Crainial damage from crash, when driving prone/ forward or sitting up

[Dreamweaver]

Don't think you should be comparing MC rider bailouts with a crash where the rider/driver is strapped in.

Seems the MC rider that bails from his bike gets to scrub a lot of his stored energy by sliding, Mr Noonan (did I spell that correctly?) certainly is a testament to that.

In a strapped in configuration the rider/driver parts that are in direct contact with his belts take a lot of the force. Unsure on what happens to the head/brain under massive deceleration when the rest of the body is restrained.

The more seasoned vets of LSR racing may be able to attest to the surviveability of a car crash vs a MC  crash.

But then is really about Jack's laydown bike, seems his accumulated data says it's safe.

If BNI/SCTA were to ban vehicle types that have killed drivers, Jack might be the only one racing.

[fastman614]

When Randy Scoville crashed in 1989 or 1990, I was in Salt Lake City and I went in to see him.... he showed me some of his body damage .... I know what the roadster did .... and he hit pretty damned hard coming straight down nose first into the salt..... don't tell me that when going into  "end-Os".... that you can't or don't hit as if in a head on situation.... other cars at the salt have done it too.... granted, the Noicemaker WAS a roadster and NOT a 'liner... but ....

I also know that the 'nebulous" vehicles are all pretty leading edge..... and when my lakester grows up, it wants to be just like one of the 'liners..... but an observation that was made to me about something totally unrelated to land speed racing applies here..... "The pioneers get the arrows"..... the red tag is an arrow, the way I see this......

[NathanStewart]

EDIT: better to be posted in the other thread.

[Saltfever]

The red tag supposition appears to be that the initial impact will be frontal. Also DocBeech seems to be discussing a frontal impact. I have seen many LSR accidents where the initial impact is a rear-end landing after taking flight. I don’t know how frequent a rear end landing occurs and I doubt SCTA does either. In a rear-end impact a conventionally mounted driver is landing head first! Isn’t that the reason for the red tag? How can SCTA or anybody say which end is going to impact first? Without data how can anybody say either driver orientation is safer than the other?

[DocBeech]

I am just commenting on one situation. There are a million ways to crash, in the event of a crash as well keep this in mind. I have personally walked away from a 180mph crash. Without a scratch. My car on the other hand well that was a mess I would like to forget. Also though I have worked hundreds of car crashes and accident scenes. Both inside and outside of the racing world. I have seen people die in small crashes where they were expected and we all believed nothing serious would come of it. On that note I have seen people walk away from crashes where you thought they should be dead. Crashing is not an exact science, and as such we need to keep in mind a lot of things can go right, and go wrong.

Personally my opnion its racing. Racing kills people and we all know this. If you want to take the risk and be the pioneer we should let you. Its your life, and your car. If no one ever took the risks that previous drivers did the advancements and knowledge we have today wouldn't exist.

[mkilger]

 

[joea]

taken straight from a dictionary.....

"""Nebulous (NEB yuh lus) adj: vague, hazy, indistinct

Oscar's views are so nebulous that no one can figure out what he thinks about anything.

The community's boundaries are somewhat nebulous, where they are depends on whom you ask""""

IMO...epitome of IRONY.......

[NathanStewart]

If you want to take the risk and be the pioneer we should let you. Its your life, and your car.

Pfft, you're dreaming.  Do a quick Google search for insurance payout ratios.  For liability insurance carriers, it's the amount they expect to payout versus what they charge for a premium.  Most insurance companies like it when their payouts are significantly less than the premiums (something on the scale of 40-60%).  We've had years where our event insurance carrier has had a 400-700% payout because a "pioneer" or "innovator" goes out and get's themselves seriously injured or killed. 

If you want to go out and get yourself killed please don't do it at an SCTA event. 

[joea]

Nathan....""We've had years where our event insurance carrier has had a 400-700% payout because a "pioneer" or "innovator" goes out and get's themselves seriously injured or killed.""

were they sitting/recumbent seating positions..?..

i hope this isnt meant to mean that innovator's and pioneers who PASS tech and are allowed to compete arent frowned
upon.....as this to me is what separates LSR (which i feel is the last bastion of amateaur motorsports)...from the other
motorsports which are largely "spec" sports......to eliminate innovation and pioneering and LEVEL the playing field........

[NathanStewart]

Joe, you know we can't run an event without liability insurance and we can't get insurance with out mitigating risk.  Letting people run haphazardly because it's their life or their car just ain't gunna happen.  It's as simple as that.

[JoshH]

So do bike liners require a HANS type device? If so, the benefit of it could be limited by this position; they have pretty specific design requirements for belt and head rest position.

I think the neck is the most exposed to damage here.

[hitz]

If we are going to call a type car or bike dangerous maybe we should look at the competition coupes saftey record and not a type vehicle that hasn't caused a serious injury. It's been said on this forum the rules are written in blood. Oh! Ok, I guess a red tag isn't a rule.

Hitz

[fastman614]

I work for an OEM supplier to the mining industry in Canada (and the world) ..... the due diligence line has been parroted to me by my bosses until I "can't stand it anymore".... YES, Nathan, you ARE correct.... the due diligence in our type of racing is all about removing moral hazard.....

Moral hazard is a term that is used in investments, insurance and other areas where liability is a factor..... if you have insurance without limitation on risk factors..... if you have an "anything goes and you are covered" environment, moral hazard works like this..... we can take as much risk as we want and the insurance company will pick up the tab.....  the the "great recession of 2008" (and continuing today)..... the US Government was the ultimate insurer....  the investment companies that played so loosely with other people's money ended up with NO risk.....

Figure out now how a scenario in racing fits this..... and you may come to a better understanding as to why "unknowns" and "outside of the box" innovations are, at times, not welcome....

Jack.... .you have to realize that it is nothing personal..... it is all about how do we keep doing what we all love to do without putting us all personally under the specter of incurring personal liability for allowing something to run that may not be proven and a "worst case scenario" situation occurs....

[nebulous]

Nathen
Sounds like you are proud or being an expert on hap hazard! Its good to be an expert on something!
I wonder if you were to drive 5050 it you would make you a better or worse expert!
It seems only a document can improve some peoples expertise!

5050 was banned not because of a bad design. It passed 6yrs of expert scrutiny by SCTA inspection teams ! It was banned because  I cannot produce a published document stating prone forward can be a safe way to control a vehicle! Like all the documents that must exist that cover all situations of all vehicles that participate in scta/bni Sounds kinda fishy to me! "we" would never ban inovation or progress , the very thing LSR stands for! Would we?

[joea]

Nathan, im the first one to proclaim warmly that the SCTA is the BEST IN THE BUSINESS..!!!!!

that is no doubt, not only the best lsr organization but the best people as well......!..

the passion which exists within the scta is the same that exists within most of its competitors....

I felt abit taken back (and internet banter loses much in translation at times) by your words that some
innovators and pioneers cause insurance payouts to be high...when these folks have been given
the "organizations" blessing and approval to run...by virtue of the scrutineering process....

Joe

ps (Nathan than YOU for caring enough, and having the cahones to share in this dialogue here on this site, where so many come for guidance and insight)