Motorcyclists To Get Wearable Airbags

jonerik writes "For the past hundred years or so motorcycle accidents have had an unfortunate potential for particularly horrific injuries, or worse. Improvements in safety gear have certainly been made in the past few decades, but in some ways those improvements have been balanced out by the tremendous speeds that modern bikes are capable of. According to this article from ABC News, though, Dainese, a protective sports clothing maker in Vicenza, Italy has developed a wearable airbag vest - called the D-Air - designed to cushion riders in the event of an accident. The D-Air vest features a tiny electronic computer referred to as the STM (which stands for Sensing, Triggering, and Memory), which was developed by an Israeli company called Merhav APP. According to the article, the STM contains sensors that monitor the bike's physical motion. 'The sensors onboard the STM will watch for telltale signs -- such as a sudden deceleration force of about ten times that of gravity -- that precede a collision. Once the computer determines an impending accident, the STM blasts the data to receiver in the vest to start the inflation process.' This site also features some pictures of the D-Air vest in action. Dainese plans to begin selling the D-Air vest in Europe in the spring, though American sales will have to wait since the U.S. Department of Transportation has yet to set standards for such a device."

Comments

Ouch!

[DJPenguin]

Sounds like this sort of thing, if not calibrated perfectly for the person wearing it, could blow your head off!

Re:Ouch!

[e8johan]

An airbag inflator has the power of a hand granade. I would not like to carry such as device too close to the body. Also, what happens if I would wear a packpack, or have someone on join me on the bike (sitting behind me).

This device may look right, but how many lives will it save compared to those it take. Also, how do you dispose an explosive jacket, or take it with out on an aircraft. I'd say that this is probably a publicity stunt, and not really a life saver as airbags in cars are, but thats just MHO.

Re:Ouch!

[Goth Biker Babe]

You do have to remember that airbags in cars in the US are a lot more powerful than those in Europe. In the US they are designed to try and save people who refuse to wear seat belts. Over here most people wear them (in the UK its the law, both front and back) and it's considered the drivers fault if they are injured because they aren't wearing their belt.

I suspect that these bags are not as powerful as you might think. Having said that I wouldn't want to wear one.

Re:Ouch!

[e8johan]

I live in Sweden where seat belts are compulsory too, just as in the UK. This rule is the biggest life saver of them all, no airbag in the world saves you in a roll-over situation (which is quite common).

As for the force, I work at a company producing the inflators used in passenger side airbags and they are really powerful (the company name is Autoflator, a part of the Autoliv group). I have also smashed a car (aquaplaning... scary stuff) and I got hit pretty good by the airbag.

At least we agree on not wearing them!

Re:Ouch!

[Zathrus]

As of Jan, 2001 17 states had primary seat belt laws (meaning that if a cop saw you not wearing one then you could be pulled over and ticketed for that alone). I haven't been able to find any more current numbers or how many states have secondary laws (can't be pulled over for it, but can be ticketed if pulled over for something else). I'm sure someone out there with better Google skills can find info.

As for the women who put the shoulder belt behind them -- well, I hope they never wind up in an accident. Three point harnasses (shoulder and waist belts) are not made to be worn without the shoulder strap. They will probably wind up being seriously injured in the groin area, along with upper chest injuries from slamming into the steering wheel (with or without airbag -- my sister has been spending the last 4 months recovering from a 90 mph head on collision because some ditz crossed into her lane of traffic; if it hadn't been for her wearing a selt belt properly and airbags she would be dead).

Re:Ouch!

[coloth]

In the US they are designed to try and save people who refuse to wear seat belts. Over here most people wear them

I'm always a little curious about broad statements, especially when comparing the habits of different societies.

I live in California, which is the most populous state, and has by far the most cars of any state, as well as the most stringent emissions laws. It turns out that, at least as of 1999, it also had the highest rate of seat belt use, nearly 90%. (Buckle up America Report, 2001)

At a national level, that 90% is considered a target number for 2005. As of 2002, national usage is at 75%, which was a sad surprise to me. Of course, each state has its own laws.

It isn't surprising to me that less than half of North Dakotans wear a seat belt, considering the rural environment and culture, but I would have thought the national average would be higher by now.

Interestingly, all the states that border California are also very high.

Re:Ouch!

[Blkdeath]

I'd say that this is probably a publicity stunt, and not really a life saver as airbags in cars are, but thats just MHO.

