New rules and HANS devices

[Steve Grosekemper]

There seems to be a lot of misinformation being spread about the new H&N restraint rule. I would like to address a few of the issues and hope that the members of the zone will take the time to understand the rule and it's impact before reacting.

The rule only applies to licensed TT participants. That means that those who are new to TT's will not have to utilize a H&N system

The rule only applies to the driver's side not to the passenger

The rule does not apply to DE events

The rule does not require a HANS device. It does require a H&N device of which HANS is one brand. There are at least 3 others available, the least expensive is around $250.

Most if not all members should be able to comply with this rule without having to buy any other additional items.

This rule was adopted by the rules committee and passed by a vote of the Region Presidents out of a concern for the safety of our members. It was our hope that the members of the region would also be interested in their safety. Our Zone has shown a long history of leading the way when it comes to safety and this rule is staying with that tradition. We see no reason to wait for other regions or national to adopt such a rule before our Zone does.

The rule allows each member to research the options available and decide what will work best for them and fit in his/her budget.

I guess I am wondering why anyone would disparage a rule that requires the use of a proven safety device. I do not claim to know how effective the various devices are, but if I lost control of my car and was headed for a wall I sure would be glad to have something to protect my neck - the only part of our body that current rules do not protect.
Richard Price
Rules Chair

The problem with implementing a far reaching rule such as this is taking into consideration all the possibilities and variations of how the drivers will be effected.

1- The rule states that use of a head and neck restraint for permit holding time trial drivers (novices are exempted). Well in SDR we hold on average 4 DE event per year. So the Novice driver comes from AX and does 2 DE's before going to the big track. On his second TT he needs a H&N device or he does 4 DE's for whatever reason and never gets a chance to see a big track w/o buying a H&N device. So there is very little time that most drivers are at novice status before heading to a big track.

2- No one is arguing as to the fact that a Hans increases safety in a frontal impact. But calling it proven is a bit of a stretch. Nascar mandated H&N in 2001 with Hans and Hutchens being the only allowed units. After extensive testing Hand was made the only approved unit in 2003. So are Hutchens devices or others going to be disallowed in the future?
Formula one only mandated their use in 2003. We are not formula one...

3-What standard do these devices have to be? Can I tie a strap on my helmet and call it a H&N device? The rules state specifications for roll bars, driving suits, helmets, and seat belts by not H&N devices. Do they have to pass the SFI Spec 38.1? Don't know, because the rules don't specify. I guess I can make something in my garage and strap it in.
By this ruling my neck collar is a head and neck restraint, does that qualify? It does limit the forward and side movement of my helmet.

4- H&N devices are popping up one after another. A quick search will give you several types
Hans
Hutchens
Hutchens II
Isaac
R3 from LFT Tech
G-Force SRS-1
Simpson
Safety Solutions
White Head Restraint
The Wright Device H&N

So who do we trust? Who is going to be disallowed in 2 or 3 years?

5- Most drivers (defined as over 50%) do not have racing seats and roll bars so it is not correct that "Most" driver will not have to buy additional items.

6- I believe this ruling is a reaction to 3 crashes that took place in events unlike ours, without our high level of current safety in place. I believe this rule is far more outreaching than anyone imagined, including myself.

I think in needs to be tabled until the majority of the professional racing bodies decides what they are going to do, before a car club tries to be Formula One, NASCAR or FIA.

[RickK]

Richard,
I don't see a bunch of misinformation out there, just a bunch of people with questions and concerns. Currently all of our safety rules require devices that meet some minimum certification, Snell, SFI, etc. Now, if we start to require H&N devices what rules/certifications will they have to meet? It is a false sense of security to allow just any H&N device, or what even constitutes a H&N device? Does a foam collar count? Is a HANS safe if used with the wrong belt, harness bar, seat configuration/combination?

I suspect that nobody opposes the idea of a required H&N device but we all want to be sure to get ones that are safe, legal to our rules and make a cost effective decision all at the same time. It would be a shame for someone to buy an Isaac for 2007 only to find out that 2008 rules require SFI certification which Isaac does not have (currently only HANS, R3 and Hutch-II have certification) and never will unless SFI changes the "single point of release" requirement in the current rule.

While lesser requirements for new drivers is a great way to encourage new participants, waiving safety requirements is a difficult decision. New drivers must be at least as likely, if not more likely, to have an incident than the veterans. Are there any statistics in the zone for this?

Lastly, are DEs any more safe than TTs? Do we have fewer incidents at DEs than at TTs? I can't see any reason to have separate rules for this, a DE and TT event are exactly the same with the exception of the timed final session at a TT. Actually a DE has more track time if everyone drives the full last session rather than turning it into 2 hot laps for timing for a TT.

