Eject System

[Woodcraft]

I do think that we all need to take a breath on this one a little bit. I put information out there as I got it, and it is exactly what you'd expect from a manufacturer. (1) We need to know it doesn't affect the helmet (2) riders can't mess with their helmets to try to make it "fit" and (3) they need to take care of it. It all makes sense. I'm sure that if you talked to any other helmet manufacturer they would say the same thing. What I did not get was "Hey, no way, don't use those things - they are bad". If I had got that response, there would be a big problem. There is not.

I think we need to consider the intent here...which is that the track wants to be sure that no matter what, the people who staff the Ambulances are fully capable of removing a helmet without further injuring the rider. I think that there is little doubt that this system will help accomplish that goal. We have a medical staff that does both bikes and cars, and they are all trained on how to use this system. Is the track going to make money on this...I don't think so. It would be a heck of a lot easier to raise entry fees $5 if the goal was just to make money.

So, what it boils down to is that we need to make sure that they are comfortable and that they don't affect the safety of the helmet. Logically thinking, do I feel that a little plastic bag between the pads and the styrofoam in my helmet is going to render it unsafe....no. That's not scientific fact, but it is my gut feeling. I'm having a hard time imagining how it could pose a problem. Are they comfortable? Timmy says that he didn't notice it, and I think we wears an Arai like I do. Either way, we've got someone who tried it on and says it's not terrible.

With all this said, if the track requires a device that for $60 makes it much more likely that the person who tries to pull my snug fitting helmet off my head doesn't jostle my spine around, and it goes unnoticed while I ride....it's not that big a deal. I think that there is more data coming out from a third party that we all need to take a look at before going too crazy here. But, from what I see so far, if the track requires it, I'm going to throw it on and roll from there. I do believe that it is being put forth with the intent of making racing safer and in the end it's not a really big deal.

[Yknot]

I used the EJECT all last season. I bought it when they hinted at it being required for 2011 and when it wasn't figured I would put it in anyway since I had it. That said I never really noticed that it was there. The profile is fairly small and any additional pressure wasn't noticable.

Another note, it was not used in my trip to the infield care on the backboard to remove the helmet. Most of the concern was with back injury and quite frankly don't even remember them removing my helmet. Maybe it would only be used in the event that neck spinal injury is a concern? Not sure, my helmet was labeled with the EJECT stickers.

[scottieducati]

I am absolutely no expert on this subject, but from my understanding the biggest potential issue with the device is that it was developed in sports (e.g.: mostly cars w/ cages) that generally do not hold the potential for a significant, direct hit to the top of the head. If that is the case it was not designed in an environment where one could have significant trauma to the top of the helmet (area where the device is housed). Using the system to remove the helmet in this instance could potentially exert pressure on the impact area, an issue rarely found in other forms of motorsport (e.g., with dirt bikes, you're really talking sudden neck jerking incidents of smacking against the ground and flopping back, not so much flying head first into something hard and even in open-wheel auto racing, there's a bar right over the riders' head).

IF that is true (their developmental background and intended use), and if that added pressure poses a significant risk to the riders' safety in the case of a high-speed impact to the top of the helmet, the real issue of concern boils down to:

This proposed new rule requiring the use of the device would be two things: 1) a mandate to modify the single most important piece of rider safety equipment and to do so in contrast to manufacturers' recommendations and 2) potentially placing the rider at greater risk in the instance of trauma to the area where the device would be used.

That being said you could also say the EMT's will be trained to inspect that area of the helmet prior to utilizing the system to assist in helmet removal. The debate can rage on, and on.

I am of the same mindset as Eric, if it didn't bother me I'd wear it and move on (just like I wear my back protector even though nobody checks if it's on during practice). I'd consider those brace things you wear over your shoulders to prevent your helmet from snapping back if I found it comfortable and not intrusive to my particular riding style. I'll choose to wear the best safety gear I can possibly afford if:

a) I think it will protect me in a crash. Because I've been at this long enough to know crashes can happen anywhere, anytime, at any point on the track and to anyone.

b) If it does not impact my ability to comfortably ride my bike.

