'Make airbag jackets compulsory' says A&E doctor
Parts of the medical profession would like to see airbag jackets made compulsory for bikers, says BBC report
MANY MOTORCYCLISTS' lives could be saved if air bag jackets were made compulsory, accident and emergency doctors have said.
A report on today's BBC News says that doctors believe the protective qualities of an airbag jacket could significantly reduce the number of fatalities on Britain's roads. Statistics show 561 bikers died on the UK's roads in 2007.
In the BBC report, Andy Parfitt, an A&E doctor at St Thomas' Hospital in London, said: "There is a shocking number of deaths of motorcyclists on the roads. I think dozens of lives could be saved if these jackets were made compulsory."
The report also shows video footage of a stunt rider testing a jacket's protection qualities, in a staged crash at Goodwood race circuit.
To see the report in full click here
Discuss this story
these Statistics show 561 bikers died on the UK's roads in 2007. but does not show how many bikers were knocked off by other road users, If they were more aware then maybe we would not need to wear these jackets
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 12:52
You could use the same argument for Hemets, or seatbelts. After all it's everyone else that causes crashes never ourselves isn't it? But don't get me wrong, I'm not in favour of any kind of legislation that insists on us having any mandatory kit. What's approved? what's not approved? Where do you draw the line? We've had back protectors available for years, and they will possibly prevent many injuries that these airbag jackets are supposed to guard against but they are not mandatory. The vast majority of riders don't wear one either. Aside from that there's a practicality issue with the airbag jackets. I think the trigger system needs work before it's perfect for daily use. I also find it rather ironic that in the bbc report they use an example of a track rider that got injured and I suspect that the airbag jacket probably wouldn't have been permitted on a trackday would it?
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 15:07
On radio 1 this morning the news story made a big deal about how doctors want them made compulsory etc, then the last thing they said was, "The govt has no plans to make them compulsory"! Must be a slow news day.
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 15:25
Firstly don’t get me wrong, I think it is a good idea… but at the end of the day why should I have to ware some stupid jacket just because the car drivers on the road are not looking for me! Or if it is my fault because Im going around a corner at 140mph then that is the risk I take for doing it. I think there a good idea but should be optional.
You don't have to wear some stupid jacket just because some car drivers are not looking for you. But you could remember that regardless of how well trained you or the car drivers are, there is always the possibility that some car driver will do something stupid and you cop the worst of it. Sadly we have to make allowances for everyone elses ignorance/stupidity. But the primary point is, that regardless of how good the jacket is, extra legislation won't get a great deal of support from anywhere. As Camel said, there are no plans to make them compulsory. He is right to suggest that it must be a slow news day. There is a huge difference between 'experts' suggesting it would be good for everyone to be compelled to doing something, and it actually being legislated as such.
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 17:42
Sounds like a good idea, partcularly if you do a lot of miles. But if you're going to spend a large wad on a jacket shouldn't it be useable after a low speed off. If so then this one is next to useless because it will inflate the instant you part with the bike making it impossible to then ride home even if you and the bike are in good enough shape. Plus, how do you reactivate it once it's been called into action in said low speeder? I can also see a few 'Bugger I forgot to unclip the lanyard' moments occuring too. Still, if it saves a few people from serious injury, or worse, then I won't complain about it. I believe that the French Police have oredered 18000 of them.
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 17:52
Doctors are always calling for everything safety related to be made compulsory. When I crashed a couple of years back, I heard the nurse telling the doctor that I'd been in a bike crash, at which point he wandered off until she said "It's OK he was wearing full leathers". Gave me the impression that he wasn't going to bother unless I was wearing all the gear. AFAIK there is no legislation to say we have to wear anything other than helmets, so it would be quite a leap to make these jackets compulsory. Cost would be an issue as well.
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 18:30
if there is a compulsary requirement, then maybe it should be an air bag system you can wear under your jacket, like you can buy armour. then you have the choice, either leathers or textile, from the manufacturer of your choice... the only flaw i can see with the design is, if you get off your bike, and forget to detatch the trigger, you'll become an instant michelin man
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 18:39
hmmm it could save my life should i wear it ?? yes Also will it double as a life jacket on the boat
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 19:22
I agree with that one IIIrd, the system should be able to be worn with other kit (inderstand they want you to buy their jacket). Why dont they make them more like one of those hi-vis harnesses (Respro H-Belt)? then you could wear them over whatever you may chosse to buy?
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 19:25
Plus, how do you reactivate it once it's been called into action in said low speeder?
You can take off the CO2 canister and squeeze the air out, then put on a new canister, resewt the trigger and youre good to go (theres a video of it being done on the wairbag website. Its an arse if youre out and about, but at least you dont have to go and spank another £400 on a new one!
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 19:29
Plus, how do you reactivate it once it's been called into action in said low speeder?
You can take off the CO2 canister and squeeze the air out, then put on a new canister, resewt the trigger and youre good to go (theres a video of it being done on the wairbag website. Its an arse if youre out and about, but at least you dont have to go and spank another £400 on a new one!
And after a crash you're going to be in a fit state to go that? At least Harry could get his Butler to do it. 
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 20:22
Even more nanny state at the ready. The jacket looked good, well made and ...... very warm. No problem in Feb, but what about July.... do they do them in leather, short sports style, airmesh vented for the really hot days .... thought not  . Bloody stupid idea to even suggest we should be made to wear them. Just make them available and let the public decide if they want to increase their chances of survival in a crash.... same as smoking. If you light up a lot then you have less of a chance of seeing the grand kids, if not, you have a higher chance. What is wrong with allowing the bike riding public to decide.
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 21:28
Great idea. We're really bad (as a genre of road users) at looking after ourselves adequately on a voluntary basis so things like this are only a matter of time....and probably less time than you think. The old adage is true - can't do it yourself then the Govt will do it for you.
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 22:13
Great idea. We're really bad (as a genre of road users) at looking after ourselves adequately on a voluntary basis so things like this are only a matter of time....and probably less time than you think. The old adage is true - can't do it yourself then the Govt will do it for you.
I don't think that we are Nige. In general most of the bikers I see are pretty well togged up, OK in the summer things get a bit slacker, and there is always the occasionaly biker that doesn't care, but on the whole I think, as a group, we're pretty good. Mind you, to counter that. Back protectors are readily available and not expensive, how many of us wear one regularly when out on the road?
Posted: 13/02/2009 at 23:31
They will never do it. This is just some Dr spouting off about bikers... But anyway, first of all they should make other things compulsory like back protection. I cant see this ver being compulsory.
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 00:11
I still think it's a stupid amount of money, it's basically trying to rip people off for wanting safety, I mean, how much does this product cost to themselves? The same goes with Daytona boots, 1000 quid, it's a joke, bet it cost them less than 100 quid to make
And then the boots walked themselves to the shop, accidentally forgot to pay the wages for the staff and cover their share of the premises they were made in and luckily found a shop that was rent free to sell themselves in, even better was the staff in the shop who work for free.
Thanks for pointing out that the only cost in manufacturing something is the cost of the raw material and that everything else is free. I think I'll point that out next time I get charged for anything other than materials when I get my bike serviced.
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 00:19
Plus, how do you reactivate it once it's been called into action in said low speeder?
You can take off the CO2 canister and squeeze the air out, then put on a new canister, resewt the trigger and youre good to go (theres a video of it being done on the wairbag website. Its an arse if youre out and about, but at least you dont have to go and spank another £400 on a new one!
And after a crash you're going to be in a fit state to go that? At least Harry could get his Butler to do it.
If you consider yourself in a fit enough state to ride a motorbike, then I'm sorry, but squeezing some air out of a bag and screwing in a new CO2 canister is a doddle.
These arent unique anyway, havent Dainese been working on systems for racers for years? Im sure thers some vids about of those iniflating to protect riders.
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 09:23
On the face of it it looks like a good concept, sadly it is a flawed concept because the air bag makes you roll along the ground, even at slow speeds. Check out the video. http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technology/newsid_7886000/7886427.stm This effect means multiple fractures of limbs and repeated banging of the head on the ground are much more likely. A slide is a much better and safer option if you come off. This concept has been around for a few years and not a single race team uses it for good reason. Slide not roll.
