|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Sad helmet incident
On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:23:21 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote: On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 10:06:14 +0700, John B. wrote: On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 02:42:49 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 05:46:38 +0700, John B. wrote: Helmets don't protect nor can they protect from everything. Sheesh, when I was in the army I saw bullets go clean through M1 style steel military helmets. Does that mean no soldier should wear a helmet? LOL VBEG Cheers But... military helmets are not designed to be bullet proof, or to phrase it a bit differently the M-16 was designed to penetrate one side of a helmet at 500 yards. Yep, it is marketing FUD to makethe troops happy by feeling "safe". I believe that current studies show that the majority of combat wounds, are caused by explosive devices, not gunshots. Yep, skill in IED development seems more handy that ordering ammo and waiting for it to arrive. Over here, all that childhood chemistry experimtation(sp?) would see you locked up. Actually I was referring to cannon, mortar, hand grenade, airfare bombs, etc. -- cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Sad helmet incident
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 18:39:36 -0800, sms
wrote: On 1/20/2020 8:09 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: snip I suspect you don't understand how most product cycles operate. I don't have time to go through the details right now, but at some point, a mature product (same as an over-sold product), ossifies into a standard configuration, where all the competing products appear to be 99% identical. While all helmets may meet the minimum CPSC or European standards, they are not identical in level of protection. Look at the tests performed by Virginia Tech at https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/bicycle-helmet-ratings.html where they rate a bunch of helmets from best to worst. Here's how Virginia Tech ran their tests: https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/83760/Bicycle%20STAR%20Methodology.pdf At first glance, I'm having problems figuring out what they're doing, what they're measuring, and how they're producing their STAR rating. Let's just say I'm suspicious when most of the helmets cost over $100, claim to meet CPSC, and probably meet SNELL and ASTM F1447. Yet the report shows some variability in the STAR test results. I just might suspect that either manufacturing inconsistencies, or wide variations in testing methodology or results. Also, I get rather suspicious when I can't find the raw data to see how it was generated and processed: https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/83760 Also, note that the test report was from 5/30/2018, while more helmets and data were added on Nov 25, 2019 which makes me wonder if any of the conclusions changed due to the updates. https://cyclingtips.com/2019/11/virginia-tech-add-more-helmets-to-tested-list-mips-still-trending/ Oh swell. Yet another helmet standard, this time from Australia. https://cyclingtips.com/2019/03/australia-has-a-new-helmet-standard-on-the-way-why/ I also blundered across yet another safety publication, the International Journal of Crashworthiness. https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/tcrs20/current Are you worthy of crashing? -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
OT Linux Sad helmet incident
On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 02:39:01 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote: On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 08:09:28 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 10:51:25 +0200, Eric Pozharski wrote: with Jeff Liebermann wrote: So, what is an RBT reading geek to do? If helmets are not going to disappear, and many people seem to want helmets, then at least make them better, more functional, more usable, cheaper, and in this case, less dangerous to small children. Minor tweaks to the design of a chin strap are not going to affect global use and sales of helmets, but it might save the lives of a few kids. No way. Changes as such would draw on profits. I suspect you don't understand how most product cycles operate. I don't have time to go through the details right now, but at some point, a mature product (same as an over-sold product), ossifies into a standard configuration, where all the competing products appear to be 99% identical. You may have noticed this in Linux distros, which are 99% identical, except for the installer, desktop decorations, and bundled applications. Actually there is only two main sources of Linux distros; Redhat & Debian. Rhe rest are rebadging of their work with greater (Canonical/ Ubuntu) and lessor, e.g devuan, which accounts for your comments. There are very few truely independent distos, such as Slackware. As to product lifestlye comments; spot on. I thought that would get your attention. Thanks for the clarification on distributions, but it still doesn't invalidate my 99% identical comment. Every fork (such as the systemd haters forking Debian to Devuan) borrows a great deal from its predecessor. MATE did the same for those who hated GNOME 3.0. As new kernels are released, the fork creators continue to borrow. Some forks may actually be 99% copies of the main branch differing only in the installer and bundled apps. Others have written their own utilities, package managers, and kernel enhancements (performance enhancements and runs well on very little RAM) and might perhaps be 92% borrowed. Whatever the differences, under the hood (bonnet), they are very much similar to each other. https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=family-tree Wikipedia claims there are about 500 Linux distributions in active development. Distrowatch notes that the bulk of their downloads and users use one (or more) of 11 major distributions: https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major Competition must be fierce among distributions in order to get the attention of prospective users. So, what do the minor distribution do to get attention? Minor tweaks, just like the bicycle helmet business and any other mature business that's facing a saturated market. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Sad helmet incident
On Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 2:23:34 AM UTC, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 16:13:19 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute wrote: What I really want is armour to protect my little fingers, especially at the first joint. I'm not sure these will work for you, but some of the prices are sufficient low that they might be worth trying: Thanks, Jeff. I had fun looking up these. Chainmail Gloves Medieval Light Weight Aluminum Chain Armor Replica Ring Gauntlets http://www.swordsaxe.com/chainmail-gloves-medieval-light-weight-aluminum-chain-armor-replica-ring-gauntlets.aspx http://www.swordsaxe.com/images/products/detail/Chainmail_Gloves_Medieval_Light_Weight_Aluminum_Ch ain_Armor_Replica_Ring_Gauntlets_3.jpg The ones in the second link are a bit DUH! But I in fact have something like the lightweight ones in your first link, in knitted kevlar, for protecting my left hand which turns the plate on the sandbag so the graver in my right hand can cut a curve. I also use them for less dangerous tasks, like making lino or woodcuts with very sharp Swiss and Japanese tools. But I doubt mine are stiff enough to stop the little fingers being broken. Metal motorcycle gloves: https://www.mcgearhub.com/motorcycle-gloves/excalibur-chrome-gloves-review-icon-timax-lookalikes/ https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01MUD94D8/ Pity about the appearance of these things (and the likely weight) because they'd do well. Exoskeleton gloves: https://www.google.com/search?q=exoskeleton+gloves&tbm=isch Power assisted Festo ExoHand: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=exohand https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcTL7Hig8h4 Those flying buttresses on top of the fingers would do nicely for self-defence against Range Rovers passing too closely. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 Andre Jute It doesn't need to be a war every time you ride your bike |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Sad helmet incident
On Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 1:58:54 AM UTC, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:36:40 -0500, Duane wrote: I'm with Jay and Andre. I wear a helmet because road rash on my head hurts like hell and scalp wounds bleed a lot and though my ears are larger than necessary I don't want to scrape them down in size. Well, if you don't care about impact protection, the design of a bicycle helmet to protect against abrasion (road rash) is much simpler. Instead of a web suspension and foam padding, all that's needed is a sacrificial skull cap made of almost anything that can prevent penetration when the road tries to act like a belt sander on your head. Your brain might turn to mush from the impact damage, but your skin, scalp, and ears will probably survive intact. Time for some recreational math... My Harbor Fright 1x30" belt sander runs at: 3260 ft/min = 54.3 ft/sec = 37 mph https://www.harborfreight.com/1-in-x-30-in-belt-sander-61728.html That's a bit fast for a bicycle, which I would guess can do 15 mph. 15 mph = 22 ft/sec I need to slow down my belt sander by 1/2. A 40 grit aluminum oxide belt should simulate a rather abrasive road surface. Now, all I need to do is apply pressure to the half speed belt sander equal to the weight of one's head (about 11 lbs), and see how long I might survive before the belt breaks through the helmet. From the time, the distance I might survive a head first skid into the pavement can be easily calculated (1 sec = 22 ft at 15 mph). Hmmm... let me think about this some more. I'm not sure I want to know the answer. I certainly hope you will think a long time, preferably forever. This is too gruesome a thought experiment to relish. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 Andre Jute Grossed out^144 |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Sad helmet incident
On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 9:05:10 AM UTC-8, Radey Shouman wrote:
Girl, 4, died after bike helmet got caught on branch: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-...shire-51139789 She wasn't riding her bike at the time, but, being four years old, she probably wasn't able to remove her own helmet. -- I always wear a helmet when on the bike, and aggressively argue back at anyone who says they shouldn't be mandatory for all ages. Twice, I would have been dead if not for wearing a helmet when I crashed on a bike. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Sad helmet incident
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:07:10 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Oh swell. Yet another helmet standard, this time from Australia. https://cyclingtips.com/2019/03/aust...t-standard-on- the-way-why/ All of which means; how to keep out cheap chinese produced helmets. Not unstrangley, there was actually nothing in that opnion piece that talked about what the actualy standard are now. It would be fun to be a fly on the wall about which overseas standards they accept. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
OT Linux Sad helmet incident
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 21:37:16 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 02:39:01 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 08:09:28 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote: I suspect you don't understand how most product cycles operate. I don't have time to go through the details right now, but at some point, a mature product (same as an over-sold product), ossifies into a standard configuration, where all the competing products appear to be 99% identical. You may have noticed this in Linux distros, which are 99% identical, except for the installer, desktop decorations, and bundled applications. Actually there is only two main sources of Linux distros; Redhat & Debian. The rest are rebadging of their work with greater (Canonical/ Ubuntu) and lessor, e.g devuan, which accounts for your comments. There are very few truely independent distos, such as Slackware. As to product lifestlye comments; spot on. I thought that would get your attention. Thanks for the clarification on distributions, but it still doesn't invalidate my 99% identical comment. Yep, to date it has all been "Linux" and some programs was served locally from your distro source, but you are basically free to souce any package. Every fork (such as the systemd haters forking Debian to Devuan) borrows a great deal from its predecessor. Err, devuan currently rus on/off the base debian source tree, but with an empahsis in providing an alternative to the microsoft like systemd(one ring to rule them all and allow back doors) This is wha the init-system (start up method) debate was about; aka choice in how crank it all up. MATE did the same for those who hated GNOME 3.0. That is really