Invisible bike helmet!

the_syco

BuzzFish wrote: »

Video is slowed down

If it takes more than half a second, you're dead.
If it fails, you're dead.
If it deploys when not needed, it'll block off your vision to your left and right, and you could get hit when it's deflating.

dj jarvis

the_syco wrote: »

If it takes more than half a second, you're dead.
If it fails, you're dead.
If it deploys when not needed, it'll block off your vision to your left and right, and you could get hit when it's deflating.

ok so apply what you have said to a car , the system work's in cars,

it takes less than half a second to deploy ( if its the same as a car, its deployed at over 200mph )

if your car airbag or normal lid fails you are dead , but i presume you trust them ? so why not the same tech used in a new product , these would not be released onto the open market until they have been tested to all safety regulations - do you actually think these would be road legal without proving they work and work every time ???

a motorcycle helmet already blocks your vision right and left , you turn your head

as for deflation , the amount of time it stays inflated is down to the amount of charge it uses - again , ALL this would be sorted before it is for sale to the public - lets face it , if you have these concerns don't you think the manufacturer and investors have already thought of this ?

they would not be able to sell this ANYWHERE without the proper safety regulation and certification - the same people that certify your airbags in your car or your motorcycle helmet , and i presume you trust them ?

Noopti

I think it actually looks more ridiculous than a normal helmet.

Fair play to them for pulling it off, but until it is much cheaper I can't see it selling well. Also...in that last video the person slowly falls over on their bike, and it goes off - sure it protects their head from the fall, but it looks like you could bend down to tie your shoe laces and the bloody thing would inflate!

ScumLord

It's also not going to help with collisions with low head room objects.

dj jarvis

Noopti wrote: »

I think it actually looks more ridiculous than a normal helmet.

Fair play to them for pulling it off, but until it is much cheaper I can't see it selling well. Also...in that last video the person slowly falls over on their bike, and it goes off - sure it protects their head from the fall, but it looks like you could bend down to tie your shoe laces and the bloody thing would inflate!

all shots of the helmet deploying are in slow motion , it actually takes 100's of a second

they have the same sensors in the charge that you car airbags have , your airbags dont go off every time you hit a pot hole do they ?
they also dont go off when you nudge the car in front of you

think of it logically - do you think they would get 10 million in seed money if these question have not been addressed ?
as with any air bag system a sensor set to a range of force/movement will determine if its deployed - so you will be safe to tie your shoes with out it going off

people who are hung up about it being deployed by accident or it not being deployed quick enough should just think car air bag , they work perfectly and this is the exact same system

christ - people have no issue with flying in a 300 ton pressurized alloy tube at 500 mph 36,000 ft off the ground because they trust the systems
why so cynical about this ? the use of this tech has been around for decades , this is just another application of proven systems

[Jackass]

Not much use if you run into an opened car door or a side swipe to the head from a passing vehicle or falling debris from a truck or hitting a pole or traffic sign...as examples of some city scenarios where this product wouldn't protect you versus a traditional helmet...or in off road cycling, a head on collision into a tree branch.

There's also the danger of an accident at excessive speed, where the inflatable helmet may become shreded or torn before protection is no longer required, such as a face skid followed by a car running over your head...

I'll stick to the old tried and tested, cheers.

If it aint broke....

No need to reinvent the wheel etc....

CardBordWindow

[Jackass] wrote: »

Not much use if you run into an opened car door or a side swipe to the head from a passing vehicle or falling debris from a truck or hitting a pole or traffic sign...as examples of some city scenarios where this product wouldn't protect you versus a traditional helmet...or in off road cycling, a head on collision into a tree branch.

There's also the danger of an accident at excessive speed, where the inflatable helmet may become shreded or torn before protection is no longer required, such as a face skid followed by a car running over your head...

I'll stick to the old tried and tested, cheers.

If it aint broke....

No need to reinvent the wheel etc....

And a traditional helmet will save you in that situation???

The Scratcher

It's also not meant for off road cycling!! You'd be pretty stupid to take this thing on a DH race. All of the other scenarios can be easily flipped to make lid helmets appear inadequate, what if something catches the strap and takes the helmet off my head before I hit the ground?

dj jarvis

[Jackass] wrote: »

Not much use if you run into an opened car door or a side swipe to the head from a passing vehicle or falling debris from a truck or hitting a pole or traffic sign...as examples of some city scenarios where this product wouldn't protect you versus a traditional helmet...or in off road cycling, a head on collision into a tree branch.

There's also the danger of an accident at excessive speed, where the inflatable helmet may become shreded or torn before protection is no longer required, such as a face skid followed by a car running over your head...