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 09:46
Great idea. We're really bad (as a genre of road users) at looking after ourselves adequately on a voluntary basis so things like this are only a matter of time....and probably less time than you think. The old adage is true - can't do it yourself then the Govt will do it for you.
I don't think that we are Nige. In general most of the bikers I see are pretty well togged up, OK in the summer things get a bit slacker, and there is always the occasionaly biker that doesn't care, but on the whole I think, as a group, we're pretty good. Mind you, to counter that. Back protectors are readily available and not expensive, how many of us wear one regularly when out on the road?
Nail on head fella.
Helmet laws, number plate laws, speed camera proliferation, licencing laws and for cars, seat belt laws (and probably more) We're our own worst enemies sometimes.
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 11:18
Just checked out a demo of an airbag jacket at J&S and they set it off for me whilst i had it on and seems a good concept to me apparently the sales guy was telling me they have done them for a couple of years now!
Longer than that - I'm sure I can remember seeing them at J&S getting on for 10 years ago. And they weren't new then. ... first of all they should make other things compulsory like back protection. I cant see this ver being compulsory. Why would I want to have one of those pointless things?
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 14:33
I can also see a few 'Bugger I forgot to unclip the lanyard' moments occuring too. I believe that the French Police have oredered 18000 of them.
I can see me being one of those persons   And I guess you were listening to Chris Evans too!!! Plus, how do you reactivate it once it's been called into action in said low speeder?
You can take off the CO2 canister and squeeze the air out, then put on a new canister, resewt the trigger and youre good to go (theres a video of it being done on the wairbag website. Its an arse if youre out and about, but at least you dont have to go and spank another £400 on a new one!
Hmm - Closer to £600 I heard on the radio! Just checked out a demo of an airbag jacket at J&S and they set it off for me whilst i had it on and seems a good concept to me apparently the sales guy was telling me they have done them for a couple of years now!
Longer than that - I'm sure I can remember seeing them at J&S getting on for 10 years ago. And they weren't new then.
I believe the main difference is the speed of inflation from setting off - its why Im not convinced (despite the sarky comments from my dad earlier!!) - if it takes one point something seconds to inflate, surely I could hit the ground/something before inflation and still break my back???
The other thing is - I've only seen/heard that its been tested at 30mph - I might be less sceptical if I could see a decent test at 70mph (minimum) As for being compulsy - well, the Nanny State seems to think I needs to make us do all sorts of thing that should be common sense, maybe dangerous sports & motorcycling will now be subject to Nannys decisions too
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 16:38
Hmm - Closer to £600 I heard on the radio! Not even that. IXS Stunt Airbag Jacket - £234. Not like the press to over exaggerate and misrepresent the issue is there........?  The other thing is - I've only seen/heard that its been tested at 30mph - I might be less sceptical if I could see a decent test at 70mph (minimum)
The 'stuntman' for the BBC item was ever so brave with his 30 mph get-off...... As for being compulsy - well, the Nanny State seems to think I needs to make us do all sorts of thing that should be common sense, maybe dangerous sports & motorcycling will now be subject to Nannys decisions too
All I can think of is we have to pass a test and wear a helmet.
Have I missed something?
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 17:55
I agree with that one IIIrd, the system should be able to be worn with other kit (inderstand they want you to buy their jacket). Why dont they make them more like one of those hi-vis harnesses (Respro H-Belt)? then you could wear them over whatever you may chosse to buy?
another worry for me, is how good the jackets will be....water proof, wind proof...i spent alot of money on my rukka gear and would like to keep it. i'd wear a system if compulsary if it were as well as my existing,...like a crash lid is..but to have to re-buy all my kit i would be against. maybe the med profession should insist on more training, like the advanced rider courses etc, as not having the crash in the first place seems a better option to me. this goes for all drivers/ riders. either way, if they decide that we have to,..then what choice do you have. i think in the present economic and political climate, its unlikely that anything unpopular will be pushed through , for any sector of the population.... i also think, as in air bags in cars,...if you hit something solid going really fast, your dead...car, bike, whatever....