Airbags, much like ABS brakes and anything else used in cars are only partially effective, and only when used right. In many circumstances people have walked away from rather non-fatal collisions with broken jaws, ribs, and being partially or completely blinded.

Having spoken with a biker (sitting in the next room from me. ;) ) he agrees that this vest is highly impractical. When you're launched from your bike, you keep your appendages close to your body and roll, similar to how paratroopers roll on landing to reduce the stress on your body. Also, they have to be able (barring physical injury) to get up and walk away, so as to prevent them from being flattened by passing cars (who tend to pay so much attention to the wreck they'd hit the broad side of a barn if it were planted in front of them). This vest looks like it has serious potential to create a situation faced by Ralphie's brother in "A Christmas Story". (Think 'big snow suit', and 'can't move')

Much as I hate to abuse a cliche; the best life saver in all these cases is education. Motorcyclists have to observe proper safety precautions, and cars have to be told that no, you can NOT share a lane space with a motorcycle, and that while they're not as big, they're considered the same as a car when it comes to road usage. There are many statistics about how motorcyclists have been faulted as the cause of collisions, but I'd be willilng to bet that most of those have been indirectly (or directly) caused by the car, or other surrounding motorists (I'm not including those plastic, 20lb "sport" bikes, because the guys who drive those seem to have a death wish).

If people don't use safety devices properly, they have this habit of backfiring and causing death or injury, rather than the desired prevention. Take my above example of ABS brakes; people have started to become complacent, believing that ABS will reduce their stopping distance, so they drive faster towards intersections and brake later. What they don't realize is that ABS actually increases your stopping distance. I can only imagine how the bikers have felt watching a car speed towards them at 80KM/h while they sat stopped at a light, often behind another car.

Chevrolet (and perhaps all of General Motors, I'm not sure) has apparently decided to make ABS once again an optional, rather than standard feature in their new product lines. I only wish I'd had that option for my '95 Cavalier.

Unfortunately, my usual opinion of 'Remove the safety labels/devices and let the stupid take care of themselves' doesn't apply here. The drivers of cars would cream motorcycles, and innocent (and perhaps highly intelligent) bikers would be dead, while drivers of cars would walk away.

How about this - retroactive corporal punishment for any driver who causes an accident due to stupidity (which includes not paying attention, driving while tired, intoxicated, being distracted by cell phones, kids, oral sex from the passenger seat, etc.)? What we do is break their ankles on a cinder block, much like in Misery, and then revoke their drivers license for five years with mandatory driver training in order to get it back. That is, of course, if their ankles are fit to operate the pedals. ;)

Re:Ouch!

[j-turkey]

There is *nothing* in there that would lead anyone to conclude that removing ABS would be an advantage. Quite the opposite. The only time it increases your stopping distance is a) driver misuse (letting up on the brake due to feedback), b) snow covered road where the "piling up" of snow in front of the wheel helps.

...People like you will keep propogating this myth and disinformation, and it must stop here...

OMG, what an arrogant comment. Do you work for the IIHS, NHTSA, or a major insurance carrier?

In this case, I picked the first reference from your google search and read the second paragraph that contained this line:

It isn't entirely clear that antilock braking will reduce stopping distance for the skilled driver

A skilled driver can stop better without ABS brakes (particularly on dry pavement) using a technique called threshold braking. Essentially, threshold braking is when a driver applies the maximum amount force on the brakes to slow the car without locking the wheels. If executed properly, the wheels will not lock, but actually move slower than the rotational speed required to maintain speed on the pavement. It tends to work best in an open-wheeled race car, but the technique also applies to roadgoing cars. Anti-lock brakes will hinder this technique. Check racing literature -- using this technique yields shorter stopping distances then punching the brake on an ABS-equiped vehicle.

ABS brakes also tend to limit the ability of a driver to use another technique called trail-braking (and left-foot braking). These are braking techniques used to offset the balance of the vehicle in a corner and tighten up the line through a corner. This is used in both racing situations and emergency avoidance manuvers.

Additionally, having ABS tends to make drivers over-confident -- many tend to steer during heavy braking, which unloads the rear tires of a car and can easily cause a vehicle to spin out of control...or cause a sport-ute to roll.

Many drivers prefer ABS brakes -- which is fine. Its their choice. In fact, for most drivers, ABS is better...but the absolute mentality you have is just wrong.

