Safe Speed Forums

This thread has been brought on by Felipe Massa's horrible crash (get well soon Felipe), Richard Hammonds high speed crash and the countless spectacular rally crashes.

Newton's Laws tell us that a higher speed is a higher Force, haven't done the maths but would be interesting to see the difference in momentum between say Massa's crash and a 60mph-into-a-ditch-in-a-Civic crash, yet in the car death and serious injury occurs, but Massa and Hammond both survived. Some major Difference being:
1) Crash helmet
2) HANS system (Head and Neck Safety)
3) Racing harness vs normal seat belt.

The road going seat belt, while much better than nothing, still puts a lot of force through your body and especially your neck.
Ignoring risk compensation for introducing these devices, and the obvious problems of nuisance at having to wear them, could they significantly cut road deaths?

Not sure "momentum" (Mass x Velocity) is that useful a property to examine. "Force" might be better (F = Ma) where M is the mass being decelerated and a is the deceleration. One of the bad things about crash helmets is that they have a weight all of their own and the neck will need to restrian this (as well as the head) in a crash.

If we can't reduce "M", we need to reduce "a". That's where much of the work in crashworthiness has been focused - crumple zones, airbags etc.

Also not certain of the mechanism of the 60-into-a-ditch deaths. The Massa crash was a nice linear one, from what I saw on the news, and into a tyre wall at that. What happened in the ditch crash? Did the car spin / roll?

One of the biggest problems is that for road use, you need a much greater field of view. A 4-point (or better, a 5 - point)harness would, (I feel) save a great many vehicle occupant lives, but they're a right royal pain in the backside when you're trying to lean forward to check if a T junction is clear! We might just see more "SMIDSY" accidents instead.

You'd also have to see where the balance shifted in terms of fewer people belting up if it was more trouble to do so.

Finally, it's worth remembering that motorsport crash victims are usually fit young males, not old dears with brittle bones or hugely overweight business men with poor muscle tone.

Force would be better than momentum (I'm tired, blame it on that), I used 60-into-a-ditch as similar to a tyre barrier, as in straight in with a extension of impact through tyres/ditch.

The helmet, as your enclosed probably doesn't need to be worn on the road, its use would be purely for the HANS device.

The point about fit young male vs brittle old dear is important and did not think of that, but fit young males still crash and die

The 4 point or 5 point harness is the critical issue, the pros and cons of that is what I really want to get feedback on.

In my opinion:

PRO:
A harness spreads the load over a bigger area of the wearer. A harness with a crutch strap prevents "submarining". A harness minimises the asymmetrical loading that you get with a three-point belt.

CON:
A harness is more trouble to wear than a 3-point inertia reel belt, so more people won't bother. It relies on being done up tight, so it's less comfortable and restricts movement. This, in turn, prevents you from leaning forward to get a good view out of a junction. In a 4 seater car, it's hard to find a decent anchorage point for the upper straps of a harness that don't render the rear seats useless! There are certain aspects of a harness that would significantly impinge on practicallity (ask any lady wearing a dress)!

Finally, I'm not sure how a harness would work in a conventional car seat rather than a competition "bucket" seat.

I would go with Mole's pro and con list, I have a car with 4 point harnesses which can be awkward on some junctions and forget being able to reach the dash on most cars. At junctions you have to position the car more like a van and occasionally it is necessary to loosen the chest belts or even slip your shoulder out of one belt to get an adequate sight line.

The chest belts are supposed to run as close to horizontal as possible back from the seat so they are only really usable in two seaters or saloons modified for track use, i.e rear seats removed or at least unusable while the harness is in use.

Mole, I thought modern seats were designed to be anti-submarine?

Oh yes, I think most blokes would prefer a six point harness rather than five

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Massa had a head impact with a spring that fell of a car going at over 120mph, what speed it impacted his crash helmet is another thing. His crash injuries hardly count....he was not going above 60mph on impact with the tyre barrier.

