Sad helmet incident

John B. writes:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 21:54:24 -0500, Joy Beeson
wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 09:59:08 +0700, John B.
wrote:

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 21:50:51 -0500, Joy Beeson
wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 07:38:56 +0700, John B.
wrote:

"100 percent greater blunt impact protection "

My freshman-year English teacher would have marked that as a
grammatical error because it doesn't say 100% of *what*.

"100% greater blunt impact protection"? "Blunt Impact" is something,
see:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blunt_trauma

" Blunt trauma is physical trauma to a body part, either by impact,
injury or physical attack. The latter is usually referred to as blunt
force trauma. Blunt trauma is the initial trauma, from which develops
more specific types such as contusions, abrasions, lacerations, and/or
bone fractures. Blunt trauma is contrasted with penetrating trauma, in
which an object such as a projectile or knife enters the body. "

[snipped quote]

But what is the blunt-impact protection 100% greater than?

:-) Well the subject under discussion is blunt trauma protection,
and discussing new helmets, so one would assume that if the new helmet
gives 100% better protection then it is 100%, i.e., double the
protection of the old helmet against getting hit on the head with a
baseball bat (for example) :-)

Just as I hear people say "Oh! I've gained weight!", or what might be
a classic, "She lost her husband" :-)

I'm not bald, I'm just 3% taller than my hair.

On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 10:40:20 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 1/25/2020 3:21 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 07:41:06 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 05:34:56 +0700, John B. wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:57:53 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 07:38:56 +0700, John B. wrote:


"100 percent greater blunt impact protection"

So it has doubled the past protection from being hit over the head by a
4x4?

the irony from this articles is that they been chasing lighter and
lghter helment, but also come uo with a new system to attach junk/weight
to it?

I think the reasoning is "that as we want to attach a lot of junk the
helmet needs to be made lighter" :-)

I can not help but think ofd those Prussin(?) calvary helmets with great
'oblongs' on top.

Polish, I believe.


Pretty sure picklehaube are Prussian from early 1800s before
Germany was a nation and when Poland was segmented and occupied.

Yes, "The Pickelhaube was originally designed in 1842 by King
Frederick William IV of Prussia".

But... picklehaube have a spike on the top, not a square or oblong
plate :-)
pickle = "point" or "pickaxe", and Haube = "bonnet"
--
cheers,

John B.

On Saturday, January 25, 2020 at 4:40:28 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/25/2020 3:21 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 07:41:06 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

I can not help but think ofd those Prussin(?) calvary helmets with great
'oblongs' on top.

Polish, I believe.

Pretty sure picklehaube are Prussian from early 1800s before
Germany was a nation and when Poland was segmented and occupied.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Correct.

Not that most Germans who ever mattered were anything but Prussians, even the humanist Conrad Adenauer.

Andre Jute
Arbiter

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 2:30:50 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:25:17 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
At another forum the usual helmet crap came up and someone had a reference to how well helmets compared to the international standard. It turned out that most of the expensive helmets came in around 1.2 times better than the standard. These helmets met this simply by making the thickness of the Styrofoam a little more than necessary. The cheap Chinese helmets like Schwinn etc. had 1.5 or even more that of the standard and again that was simply by making the helmet marginally larger and adding additional Styrofoam.

Specialized I believe had the best of all performance. They did this not by adding more Styrofoam or making the helmet larger but have very high quality controlled Styrofoam with very carefully controlled bubble size in the foam.

Of course being three times as effective was measured simply by how far you could drop it with a head weight in it and maintain the deceleration rate in the standard. Since this rate is too high, almost all of these helmets were worthless standard or no.

Interestingly, the Trek/Bontrager helmets met the International standard despite having a deceleration rate much lower than the Styrofoam helmets. All this means is that as the Q-Cells collapse they meet a point at which they have smashed together so much that they then decelerated at the normal standard speed. This is hardly the point since the initial deceleration rate of 2/3's or so that of Styrofoam is the important part.

This testing didn't even mention that surprising reduction of deceleration and hence the improvement of concussion rates of 48 time lower brain damage.

IF you wear a helmet I would really recommend the Bontrager Q-Cell standard helmets. When they tested the MIPS they found no improvement but they do provide a MIPS liner for those who believe that it decreases injuries.

What is this "International Standard"? I ask as I did a search for
such a thing and I can't seem to find it, although I did find:

CPSC Standard - The U.S. Law that covers all helmets produced for the
US market after March 10, 1999.

ASTM F1447- more than 70 per cent of the world's bicycle helmet
production had been certified to the standard of the American Society
for Testing and Materials.

The Australian standard, which is superior in some respects to any of
the U.S. standards.

The Canadian standard has also been rigorous, and has been updated to
reduce the permissible G level for child helmets

There were national standards in effect in various European countries,
but Europe now has a CEN standard that covers all member states

Japan has a standard of its own.

The site I found says that " Our Helmet Standards Comparison includes
as many of the standards as we have been able to get copies of to
date, at last count fifteen, but it may not be entirely up to date."