If the track thinks these are a good idea (as do I, for the record), how about they offer 'em to anyone who wants one at the lowest price possible... or, include one with every trackday signup, race registration, etc. for each person in 2012 onward?

[scottieducati]

PS: I am 100% sure everyone involved in decision makings going on are working for no other reason than to provide the safest environment for us to ride in possible. THANK YOU, for that. And thanks Eric, for taking the time to talk with us, think about / look into, etc. about these issues and to be involved with all these discussions. You're a heck of an ambassador for us.

[Gecko]

Okay, I told myself I wasn’t going to get involved and I wasn’t to do this … but I cannot help myself.

Eric, I have the utmost respect for you, your dedication to the sport and to the LRRS racing community. I do not question that everything you’ve said is well intentioned. This is not meant as a personal attack, but merely an open discussion of the issues you’ve set forth. I have no real horse in this race (I will likely wear the unit if forced to do so and it does not impede comfort), but feel compelled to advocate for an individuals choice to assess and balance his/her personal risk where empirical data does not appear to exist to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that this unit is necessary for a rider's health, safety and well-being. With that said....

What I did not get was "Hey, no way, don't use those things - they are bad". If I had got that response, there would be a big problem. There is not.

Do you wonder why you haven’t gotten that type of response back from helmet manufacturers? Since you didn’t get that response back, is it proper for us to assume, a fortiori, that this unit is safe? Well, let me ask you this: whose job is it to do testing on this product? Arai, Shoei, AGV? No. It’s the manufacturer of this nifty little unit. I have yet to read anything yet that indicates that the manufacturer of this safety device, which is supposed to fit into a helmet not manufactured to accommodate the piece of equipment, has fully tested it in every (or almost every) type of helmet, or sought or received approval of its device for use in all the major helmet manufacturers products, or even approached SNELL or some other safety organization's for their approval or endorsement. Doesn’t this send up a red flag for us? NHMS? LRRS?

I think we need to consider the intent here...which is that the track wants to be sure that … the [Ambulance staff] are fully capable of removing a helmet without further injuring the rider. I think that there is little doubt that this system will help accomplish that goal.

Was the Ambulance staff unable to do that before? Are they unable to do that now? Are they unable to do it with the Arai system? Surely there must be empirical data to support this need (just like LLRS has with regard to their banning of certain types of helmets) … so, how many injuries have been recorded at LRRS that are attributable to the unsafe removal of a helmet? AMA level? WSB level? Of course this is rhetorical, but the point is valid nonetheless.

By the way, statistically speaking, per year, how many neck injuries in are there from motorcycle racing vis-à-vis the total number of crashes? I ask because I just don’t know how at risk we are from neck injuries (let alone helmet removal neck injuries). How much risk is this system saving me from versus creating by being put in a helmet that was not manufactured to accommodate the piece of equipment? Again, rhetorical, but the point is valid nonetheless.

Is the track going to make money on this...I don't think so. It would be a heck of a lot easier to raise entry fees $5 if the goal was just to make money.

I seriously doubt this is the issue. Even a cursory review of the posts in this thread (with the exception of one I think) reveals that this is not the issue here.

So, what it boils down to is that we need to make sure that they are comfortable and that they don't affect the safety of the helmet.

Correct, and I think what is being said here is that until such time as the manufacturer of this unit does its due diligence as mentioned above (testing, approvals, etc.), LRRS should not mandate it use. Let the individual racer decide whether he chooses the risk with or without this unit. LRRS and NHMS can endorse its use, but mandating it is an entirely different issue.

With all this said, if the track requires a device that for $60 makes it much more likely that the person who tries to pull my snug fitting helmet off my head doesn't jostle my spine around, and it goes unnoticed while I ride....it's not that big a deal.

Again, that’s your personal choice to make, balancing the as yet unknown risks of having the unit in your helmet against the unknown benefit as you perceive it. It’s likely not a big deal for me either. However, with that said, others would like to be able to make the same personal choice, where the data is not concrete, and come down on the other side. These individuals are being told they cannot make such a choice with little more than a paternalistic “because we said so” in response to their question “why?”

…if the track requires it, I'm going to throw it on and roll from there. I do believe that it is being put forth with the intent of making racing safer and in the end it's not a really big deal.

