Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thread)

Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby yugyug » Sat Jul 05, 2014 11:56 pm

It just occurred to me that the heatstroke/fatigue issue could be something that might convince a doctor to sign a medical waiver for not wearing a helmet. I think that can be an exception in NSW (correct me if I am wrong).
yugyug
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am

by BNA » Sun Jul 06, 2014 10:03 am

BNA
 

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby human909 » Sun Jul 06, 2014 10:03 am

yugyug wrote:It just occurred to me that the heatstroke/fatigue issue could be something that might convince a doctor to sign a medical waiver for not wearing a helmet. I think that can be an exception in NSW (correct me if I am wrong).


There are no exemptions under the road rules. However some people have had success with avoiding a fine by having a medical certificate.


(I believe QLD now has an exemption for religious reasons.)
human909
 
Posts: 4719
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby yugyug » Sun Jul 06, 2014 9:13 pm

human909 wrote:
yugyug wrote:It just occurred to me that the heatstroke/fatigue issue could be something that might convince a doctor to sign a medical waiver for not wearing a helmet. I think that can be an exception in NSW (correct me if I am wrong).


There are no exemptions under the road rules. However some people have had success with avoiding a fine by having a medical certificate.


(I believe QLD now has an exemption for religious reasons.)


Cheers, I see the difference, that must have been what I remembered reading about.

The QLD law only has the religious exception for Sikhs wearing turbans, right? Like the SA law? Or is it broader?
yugyug
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby high_tea » Mon Jul 07, 2014 10:10 am

Broader. Medical (r256(4) and religious (r256(5)).
high_tea
 
Posts: 1264
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby Xplora » Mon Jul 07, 2014 12:06 pm

I feel that explanatory notes in the legislation would possibly be helpful for exemptions and strange requests. The law is trying to balance the freedoms of restricted religious followers and physically restricted riders from health issues but at what point do we need to say this no
Longer reflects the justification of the law? I can dig that Sikhs are going to struggle to wear a helmet, but if the intention is to protect us for our own good, then no excuse is good
Enough. If you get heatstroke from any helmet, you shouldn't ride.

A fine for a helmet is so small that testing it in the courts is typically just not worthwhile.
Xplora
 
Posts: 5548
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby il padrone » Mon Jul 07, 2014 12:39 pm

Xplora wrote: but if the intention is to protect us for our own good, then no excuse is good

Let US look after our own good and you look after yours.

My wearing or not wearing a helmet has no impact upon the physical well-being of anyone else, so it should be no business of the government.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18141
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby Xplora » Mon Jul 07, 2014 1:17 pm

^^^ Agreed.

If protecting the vulnerable was the top priority, cars would have been banned years ago. Tens of thousands killed by motor vehicles.
Xplora
 
Posts: 5548
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby high_tea » Mon Jul 07, 2014 1:58 pm

Xplora wrote:I feel that explanatory notes in the legislation would possibly be helpful for exemptions and strange requests.


Can't comment on other states, but recent changes to Qld regs all have an explanatory note. It's next to the amending legislation in "SL - as made" on the OQPC website.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1264
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby yugyug » Mon Jul 21, 2014 2:05 pm

Stackhat nostalgia is a topic here recently. Thought it would be interesting to understand the relationship this iconic helmet had to MHLs. The manufactor Rosebank's history, as detailed on their own site, seems to suggest MHLs and their specifications were important to the success of the company:
http://www.rosebank.com.au/rosebank_about

E.G:
1986
Rosebank receives the Design Award for Product Excellence and design from the Industrial Design Council of Australia for the 'Stackhat'. The most successful Australian manufactured helmet of all time with nearly 2 million helmets sold. Rosebank is the first Australian cycling helmet manufacturer to win this award.

1987
Joint taskforce established to determine feasibility of the compulsory helmet use for cyclists in Victoria. Rosebank Stackhat TV commercial - World's first bicycle helmet TV ad.

1989
Compulsory helmet use implemented in Victoria is a World's first. Many new competitors enter helmet business

1990
Resistance to Penetration test is removed from the Australian Standard Rosebank introduce "Microlite" (19/09/1990). Microlite was the first "Microshell" helmet.


Suzy from Little Fish bicycles go further and says Rosebank directly lobbied for MHL implementation (as I suppose they would).
http://suzyj.blogspot.com.au/2014/02/st ... -kill.html
So they kept trying to force these helmets on us, and we kept ignoring them. Soon enough, they started getting in the politician's ears. Rosebank were particularly insidious. Not only did they go to work on the Victorian government, they also got in the ear of Standards Australia, making sure that the new Australian Standard for bicycle helmets, which was being developed ahead of compulsory helmet legislation, would favour them over other manufacturers. Key to this was the "resistance to penetration" test, which the lightweight well ventilated fabric covered polystyrene helmets of the time failed, but of course the Stackhat passed. Note of course there was no maximum weight test, nor ventilation test. The standards, like the helmets, were developed by a committee of bureaucrats, not cyclists.


