"Cyclist talks of impact collision had on his life"

On 10/03/2012 04:55, Simon Mason wrote:

On Mar 10, 12:27 am, (roger merriman) wrote:

sure, my main risk is probably impact with a motorvehical thus my faith
in a cycle helmet is low.

You mean a "motor vehicle"?
You haven't got a degree by any chance have you?

You haven't got a diploma from the 'Ull John Prescott School of Charm, have you?

On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 20:55:16 -0800 (PST), Simon Mason
wrote:

On Mar 10, 12:27*am, (roger merriman) wrote:



sure, my main risk is probably impact with a motorvehical thus my faith
in a cycle helmet is low.


You mean a "motor vehicle"?
You haven't got a degree by any chance have you?



You're a nasty ****er - you replied to the post where he said that he was
dyslexic.

He did of course really think that the "word" 'motorvehical ' was in fact a
"word".

Remind us - what is your degree in?

"Judith" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 20:55:16 -0800 (PST), Simon Mason
wrote:

On Mar 10, 12:27 am, (roger merriman) wrote:



sure, my main risk is probably impact with a motorvehical thus my faith
in a cycle helmet is low.


You mean a "motor vehicle"?
You haven't got a degree by any chance have you?



You're a nasty ****er - you replied to the post where he said that he was
dyslexic.

He did of course really think that the "word" 'motorvehical ' was in fact a
"word".

Remind us - what is your degree in?
=====================================

He doesn't have a degree. He doesn't even have 'O' Level English by his own
admission.

On Mar 10, 8:09*am, Doug wrote:
On Mar 9, 11:00*am, Simon Mason wrote:



On Mar 9, 7:20*am, Doug wrote:
.

Repeat with rib-cage, with and without body armour, instead of skull
and see what happens.

Broken ribs can cause serious damage to the heart and lungs.

I repeat, helmets are a tokenistic protection used to deflect blame
from drivers to vulnerable cyclists.

Agreed.
I never wear one, never have done and never will do.
Total waste of time.

I've experimented and find that drivers come closer to me when I am
wearing one and avoid me more when they see my white hair.

Doug.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That seems to agree with that Bath study - they drove closer when the
cyclist was lidless and further away when it looked like it was a
woman.

--
Simon Mason

On 10/03/2012 14:59, Simon Mason wrote:
On Mar 10, 8:09 am, wrote:
On Mar 9, 11:00 am, Simon wrote:



On Mar 9, 7:20 am, wrote:
.

Repeat with rib-cage, with and without body armour, instead of skull
and see what happens.

Broken ribs can cause serious damage to the heart and lungs.

I repeat, helmets are a tokenistic protection used to deflect blame
from drivers to vulnerable cyclists.

Agreed.
I never wear one, never have done and never will do.
Total waste of time.

I've experimented and find that drivers come closer to me when I am
wearing one and avoid me more when they see my white hair.

Doug.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That seems to agree with that Bath study - they drove closer when the
cyclist was lidless and further away when it looked like it was a
woman.

FX Sound of bottom of barrel being scrapedFX



--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 06:59:08 -0800 (PST), Simon Mason
wrote:

snip


That seems to agree with that Bath study - they drove closer when the
cyclist was lidless and further away when it looked like it was a
woman.



That "study" was one of the biggest load of ******** that was ever labeled
"research"

Have a look at a rebuttal
http://www.cyclistview.com/overtakin...aper-Rev-4.pdf


His major findings were

The further out the cyclist is from the curb - then the nearer the overtaking
vehicles will be.

The nearer the overtaking vehicle is - then the greater the chance of the
vehicle hitting the cyclist.


No **** !!!

On Mar 10, 8:17*am, Doug wrote:


I have only ever struck my head once while falling off and that was
when a motorist was coming straight at me and I had to swerve to avoid
it and struck the side of the narrow sunken lane with my head and
shoulder. Even then there was no concussion.

Same here - I hit my head directly on the road after hitting some
diesel.
I bashed my head at 20mph, but rode home with no problem at all.
Since a plastic hat is only rated to 12mph and I have road tested my
skull at 8mph above that, then there is no need for a coffee cup on my
bonce.
Especially as it is getting warmer now.
--
Simon Mason

On Mar 10, 11:01*am, Judith wrote:
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 00:27:44 +0000, (roger merriman) wrote:

snip

sure, my main risk is probably impact with a motorvehical thus my faith
in a cycle helmet is low.