I think what needs to happen is that a complete, well thought out rule needs to be written and adopted, what we have right now seems to be hastily thrown together and while good intentioned it lacks the detail that makes the rest of our rules so good.

[Robert]

Our Zone has shown a long history of leading the way when it comes to safety and this rule is staying with that tradition. We see no reason to wait for other regions or national to adopt such a rule before our Zone does.

Sounds to me like the big concern was being first to implement such a rule, rather than thinking anything through properly. I'm all for safety, but Steve's points above are excellent and difficult to refute. "Tradition" aka politics.

[CoryM]

Just to prevent the spread of misinformation: The ISAAC is NOT SFI or FIA certified. The wording on their webpage can be a little misleading, basically the ISAAC device has been independently tested and shown to meet the loading requirements of SFI but does not have a single point release (you have to pull two pins, one on each side of the helmet) and is therefore NOT approved by SFI. So if a rule is passed that only allows SFI certified head and neck restraints you're limited to HANS, R3, and Hutchens II at this time.

[ajackson]

I suspect that nobody opposes the idea of a required H&N device

I actually think the decision to use a H&N device should be left to the driver for DE/TT.

New drivers must be at least as likely, if not more likely, to have an incident than the veterans. Are there any statistics in the zone for this?

I completely disagree with this. The issue isn't how likely they are to crash at one event, but to have crashed at all. I would say that most people that have only done one or two DE's/TT's have not crashed. The percentage of people that regularly DE/TT that have crashed at some point is much higher. Every time you go out you roll the dice in a sense. If you roll the dice a lot of times, eventually your number is going to come up (allowing for variations in skill level and willingness to drive at 10/10ths).

Lastly, are DEs any more safe than TTs? Do we have fewer incidents at DEs than at TTs? I can't see any reason to have separate rules for this, a DE and TT event are exactly the same with the exception of the timed final session at a TT. Actually a DE has more track time if everyone drives the full last session rather than turning it into 2 hot laps for timing for a TT.

I think DE's were mentioned because we tend to do them at the stadium which is much lower speed and safer than a big track.

[C.Plavan]

FYI- I am a West Coast distributer for the R3. If anyone wants to put together a group buy, I will approve it for my fellow Porsche drivers. I race my 911 with VARA. If anyone has questions about the R3 shoot me an email chad@plavanracing.com . The R3 is perfect for instructors and cars with 3 point belts (DE)

FYI- Anyone even considering and Issac should look at the Issac website for the video. Focus on the Issac side of the video and not the HANS side. You clearly see the left attachment point is now in front of the driver (instead of in back where it is supposed to be) after impact. Now imagine a secondary crash with that attachment point in front..... OUCH!!! Bye, bye collar bone and maybe some ribs at the least.

[rtp356]

The problem with implementing a far reaching rule such as this is taking into consideration all the possibilities and variations of how the drivers will be effected.

1- The rule states that use of a head and neck restraint for permit holding time trial drivers (novices are exempted). Well in SDR we hold on average 4 DE event per year. So the Novice driver comes from AX and does 2 DE's before going to the big track. On his second TT he needs a H&N device or he does 4 DE's for whatever reason and never gets a chance to see a big track w/o buying a H&N device. So there is very little time that most drivers are at novice status before heading to a big track.

2- No one is arguing as to the fact that a Hans increases safety in a frontal impact. But calling it proven is a bit of a stretch. Nascar mandated H&N in 2001 with Hans and Hutchens being the only allowed units. After extensive testing Hand was made the only approved unit in 2003. So are Hutchens devices or others going to be disallowed in the future?
Formula one only mandated their use in 2003. We are not formula one...

3-What standard do these devices have to be? Can I tie a strap on my helmet and call it a H&N device? The rules state specifications for roll bars, driving suits, helmets, and seat belts by not H&N devices. Do they have to pass the SFI Spec 38.1? Don't know, because the rules don't specify. I guess I can make something in my garage and strap it in.
By this ruling my neck collar is a head and neck restraint, does that qualify? It does limit the forward and side movement of my helmet.

4- H&N devices are popping up one after another. A quick search will give you several types
Hans
Hutchens
Hutchens II
Isaac
R3 from LFT Tech
G-Force SRS-1
Simpson
Safety Solutions
White Head Restraint
The Wright Device H&N

So who do we trust? Who is going to be disallowed in 2 or 3 years?

5- Most drivers (defined as over 50%) do not have racing seats and roll bars so it is not correct that "Most" driver will not have to buy additional items.

6- I believe this ruling is a reaction to 3 crashes that took place in events unlike ours, without our high level of current safety in place. I believe this rule is far more outreaching than anyone imagined, including myself.

