Really? Besides me, only four other people wrote in?!
Printable View
>35 and I say do it :thumbsup:
"Majority of letters received were probably against mandating it. Implies either they weren't read, not coherrent enough to understand, or not tallied. Is that really hard to do with 4 letters or less?
Don't doubt that is what you were told. Perhaps that BoD member was misinformed or misunderstood.
Or was purposely misleading you by not counting "emails" as "letters".
[QUOTE]
Doug, I have come to the conclusion that I will NEVER post what a BOD/CRB member has told me first hand ever again. I have talked to 3 BOD/CRB members about the H&N deal and have got 3 completely different stories. I was getting the same thing and still do with any Honda related info also.
I was told directly over the phone that the H&N deal was pushed through by K&K from a CRB member and now it seems that's not true as posted by Phil. Who do I believe? Or does it really matter anyway!
Ok, everything I posted is wrong and everyone lies about everything. There are no truths to hold self evident, all men are created equal and internet arguments are pointless and a waste of time.
My resolution for 2010 is to stay out of threads like this indefinitely. Nothing is solved by a bunch of people whining and refusing to listen to reason or facts. Write your letters, complain to anyone who will listen. Snap your own neck in half if you want to.
I give up. :whiteflag:
Mike
I can absolutely tell you that the H & N deal was not pushed by the Insurance company which is not K &K BTW - its Weisenberg. Everytime we asked risk management they said that they would like it done but it was not a condition of insuring us. Where it would hurt would be a catastrophic claim using the lack of a mandatory modern proven safety device to breach the waiver protection and its subsequent effect on premiums.
In case you don't understand its all a question of loss ratios that determine premiums we all pay to be insured at the race track - no claims, lower rates. One good negligence suit - who knows? Can we risk it, sure, but as a BOD I don't think its an acceptable risk to the Club in the long run
I have found that some members of the CRB and BOD try not to aggravate pissed off members when they communicate on issues like this - I tend to be more blunt!!!!
Phil
Doug, I never said you were wrong. Just giving you my experiance as of lately. My point is that unless someone posts for public record, all else is just hearsay info. That's why I asked Phil to come on here and post his views. I have now learned my lesson! Unfortunatly being raised by a bunch of old world Italians I was tought that if you gave your word or made a deal on a hand shake that it was "law". I guess I'm just expecting too much from other people these days.
Phil, You have an email.
Phil....I appreciate your straight talk! As an opponent(I wear a HANS) only because of allowing folks to make their own choice, I now stand corrected due to your explanation of the insurance issues and ramifications of not mandating H&N's. Also, my ignorance of some very compeling liability issues!!
Color me converted and no more sh*t coming from this corner of Vermont....LOL. Thanks again for your enlightenment!
As an ex BOD member as of tomorrow.Phil is telling you the absolute gospel.I personally voted against the motion ,as I see a 2012 implementation date as too far down the road if we in fact believe it is a necessary safety item. My second issue is that SFI in my opinion is too tightly tied to the manufacturers on many items because there is financial gain within this relationship.I don't discard any ideas that almost any H&N restraint system manufacturered by a reputable company is going to make you safer but this rule sticks us with the 38.1 SFI rated devices only.We all assume that,but the lack of empirecal data within our club and implementing a safety device two years down the road that is perceived to be necessary now bothers me.I am glad that most competitors use them already I just wonder how many competitors will be pushed out of club competition because there is not device that fits the 38.1 SFI rating that will work in their particular car.
Putting aside SFI, here's a simple survey to try to understand how people feel about the fundamental difference between the 2 basic approaches to HNR
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/H2QRMR7
Is this survey perfect, NO. Will people game it, probably.
Mike Sauce just validated what I said earler about SFI.
Well said.
But we know the issue isn't really safety so much as risk and liability. The club cannot assume that its members are reasonable people. Is the policy perfect? No. But without a HNR policy (and in light of the fact that other clubs DO have a HNR policy) we would clearly be lagging behind the accepted industry norm. Can you picture the lawsuit: "PCA requires a HNR, SCCA does not and therefore SCCA implicitly encouraged my plaintiff that it was not necessary, which was a contributing factor in his injury."
Thanks to Mike and Phil both for their willingness to put forth their thoughts on the matter.
I did write in; hope it made it through, but I guess ultimately it didn't matter...
Sorry to the die-hards out there, but this is NOT going to stop me from racing in 2012.
The SCCA recently changed the mailing process for letters to the CRB & the BOD. I do not know if any letters were delayed.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
That's interesting because I sent an email to the BOB on 12/21 and received a reply in less than a half an hour.