Roger

But if you are hit by a motor vehicle - it is more likely that your head will
hit the ground than the vehicle itself. *(That is why motorcycle helmets and
cycle helmets are only tested to the equivalent force of your head hitting the
ground.

The following concerns motorcycle helmets - but also applies to cycle helmets

Most motorcycle helmet standards use impacts at speeds between 4-7 m/s (9-16
mph). At first glance, this is confusing given that motorcyclists frequently
ride at speeds higher than 20 m/s (45 mph). This confusion is relieved by
understanding that the perpendicular impact speed of the helmet is usually not
the same as the road speed of the motorcycle and that the severity of the
impact is determined not only by the speed of the head, but also by the nature
of the surface it hits and the angle of impact. For example, the surface of the
road is almost parallel to the direction the motorcyclist moves in so only a
small component of their velocity is directed perpendicular to the road while
they are riding. *A perpendicular impact against a flat steel anvil at 5 m/s
(11 mph) might be about as severe as a 30 m/s (67 mph) oblique impact against a
concrete surface or a 30 m/s perpendicular impact against a sheet metal car
door or windscreen.

When I was hit by a car a couple of years ago my head collided with
the bonnet. Fortunately the car was going at a very low speed so my
injuries were slight, with some rib and shoulder pain but very bloody
and with no concussion. Was kept in hospital overnight for
observation. Had the car been going at 30mph I seriously doubt a
helmet would have saved my life.

Doug.

On 11/03/2012 07:04, Doug wrote:
On Mar 10, 11:01 am, wrote:
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 00:27:44 +0000, (roger merriman) wrote:

snip

sure, my main risk is probably impact with a motorvehical thus my faith
in a cycle helmet is low.

Roger

But if you are hit by a motor vehicle - it is more likely that your head will
hit the ground than the vehicle itself. (That is why motorcycle helmets and
cycle helmets are only tested to the equivalent force of your head hitting the
ground.

The following concerns motorcycle helmets - but also applies to cycle helmets

Most motorcycle helmet standards use impacts at speeds between 4-7 m/s (9-16
mph). At first glance, this is confusing given that motorcyclists frequently
ride at speeds higher than 20 m/s (45 mph). This confusion is relieved by
understanding that the perpendicular impact speed of the helmet is usually not
the same as the road speed of the motorcycle and that the severity of the
impact is determined not only by the speed of the head, but also by the nature
of the surface it hits and the angle of impact. For example, the surface of the
road is almost parallel to the direction the motorcyclist moves in so only a
small component of their velocity is directed perpendicular to the road while
they are riding. A perpendicular impact against a flat steel anvil at 5 m/s
(11 mph) might be about as severe as a 30 m/s (67 mph) oblique impact against a
concrete surface or a 30 m/s perpendicular impact against a sheet metal car
door or windscreen.

When I was hit by a car a couple of years ago my head collided with
the bonnet. Fortunately the car was going at a very low speed so my
injuries were slight, with some rib and shoulder pain but very bloody
and with no concussion. Was kept in hospital overnight for
observation. Had the car been going at 30mph I seriously doubt a
helmet would have saved my life.

The Porky Chapman Helmet Test.

1] Wear a cycle helmet & allow someone to hit you on the head with a hammer.
2] Repeat, but without wearing the cycle helmet.
Record which one hurts the most & causes most trauma.



--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On 11/03/2012 04:33, Simon Mason wrote:
On Mar 10, 8:17 am, wrote:


I have only ever struck my head once while falling off and that was
when a motorist was coming straight at me and I had to swerve to avoid
it and struck the side of the narrow sunken lane with my head and
shoulder. Even then there was no concussion.

Same here - I hit my head directly on the road after hitting some
diesel.
I bashed my head at 20mph, but rode home with no problem at all.

Are you sure there weren't any problems? We aren't.

Since a plastic hat is only rated to 12mph and I have road tested my
skull at 8mph above that, then there is no need for a coffee cup on my
bonce.
Especially as it is getting warmer now.

The Porky Chapman Helmet Test.

1] Wear a cycle helmet & allow someone to hit you on the head with a hammer.
2] Repeat, but without wearing the cycle helmet.
Record which one hurts the most & causes most trauma.


--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University