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

Ah! That makes a lot more sense! I saw the Massa crash on the news and didn't think it looked that bad!

As for anti-submarine" seats, pretty much most modern cars have a degree of provision, but it's not really a "tickbox" thing. They tend to make the thigh support quite a bit stiffer than it used to be to help prevent submarining but, it gets too uncomfy for general use by most people before you can be confident that it won't ever happen.

Yes, I agree about the 6-point harness. However, it would be a shame if "laydeez" stopped wearing skirts in the name of occupant safety!

(Oh yessss! Sexism is alive and well and posting on Safespeed)! - sorry all you "laydeez" out there!

It ist not sexist for me to enjoy a sassy male's bum nor for you to remark that I have nice legs.. und tits!

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

But I agree with all the points raised by Mole I think he right that a harness may lead to more SMIDSY type incidents - but they may not be "true SMIDSY" as driver may inch forwards to look more closely und then end up in tragic conflict as result of this perhaps


Harness as you say would not be suited to most family saloons.

Do belts save lives? Well - I would say yes on aggregate. There are the odd occasions when they have contribute to outcome all the same but have not been held to be cause of death.

I did deliberately remove my seatbelt when I saw that car approach und knew I had no escape. At the time - I took the gambled risk that by undoing the belt und taking up a foetal brace position was the better option. This proved by chance to have been the right decision given the "missile effect into my car" resulting from his unbuckling of his own belt in his apparent convulsions at the time (based on autopsy reports).

Thus it hard to say .. I ended up crushed on impact but was not squished against the windscreen nor hit on head by his body as it rocketed into the car at the time - which would have killed me for sure. Had he been wearing his belt - who know if he also live?

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

I guess things are looking brighter for me than for you then! (nobody's ever called my bum "sassy")!

each crash is different. we have all heard of incidents where the seat belt has actually caused injury or even death so there is no possible way to determine a 'one size fits all' seatbelt that would save a life in every situation. to that end, i would suggest that the best way to save lives is to teach them to not crash in the first place thereby eliminating all these different scenarios

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585

Up to a point, but there are lots of things that we can only show statistically. I agree we have all heard tales of accidents where the belt was alleged to have been the cause of death. In much the same way, we have probably all heard of a 40-a-day smoker that lived to a ripe old age!

Unfortunately, they are the exception rather than the rule. I agree that the utopian situation would be to prevent the crashes in the first place. Unfortunately, that hasn't yet happened at any point in motoring history so I'm not holding out much hope for it happening any time soon!

I'm sure there has been time when seat belts have cost a life but I can't think of any situation where the force required by the belt to kill you would give you less of a chance of survival than being shot out of the car.

I think that most of the seat belt deaths are due to being trapped in the car. Plus a few strangulations from badly fitting belts.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

There are a whole list of injuries that are associated with seat-belt use in an accident.
Bowel injuries would seem the most common, although breast injury in women is also common.
Still, as a fireman said: At least they keep the remains in one place and I no longer have to shovel intestines into a bag.

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

funnily enough my ex was involved in a crash where she would have been killed had she not been wearing a seatbelt. a drunk driver T boned the car she was travelling as a rear passenger in. the car was a write off but because she was thrown across, she survived and it was a police officer who told her that she would have been killed if she had been wearing a seat belt.
there is no doubt that in most cases a head on crash does provide a higher chance of survival with the wearing of a seatbelt but not all crashes are head on. surely in the case of a side impact it would be better to be thrown away from the forces that would be inflicted upon the body

again, it is impossible to predict and prevent every eventuality

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585

if that were the case then we would have nothing to discuss here because all the effective solutions would already be in place

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585

Hah, so you say. We need to see evidence of that.

Where's that "This thread is useless without pics!" thingy when you need it?

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Hmmm. I notice you've not asked to see my bum! That's sexist, that is!

...fair point though - it's a commonly held Safespeed principle that we take no claim on trust without hard evidence to back it up!