BHS magazine - airjackets, confused!

NeverSayNever

NeverSayNever

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 July 2008
Messages
4,437
Location
uk
Visit site
in the latest copy of the BHS magazine there is an article entitled "energy management" about BP's and airjackets.

One statement in it has left me confused -

" An airjacket is designed to help provide protection by decelerating, or slowing down the body when the rider separates from the horse."

what, as in a parachute? is it me? Am i mis-interpreting this or is it totally wrong...
 
Haha, that is a very weird way of putting it, I hadn't seen that!

Falling isn't dangerous. The action of suddenly NOT falling is the dangerous bit. Deceleration occurs when we land whether we like it or not...we're moving forward and suddenly we're not.

What the air jacket tries to do is slow that deceleration down a fraction by having something squishy in between us and the ground/jump/whatever is causing us to stop suddenly. Same as air bags/crumple zones etc on cars. And parachutes too, just in the opposite direction (pulling back rather than squishing the forward motion).
 
why1040 said:
Haha, that is a very weird way of putting it, I hadn't seen that!

Falling isn't dangerous. The action of suddenly NOT falling is the dangerous bit. Deceleration occurs when we land whether we like it or not...we're moving forward and suddenly we're not.

What the air jacket tries to do is slow that deceleration down a fraction by having something squishy in between us and the ground/jump/whatever is causing us to stop suddenly. Same as air bags/crumple zones etc on cars. And parachutes too, just in the opposite direction (pulling back rather than squishing the forward motion).
Click to expand...

ah ok thanks for that.i had thought about it in that way? but surely an airjacket is designed to provide impact protection rather than protection by deceleration? or is it the same thing? only the article reads (to me), that only a BP provdes impact protection
 
Methinks the person writing the article hasn't a scooby on how the things work, nor any basic knowledge of physics!

Any deceleration provided by an airjacket (or a car airbag) is very minimal as there is very little "squish", however the impact is spread over a greater area. One could, I suppose, argue that there is a little deceleration from what would have been your terminal velocity had you hit the ground without the extra 4cm or so of airjacket but again that is negligible. Or possibly the writer thought that the lanyard tethered you to the horse and slowed your travel that way.

There is certainly impact protection from an inflated airjacket, just like bubblewrap provides.
 
jemima_too said:
Methinks the person writing the article hasn't a scooby on how the things work, nor any basic knowledge of physics!

Any deceleration provided by an airjacket (or a car airbag) is very minimal as there is very little "squish", however the impact is spread over a greater area. One could, I suppose, argue that there is a little deceleration from what would have been your terminal velocity had you hit the ground without the extra 4cm or so of airjacket but again that is negligible. Or possibly the writer thought that the lanyard tethered you to the horse and slowed your travel that way.

There is certainly impact protection from an inflated airjacket, just like bubblewrap provides.
Click to expand...

the article is, i believe, part of the BHS safety Conference. I think it would be great if once and for all the BHS would appoint an independent, qualified expert to look at all these safety products. Or has that been done elsewhere?
 
I agree with you. Sadly most of the "experts" that pontificate on these air jackets have a) no access to testing facilities, b) no access to the product, c) no technical expertise in any area of testing, product design, or safety and are certainly not qualified. Still I guess their hearts are in the right place.
 
There was an episode of Mythbusters on telly the other night that gave a really good non nerdy explanation of the sudden stop when falling, and how to decelerate yourself (specifically they were looking at jumping off a building into a dumpster [skip], like they do in movies - highly not recommended on grounds you'd impale yourself on anything even vaguely sharp in the skip! They'd some great slo-mo footage of Adam jumping onto various substances in order to define which gave the best deceleration (they tried cardboard, polystyrene chunks, mattresses and sponge foam stuff)

I now totally understand how an airjacket works to protect you from the impact of a fall! :D
 
Think of an air jacket as a football being kicked , it absorbs a bit of the energy but just transfers most of into movement. A body protector absorbs the energy transfering it through out its structure. Obviously in both cases the wearers body will also absorb some of the energy, the trick is to have a body protector with a material designed to transfer/disapate as much force as posible before it gets to your body.
Its really important that people realise an air jack sould be worn WITH a body protector. See seperate threads ;)
Lobelia do you have a link or episode number for the Mythbusters?

Jemima,I take it you have an engineering, materials technology background? :)

T F

(30+ yrs in aviation including engineering/safety)
 
the Financier said:
Jemima,I take it you have an engineering, materials technology background? :)

T F

(30+ yrs in aviation including engineering/safety)
Click to expand...

Nope, I include myself in the following quote from a post I made earlier - but I do not claim to be an expert!:)

Sadly most of the "experts" that pontificate on these air jackets have a) no access to testing facilities, b) no access to the product, c) no technical expertise in any area of testing, product design, or safety and are certainly not qualified. Still I guess their hearts are in the right place.

However I do have access to the product, and have been involved in discussion with friends, including some who are longterm employees of Marshalls, working in areas you would be familiar with, about the possibilities of modelling and testing the product.

Off to look at the mythbusters link:D
 
I know Marshalls and some of the people there...

The whole rider protection issue is complex and with new materials being developed all the time its good to see the BHS trying to promote safety. It would be nice if maybe all the governing bodies (racing,eventing etc) got together and offered to fund some research at somewhere like MIRA that has the facilities to test properly (dummies with accelerometer etc) then produce an industry wide set of standards and clear information that all riders could access. This would help people (whether parents with children just starting or experienced rider) make informed decisions based on facts not just sales pitches.

As we saw with the ASA's comments on certain ads!
 
I thought you might know some bods at Marshalls:)

Like you, I wish that some PROPER work was carried out, jointly funded by as many interested parties as possible.

I thought the Exo was a great idea, but like the Point2, HitAir etc there is no standard for testing to. As I've said before on here, sure the Exo is BETA approved - but only the standard body protector element, not the cage, same for the new hybrids, the BP is fine, the airbag is not tested!

However, having watched a number of bad falls and spoken to the riders, connections and the medics who treated them, the product (airbag) is credited with having made a considerable difference in those cases. It really is about time that the issue was properly addressed as you say to try to make the sport that both your daughter and mine choose, or have in the past (in the case of mine) chosen, to compete in one where the choice of safety equipment can be made with knowledge, rather than by clever marketing, dodgy adverts and misinformation:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top