--Turkey

Re:Ouch!

[snarkasaurus]

I think you'd rather wear one than put up with a broken neck, old son.

Think about the classic car/bike accident where the imbecile car driver turns in front of the bike, which then hits the side of the car at full speed. I know of several people who would be walking today if they'd been wearing an airbag like this that fixates the head and neck upon impact. I'm a physiotherapist, I meet a lot of the ones who don't die on impact.

I'm walking today becase I was 17 when some prick did it to me, and I had reflexes like a cat. And I was LUCKY. He drove into me, and I managed to clear the hood of the car before impact.

One millisecond too slow and my left leg would have been a bag of smashed bone chips, an infinitely preferable arrangement to the head and spinal cord injuries I've seen, belive me. Even if they have to cut off your whole fucking leg, you can still wipe your own ass.

So don't be too quick to dismiss the good old airbag. Anything that adds armor to the neck and head is good. I'd wear it.

This is just the begining too. Once they get this perfected they can start on the lower trunk and limbs. Progress!

Re:Ouch!

[Blkdeath]

I call bullshit, and demand references.

Do you understand how ABS works? It alternatively locks and unlocks the wheel, which gives a pulse pattern, which means you stop for a second, roll for a second, etc. (Not actually 'a second', but short, pre-determined time intervals)

Read the first 10 pages of google results for "abs increases stopping distance".

What, like;

• This one?

  "1) It isn't entirely clear that antilock braking will reduce stopping distance for the skilled driver;"

  "The IIHS report, issued December 10, 1996, notes that in single-vehicle accidents, cars with antilock brakes are as much as 44% more likely to produce fatalities than are cars without the antilock system."

• Or this one?

  "Other factors affecting ABS performance include the condition of the tires, shocks, and suspension components, as well as their design. For example, if a tire hits a bump and the shocks/springs are weak, the tire may lift off the ground and lock under brake pressure. ABS interprets lockup and releases the brakes. The more the tire is off the ground, the more the brakes will release, thus extending the stopping distance."

• Or this one?

  "Stopping distance is nearly the same for pumped brakes as it is when the brakes are locked. However, with locked brakes the driver has little, if any, control over vehicle direction. ABS pumps the brakes automatically during emergency stop. It prevents wheel lock and allows the driver to maintain a higher degree of control."

  "Most people who have tested ABS in panic situations feel positively towards them. ABS, as stated before, does not shorten stopping distance. If the driver doesn't leave enough room to stop, an accident could occur. Drivers must apply good judgement whether or not their vehicle has ABS."

• Or this one?

  "Do cars with ABS stop more quickly than cars without it? Not always. Although the stopping distance with ABS is shorter under most road conditions, drivers should always keep a safe distance behind the vehicle in front of them and maintain a speed consistent with the road conditions. While a vehicle with ABS maintains its steering capability in a sudden stop, it may not turn as quickly on a slippery road as it would on dry pavement."

• Or this one?

  "ABS technology is designed to maintain rolling traction and steering. The rolling action may produce longer stopping distances on some surfaces, such as freshly fallen snow or loose gravel."

I think you get the point. The comonality between all of thesee pages looks like this;

1. Ideal conditions are required (both road and vehicle)
2. Drivers must be trained/knowledgeable in use of the system
3. Stopping distance is not always reduced, but the steering advantage is hilighted.

The problem with light cars (a very large number of consumer purchased vehicles lately) is that they don't have the weight to keep the skipping wheels on the ground, thus dramatically reducing the efectiveness in both stopping distance and steering control, hence the reason for removing them from the likes of the Cavalier and Sunfire.

Especially in snow, gravel, and sand (loose pack) ABS will drastically increase your stopping distance (by about 200% in some cases, depending on speed and density of the material you're driving in). The plow effect by your car's tires slows the trajectory of your vehicle.

ABS isn't designed to reduce stopping distance, it is designed to give steering control. These are two VERY different things. Incidentally, locking your tires and knowing how to change directions can/will significantly reduce your stopping distance with the same amount of control, as anyone who's ever taken or instructed a crash course will tell you.

I've conducted 80KM/h tests myself, in snow (loose and hard packed), gravel, sand, and wet and dry asphalt and under many of the conditions, especially the non-ideal driving conditions, my stopping distance was increased. I will grant you that my tires did suffer more on the locking tests, but if I'm making an emergency stop, I'd much sooner replace some tires than find myself face-first in the side of an SUV/Minivan/truck/etc.

