manufacturers will hopefully realize that while they are in 'business' to make money, they should be in business to save lives and not let whiny middle school feuds get in the way.
To address but one of your misguided (or perhaps intentionally provocative) statements:
Yes, instead let's bring in beef without testing (no point in testing if you have no standards to judge against) and melanin enhanced baby food. In China they do not even trust their own locally produced food.
Let's go back to the days of no drug standards and Mrs. Winslow's Soothing Syrup.
I could use some soothing syrup after reading all this!
WRT to the data I pulled together.........
It's virtually impossible to find data untainted by being taken or presented by the inventors, OEM, or people associated with a device. The SAE papers, even with the peer-review, suffer from this.
Izusu saying Hyundais are dangerous is similar, neither can be believed.
I will say I'm not an ISAAC fan because of the extra attach points. I am too wide in my cockpit to be able to reach up and release both my HANS anchors at once, for example -- I have to twist and do one, then twist the other way to get the other side.
That said, I still think that, as Doug said, "the writing has been on the wall" that HNR ruling were coming, and that it was almost a certainty that it would be defined as by a specific measure/standard. And SFI 38.1 has been that standard for a while now. So companies should have working to get into conformance, or get the standard modified. They *still* have time.
Steve
Or crack.....LOL
What? Rick?
If the fuel cell foam hadn't kept the flow of gas to a 'reasonable' level there's NO way we could have suppressed a complete dump of fuel with hand extinguishers.
--------------------------------------
Rick, please explain to me how the fuel cell foam reduced or minimized the flow of gas. This is new to me.
Thanks,
Larry Oliver
Larry Oliver
To all that are opposed to rule, your feelings would be different if you had just been in a crash and suffered a neck injury. Although my situation happened racing moto-x everything still carries over to auto racing. Some racers wear Leatte braces in moto-x but it is not mandatory. I knew I should wear one (and was definately going to get one) but was just dragging my feet cause I didn't want to spend the money. To make a long story short the first race of the year, in practice yet, I crashed doing something I had done easily a thousand times, next thing I knew I was in ICU with a fractured c-4 (the exact injury the Leatte prtects against). When your laying there wondering if your ever going to regain proper use of your arms again (My experience) or worst your legs you will feel really stupid and will have wished someone had mandated something like this. I was in the position where my wife was watching over me with tears running down her face wondering what the outcome was going to be and let me tell you it is not a good feeling. Not only was I out of commision for many months but she had to take a leave from her work to take care of me. Although I do not blame anyone but myself for not wearing a H&N device if it was mandated these stories would be far less. I am all for personal freedoms but adding H&N protection is just like wearing a helmet or suit, etc.. The cost of the units is a drop in the bucket compared to what can happen and if you feel uncomfortable wearing one believe me you will get used to it. I was fractions of an inch from never walking or possibly death (the x-rays were scary) and I truely believe it could of been prevented by the H&N device.
Hind site is always 20/20!
Better to have raced for a day...
than been a spectator for life!
No, I wouldn't wish that someone had forced a decision on me. I'm a grown up and can make a decision for myself and accept the responsibility for it.
I wonder how many of the people who are so worried about neck injury are doing neck strengthening exercises to help prevent injury and help stabilize their neck after injury?
You and I both are, but most people can't or won't. That's the problem. As always, lowest common denominator.
Question Authority
Doug,You and I both are, but most people can't or won't. That's the problem. As always, lowest common denominator.
I agree with you. What I find frustrating is the application to the lowest common denominator. So we all pay. I guess it comes from the time I grew up. Like many, I hate being told what to do or how to think. Something about "drinking the kool-aid".
I have no problem wearing a H&N device. I wear one. I spent the money on a new helmet so I could get the clearance and movement I needed. I just hate to be told I have to.
Regards,
Dan Wise
“Racing makes heroin addiction look like a vague wish for something salty.” -Peter Egan
Agreed, Dan. Though if I made a list of everything that we are all told to do and how to do it, I'd be here until February adding to it. We're told to wear helmets and we do, and when to replace them, and we do. This is just another thing that protects us from ourselves and protects the SCCA from money-grabbing lawsuits.
We created our own problems.
[QUOTE]
Doug, I'll ask you but maybe an answer from a lawyer would be better. If I break my neck in 2010 at an SCCA event, who do I sue? I guess what I'm asking is if a competitor brakes their neck, can they sue SCCA for not mandating a device which there is NO guaranty of not breaking your neck with in the first place? I don't think there's a H&N device made that comes with a warranty against death.
Stonebridge Sports & Classics ltd
15 Great Pasture Rd Danbury, CT. 06810 (203) 744-1120
www.cryosciencetechnologies.com
Cryogenic Processing · REM-ISF Processing · Race Prep & Driver Development
Agree and doesn't that same logic apply to helmets, harnesses, and Nomex clothing?I don't think there's a H&N device made that comes with a warranty against death.
I'm not Doug or a lawyer, but ... :-).
I think anyone can sue anyone anytime. The SCCA is just trying to position itself (by 2012) so any lawsuits from that point on will have a tougher time convincing a judge/jury.
If you break your neck in 2010 you can sue the same people you would have in 2009, or the same people you will in 2013. Your chances of winning may be different, though.
Racer Russ
Palm Coast, FL
The perfect world answer is, you don't sue anyone if you take responsibility for your own actions. But we all know that this isn't how the world works, unfortunately.
The SCCA took preventative measures to protect themselves from the assumed liability that is resulting from being the last major sanctioning body to NOT mandate at least some standard of H&N protection.
It's called risk management, and the SCCA felt the lack of any mandated requirement was too great of a risk. It's pretty cut and dry.
I understand that it is risk management, but did the BOD actually get legal advice that recommended this action, or did we get a bunch of businessmen and prep shop owners trying to guess at how the legal system works?
Is some grieving widow/family really going to change their mind about a lawsuit because HNR was mandated? SCCA will still be defending themselves in court and the insurance company will in all likelihood be settling with the people suing anyways.
This is pure posturing. If the BOD was serious about making racing safer, they would do something about getting people like the guy who crashed Greist off the track. That would have a positive effect on safety and other people's enjoyment. IMO, the BOD position is indefensible until they address the much larger safety issue.
Member opinions should count for something. Someone should remind the BOD.
Sometimes progression cost a couple xtra $$. Why isn't anyone complaining about mandatory helmets or fire suits? Club and Pro Racing is done in a "controlled" environment with rules put in place to protect both the participants and the sport. I believe this rule does both. If you were required to purchase a single source device and had no options I would say that sucks but this is not the case. If you want to play football you have to wear the required equipment, if you want to go hunting you have to wear the required equipment, if you need to step on to a construction site you will have to wear the proper equipment why should racing be any different. Sometimes the rules seem stupid but they are there for a reason. Remeber progression comes in all forms, style, speed, technology and in this case safety. Our decisions don't only affect us but they affect everyone around us to. Too many neck injuries unadressed would be irresponsible.
Better to have raced for a day...
than been a spectator for life!
HNR
I have been against HNR's but this year saw a good friend get flipped. We timed it on the computer video footage and it was 5 flips in 2 seconds. He was wearing a HANS and suffered a t12 spine fracture but his neck was OK.I don't think without HANS he would have been so lucky. I now convinced my wife to wear one for the 2010 season. However I always tell people that since we lean on our fuel cells, I think we have bigger worries. If something gets to my cell it probably went thru me first at which point I don't think I'll care about the fire.
Jim
Wren: Do you carry health insurance through your employer/business or are you self insured? If you have insurance you essentially are transferring the risk of your responsibility to the insurer in exchange for money. So, all the people who are in your insurance pool are accepting the responsibility of your actions, not just you, if you are not self insured. If you really want the sole decision making capacity and are willing to take full responsibility then you're talking out of both sides of your mouth until you've severed all ties to pooled risk dispersion.
------------------
'Stay Hungry'
JK 1964-1996 #25
I have health insurance and no, it is not talking out of both sides of my mouth at all. My financial agreement with a private company (BC/BS) is a completely separate thing and really doesn't relate at all. I'm honestly having trouble even wrapping my brain around how a contract between me and a company is somehow not taking responsibility. No one is forced into anything. I would give you the non-sequitor of the thread award, but I don't think your point is even relevant enough for that. I think it is just bizarre.
If my insurer doesn't want to cover my racing, they can feel free to exclude it, just like they exclude other activities. They would be much better off to exclude my other hobbies though. Those are actually dangerous.
If this decision was to keep the insurance costs down, then I would not have a problem with it. As already posted in this thread, K&K didn't care.
That is quite a slippery slope.
Again, the problem here isn't whether or not HNR makes you safer. It is the BOD doing something the members didn't want and the annoyance factor of other people insisting that they know what is best for you when there is not a neck injury problem in the SCCA.
But the real question is....how many neck injuries have there been.....addressed or unaddressed?
My understanding is the 70% of the solicited membership input was against mandatory....also the majority of the CRB was against MANDATORY.
Wren,
Just an FYI, I had BC/BS(the same carrier you mentioned above) about 20 years ago when i used to roadrace motorcycles.
they would not cover me for any injuries while i was racing, hang gliding or scuba diving.
those were written in the small print of the policy.
good thing SCCA has a nice insurance policy because i seriously doubt that they (BC/BS)have loosened up thier exclusions.
I don't believe that to be true, but I am going to ask around to find out for sure.
I've never really checked the small print for racing injuries because I know that the SCCA insurance is good and I don't think the risk with racing is especially high.
My dangerous hobby is wrestling (not the fake kind). That is a high injury sport with serious neck injury potential. I can still remember the names of local kids paralyzed. This year BC/BS has put me back together from a shattered arm, MRSA, broken nose, torn labrum, and some other stuff. I didn't even get to train much this year due to travel and having to sit 7 months for the shattered humerus (I still was back training a month before the doctor wanted me back training). I keep thinking about giving it up and I am just not ready. I know that at 29 I am pushing it, but I am eligible for the masters class starting next year. I do use a sports medicine doctor for a primary care physician though, it's way more convenient.
No, you simply don't understand the inner workings of the insurance business. You are not taking the responsibility for your decision if your 'safety net' of making that decision wrong is from your insurance policy. You're transferring that responsibility to them by buying the insurance. Therefore your decision impacts many more people than you. But go ahead, beat your chest thinking you're footing all the responsibility for your actions if it makes you feel good.
You can believe its not relevant, but in fact it is. No one in this country is a 'rugged individualist' due to the distribution of costs amongst the ommunity so all of your and my decisions have impacts on others. With that transfer of risk comes with (a choice) of whether adhere to the rules of the transfer of risk, which may include personal liberty limitations.
Think bigger than you and you can fathom the issue. Or be totally self insured...with that you are fully taking your responsibility for your actions.
Tim
------------------
'Stay Hungry'
JK 1964-1996 #25
That statement has been made several times in this thread, but I haven't seen a credited source. Does anyone know what the result was of the member input on this topic?
Matt King
FV19 Citation XTC-41
CenDiv-Milwaukee
KEEP THE KINK!
insurance
I broke my left leg at the 1986 Runoffs. Thank goodness for the SCCA insurance as my BC/BS refused to cover anything including a surgery a year later.
So to say that you are insured for racing accidents because you have your own health insurance in not correct.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
Last edited by Jnovak; 12.28.09 at 8:15 PM.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
313-445-4047
On my 54th year as an SCCA member
with a special thanks to every SCCA worker (NONE OF US WOULD RACE WITHOUT THE WORKERS)
I don't know all of the inner workings of the insurance industry, but I have a solid understanding of risk pools and how insurance works. At the moment, no one has a gun held to their head and we both freely entered in to this arrangement. And yes, managing/transfering risks through insurance is taking responsibility for yourself. I have never misrepresented anything to my insurance, they know exactly what they are getting into.
I've got to say that this is a new one to me- anyone who uses insurance doesn't believe in personal responsibility.
Still, none of this has to do with the issue at hand or what I originally posted, I'm not really sure where your post came from. The post I quoted was about the impact to the racer's body and their family.
Bottom Line:
To continue to provide the established racing insurance that is in effect during an SCCA event and is provided as part of the entry fee and national dues . . . . you will have to wear a H&N device as specified.
To quote that famous 20th century American philosopher D. Henley . . . . Get Over It!
Charlie Warner
fatto gatto racing
'Cause there's bugger-all down here on earth!
People buy insurance to protect themselves from events that occur that they cannot take full personal responsibility for themselves. Liability in the street car you drive or the replacement value of your house in a fire; my actions may result in impacts that I cannot fully personally cover. It is responsible to buy insurance; what I'm trying to point out is that your decisions are not freely yours when you choose to buy insurance. There are limits that are going to be imposed..and if you make a bad decision your insurer is taking on the responsibility within the limits of the contract. Their only recourse for a policy holders bad decision is to drop you. But then its too late.
In the HND example, I'm surely not qualified to say whether wearing one or not is or is not a good decision. But if you want to live free or die by not wearing a HND and are willing to take 'full responsibility' of any adverse affects then so be it. But when you use your or SCCA's insurance to pay for your health care in the event it was a bad decision, I pay for your decision too thus you are not taking full responsibility for your decision.
------------------
'Stay Hungry'
JK 1964-1996 #25
I'm sure the years that those items first became mandatory there were many complaints.
[QUOTE=stonebridge20;240425]There is a certain amount of assumed risk by participating in this sport. We have choices of which device to wear. That way if we choose Device X and it traps us in our car or causes our belts to come off the defense would argue that we were free to wear Device Y if we so chose.I guess what I'm asking is if a competitor brakes their neck, can they sue SCCA for not mandating a device which there is NO guaranty of not breaking your neck with in the first place?
Since 1988 all new cars sold in the US have been required to have airbags. Airbags have saved many lives I'm sure. Airbags have also caused deaths. Lawsuits have been won over airbag deaths and injuries. In general, we are probably all better off with rather than without. Same with HNR's. But that doesn't mean that those who make them mandatory are absolved.
It's only a matter of time. In 2012 we will have many more racers with a HNR than we had in 2009. Someone will be wearing one who didn't want to. They'll have an accident. It may save their life but cause other injuries and everybody involved will be named in a suit.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
