ASRA - Australian Skateboard Racing Association

Hey, im in the market for a fullface and was just wondering, is there a future ban or restriction with paragliding helmets? (Charlies, vector m-4/5, icaro, etc.) Because i really dont wanna get one and not be able to use it in the future. This question doesnt just concern me but a couple of my mates. So far, its just easier access to a paragliding helmet, price and stock wise. Suggestions on what to do please. :)

Views: 1727

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

but when it comes to rider safety then its often swung the other way in a lot of cases, i think its best if the IGSA changes nothing with its rules when it comes to helmets, at the end of the day no one is going to go out there in a lid they don't feel safe in regardless of rating

bernie said:

Even a $50 helmet with a rating is better than a helmet with no rating in this light.

Any idea on what set of standards they will be using if this goes through? Will they be using the standards for bicycle helmets or motorbike helmets? Because a shitty $20 rosebank helmet from Big W conforms to Australian standards for a road bike helmet and so far as I know a predator wouldn't pass the standard for motorcycles. Where are they drawing the line? Australian standard, European, SNELL? As far as I know the standards vary from place to place (thankfully we have one of the highest standards in the world so we should be fine) which could make it difficult to enforce on an international series without creating their own rating system.

Not relevant here cos the only insurance that is required doesn't cover rider injury anyway.


bernie said:

Trav,

Really missing the days when we could stuff without needing insurers to keep the lawyers away.

These are the "standards/ratings" the IGSA have quoted as being mandatory for next years season.

ASTM F1492

ASTM F1952

CE 1078

CPSC

SNELL N94

Google search each rating and you can see the standard required. 

Insurance/liability will be a major issue, as no organiser wants to lose their homes, etc.

There are other insurance policies out there, for organisers use.
 
James said:

Any idea on what set of standards they will be using if this goes through? Will they be using the standards for bicycle helmets or motorbike helmets? Because a shitty $20 rosebank helmet from Big W conforms to Australian standards for a road bike helmet and so far as I know a predator wouldn't pass the standard for motorcycles. Where are they drawing the line? Australian standard, European, SNELL? As far as I know the standards vary from place to place (thankfully we have one of the highest standards in the world so we should be fine) which could make it difficult to enforce on an international series without creating their own rating system.

such a stupid idea, i have no idea why IGSA would make life more complicated for people...

propper rated helmet or standard helmet people have been using for years, either way if you biff your head in such a way that causes serious injury i dont think that an extra rating on the helmet will save your life....

people have been crashing in races for years and years, and of course there have been some serious injuries (and deaths) but whats to say that doesnt happen to people who DONT use safety gear?

if ur worried about the proper helmets and IGSA ask yourself this question: what IGSA races will u be attending next year? the one race in OZ thats IGSA might have restrictions on ur helmet, why would you need to bother? theres plenty other races in oz right now that dont have these silly requirements...

i dont think that changing the rating of the helmets is going to make the sport safe. what we do is already un-safe.... no matter how many ways you look at it its still a high-risk extreme sport, put as many restrictions as you want its still un-safe. the best thing to do is be COMFORTABLE in what you are using so you do not put urself at risk of accidents...

i for one would not bother racing IGSA anymore if they are going to incorporate these silly rules and changing the way things go... so far ive heard tales of them changing the format to include begginers, novice AND pro divisions? you know what that means? LESS TRACK TIME! its already a waiting game now we have to wait longer, oh and now we can't use our comfortable helmets either, we have to go buy some heavy uncomfortable rated helmets!

what a crock of shit. death to IGSA, long live ASRA

Oath...

Jacko said:

such a stupid idea, i have no idea why IGSA would make life more complicated for people...

propper rated helmet or standard helmet people have been using for years, either way if you biff your head in such a way that causes serious injury i dont think that an extra rating on the helmet will save your life....

people have been crashing in races for years and years, and of course there have been some serious injuries (and deaths) but whats to say that doesnt happen to people who DONT use safety gear?

if ur worried about the proper helmets and IGSA ask yourself this question: what IGSA races will u be attending next year? the one race in OZ thats IGSA might have restrictions on ur helmet, why would you need to bother? theres plenty other races in oz right now that dont have these silly requirements...

i dont think that changing the rating of the helmets is going to make the sport safe. what we do is already un-safe.... no matter how many ways you look at it its still a high-risk extreme sport, put as many restrictions as you want its still un-safe. the best thing to do is be COMFORTABLE in what you are using so you do not put urself at risk of accidents...

i for one would not bother racing IGSA anymore if they are going to incorporate these silly rules and changing the way things go... so far ive heard tales of them changing the format to include begginers, novice AND pro divisions? you know what that means? LESS TRACK TIME! its already a waiting game now we have to wait longer, oh and now we can't use our comfortable helmets either, we have to go buy some heavy uncomfortable rated helmets!

what a crock of shit. death to IGSA, long live ASRA

I'm not aware of any races, anywhere in the world, where the organisers are insured against claims by race participants. It's certainly not the norm in Australia, where the only insurance an organiser needs is one that protects them against claims by members of the public, and specifically does NOT protect them against claims by participants.

So it's not an insurance issue at all.

As for liability, the idea that a racer might sue an organiser because they allowed them to race with a helmet that didn't conform with a particular standard. The racer would have to argue that they relied on the organiser's judgement about the necessary level of safety gear, and that their own judgement was not sufficient. That's a difficult argument to make after you've signed a waiver that admits you're doing a dangerous thing where you might get killed and it's nobody's fault but your own. And to the extent that it has any basis the organisers would be best to ensure that they do not communicate that any particular safety gear is better than any other. Recommending a particular standard is exactly the wrong thing to do to limit liability.

Sakamoto said:

...Insurance/liability will be a major issue, as no organiser wants to lose their homes, etc.

There are other insurance policies out there, for organisers use.
 

Our sport is pretty much the only sport where a helmet is required and it doesnt have to pass a standard. Try getting into a bmx race or DH MTB race without an Australia standards approved helmet. Standards are in place to insure adequate impact protection. Thickness of the shell, padding, chin strap strength among other things come into it to pass these standards.

I personally wouldn't be wearing a helmet that hasn't passed a standard the relates to impact with hard surfaces. With the exepction of a Risch, although not approved the are as solid as any certified helmet.

When buying a helmet you should not be thinking about what you need to get into an event. Think about your head possibly hitting the road, tree, cutter, guard rail if you come off flogging down a hill at high speed.

Grab a Charly and feel how flexy the shell is, then compare it to a predator for example, you will feel the difference. then have a look at the thickness and type of padding inside the helmets you are considering. the thicker the styrofoam the more impact dampening it has (have a look inside a roadbike helmet, it thick as, obviously they go alot faster then us but you get the idea).

 

I may have missed something as I didn't fully read all the standards but from what I can see those standards are all pretty much for skid lids, except for one for DH mountain biking which still has no specific requirement for fullface protection (according to the abstract on the ASTM F1952 standard). Are all these standards to be met for a a helmet to be allowed to race or do you only have to meet one of them? If its all, I doubt there are many helmets (if any) that would have been submitted for all the standards and if you only have to meet one what's stopping people from just using a regular lid (mine passes pretty much all the standards with the possible exception of the MTB one)? This idea seems sillier and sillier the more I think about it. Its hard to apply standards to a sport that has no specific standards applicable to it...

Sakamoto said:

These are the "standards/ratings" the IGSA have quoted as being mandatory for next years season.

ASTM F1492

ASTM F1952

CE 1078

CPSC

SNELL N94

Sorry Bugs, there are events staged in Oz which have this type of cover. The majority of legitimate gravity events have this type of cover here, everything from Training Days, Races as well as Free Rides.

As an Organiser you have the option of being minimalist in the insurance cover you have for your event, and in turn, as an Organiser you can have greater insurance cover, if that is what you choose. You are quite true in what you say, in that you only need to have basic cover to stage an event in Oz, cover which specifically DOESN'T cover for rider claims.

 

All safety issues most certainly are an insurance issue, as the event organisers, including ANYONE who is involved in organising an event, all the way through to the Tech Inspectors for any event are liable in the case of an insurance claim being raised.

 

Most people would imagine that having greater coverage of an event would cost more, but in actual fact thats not the case for 99% of legitimate events.

Scenario: What do you think the outcome would of been, Bugs, if the rider who came off at Newton's, smashed his helmet and got stitches, had turned around and made a claim against the organisers? Suppose he had suffered brain damage and his Family claimed on his behalf?

Doing the basics to "just get by" the Council requirements is fine, if you're prepared to live with the possible consequences.If legitimate events are to grow in Oz, then every aspect of organising has to grow as well.  
 
Bugs said:

I'm not aware of any races, anywhere in the world, where the organisers are insured against claims by race participants. It's certainly not the norm in Australia, where the only insurance an organiser needs is one that protects them against claims by members of the public, and specifically does NOT protect them against claims by participants.

So it's not an insurance issue at all.

As for liability, the idea that a racer might sue an organiser because they allowed them to race with a helmet that didn't conform with a particular standard. The racer would have to argue that they relied on the organiser's judgement about the necessary level of safety gear, and that their own judgement was not sufficient. That's a difficult argument to make after you've signed a waiver that admits you're doing a dangerous thing where you might get killed and it's nobody's fault but your own. And to the extent that it has any basis the organisers would be best to ensure that they do not communicate that any particular safety gear is better than any other. Recommending a particular standard is exactly the wrong thing to do to limit liability.

Sakamoto said:

...Insurance/liability will be a major issue, as no organiser wants to lose their homes, etc.

There are other insurance policies out there, for organisers use.
 

Fantasy. 

Sakamoto said:

Sorry Bugs, there are events staged in Oz which have this type of cover. The majority of legitimate gravity events have this type of cover here, everything from Training Days, Races as well as Free Rides.

The result of that scenario Andy would be the rider would have to claim against the organisers on the basis of them being negligent and of the rider not knowing they were doing something that is dangerous and therefore being unaware of the risks.

The majority of legitimate skateboard races do not have this cover Andy and the 2 major ones in Australia certainly don't nor do any of the IGSA world cup events. This is not an insurance thing, if it was the IGSA would require this extra cover. Its about a wishful idea that if you do get sued there is less chance the rider will win.

The problem with bringing more and more expensive regulation into the IGSA (the helmet thing is only one of many proposed) is that they don't pay any of the bills nor accept any of the responsibility for any of the liability. The biggest problem for the IGSA is not regulation, its that after 10 years every race organiser (the people that make the IGSA tour) lose money on every IGSA event. Unbelievable that after 10 years the IGSA is still unable to find a sponsor for the IGSA World Tour. If they did it would allow them to give something financially back to the orgainsers that have been burdened with so much yet still finds ways of laying out cumbersome regulation and increasing the overall loss of the people who run the events.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Search

© 2024   Created by Bugs.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service