:shrug:
I sent mine on Jan 11, 09 and as of today have not received a response.
Has anyone had to modify the headrest in their car to comply with the HANS use instructions? If you haven't read them the device (HANS) should NEVER touch the headrest. The current rules allow for a HANS but the headrest rule could invalidate the manufacturer's warranty.
James
Where did you see that?:confused:
I saw that the HANS should not contact the seat-back in the HANS instructions I have. It also said that the headrest should be able to be fully compressed by the helmet and HANS.
Having said that, I had to move the headrest back slightly and move my seating position forward to fit the HANS into my Citation 95SF.
I use a DefNder. To get comfortable I had to cut notches in the top of my seat to accommodate the shoulder harnesses and remove a bit of padding behind my head (about 1.5cm worth). This is in an RF00.
I know it's not a HANS but it when I was removing some of the pieces from my bead seat it just seemed like accommodating the h&n device was something that everyone had to deal with to some degree.
CORRECT:
When sitting in your 'normal' position, the HANS device should NOT contact either the helmet or the head rest.
There should be about 1.5" between the back of your helmet and the head rest with the HANS sticking up in between.
For those who need pictures:
http://www.stableenergies.com/HANS_quick_guide.pdf
From the installation instructions:
"3) So that the interaction of the helmet and headrest is not compromised in rebound during a frontal impact there must be sufficient clearance between the back of the HANS and the chassis seatback bulkhead/top of seat. The minimum distance for this clearance is 25mm."
James
We have fit HANS devices to several formula cars for multiple drivers with very few problems. It typically requires movement of the headrest height up a bit & minor mods to the seat backs to allow for rearward clearance for the HANS.
Thanks ... Jay Novak
That didn't make sense to me either, because if it was true, you would not be able to use a HANS in any sedan with an upright seat.
The following is from the FIA certification. They also list the allowable helmets that are certified for use with the HANS.
3. Headrests and cockpit surrounds with HANS®
In order to ensure compatibility with the rear headrest, sufficient clearance is necessary between the rear of the HANS® and the seatback bulkhead or top of the seat. The minimum necessary is 25mm. Where possible the installation should enable the headrest to be fully compressed by the helmet and HANS® without any interaction with the seatback bulkhead or top of the seat.
Indy Car has an extention developed by Jeff Horton, Indy Director of Engineering, to reduce injuries resulting from the HANS digging into headrests during rear impacts.
James
'Nother update on letters; I put mine in back in Dec, though the website just after it was rolled out. Just got an email in the last couple of days that my letter was passed on for reading.
Looks like this vote was premature, and another month or two should be allowed for the feedback to come in, at which point the issue needs to be revisited? Or does it pretty much not matter what we want or think. I'm guessing the latter - based on the legal environment.
Or, to put it another way, no amount of letters would keep devices from being required at this point - at most, they'd only change small details of implementation.
Notice it says headrest and seat back bulkhead. That means the solid part of the headrest or seat back that isn't going to move. The squishy parts are fine if they touch. What it looks like they are trying to make sure of is that when your melon comes flying back on rebound that there isn't a instant hard stop hence our normal padding behind the helmet. Or at least that's how I read it.
I've been out of racing for 2 years and getting back in this year. So I need to shop for a new helmet and other gear.
Does anybody know if there are any helmets manufactured with the HANS anchors already built in? With HANS being more and more universally accepted I' be surprised if there weren't. Or is there a reason why not?
When you purchase your H&N device, the anchors are included.
Many, such as Bell, have either drilled and installed a small plug where the anchor goes, or has the spot marked in the mold, so a dimple shows up in the drill location.
The only anchors I heard of, that were included with a helmet, were those found on Impacts, which were recalled when they were found to be copies and not HANS pieces.
Gforce helmets are pre-drilled for HANS and have the nut washer already inserted under the liner. We have not had any problems with counterfeit nut washers with Gforce. The top of the anchor is screwed into the helmet and you are good to go. Gforce also includes a small wrench to adjust the nut washer for tightening. You also get a nifty thin wrench with the HANS device and anchors.
We will install the anchors at no charge with the purchase of a device. If you are getting a new helmet, we strongly recommend trying on the helmet first and if you want to send it back for the install, we would be happy to do that for you.
We have a good supply of helmets in stock and HANS devices if you are near our neck of the woods and want to stop in. - Oops - Just noticed you are in CA - not near us. If we can help with anything though, feel free to contact me!
My brother & I started racing 5 years ago and wore HANS devices from day one.
Our friend who started with us just got one.
It was like putting a collar on a feral cat.
He keeps scratching & biting at it
Funny as hell to watch.