I have no doubt that this is being put out there with good intentions. But sometimes even the best intentioned actions can often turn out poorly. Some people would like to be able to balance the unknown risks at stake here (for and against) and make the choice for themselves.

Let me ask you this ... if they believe in this little nifty device so much ... are NHMS and LRRS willing to exempt from the waiver of liability any and all injury arising from, either direct or indirectly, the use or deployment of this device as a safety measure whether properly or improperly used by the rider, cornerworkers or emergency personnel? Or do you think that NHMS and LRRS’s insurance carrier(s) might balk at such an exemption from their waiver? Why should they? After all, it’s in the name of safety, no? Wouldn’t that be a show of good faith and belief in this system on the part of NHMS, LRRS and their respective carriers? Again, rhetorical, but the point is valid nonetheless.

As I said in my prior post above, without empirical data in existence to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that this unit is necessary for a rider's health, safety and well-being, mandating its use, even if this equipment is meant (with all the best intentions) as a safety measure, knowing that that the helmet the equipment is supposed to fit into is not manufactured to accommodate that piece of equipment, and knowing that the piece of equipment has not been fully tested by its manufacturer in every type of helmet, and its manufacturer has not sought or received approval of its device for use in all the major helmet manufacturers products, and has not even approached SNELL or some other safety organization's for their approval or endorsement, that later proves to be dangerous and causes injury to a participant(s) of a sanctioned event where its use has been mandated by LRRS and/or NHMS … with or without a waiver of liability … is a lawyers wet dream.

[Woodcraft]

John,

The concerns you raise are something for the track to consider, it's certainly not my place to go into the ins and outs of the legal side of this issue. At this moment, I can only offer my personal opinion knowing what I know now. I am not a medical expert - just a rider who wants to see the sport and the people who participate in it continue to succeed. I expect that if the track is to indeed mandate this that they will also release some data supporting their decision. When and if that happens, we will all look what is presented and make a judgement from there.

Sound reasonable?

[butcher bergs]

I continue to stand by every single one of my posts regarding this device and it's good to know that others are just starting to see the light since we now have the attention of the Expert racers in the community.

I accept the apologies in advance from the people who wanted to accuse me of stirring up shit just for the sake of stirring up shit. I highly doubt the few of you would man up and say it outloud to me but I forgive you regardless.




Thank you Eric, for taking the time to follow up on this.

[Jim]

Bergs, you already made it clear that you want nothing to do with any CCS organizations, including LRRS. So go back to the WERA boards :

[BrianC]

Is the bag made out of latex or sheepskin?

seriously... someone might have allergies to latex.

[RyanNicholson]

Personally... I'm not smart enough to challenge the decision and if I'm told I have to wear one to ride on the track, ok thats annoying but fine I'll buy one. IMHO there are a million other factors that come with riding on the track that exceed the potential danger of a 1/4" thick device in the top of my helmet, that may or may not at some point cause more harm than good.

I'm behind improving rider safety 100%, have donated to the air fence fund, and am a huge advocate of wearing the best gear possible to make this relatively dangerous sport as safe as it can be. That said, we're racing motorcycles.

As for the discussion, I think Gecko makes a damn good point... but I'll wear one regardless if I'm told I need one.

[butcher bergs]

Bergs, you already made it clear that you want nothing to do with any CCS organizations, including LRRS. So go back to the WERA boards :

You know that's not the case, Jim.

I simply gave up on trying to show you the proper line through T5.

[butcher bergs]

How can you show what you don't know?

Aren't you busy petitioning for a bump you're not eligible for?

[PainfullySlow]

There is a line through 5?

[Jim]

There is a line through 5?

I think their making a reference to the time I went through the fence between T5 and T6.

[SVRACER01]

if the track is honestly concerned about rider safety and being able to safely remove a helmet then why require just one particular device when there are obviously other devices out there that perform the task. maybe what should be MANDATED is a helmet removal system. that way if someone likes the Eject they can get it. if someone wants the Arai head sock they can get and with both arai and shoei making removable cheekpad systems they should also be adequate enough to perform the task at hand for those that maybe have to buy a new helmet this year anyway. Mandating ONE specific device is like telling everyone they can only wear one brand of back protector or one brand of glove.
personally, i see myself buying the shoei X12 when its time to replace my lid, and in my eyes that system should do the job of assisting in helmet removal just fine without the Eject

[Eric Baker]

The problem with allowing multiple devices is the staff will have to all have training in multiple devices. It's easier to just train them well on one device.