desktop decorations. The real difference is the collection of pretties/desktops each supposts. gnome made the mistake of assuming that people were prepared to spend big money on hardware to run their collection of shinies. They were not along in this delusion. As new kernels are released, the fork creators continue to borrow. Some forks may actually be 99% copies of the main branch differing only in the installer and bundled apps. Others have written their own utilities, package managers, and kernel enhancements (performance enhancements and runs well on very little RAM) and might perhaps be 92% borrowed. Whatever the differences, under the hood (bonnet), they are very much similar to each other. https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=family-tree Wikipedia claims there are about 500 Linux distributions in active development. Distrowatch notes that the bulk of their downloads and users use one (or more) of 11 major distributions: https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major Competition must be fierce among distributions in order to get the attention of prospective users. Err,hardly, unless you are thinking of IBM/Redhat & Canonica,l who really are about selling support services,. that is the beauty of linux, you can modify the collective whole or part of it, and release is as a disrto for others to share. e.g scientific linux is a distro tweaked at the scientific community. Others are tweaked for beginners, others to look like the current MS OS. Plenty of people actually roll their own kernels from the source for the inherent greater performance. There is so much bloat in the kernel now that it has largely left its unix/bsd origin or only loading code when needed. So, what do the minor distribution do to get attention? Minor tweaks, just like the bicycle helmet business and any other mature business that's facing a saturated market. Except for a the people in the big companies, it isn't a business. The income is for providing 'support' and as you say, it has a lot in common, which means disagnostic tools abound and are common. (note to self, if you remember to load them each time you roll a new machine) My long held opinion is that people develop a new program(easier) or fork a new version of anexisting one to make their reputation as a programmer, to obtain employment. Lol, there has been at least one global linux support company sink below the waves because they prioritised programmers in their recruitment and consequently had no skills in actually providing support services. I might have an entirely different view to you as my entire Linux exposure (almost) was never linked to an external pay packet. I revelled in keeping old hardware working as it was very capable of providing for my hobby and SOHO interests. I've also been around from before Linus Torvalds posted his usenet message about something for the 386 kernel and just as I spent a lot of time boosting bicycle groups, I spent a lot of time boosting Linux Users Groups. Similarly, I'm very happy with my steel diamond frame daily ride and the only thing that has really change in bicycle helmet in our garage is that every decade we buy another one as the poly foam has hardened abit. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Sad helmet incident
Oculus Lights wrote:
Twice, I would have been dead if not for wearing a helmet when I crashed on a bike. Helmet wearers love to make assertions like this. If they were anything like true, a lot more of the roughly half of us who don't wear helmets would already be dead. Or maybe the half who do wear helmets are much more clumsy, reckless, fragile, and unlucky than we are, such that their lives depend on their choice of headgear? On the whole, your odds of getting killed while riding your bike aren't measurably better than they were when nobody wore bicycle helmets. Explain how that could be, if helmets are so very effective. |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Sad helmet incident
On 1/20/2020 11:14 AM, jbeattie wrote:
Hasn't cut down or ridership in Portland. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/trans...article/407660 To you, it is an end-of-world issue. To the cycling population in PDX -- its meaningless. Kids are used to wearing helmets, and people over 16 do what they want. For children, the compulsory helmet laws probably increase cycling in my area. Parents have this idea that all that's necessary to keep their child safe while cycling is for them to wear a helmet (often incorrectly). This leads to the children being allowed to cycle but often without any other knowledge of proper behavior or other proper equipment. Voluntary helmet usage among adults is so high in this area, and I suspect in Portland, that there's no point in passing more laws that would be unlikely to be enforced anyway. If an adult chooses to not wear a helmet that's their decision and they accept the consequences should they be in a head impact crash. A compromise for motorcycle helmets has been reached in some states. For example, in Michigan, the state requires at $200,000 in medical coverage for riders that don't wear helmets. No U.S. states have bicycle MHLs for adults. Another insurance issue is electric bicycles (and electric scooters). On most policies neither your homeowners insurance nor your vehicle insurance covers you for loss or injury unless you pay extra, if they offer such coverage at all. My homeowners insurance doesn't cover " “motor conveyance on land.” "Electric scooter riders might think their auto insurance would kick in to cover an electric scooter accident, but automobile insurance generally doesn’t cover vehicles with less than four wheels. And homeowner’s or renter’s insurance may cover an accident that occurs on a traditional bicycle, but it does not cover motorized bike or scooter trips. “Once you motorized that scooter or that bike, then the equation changes,” said Bob Passmore, assistant vice president at the American Property Casualty Insurance Association. “More likely than not, most people’s home liability or their renters’ liability probably aren’t going to provide coverage for that.”" https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2019/06/28/530715.htm |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another RLJ incident | Simon Mason | UK | 6 | September 30th 11 07:31 AM |
An Incident | Jorg Lueke | General | 28 | June 17th 08 04:51 PM |
First incident in ages | Chris Eilbeck | UK | 12 | September 22nd 06 07:52 PM |
Strange incident | Tom Crispin | UK | 7 | March 3rd 06 05:54 PM |
Another incident | MikeyOz | Australia | 18 | January 17th 06 08:48 AM |