BTW, speaking of ideal conditions; This study hilights another problem with ABS - Driver reaction time and leg strength. Many (most?) women and smaller men have great difficulty in putting 100lbs pressure on their brake pedals in a real hurry, which the NHTSA has discovered increases stopping distance (150-200lbs is the desired pressure, which was difficult to attain, except by the TRC (professional) test driver).

Re:Ouch!

[MightyTribble]

In MA, the seatbelt usage rate is around 60%. One of the worst in the nation, apparently, but the recent 'click it or ticket' campaign, even though it has no legal standing, has driven usage up by six points. Which is good.

On a related point, my wife was talking to the head of the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) just yesterday about airbags. US airbags are a big pet peeve of his, because if you're a passenger using a seatbelt in a US airbag-equipped car, you're *MORE LIKELY* to be injured than your European seatbelted compatriot, because of the more powerful airbag. Congress deliberately set them more powerful to give (statistically-unproven) better protection to folks not wearing belts. While it *has* been statistically proven that belts plus low-velocity airbags reduces injury. I'm not making this up : this is what Dr. Runge said, and I assume he knows what he's talking about.

In fact, I know a doc in one of our local hospitals who is pissed because his wife is permanently disabled, directly because of the US high-powered airbags.

So, to conclude : US airbags are more powerful to provide an *unproven* amount of protection to non-seatbelted occupants, at the *direct* expense of seatbelted occupants. Gah.

Re:Ouch!

[Scotch Game]

Having spoken with a biker (sitting in the next room from me. ;) ) he agrees that this vest is highly impractical. When you're launched from your bike, you keep your appendages close to your body and roll, similar to how paratroopers roll on landing to reduce the stress on your body. Also, they have to be able (barring physical injury) to get up and walk away, so as to prevent them from being flattened by passing cars (who tend to pay so much attention to the wreck they'd hit the broad side of a barn if it were planted in front of them).

This is obviously written by someone who has never ridden a motorcycle for any length of time and who's getting advice from someone who thinks he's a better rider than he is (which is scary). As a former editor at Motorcycle Online (http://www.motorcycle.com),
I can tell you that when you're tossed off a bike at 70 miles per hour, the first thing that goes through your mind isn't, "Ah, now I'll tuck my legs and roll!" That's just ridiculous. You hit the ground so quickly (if you're lucky and don't highside which involves you being tossed through the air and is definitely the most dangerous way to wad) that about all you have time for is "OHSHIT!!", which is, interestingly, what anyone who claims otherwise is full of.

As far as the vest is concerned, well, if it works, great. Many would refuse to wear it just like many refuse to wear helmets, citing rights and freedoms and fashion and whatever. But research into this kind of technology is nice to see because, at the very least, it keeps a dialog open and fresh about motorcycle safety.

Heh

[jgerman]

Welcome to SnowCrash...

This is good stuff, as a biker one of my biggest concerns is protection. Dropping the bike is no big deal, wearing the right gear you're more or less safe. But in the case of collisions with other vehichles I'm not sure this will help. But more protection is always good.

Re:Heh

[ender-]

I have to say, I can't imagine getting on my bike without a helmet, despite (touch wood) never having an accident... Do Merkins really have that much problems with the idea?

Well, I just moved from California [has a helmet law] to Texas [no helmet law]. I can tell you there's NO FRIGGIN WAY I'm getting on my bike [sport bike] without a helmet. Especially on Texas roads. The speed limits are generally lower than they would be on similar roads in California, but the driver's here are so bad that I feel safer doing 90mph [speeding nicely] in California than I do going 55mph [under the limit] here [Dallas/Ft. Worth area]. It's to the point where I'm tempted to start riding tracks only. [Partially because there don't seem to be any nice twisty roads here]

Anyway, the most I've ridden my bike without a helmet is across a large parking lot [helmet propped on tank] and I feel so naked without it. No way I'm getting on public roads without it.

As for the Air-bag vest, I dunno. Maybe it'll be ok if you t-bone a truck or something, but if it were to go off during say a high-side [don't think it'd go off on a low-side], I'd think [based on the size of it when inflated] it would make you tumble more once you hit the ground. The reason leathers are so tight is to let you slide so you're not breaking limbs left and right. :)

So I'll wear the helmet, but I think I'll skip the air-bag vest.

Ender

Is this the same patent?

[ianscot]

Is this patent from the same Tokyo commuter whose inflatable underwear went off on the train a few years ago?

(Who knew NASA technology would pay off in this particular indirect way? Now our motorcyclists are bouncing around like Mars Pathfinder... After the accident maybe they can enjoy some refreshing TANG.)

Worse?

[Skiboo]

Am I the only one that at first glance read that as:

For the past hundred years or so motorcycle accidents have had an unfortunate potential for particularly horrific injuries, or worse; Improvements in safety gear

Methinks I need some coffee... :/

personal air bags

[Lazarus_Bitmap]

Here in Dallas, we've long been on the cutting edge of this type of technology. Specialized silicon-based versions have been available for some time, though they seem to be much more popular with women than men...

thats retarded... i'll take my leathers

[in_ur_face]

i'm sorry but i still feel much more comfortable in my full leathers. not only is my whole body protected, but that air bag looks like it would do more damage then good for the rider.

when riding, its important not to have anything on your body in case of a fall. For instance, if you wear a backpack, it has been shown not to be safe in the event of a fall (increased back injury, etc...). this is why they have tank/trunk bags. But this air bag looks like it would only protect your back and cause a more ackward fall in the case of an accident.

also price is rediculous. good full leaters will run you around 500$. the price of the vest is well over that (sure its becuase it is early development phase but still). what about re packing your air bag? i'm sure thats more $$$ too

good concept but not good enough

My airbag

[night_flyer]

always sits behind me on the motorcycle.

(dont let her know I said that or she'll yell at me!)

It will help in some accidents

[davidfsmith]

However it wouldn't have stopped my thigh bone being broken when I was "helped" off my bike at a junction by a kindly lady pulling across my path.

What you probably need is a version of the michelin man suit !

Anything that adds to the protection of motorbike pilots has to be a good thing, but I would suggest that a lot of the problem is from two areas, pilots riding too fast for the conditions, and car drivers / other road users not being aware of bikes.

I was wearing a jacket with armour in it, and a 400ukp crash helmet, without the full face lid I would be dead as the lower part of it seemed to have been the first point of contact I had with the ground as I performed a face plant on my way to going 30-0 mph in a few feet. When on a bike assume all other road users are idiots, and spend as mcuh money as you can (and more) on your personal protection, it *will* save your life!

If you have an accident on your bike the next important bit is the speed you get taken to somewhere that can put you back together... luckily I crashed a 2 minute ambulance ride away from the local hospital (and you have to hope that as you lie there in the road a "helpful" stranger doesn't remove your crash helmet unless they know what they are doing)

Airbags for construction workers.

[XNormal]

This article in Wired from 1999 describes an airbag vest developed by Japanese construction giant Kajima to protect construction workers from falls.

I'll pass thanks

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

It's bad enough we have hand grenades in the steering wheels of our new cars (another reason I only drive old cars) but now we'll be wearing one too?

Thanks, I'll pass. When I ride my FZR600, I wear heavy leather gloves, massive leather jacket (along with a spine brace), two pairs of pants (inner one are jeans, outer: leather) and a full helmet.

When I flipped my FZR once and was thrown off, the only thing bruised was my pride (and all the expensive fiberglas on the bike.)

If I want hand grenades attached to my jacket, I'll join the military.

Doubtful...

[ivrcti]

I rode every day for 7 years and I'm not sure about this product. This won't protect against the slide (as others have already pointed out), but that only accounts for about 5-10% of accidents.

The biggest cause of motorcyle accidents is when the car driver doesn't see you and either turns left in front of you, or pulls into your lane. In the left hand turn accident, the bike would experience the sudden deacceleration and the vest would inflate. But if it does, the inflated vest makes you a slightly more "round shape." I believe this would tend to cause more rolling and less sliding. At 30+ mph, the rolling effect would likely protect the head and neck (IF you are wearing a helmet), but tend to cause a LOT more arm and leg injuries.

In the accident where a car pulls into your lane, you usually bounce off the car and go into an uncontrolled tumble. I don't believe the vest would inflate.

I also wonder about the vulnerability of the wireless link. If a passing cell phone/CB/Ham radio/TV tower caused it to go off accidentally, it would almost certainly cause an accident.

The biggest hurdle by far, though is cost and use. Most riders are young, predominately male. As a general rule, we either are so young we don't fully understand the risk of riding (or after about 2 weeks of street riding) we realize the risk and accept it as the cost for our freedom. Most riders will spend plenty of money on their bike, but not much at all on their gear, so you would first have to convince the young guy that the risk will really be minimized and that the financial cost is worth the reduction in risk. Not an easy sale! I give it a 10% chance of being successful.

Re:Doubtful...

[gillbates]

I agree, but I'll add something.

The biggest problem with motorcycle accidents is spinal cord and head injuries, which this device will do nothing to prevent. All other types of injuries commonly associated with motorcycle accidents are very survivable (road rash, bruises, the occasional broken bone, etc...).

I remember a few years ago, someone came out with a motorcycle seatbelt which could be retrofitted to a motorcycle. Not surprisingly, very few bought the idea. The reason is simple: it is fairly common for motorcycles to "come out from under" a rider; slick asphalt or gravel, a flat tire, or locking either wheel while braking will cause a motorcycle to fall over, and most riders would rather ditch the bike than be dragged along with it. (motorcycles will slide on the pavement much farther than the rider.) Once again, we have a device which inspires little confidence in its safety because:

• The number of accidents in which this device would protect the rider is relatively small, and the degree of protection is relatively minor - the road rash and bruises this device would prevent are relatively insignificant compared to the spinal cord and head injuries feared by the safety-conscious riders.
• The possibility of this complicating injuries in an accident is relatively large.

This is the kind of device which is invented by technicians wearing lab coats, rather than real riders. Most riders are open to safety enhancements, however, the nature of motorcycle riding dictates that different methods of safety be used. In cars, ejection of passengers results in injuries more often than not; with motorcycles, it's just the opposite - many motorcyclists (myself included) are still alive today because they separated themselves from the bike before or during an impending accident. While airbags and seatbelts may increase the safety of automobiles, they have the opposite effect in motorcycles - they tend to complicate injuries while offering very little in the way of accident protection.

Re:Doubtful...

[olman]

The biggest problem with motorcycle accidents is spinal cord and head injuries, which this device will do nothing to prevent.

Doesn't protect your back? Did you look at the link? This suit has BIGGER airbag protecting your back than ribcage! Anyone riding a bike without a helmet deserves what they get IMHO.

Important Safety Rule For Motorcycle Riders

[wiredog]

Always assume that anyone driving a car, truck, etc, is one or more of:

• Blind
  
• Drunk
  
• Stoned
  
• Stupid
  

Re:Important Safety Rule For Motorcycle Riders

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

I try to go 5-10mph faster than traffic, since it reduces the danger of being hit from behind or clipped from the side by cagers. I know I'M paying attention to what's in front of me, but the guy behind/beside me is beyond my control. I also pay close attention in my mirrors when stopping, making sure the guy behind me looks like he is too. If he isn't, I try to leave an escape route for myself.

Sometimes, it's just safer to speed. :-/

Dropping your bike

[panker]

I have ridden motorcycles for quite some time, and everyone I know has dropped their bike while parked at least once. Having your airbag vest go off at that time would make the event even more embarassing that it already is.

I can just see it.

[BurntHombre]

So your leg will be lying over there...

And your arm will be hanging from that tree...

And your head will be there by the curb...

But your torso will be in a remarkably preserved state!

Re:I love government regulation

[YrWrstNtmr]

So, how many motorcyclists will die a preventable death before the DOT gets off its ass and allows these.

Or, how many would be injured or die due to use of a "safety" device not properly tested and evaluated, which may introduce other, more serious problems. Even though "It seemed like a good idea at the time".

These things may be the best prevention device going. Or, they may compound the problems in a crash. Causing the rider to tumble instead of slide, inadvertant activations, too much force resulting in broken ribs, compatibility with other user worn articles (backpacks, etc), and on and on.

Just because it looks like a good idea doesn't mean it is a good idea.

Re:Biking stories ... sniff

[petrilli]

On the other had, it's just plain impossible to respect the speed limits with any stock supersport bike these days.

Bullsh*t. It's called self-control. I ride quickly on the open roads, as do all my friends, but that doesn't mean we ride at 100MPH+ on the streets. That's what track days are for.

I'm sorry, but you and your friends were nothing more than squids who took stupid risks, and paid the price. Personal responsibility, buster. It's just like people who choose to ride without a helmet, in shorts and a set of flip flops on a bike that can do 200MPH. Yeah, there's using your noggin.

Darwinian evolution. Get out of the gene pool.

Until then..

[nolife]

Anyone that rides a motorcycle hopefully already knows this.. use LEATHER!!

It's not just a Harley thing or a status symbol, it is for safety. Leather boots, pants and gloves with hard sole boots or shoes. In a motorcycle ejection or fall off, it is better to gradually slide to a stop then to stick to the ground and tumble around. Leather will allow you to slide while protecting the skin and provide a decent stopping friction. It does not help much when slamming into something where conservation of momentum is tested but for most motorcycle dumps and mishaps it can save your life.

Re:Until then..

[Scrameustache]

Don't forget a full-face helmet.

I was coming home on my bike once, in traffic, and this FUCKING IDIOT threw his cigarette out the freakin' window, it flew right into my left eye.

Now lemme tell you, there is nothing like red-hot ashes in your eye to make you realise the value of a full-face helmet (it was really hot, so my visor was up). I still can't believe I managed to get to the curb and stop safelly without being run over by another idiot...
Of course now whenever I see someone throw a cigarette out of a car window I get an adrenaline rush and the urge to ram their car, drag them out and beat them to a bloody pulp...sigh.

Re:The picture

[Paul Jakma]

Not wearing a helmet on a bike is /insane/.

It doesnt take much of a knock to the head to kill, you can kill yourself when the bike is /stationary/ if you're not wearing a helmet. (ie you fall sideways and your head happens to be the one to break the fall).

Re:Preceding a collision?!?!

[BradleyUffner]

"Yeah, riiiiiight...
and while they're at it why don't they try detecting other tell-tale signs like profuse bleeding and bone fractures that also precede a collision."

I'm going to assume them mean the collision between the rider and the ground, or other object. When the rider is thrown from the bike it would mean that the bike has alrady hit something and the rider is being carried by innertia. The sudden deceleration of the bike triggers the wearable airbag before the rider actually impacts something.

Version for Segway also planned...

[clickety6]

It looks the same and works identically except that the trigger goes off if the wearer acheives speeds of more than 20 miles per hour, as on a Segway this is an obvious sign of a collision...

is an airbag the right concept?

[g4dget]

The primary problem that airbags address is hitting the windshield or steering wheel with your head. But on a motorcycle, the head is already well protected by the helmet. The main concern would seem to be the spine. Is an airbag the best way of protecting that?

Perhaps the various semi-rigid body armors are better after all. Does anybody know how effective they actually are? Are there any studies or tests?

In the unlikely event of a 10g+ water landing...

[NotTheNickIWanted]

...your motorcycle gear may be used as a flotation device.

Re:Biking stories ... sniff

[jonerik]

It was the 3d person of a 15 member group of bikers that had died in the course of about 2 years, and i had enough. OK, most of the blame was up to us, we drove at incredible speeds on public roads ( 200 kph+ was not at all unusual

Christ, what was the name of this group? The Lemmings?

this is more about scooters in Italy

[SethJohnson]

Considering that the product is coming out of Italy, where scooters are wildly popular within cities, I have the feeling this vest is primarily going to be sold to the scooter crowd. According to this BBC article,

"scooters and motorcycles are the principal cause of death in Italy among youths aged 19 to 24"



Speaking in general terms, the accidents that scooter users suffer in Italian cities are likely to be less extreme than motorcyclists in the US. There are probably fewer collisions with automobiles compared to the overall number of scooter spills due to other mishaps such as leaning out too far to grab a woman's ass (I have personally witnessed this maneuver in Rome). In such circumstances, this vest will probably decrease the impact of a low-speed tumble.

Though statistics show a lot of Italian deaths caused by scooter accidents, that doesn't mean scooter riding itself is so dangerous that injuries can't be mitigated by products like this. It means that there are a LOT of people tooling around on scooters in Italy. If you go there, you'll notice that right away.

Fun with spark gap generator

[JUSTONEMORELATTE]

12v relay - $3.50
9v battery - $2.29
momentary contact switch - $0.79
WarDriving with a spark gap generator to swamp the sensor in the exploding vest - priceless
--