But no "International Standard".

Is this, yet again, proof that Tommy doesn't know what he is talking
about?

I would say that is just more proof that you will die pretty soon from a brain fart. Every helmet standard is at or extremely near the CPSC standard. But I suppose if you are already brain damaged that wouldn't make any sense to you. Did you get that brain damage flying bombing missions in a B50?

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 11:37:40 PM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:27:50 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 4:52:16 AM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 14:31:49 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:

On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 10:13:16 PM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 20:29:00 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:

Since I did some work fairly recently for the military I had some
idea of the things that were being used in the 80's

80's, Recent?

I worked at Sandia National Labs and Lawrence Livermore Labs which is
next door in the 2005 time period and the improvement of the old tin
hat started in the 1980's with improvements every couple of years and
enough improvement to make full scale changes about every 5 years.
That means that the latest improvements have gone on-line about
something in the last five years.

But the stuff I was hearing about is still at least 10 years off.
Through with the papers I have recently read I can see pretty much
how it will be done.

What have you done with your time besides posting here?

You wouldn't believe it.

Be3cause you're a smart ass that ****es me off doesn't mean that I
wouldn't believe you. I do think that you can discuss things
intellectually if the time is right.

Sorry tommie. it isn't time for more tommie fairy tales.

I don't remember you telling us how old you are and what you do for a living? Without that information how is anyone to even guess what sort of judgement you have? Aren't you the one that was crying because I said I worked on the cyclotron at Berkley Labs? It is pretty ugly when you leftist have nothing left that to deny anything and everything.

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 11:41:08 PM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 05:34:56 +0700, John B. wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:57:53 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 07:38:56 +0700, John B. wrote:


"100 percent greater blunt impact protection "

So it has doubled the past protection from being hit over the head by a
4x4?

the irony from this articles is that they been chasing lighter and
lghter helment, but also come uo with a new system to attach junk/weight
to it?

I think the reasoning is "that as we want to attach a lot of junk the
helmet needs to be made lighter" :-)

I can not help but think ofd those Prussin(?) calvary helmets with great
'oblongs' on top.

So among your other talents you can't even look the spelling of a word up or turn on spelling correction? That doesn't say much for your mental capacity.

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 07:32:19 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 11:37:40 PM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 10:27:50 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 4:52:16 AM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 14:31:49 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:

On Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 10:13:16 PM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 20:29:00 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:

Since I did some work fairly recently for the military I had
some idea of the things that were being used in the 80's

80's, Recent?

I worked at Sandia National Labs and Lawrence Livermore Labs which
is next door in the 2005 time period and the improvement of the
old tin hat started in the 1980's with improvements every couple
of years and enough improvement to make full scale changes about
every 5 years. That means that the latest improvements have gone
on-line about something in the last five years.

But the stuff I was hearing about is still at least 10 years off.
Through with the papers I have recently read I can see pretty much
how it will be done.

What have you done with your time besides posting here?

You wouldn't believe it.

Be3cause you're a smart ass that ****es me off doesn't mean that I
wouldn't believe you. I do think that you can discuss things
intellectually if the time is right.

Sorry tommie. it isn't time for more tommie fairy tales.

I don't remember you telling us how old you are and what you do for a
living?

Tommy, I've been retired for over 10 years. I've said that before.

Without that information how is anyone to even guess what sort
of judgement you have?

Such prejudicial judgement. However, i am replying to you, so that
probably shows poor judgement.

Aren't you the one that was crying because I said
I worked on the cyclotron at Berkley Labs?

No.

It is pretty ugly when you
leftist have nothing left that to deny anything and everything.

Err, mirror?

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 07:26:36 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:


The site I found says that " Our Helmet Standards Comparison includes
as many of the standards as we have been able to get copies of to date,
at last count fifteen, but it may not be entirely up to date."

But no "International Standard".

Is this, yet again, proof that Tommy doesn't know what he is talking
about?

I would say that is just more proof that you will die pretty soon from a
brain fart. Every helmet standard is at or extremely near the CPSC
standard.

So, it is silly to pay more that the minimum for a helmet?

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 07:33:40 -0800, Tom Kunich wrote:

On Friday, January 24, 2020 at 11:41:08 PM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 05:34:56 +0700, John B. wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:57:53 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 07:38:56 +0700, John B. wrote:


"100 percent greater blunt impact protection "

So it has doubled the past protection from being hit over the head by
a 4x4?

the irony from this articles is that they been chasing lighter and
lghter helment, but also come uo with a new system to attach
junk/weight to it?

I think the reasoning is "that as we want to attach a lot of junk the
helmet needs to be made lighter" :-)

I can not help but think ofd those Prussin(?) calvary helmets with
great 'oblongs' on top.

So among your other talents you can't even look the spelling of a word
up or turn on spelling correction? That doesn't say much for your mental
capacity.

Ooooooh, so easy trolling you. Here is a few aaaaaaaaa's for next time.
Let me know f you're short of anything else.

BTW, did you know the answer?
Or RDS?