Airbags expanding

[Hot_Air]

Mark Marquez rides a SuperGlide! Who knew?

[Hot_Air]

This study has performed evaluation of the current airbag jackets found on the market. The airbag jackets
seem to provide limited protection from a threshold speed which can be estimated to an impact around to 30-40km/h but these speeds differ with the impact configuration (direct impact against an obstacle or ground fall). This level of protection can be considered as important since the impact of a human against an obstacle at this range of speed is particularly strong and concern high levels of energy.

Germany's ADAC tests came to a similar conclusion about airbags providing (valuable) protection up to 50 Km/h. Though I'm curious why ADAC gave a Good protection rating to all the airbags tested - none scored Very Good - but then it's new-ish tech.

Google translate required: ADAC Test: Airbag-Westen für Motorradfahrer

looks like I have some bedtime reading to do.

How's your bedtime reading? It looks like what needs most impact protection is the front and side of the chest, plus the abdomen. Yet (except Alpinestars Tech-Air) most airbags don't protect all these areas.

analysis showed that the most vulnerable anatomical regions of the trunk (in this work neck, shoulders, thorax, abdomen, spine and pelvis) are the thorax and the abdomen. Accidents involving a passenger car, in particular on the side (head-on-side and oblique-on-side) and the front (head-on) of the vehicle were identified as the main crash configurations resulting from the accident study. Multibody simulations demonstrated that the impacts presenting the highest risk of injury for the motorcyclist are impacts against the car. The body regions most exposed to these impacts, and therefore the suggested protection zones for airbag devices, are the frontal and lateral thoracic and abdominal regions.

The conditions of the impacts sustained by the motorcyclist, in terms of impact velocities and impacted surfaces, were also determined and could be used to define the required protection levels. Two main types of surfaces (flat and penetrant) and three impact velocities on the thorax (5, 7 and 13 m/s) and two on the abdomen (5 and 11 m/s) are recommended to evaluate and improve protection devices in order to reduce thoracic and abdominal injuries.

[The Spin Doctor]

How's your bedtime reading? It looks like what needs most impact protection is the front and side of the chest, plus the abdomen. Yet (except Alpinestars Tech-Air) most airbags don't protect all these areas.

But again this isn't new... we've known that for ages. It's one reason I've kept saying that back protectors are only of use in a limited subset of crashes.

And you also need to protect against pelvic and femur fractures - they often cause fatal bleeds.

[Hot_Air]

Helite's E-Turtle looks like it could protect the pelvis in some circumstance, but won't save the pelvis from being slammed forwards into the bike. Protection against femur fractures seems tricky (is there anything that can?).

I've kept saying that back protectors are only of use in a limited subset of crashes.

Haven't we already agreed this (the CE-standard for back protectors needs a re-think)? Though I was interested to see that a manufacturer, RST, states on its website that spinal damage would be "unmitigated" by a back protector:

Serious spinal injuries are usually caused by axial forces due to blows to the head, or bending and twisting forces on the back caused by blows to the shoulders, hips or other parts of the body. In the Cambridge standard for motorcyclists clothing, Roderick Woods asserts that the majority of spinal injuries are caused by blows to the hips and shoulders. In the rare circumstance that a motorcyclist received a direct blow to the back the damage would be unmitigated by armour. The concept of a "back protector" is therefore not endorsed by Woods. Although back protectors are defined in the standard, cannot protect against axial forces they are required to protect the scapula and there is now a considerable anecdotal evidence that wearing a certified back protector can significantly reduce trauma in a major accident as they reduce the effect of impacts on the ribs and lessen the blows to the internal organs too

See: https://www.rst-moto.com/protection.html?limit=all

[Horse]

could protect the pelvis in some circumstance, but won't save the pelvis from being slammed forwards into the bike. Protection against femur fractures seems tricky (is there anything that can?).

Yes, your brain.

A variety of measures can be taken on the approach to junctions to try to prevent the situation from developing further, but for now we will confine ourselves to an 'imminent collision'. ...

...

If you are going to collide with the car, it is likely to be a glancing or angled impact with its side or square-on to its rear wheel arch area. Try to ensure that it is the bike which hits the car, not you. Stand up. If your leg is about to attempt an impersonation of a crash bar, lift your leg. If you can get your knee and shin onto the seat, the car driver will really have to work hard to break them!
Release the handlebar on the side that will impact and swing your arm in front of your body.

...

In the third and final variation, the driver starts off just as you reach the junction. The vehicle is likely to hit your side. ...

If not, then the standing up and arm-swinging technique is used again. You might even control the bike and continue on.

[Horse]

And let's be realistic: people get mangled very badly when they're belted into modern cars and involved in high energy crashes.

Mitigating against that sort of impact force by adding a wearable airbag and a bit of squidgy plastic isn't feasible.

[scottyuk]

Airbags don't solve everything. They don't purport to.

If they help a bit then its surely just down to the individual on whether that extra bit of help is worth the expense.

[Horse]

Airbags don't solve everything. They don't purport to.

Dainese say:

Experience the highest level of safety for use in any situation on the road.​

A* say:
Offering instantaneous, high-pressure inflatable protection Tech-Air® gives the rider comprehensive protection in a crash

[The Spin Doctor]

Helite's E-Turtle looks like it could protect the pelvis in some circumstance, but won't save the pelvis from being slammed forwards into the bike. Protection against femur fractures seems tricky (is there anything that can?).

Flat-topped fuel tanks where the seat is level with the tank top, so that you slide over it... and collapsible / snap-off handlebars - a ruddy great steel tiller at thigh level is pretty crude.

Haven't we already agreed this (the CE-standard for back protectors needs a re-think)? Though I was interested to see that a manufacturer, RST, states on its website that spinal damage would be "unmitigated" by a back protector:

But then go on to claim 'anedoctal' evidence and 'considerable' reduction.