I'll stick to the old tried and tested, cheers.

If it aint broke....

No need to reinvent the wheel etc....

you do that - no one is forcing you to do anything
im trying to point out that it can and will work , some people are saying it wont
i dont remember saying it was the be all and end all of cycle safety - just a workable concept - that should not be dismissed by people not actually thinking about it

as for the no need to reinvent the wheel - with that attitude we would be still with horse and cart - because sure that's fine , why change it , it works

you have a grand cycle around the cobble streets of ireland on your penny farthing - while i go on my lightweight multi geared mountain bike with disk brakes and suspension on tarmacked roads
see what im getting at ?

tdawg

The problem I see is that it seems to be activated based on impact and a specific venture away from normal cycling activity. If there is a head first impact it can do nothing, I'd also be interested to see how it responds to you simply falling off rather than being involved in an impact.

I think if it is eventually found to be significantly safer than a normal cycling helmet and could be bought at a similiar price-level, then it would be a useful device, still a bit early for them to be claiming it is the finished article.

The video is exceptionally poor in terms of the actual technology, full of philosophical thinking and comes across more so as something to get women involved and interested in engineering.

kylith

tdawg wrote: »

The problem I see is that it seems to be activated based on impact and a specific venture away from normal cycling activity. If there is a head first impact it can do nothing, I'd also be interested to see how it responds to you simply falling off rather than being involved in an impact.

I think if it is eventually found to be significantly safer than a normal cycling helmet and could be bought at a similiar price-level, then it would be a useful device, still a bit early for them to be claiming it is the finished article.

The video is exceptionally poor in terms of the actual technology, full of philosophical thinking and comes across more so as something to get women involved and interested in engineering.

I agree, I was quite annoyed that I had to wait until the last few seconds to actually see the product, and there was no discussion of what it's made of, how the protection it offers is greater than a traditional helmet, etc.

Scioch

I hope they have made some advancements in some things along the way because their end product is a bit shít.

Its not invisible, doesnt look any better than a regular bike helmet, they just switched helmet with a neck brace and it looks ridiculous when activated, cant be anywhere near as safe or practical or affordable as a regular helmet.

Alot of money wasted on an impractical idea if they are not left with some other route to go down with this.

Cienciano

dj jarvis wrote: »

christ - people have no issue with flying in a 300 ton pressurized alloy tube at 500 mph 36,000 ft off the ground because they trust the systems
why so cynical about this ? the use of this tech has been around for decades , this is just another application of proven systems

So, airplanes work, therefore any technology works and should be trusted. Brilliant

Seedy Arling

You should wear it in case this happens.



You could also fix it with your glass hammer.

dj jarvis

Cienciano wrote: »

So, airplanes work, therefore any technology works and should be trusted. Brilliant

no , any technology that works - works !!!!

so do you fly ? if you do then you trust the technology by default or you would not fly,
the same goes for car air bags , trusted technology because IT WORKS
why in gods name would you trust something that does not work ???

your point is pointless - have a think and get back to us - your adding 2 + 2 and getting potato

[Jackass]

CardBordWindow wrote: »

And a traditional helmet will save you in that situation???

Well, it depends on multiple variables, such as speed, weight of vehicle, angle at which helmet meets wheel, type of helmet worn etc., but potentially, I believe it could, yes.

I think the following products have more potential to save lives by being superior to existing technology... (videos on webpages)

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/smart-takes/a-better-way-to-see-bicyclists-at-night/18672?tag=header;header-sec

and

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1652790707/torch-bicycle-helmet-with-integrated-lights?ref=live

dj jarvis

[Jackass] wrote: »

Well, it depends on multiple variables, such as speed, weight of vehicle, angle at which helmet meets wheel, type of helmet worn etc., but potentially, I believe it could, yes.

I think the following products have more potential to save lives by being superior to existing technology... (videos on webpages)

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/smart-takes/a-better-way-to-see-bicyclists-at-night/18672?tag=header;header-sec

and

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1652790707/torch-bicycle-helmet-with-integrated-lights?ref=live

they both look good !! nice twist on existing systems ,
it ties in with the point im trying to make about people knocking the helmet with having all the information - it may work , it may not but unless its tried to its limit we would never know

and lets face it - majority on here would not have a clue about designing and engineering such a device ( me included ) but see fit to rubbish it from the comfort of their keyboard

me , i will wait and see on this technology - as i have said it has potential
its not a panacea - but who knows , its still in DEVELOPMENT

some just dont understand the concept of development - so lads relax , its not finished yet - keep your powder dry till it is .