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 18:05
Hmm - Closer to £600 I heard on the radio!
Not even that. IXS Stunt Airbag Jacket - £234. Not like the press to over exaggerate and misrepresent the issue is there........?
The other thing is - I've only seen/heard that its been tested at 30mph - I might be less sceptical if I could see a decent test at 70mph (minimum)
The 'stuntman' for the BBC item was ever so brave with his 30 mph get-off...... As for being compulsy - well, the Nanny State seems to think I needs to make us do all sorts of thing that should be common sense, maybe dangerous sports & motorcycling will now be subject to Nannys decisions too
All I can think of is we have to pass a test and wear a helmet.
Have I missed something?
You can get them more cheaply However I figured this discussion would be on the one in the news last night and today (you know, the one with the faster inflation time???) which was said by the vendor to be £595! As for the nannying - read it again, my point was that the nanny state gets involved in everything else, maybe it it now motorcycling's turn!!
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 18:10
You can get them more cheaply Cheaper than £234 from J&S? Where? However I figured this discussion would be on the one in the news last night and today (you know, the one with the faster inflation time???) which was said by the vendor to be £595!
Which one has a 'faster inflation time'?
I've seen the Stunt demonstrated (around a decade ago) and it was (to my eyes) damn-near identiacal to the one on the BBC report. As for the nannying - read it again, my point was that the nanny state gets involved in everything else, maybe it it now motorcycling's turn!!
I can remember articles in bike magazines talking about the 'death of motorcycling' when I started riding. But that was over 30 years ago...... It may come, with this New Stalinist govenrment. But it has not yet has it? (And I tend to agree with IIIrd up there - I think they have too much to bother about elsewhere at the moment!)
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 18:20
maybe the med profession should insist on more training, like the advanced rider courses etc, as not having the crash in the first place seems a better option to me. this goes for all drivers/ riders.
Maybe the medical profession should concentrate on healing the sick? They should not try to tell us how to live our lives and they should not be the ones inventing fatuous laws – if they want to do that, they should give up the day job and stand for election.
Posted: 14/02/2009 at 18:26
I think the idea is there, but only suits particular types of accidents. Ive gone to allways wearing a back protector, had to renew one allready after my 50mph mid corner spill, eventually come to a stop against a wall with my head  Arai lid cracked like an egg so absorbed impact RESULT. Knox back protector had the honeycombe stuff crushed, so job well done. I think the new reactive armor stuff will be the way forward as it hardens up on impact so will cover you in all areas. With this airbag type you are going to forget to take the tag off as all of us have tried to ride off with a disc lock on (nuts protectors please) http://www.elitesecuritysupplies.com/
Posted: 17/02/2009 at 14:57
I'm not convinced for several reasons, all touched on above. You might bounce and take greater injuries, you'd have to bin your excellent protective clothing to put this thing on, it's unlikely to be as warm, comfortable and waterproof as your favorite jacket, it looks bulky, will be heavier and more restrictive than conventional jackets- and that's before you consider piling extra costs on what's already turning into an expensive way to get around.  Another point was raised by Rupert Paul in a recent(ish) "Bike". There's mounting evidence to suggest that some single vehicle collisions may be caused by heat exhaustion. Heavy protective gear, hot day, vigorous exercise and a rider in less than peak physical condition? Lobbing one of these things onto every rider might prove that particular theory...
Posted: 17/02/2009 at 23:21
There's mounting evidence to suggest that some single vehicle collisions may be caused by heat exhaustion. Heavy protective gear, hot day, vigorous exercise and a rider in less than peak physical condition?
Sounds like a good excuse for the fair weather lemmings anyway.
Posted: 18/02/2009 at 07:03
Sounds like a good excuse for the fair weather lemmings anyway.
How true and more of them will be wearing their "protective" dragin jeans and the like. I was talking to one of their reps at a show and I asked them why don't these ones have armour in and was told that most injuries are a result of abrasion, what utter bull crap, perhaps they only ride on runways on their own? The worrying part is that people are probably listening to them
Posted: 18/02/2009 at 08:44
See more comments...
|
|