[Horse]

Helite's E-Turtle looks like it could protect the pelvis in some circumstance, but won't save the pelvis from being slammed forwards into the bike. Protection against femur fractures seems tricky (is there anything that can?).

Flat-topped fuel tanks where the seat is level with the tank top, so that you slide over it... and collapsible / snap-off handlebars - a ruddy great steel tiller at thigh level is pretty crude.

Which reminds me. I'm fairly sure that I heard / read that the inners of BMW RT fairings are designed to 'encourage' the rider 'up'.

[The Spin Doctor]

Airbags don't solve everything. They don't purport to.

If they help a bit then its surely just down to the individual on whether that extra bit of help is worth the expense.

The trouble is that people have unrealistic expectations, fuelled by hyperbolic advertising claims, deceptive demonstrations and misleading claims about race track technology - it's rare to have a car pull out on your on a race track.

it's the same with helmets... some people are convinced that a £600 helmet must be better than £200 one, but the fact is that if you collide with a car at 30+ mph and so long as they both fit and both stay on your bonce, by the time your brain discovers any difference in levels of protection the rest of your body is unlikely to be interested.

Interestingly I was watching the 24 Hours of Le Mans last night when there was a sudden fall of rain and a rash of crashes. I didn't see a single airbag go off.

[The Spin Doctor]

Which reminds me. I'm fairly sure that I heard / read that the inners of BMW RT fairings are designed to 'encourage' the rider 'up'.

Could be.

[Hot_Air]

Advertising? Sure, the Asolo and Molvena mobs have gone to the marketing mattresses. When Dainese said the Smart Vest was like wearing seven back protectors, Astars answered back: its Tech-Air was akin to eighteen.

A* say: Offering instantaneous, high-pressure inflatable protection Tech-Air® gives the rider comprehensive protection in a crash

To be fair to Alpinestars – when you see quote in context – they argue the Tech-Air gives the most comprehensive coverage: “by uniquely covering the rider’s shoulders, chest, ribs and full back, effectively and efficiently minimising the risk of the rider sustaining shoulder and collarbone injuries.” And I agree. Which other airbag (currently) provides such comprehensive coverage?

What about Dainese? It’s taken the opposite approach, and each generation of D-Air has reduced coverage (just like its back protectors, which only cover Central Back not Full Back). Protection? Stealth trumps coverage:

In particular, the D-Air Street […] Gives a “stealth” protection: comfort and ergonomics.

But at least the Italians have CE-certified their airbags, unlike In&Motion.

[Horse]

A* say: Offering instantaneous, high-pressure inflatable protection Tech-Air® gives the rider comprehensive protection in a crash

To be fair to Alpinestars – when you see quote in context – they argue the Tech-Air gives the most comprehensive coverage: “by uniquely covering the rider’s shoulders, chest, ribs and full back, effectively and efficiently minimising the risk of the rider sustaining shoulder and collarbone injuries.” And I agree. Which other airbag (currently) provides such comprehensive coverage?

Do they explain how coverage equates to protection? TBH, I haven't looked.

Also, I understood that many collarbone injuries are not the result of direct impact, instead are from indirect force up from landing on an outstretched arm. So possibly stretching the claim of "effectively and efficiently minimising the risk"?

[Horse]

But at least the Italians have CE-certified their airbags, unlike In&Motion.

Set against their previous record of not getting CE for their suits?

[The Spin Doctor]

But at least the Italians have CE-certified their airbags, unlike In&Motion.

Set against their previous record of not getting CE for their suits?

And deliberately fighting for CE for clothing to be downgraded...

[Hot_Air]

Odd, isn't it? Maybe it's because a British engineer, Colin Ballantyne, headed the Tech-Air programme (not a marketeer)? 

And the engineers responsible for Tech-Air systems are probably a different gang to the clothing marketers, with a different philosophy. Teams vary in a big company, and – I'm speculating – the Tech-Air team could be much closer to MotoGP. (The only things I know Alpinestars makes in Italy are MotoGP suits and all its airbags.)

Although Dainese is more vague - as usual - about where it makes stuff, it nonetheless volunteered the D-Air for CE-marking. I'm assuming it's voluntary because there isn't a specific CE-standard for electronic airbags, only tethered ones, which I guess is how In&Motion gets away without a CE-mark?

[Horse]

... there isn't a specific CE-standard for electronic airbags, only tethered ones, which I guess is how In&Motion gets away without a CE-mark?

"Gets away"? Is it their fault if there is no test for what they make?

That would be a bit like a 'spec' for dog identification including "must have four legs". Any three-legged dog wouldn't qualify as a 'dog'

[Hot_Air]

I was wrong: there's a CE standard for motorcycle airbags (EN 1621-4). It may have been written in days of yore - when tethered airbags were trendsetting - but it specifies minimum requirements for deployment speed, protection and coverage. It contains the requirements for the performance of the system during an accident and details of the test methods, etc. I bet it's a thrilling read

But according to the sacred writings of Motorcycle News, airbags don't need to be homologated to it. I wonder why

MCN: Exploding the myths: Everything you need to know about motorbike airbag vests

[scottyuk]

Airbags don't solve everything. They don't purport to.

Dainese say:

Experience the highest level of safety for use in any situation on the road.​

A* say:
Offering instantaneous, high-pressure inflatable protection Tech-Air® gives the rider comprehensive protection in a crash

A tad naughty chopping off the qualification from the end of the A* sentence
I do agree it's marketing speak etc but they don't claim it covers arms, legs, etc

"Offering instantaneous, high-pressure inflatable protection Tech-Air® gives the rider comprehensive protection in a crash by covering the full back, shoulders, kidney areas and chest."