I think in needs to be tabled until the majority of the professional racing bodies decides what they are going to do, before a car club tries to be Formula One, NASCAR or FIA.

In response to your points above.

1 - Yes, when the novice status is over then the person must have all the proper safety equipment to continue and beginning in 2007 that would include a H&N device. I do not see a problem with this and do not see why you would want to encourage someone to drive at very fast speeds without all available safety equipment.

2 - The Zone has never passed a rule that required a specific brand name and has not now. Why misrepresent what the rule says or present it in a way that the rule never intended?

3 - I guess your point here is to try to cause as much confusion as possible. The rules committee spend a great deal of time on this rule and decided it was best not to mandate a specific type of device or standard (see #2 above). We felt that the members of the zone were capable of researching the available devices, looking at their repective budgets and deciding how important their personal safety was and using those elements to decide which device they would buy. It is ultimately each driver's responsibility to be safe and have properly functioning safety equipment. The same approach that has been used on all our safety rules was used on this one. However your comments suggesting a home made strap makes me wonder....

4 - Thanks for helping everyone see how many options are out there - some of which will not require new seats or belts, but can be used with existing equipment. I am not saying those devices are as safe as another - I do not know this. I am saying that there are many devices to chose from and our members have one full year to research the options and the impact on their equipment and budget and make a decision. Again - the zone is not requiring a specific brand. Let your concern for safety be your guide.

5 - This is some of the misinformation that is being spread. There are H&N devices on your list that will work without roll bars and racing seats - so my point stands, most if not all drivers will not have to buy additional equipment. Do the research before making these false comments.

6 - The need for a rule like this is unfortunately highlighted by 2 tragic accidents that resulted in three deaths. I guess you could say it is a overreaction unless it was you or a member of your family. Both of these accidents occured at events that were similar to ours, with similar safety considerstions for like events. One was at a track we have TT's at, but the track was altered for slower speeds then when we use the track - so technically we are not as safe because we have significantly higher speeds.

The best part of our rules process is the members all get a say. If this rule is not going to increase your safety, or if for some other reason you feel it should be changed that make the suggestion. If a majority of the Region Presidents vote accordingly it will be changed. In the meantime, let's have constructive comments on the rule and the options and refrain from misrepresenting what the rule says. The rules committee is only trying to increase the safety of our driving events. If there is a better way to write the rule, please help.

I want to make one last point - this rule was thought out and discussed and researched before it was presented to the Presidents for voting. Please do not imply the rules committee acted in any other way.
Richard Price

[ajackson]

Lets not forget that this is a dangerous sport. If preventing all accidents at any cost was the goal, we'd just limit speed on track to 10mph.

I think Steve Grosekemper's points stand. You can't require a device without stating exactly what constitues that device. Rollbars have to meet specific construction standards. If you let the members decide what makes a H&N device, why not let them choose whether or not to use one at all.

[RickK]

Both of these accidents occured at events that were similar to ours, with similar safety considerstions for like events. One was at a track we have TT's at, but the track was altered for slower speeds then when we use the track - so technically we are not as safe because we have significantly higher speeds.

I wonder which events you are talking about. I can recall one at Fontana where someone lost their life but there is no proof that any additional safety equipment would have altered that outcome. While they were using a "slower" configuration of the track than PCA uses, reportedly, his car was going much faster than most, if not all, of ours do on that straight.

We need to make decisions on topics like these with clear, concise, consistent facts. Of course the rules committee is acting in what they believe to be the best interest of the members, but incomplete rules will benefit nobody.

[Mike]

If you let the members decide what makes a H&N device, why not let them choose whether or not to use one at all.

I am totally pro HANs device. I imagine some drivers took a similar skeptic position when seatbelts, helmets, Nomex driving suits and gloves and shoes were introduced. Aww seatbelts are dangerous, better to be ejected from a rolling car.
Is it true POC will soon be requiring HANs devices for club racers?

Also by PCA not stating which HANs device is required it does open the choices for drivers to consider less expensive non rated units. It also may limit PCAs liability. Say PCA did state only this brand is acceptable and someone got hurt with that brand HANs. What would PCA’s exposure be in this case?

I had a HANS brand device which I am selling. I like it but it does require the correct belts to work. So I bought the R3 which is not dependent on the shoulder belts. Now if I instruct from the right seat I know the R3 will protect me. A HANs device can save your life in low speed impacts too.

Richard Price, are you the one with the flamed cup car and the 911RS?

[Robert]

[3 - I guess your point here is to try to cause as much confusion as possible. The rules committee spend a great deal of time on this rule and decided it was best not to mandate a specific type of device or standard (see #2 above). We felt that the members of the zone were capable of researching the available devices, looking at their repective budgets and deciding how important their personal safety was and using those elements to decide which device they would buy. It is ultimately each driver's responsibility to be safe and have properly functioning safety equipment. The same approach that has been used on all our safety rules was used on this one. However your comments suggesting a home made strap makes me wonder....

Your second to last sentence is just completely incorrect. As Steve pointed out the Zone has specified standards for safety devices (Snell ratings for helmets, for example). If that's not being done here and someone purchases a device and later a specific standard is required, that's a problem.

[5 - This is some of the misinformation that is being spread. There are H&N devices on your list that will work without roll bars and racing seats - so my point stands, most if not all drivers will not have to buy additional equipment. Do the research before making these false comments

See above comment.

[6 - The need for a rule like this is unfortunately highlighted by 2 tragic accidents that resulted in three deaths. I guess you could say it is a overreaction unless it was you or a member of your family. Both of these accidents occured at events that were similar to ours, with similar safety considerstions for like events. One was at a track we have TT's at, but the track was altered for slower speeds then when we use the track - so technically we are not as safe because we have significantly higher speeds.

If you are referring to the tragic accident at California Speedway with your "technically we are not as safe" comment, that is a fallacy. Speed is but one factor that determines safety. To conclude that we are not as safe as a track that has been altered for slower speeds without considering the other effects of the alterations is ridiculous. Assuming people follow the law and equal traffic, is an intersection with no stop lights or stop signs but with a 25 mph speed limit safer than one with traffic control but a 35 mph speed limit? In the case at the Speedway, the track entry (which we do not use) was extremely unsafe, and more than made up for any alterations for slower speeds.

[rtp356]

Mike, yes that is me.

Robert, you are right - the zone does use standards (like SFI) in its rules. Please carefully read what I wrote. I did not say standards, I said brand names - like "HANS." The zone does not dictate the brand of belts, fire extinguisher or any other safety device. It is tough to make a point when words are twisted or misrepresented in a reply to a post.

It appears that most on this board do not like the rule. I have already explained what you need to do if you want to make a change. Ultimately, it is up to all of the Region Presidents to decide.

[Robert]

Robert, you are right - the zone does use standards (like SFI) in its rules. Please carefully read what I wrote. I did not say standards, I said brand names - like "HANS." The zone does not dictate the brand of belts, fire extinguisher or any other safety device. It is tough to make a point when words are twisted or misrepresented in a reply to a post.

I appreciate your response but I did read it carefully the first time. Steve's point 2, and your response to it, was with respect to brands. I don't dispute what you wrote and thus I did not comment on it. I did, however, comment on your response to Steve's point 3, which was specifically having to do with standards (and nothing to do with brands). And your original response to Steve's point 3 was that, consistent with all other rules, the Zone did not mandate a H&N standard. I maintain that this is inconsistent and thus troubling for those trying to decide what to do.

[kary]

I think that H&N device brands should not be mandated by any club in the weekend warrior ranks. There are so many considerations if they were to make such a mandate that would turn into mandating specific seats, beats, and driver environments if they were to mandate a HANS type device for example. Driver build plays into this as well and I do not believe that clubs want to expose themselves to the liability of H&N device failures with slipped belts for example. Some devices are will not properly fit certain driver builds and most others really do not have all the supporting environmental props to support a HANS for example. It gets very complicated very quickly.

I also do not believe the propaganda proposed here by vendors of these products in this thread as the tests are one extreme case defined by a certain group. Most of us weekend drivers will never have enough equipment to support many of these H&N driver environments and thus should be careful and beware of the propaganda. Choose for yourself what will work in your environment. Period. I believe the clubs will respect this fact removing the worry about the H&N branding mandate in the future. Just a mandate to have a H&N device, which is after all, the point, use one and you will increase your chance of survival significantly if an incident occurs.

[RickK]

Just a mandate to have a H&N device, which is after all, the point, use one and you will increase your chance of survival significantly if an incident occurs.

Mandate what though? What is a H&N device? I would think that from a liability point of view the club will need to mandate some specific body's certification as required on a device just as we currently do on helmets, harness belts, driving suits, gloves, etc. We provide a minimum specification for the geometries of roll bars and roll cages.....but any H&N device is ok. How does that make any sense? At the very least se need to mandate a maximum head loading for a some specific magnitude and angle of crash and all devices will need to have published results for that crash. So whether it is the SFI 38.1 spec or something else there needs to be a minimum standard to ensure some sufficient level of safety.

Absolutely let everyone choose which device fits them, physically and financially, and works with their in-car environment but make them choose from devices on the market that meet some standard.

Just my $0.02 fwiw.