So it appears there was a penetration test for helmet until 1990 (enough time for Rosebank to develop their own lightweight helmet?). Suzy also mentions:
My enduring memory of Rosebank's Stackhat is from 1986. I was a mad keen road cyclist, riding my crappy Avanti water-pipe roadie sans-helmet on the great Victorian bike ride, somewhere around Sale. It was bloody hot, and the day was long. I came across a younger kid who was being bundled into the back of an ambulance. Word going round was that she'd fainted and fallen off her bike, suffering heat exhaustion. Sitting on the ground next to her bike was her helmet, a Stackhat.


Apologies if this is old news to y'all. I hadn't thought much about the humble Stackhat until it came up in this forum recently.
yugyug
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby il padrone » Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:40 pm

God knows how they have the gall to call it a 'bicycle helmet'. The Stackhat was simply a very slighly modified ice hockey helmet - the Cooper ice hockey helmet probably had better ventilation :roll:

Image Image


An exceptionally ugly and horribly hot excuse for real road safety.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18141
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby softy » Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:12 pm

Although new helmets are more comfortable, I do believe all those holes must weaken the structure. Because they only have to pass the test, the consumer has no idea how much better a helmet may be compared to another.

Shame they don't test, incrementally increasing the impacts and asign a star rating like cars?? Then consumers could buy/choose on safety performance. Wouldn't this be better, if the governments were really concerned about safety?
softy
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:44 pm

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby il padrone » Mon Jul 21, 2014 9:40 pm

softy wrote:I do believe all those holes must weaken the structure.

Nup. Not how bicycle protective helmets have ever been designed to work.

They are not designed to protect from crushing of your skull by a two-tonne vehicle. Even my old MSR would not have done that. They are simply impact energy attenuators ie. they absorb the impact of a fall onto a hard surface. The strength of the helmet structure does not matter, as long as it basically stays in one piece.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18141
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby yugyug » Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:03 pm

il padrone wrote:
softy wrote:I do believe all those holes must weaken the structure.

Nup. Not how bicycle protective helmets have ever been designed to work.

They are not designed to protect from crushing of your skull by a two-tonne vehicle. Even my old MSR would not have done that. They are simply impact energy attenuators ie. they absorb the impact of a fall onto a hard surface. The strength of the helmet structure does not matter, as long as it basically stays in one piece.


Maybe the extra holes in the ice hockey helmet would have meant it failed the now defunct penetration test? Just guessing.
yugyug
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:27 am

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby outnabike » Tue Jul 22, 2014 1:45 pm

Just dug out my Rosebank Headway Freeway from 1991. I used it to test cameras ans angles etc. Looking at the label I may have buggered the thing as it says to not modify. :D Sillicone and plastic bolts did the trick.

Rosebank Helmets
http://www.helmets.org/upda9112.htm
Rosebank is another Aussie manufacturer now appearing in the U.S. market for the first time. Those who are familiar only with their venerable Stackhat will be surprised by the upscale look of their new helmets, including soft shell and thin shell models. Their thin shells are constructed of GE's Xenoy thermoplastic, which John Rose, their Managing Director (and another very knowledgeable manufacturer), said was a high quality material which requires some care in the manufacturing process. The helmets shown were all certified to the Australian standard, but do not appear on Snell's list. Mr. Rose informed us that three other Australian states have already joined Queensland and Victoria in mandating helmets, and three more will require them as of January, 1992. His comments brought home the fact that we are years behind the Aussies in bicycle helmet use and bicycle helmet standards.

Image
Last edited by outnabike on Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
outnabike
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:53 pm
Location: Melbourne Vic

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby casual_cyclist » Tue Jul 22, 2014 5:14 pm

il padrone wrote:
softy wrote:I do believe all those holes must weaken the structure.

Nup. Not how bicycle protective helmets have ever been designed to work.

They are not designed to protect from crushing of your skull by a two-tonne vehicle. Even my old MSR would not have done that. They are simply impact energy attenuators ie. they absorb the impact of a fall onto a hard surface. The strength of the helmet structure does not matter, as long as it basically stays in one piece.

I can confirm this is how they work in a real world application... of me falling off at moderate speed and striking my helmet on the ground. It would have been a nasty injury if it had been my head but basically the helmet acted as a shock absorber. Of course on the same fall I broke my knee. Maybe helmets for knees should be compulsory too :roll: :lol:
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7171
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby Xplora » Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:01 am

Knee pads. Makes it easier to beg for your freedom to do as you choose in a free society too.
Xplora
 
Posts: 5548
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby outnabike » Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:40 am

[quote="Xplora"]Knee pads. Makes it easier to beg for your freedom to do as you choose in a free society too.[/quote

Hi Xplora
Being born in Germany, a knee pad on each corner of the head probably makes more sense in my case than a helmet.
And probably cheaper by the dozen. :)
outnabike
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:53 pm
Location: Melbourne Vic

Re: Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (Was One & ONLY Helmet Thr

Postby Xplora » Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:51 am

Not MHL related in the slightest, but I've noticed a lot of the UK head gear popping up over the last 2 years in my area... it's like no one thought it was acceptable to warm their head before, because the headband/earwarmer things look retarded, but all of a sudden half the damn bunch is wearing them. I started wearing a bandanna, that's about as motivated as I can be bothered with :lol:
Xplora
 
Posts: 5548
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Previous

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Boognoss, malocchio, othy



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU



InTouch with BNA
“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter