Pro compulsion

[twobiker]

Having just looked up a little bit about the safety standards for cycle helmets it would appear that they are many and varied, and it would seem that quite a few of the helmets on sale today do not meet the same standard, if a person is advised to wear an item of safety clothing, and lets face it you would'nt wear it for any other reason, then you should have a reasonable expectation that it do the job as required, however some are tested to a higher impact than others, and most of them will provide no protection at all in an oblique accident for instance. To therefore request that someone on a cycling course wear a helmet is not reasonable and may indeed lead to a false sense of security amongst the uneducated, lessons in road safety will provide knowledge which hopefully would place the person in a position where the limited protection/safety a helmet provides may be of some use however.

 

[Red Light]

Having just looked up a little bit about the safety standards for cycle helmets it would appear that they are many and varied, and it would seem that quite a few of the helmets on sale today do not meet the same standard, if a person is advised to wear an item of safety clothing, and lets face it you would'nt wear it for any other reason, then you should have a reasonable expectation that it do the job as required, however some are tested to a higher impact than others, and most of them will provide no protection at all in an oblique accident for instance. To therefore request that someone on a cycling course wear a helmet is not reasonable and may indeed lead to a false sense of security amongst the uneducated, lessons in road safety will provide knowledge which hopefully would place the person in a position where the limited protection/safety a helmet provides may be of some use however.

About the only helmets available in the UK are the EN standard ones. If you hunt down a Specialized helmet they are tested to the Snell standard but I'm not sure they are still marked as such. So there is really only one standard involved.

 

[twobiker]

About the only helmets available in the UK are the EN standard ones. If you hunt down a Specialized helmet they are tested to the Snell standard but I'm not sure they are still marked as such. So there is really only one standard involved.

And to look at the standard would make someone realise that unless you fall off at around 12mph and hit something flat you are not very well protected, this should be explained to people at the time they purchase a helmet, or if they are required to wear one for a cycling course. Also I do not understand the problem with wearing safety gear for course, I have to attend many safety courses for my job and do not have a problem wearing the relevant gear, young cyclists could wear a helmet for the course and just not bother wearing it afterwards.

 

[Bicycle]

And to look at the standard would make someone realise that unless you fall off at around 12mph and hit something flat you are not very well protected,

Well... possibly.

My wife (earlier thread) hit the ground hard and head first, having been thrown over her bars at 20+ mph.

The helmet was badly dished but she suffered no head injury. I believe the helmet prevented likely injury.

If a Standard states that a helmet must offer protection in circumstance A, it does not always follow that it offers no protection in any other circumstances.

I was a frequent faller from trees as a child. Branches are not built to any safety standard, but it always hurt less when I fell through a few weaker boughs to break my fall on the way down.

Similarly, when a motorcycle courier I ran (accidentally) through a plate glass window in helmet and leather jacket. No head injuries and few to my arms, but neither helmet not jacket was designed for that act of stupidity.

I'm not pro-compulsion and not a helmet fanatic (I frequently ride without one) but I'm not sure it's always helpful to concentrate on the text of the Standard and exclude any protection beyond that specified in writing.

Just a thought.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Well... possibly.

My wife (earlier thread) hit the ground hard and head first, having been thrown over her bars at 20+ mph.

The helmet was badly dished but she suffered no head injury. I believe the helmet prevented likely injury.

If a Standard states that a helmet must offer protection in circumstance A, it does not always follow that it offers no protection in any other circumstances.

I was a frequent faller from trees as a child. Branches are not built to any safety standard, but it always hurt less when I fell through a few weaker boughs to break my fall on the way down.

Similarly, when a motorcycle courier I ran (accidentally) through a plate glass window in helmet and leather jacket. No head injuries and few to my arms, but neither helmet not jacket was designed for that act of stupidity.

I'm not pro-compulsion and not a helmet fanatic (I frequently ride without one) but I'm not sure it's always helpful to concentrate on the text of the Standard and exclude any protection beyond that specified in writing.

Just a thought.

My thoughts are along similar lines. Items that have a (SWL) Safe Working Load will perform above those limits to enable safe use at the limits. If a helmet it designed to protect you at 12mph there is a chance it will actually protect you at higher speeds than that.

 

[david k]

You are desperately avoiding answering the question. Training or helmet, which are you going for. Its an either/or choice.

thats a concern, you are deliberatly saying it is either helmet or training. I cannot say one or the other because i believe in both, not avoiding the question, i'm answering it, both

 

[david k]

My thoughts are along similar lines. Items that have a (SWL) Safe Working Load will perform above those limits to enable safe use at the limits. If a helmet it designed to protect you at 12mph there is a chance it will actually protect you at higher speeds than that.

most things have a 'factor of error'

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Do they not do cycling proficiency tests in Primary schools any more?

Oh, that was my favourite bit of the whole 4 years!

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Do they not do cycling proficiency tests in Primary schools any more?

Oh, that was my favourite bit of the whole 4 years!

It'sBikeability now (formerly National Standards). Schools can request that instructors run the courses. It is overseen by the DfT.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Do you still get a 4-D special agent card?

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Do you still get a 4-D special agent card?

Nope. A cert and some goodies.

 

[Theseus]

It is the people in Norwich who made it either or. You were asked which of the two options you favour helmet and training versus no helmet no access to training.

Personally, despite being against compulsion, not wearing one myselfe and not insisting my kids wear one when they ride. I would say that the greater good is that they get the training, even if it means that helmets are worn. Of course, the ride to and from the training can take place with the helmets hanging off the handlebars.

 

[twobiker]

Personally, despite being against compulsion, not wearing one myselfe and not insisting my kids wear one when they ride. I would say that the greater good is that they get the training, even if it means that helmets are worn. Of course, the ride to and from the training can take place with the helmets hanging off the handlebars.

 

[Mad at urage]

Personally, despite being against compulsion, not wearing one myselfe and not insisting my kids wear one when they ride. I would say that the greater good is that they get the training, even if it means that helmets are worn. Of course, the ride to and from the training can take place with the helmets hanging off the handlebars.

So you agree with the attitude "We provide training, but only if you spend thirty quid (or so) on something you never intend to use again. Fail to spend that money and we will not train your kid." ?

Because that is what some LAs are saying!

 

[twobiker]

So you agree with the attitude "We provide training, but only if you spend thirty quid (or so) on something you never intend to use again. Fail to spend that money and we will not train your kid." ?

Because that is what some LAs are saying!

They are just trying to cover themselves in case somebodys little darling does a dive on to the tarmac due to the no win no fee craze, if they provided helmets for the course no one would be excluded. its like horse riding.