[SVRACER01]

i see your point but realistically the removal of the helmet is basically the same. of all the systems, the eject seems to be the most involved. and slower. if im not breathing i would like my helmet removed as fast as possible. removing the cheek pads or using the head sock are pretty straight forward.

[R7]

The problem with allowing multiple devices is the staff will have to all have training in multiple devices. It's easier to just train them well on one device.

If this is the tracks reason...well that would be the icing on the cake

[tsorfas]

I think their making a reference to the time I went through the fence between T5 and T6.

I tried to follow your line too Jim

[tsorfas]

if the track is honestly concerned about rider safety and being able to safely remove a helmet then why require just one particular device when there are obviously other devices out there that perform the task. maybe what should be MANDATED is a helmet removal system. that way if someone likes the Eject they can get it. if someone wants the Arai head sock they can get and with both arai and shoei making removable cheekpad systems they should also be adequate enough to perform the task at hand for those that maybe have to buy a new helmet this year anyway. Mandating ONE specific device is like telling everyone they can only wear one brand of back protector or one brand of glove.
personally, i see myself buying the shoei X12 when its time to replace my lid, and in my eyes that system should do the job of assisting in helmet removal just fine without the Eject

that is one of the most accurate posts! never thought of that but its very important that if the issue is removing the helmet properly allow the rider to choose the equipment he wants

[timmyho414]

So, yesterday I got bored and put my helmet and sat around the house with it on for about an hour. My girlfriend asked if I was trying to be goofy or if I was actually doing something(nether surprise her anymore).

My helmet normally leaves two red spots on my forehead. Not bad but they are there. The first placement was too far forward, I tried not to cover any vent holes. The red spot is larger and less deep if I remember correctly. I moved it back maybe 1/2 to 3/4 inch and directly blocked the left center vent my Arai. I tried it for another hour. I think it fits more uniformly then before(ever) due to the shape of my head and the helmet. The pressure spots are more uniform and less deep.

I did put the hose in the wrong place the second time and it left a nasty line in my head. I could feel that the whole time, it was my fault. I didn't tuck it in between the padding. It did not do after I fixed it. I put in the pictures just so everyone would understand exactly what I'm talking about.

Obviously, everyone's head/helmet combo are different so 'your results may very'.

I'm going to run it.

I hope this helps.

[Woodcraft]

that is one of the most accurate posts! never thought of that but its very important that if the issue is removing the helmet properly allow the rider to choose the equipment he wants

This is not from the track, but what comes to me when thinking about this (and others have noted the same)....it probably becomes very difficult to train guys on what becomes an infinite number of removal equipment options....it might be a hood, or a removable cheek pad, or an Eject system; something different for Arai, Bell, AGV, Suomy, Shoei....etc. The main justification that I can think of is to make helmet removal something that the ambulance guys do not need to think about - if it needs to come off, there is one main way to do it.

[daviid]

This is not from the track, but what comes to me when thinking about this (and others have noted the same)....it probably becomes very difficult to train guys on what becomes an infinite number of removal equipment options....it might be a hood, or a removable cheek pad, or an Eject system; something different for Arai, Bell, AGV, Suomy, Shoei....etc. The main justification that I can think of is to make helmet removal something that the ambulance guys do not need to think about - if it needs to come off, there is one main way to do it.

or they could just go train ambulance personal to take a helmet off without any of these fancy dancy devices...

[lrrs428]

I got mine from Rising Sun with a LRRS discount. Fits in my Suomy just fine and its not noticed between being that thin and the pad it sits under. It even has a little piece of Velcro to secure the end of the hose to the helmet. Ill take the $50 to improve safety over the $400 I had to spend last year for a friggin transponder.

[yamaduc214]

Thanks for the post LRRS428. I wear Suomy and was wondering how the fit would be and what i could expect.