EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Off-Season Sports & The Lighter Side › Cycling › Wouter Weylandt killed in Giro D'Italia
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wouter Weylandt killed in Giro D'Italia

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
post #2 of 22

Very sad.  It happens from time to time (although rare at the top level) and is a sobering reminder how dangerous the sport can be.

 

The fourth stage was not contested, with each team taking a turn at the front and Wouter Weylandt's team mates (Leopard-Trek) crossing the line togther at the end accompanied by Tyler Farrar of Garmin-Cervelo, a training partner and close friend of Weylandt.

 

Leopard-Treck have now withdrawn from the race.

 

post #3 of 22

I'm surprised that it doesn't happen more often. Too much pressure on those athletes to perform well makes them willing to take a lot of risks on those decents. And there's just too many things that can go wrong. Mechanical failures, flat tires, weather conditions, animals that run out in the road, all things that you have no control over. I'm amazed that so many of them that do crash just get up again and keep on going. 

post #4 of 22

This is merely evidence of a major FAIL in current helmet and protection technology.

post #5 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post

This is merely evidence of a major FAIL in current helmet and protection technology.



are you kidding me? really?  there is no helmet in the world that can protect your head from a 30mph collision with a solid object. None. There never will be a practical design either for one.

post #6 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post





are you kidding me? really?  there is no helmet in the world that can protect your head from a 30mph collision with a solid object. None..


That is correct.  

 

But that is about as relevant as someone in 1985 saying "There are no drugs, none, that will stop you from dying from AIDS".

 

There never will be a practical design for one if we don't YELL and SCREAM and HOLLER for technology that fits the goal instead of accepting shiny repackagings of existing tech and paying premium dollar for low performance.

 

20 years later there are drugs for HIV.    

 

If we don't act now, in 20 years the best helmets sold will still be worse than cardboard.

http://gizmodo.com/5811066/the-best-helmet-you-could-own-is-made-of-cardboard

 

Accepting current helmet tech is total BS.

 

Quote:
there is no helmet in the world that can protect your head from a 30mph collision with a solid object.

 

Is proof of FAIL.

post #7 of 22
II guess I see it differently. Cycling, and many other sports, involves inherent risks. While I think that many technological improvements have reduced risk, I know that cycling involves risk, and I don't want a nanny state dictating that I have to wear whatever to protect myself from it. Tragic as Wouter's death was, he was a professional cyclist who knew what risks were inherent in his vocation. What imperative is there to require him to wear a rubber suit to protect himself from the risks of his profession?

Mike
post #8 of 22

That's one way to look at it, but in 1994, F1 drivers didn't really want to improve safety either. Now people walk away from crashes like Robert Kubica had in Montreal.

 

Personally, I think if the bikes had better brakes the sport would be safer, but they are banned. As for helmets, the riders would rather roll the dice, and they have proven so on many occasions. When rider safety has been mandated, they've refused to race. It's their lives and livelihoods on the line, so I guess they can do with them what they will.

post #9 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post




That is correct.  

 

But that is about as relevant as someone in 1985 saying "There are no drugs, none, that will stop you from dying from AIDS".

 

There never will be a practical design for one if we don't YELL and SCREAM and HOLLER for technology that fits the goal instead of accepting shiny repackagings of existing tech and paying premium dollar for low performance.

 

20 years later there are drugs for HIV.    

 

If we don't act now, in 20 years the best helmets sold will still be worse than cardboard.

http://gizmodo.com/5811066/the-best-helmet-you-could-own-is-made-of-cardboard

 

Accepting current helmet tech is total BS.

 

 

Is proof of FAIL.




we know about physics than we did about biologogy. Try to make a helmet that is wearable for the long haul and can protect vs a 30mph dead on crash. deceleration kills even when you find a helmet that works, people necks will still snap. I hope to be proven wrong but the solution to your problem dont even lie in unconvential means of thinking in the  bounds of practically.

post #10 of 22

A helmet to protect the brain from the sudden deceleration involved in a head-on crash with an imovable object would require a distortion of the time-space contimuum.  You can scream for that technology, but you will be screaming for a few centuries...or maybe something will turn up on the drug front so we can all race at two mph and think we're doing 200 wink.gif, I think we had something like that in the 60's but I don't remember it too well.

 

What happened in the crash.  Details please.  Did he in fact hit his head directly?  Was it a glancing blow that any good Shoei would have effectively countered?  Did he suffer trauma.  Did he slide out, low side, high side, understeer, get tangled up with another rider, suffer tire failure, what?  Why can't any news reporters do a decent job?

post #11 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

A helmet to protect the brain from the sudden deceleration involved in a head-on crash with an imovable object would require a distortion of the time-space contimuum. 



You mean kinda like a woodpecker distorts the space-time continuum every time it stabs its head in?  1200gs 500-600 times a day, maybe we should plug them into space ships instead of using them to inspire crash absorbers design. 

 

http://thecwblog.posterous.com/studying-woodpeckers-could-help-understand-co

post #12 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
 Try to make a helmet that is wearable for the long haul and can protect vs a 30mph dead on crash.


You mean kinda like the young kid with the Indian name in my link above is already halfway to doing?



Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post


we know about physics than we did about biologogy. Try to make a helmet that is wearable for the long haul and can protect vs a 30mph dead on crash. deceleration kills even when you find a helmet that works, people necks will still snap. I hope to be proven wrong but the solution to your problem dont even lie in unconvential means of thinking in the  bounds of practically.


I have no idea what your last sentence was intended to mean.      Bounds of practicality get stretched every time new tech comes out.    Unconventional thinking?    How is it unconventional thinking for someone to ask for technology that actually does the job of protection in real world conditions?  

 

 

If that is unconventional thinking, then that brand of unconventional thinking gave us dynamic climbing ropes, circus safety nets, and airbags in cars.


 


 



Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post

 deceleration kills even when you find a helmet that works, people necks will still snap.

 

And all that tells us is that the problem won't be trivially solved with existing helmet shapes and attachment points.       Did we not know that already?
 

 


Edited by cantunamunch - 6/16/11 at 5:53am
post #13 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

Personally, I think if the bikes had better brakes the sport would be safer, but they are banned. As for helmets, the riders would rather roll the dice, and they have proven so on many occasions. When rider safety has been mandated, they've refused to race. It's their lives and livelihoods on the line, so I guess they can do with them what they will.

 

 

I find this argument analogous to saying: porn stars don't want to wear condoms on screen therefore society shouldn't develop HIV drugs.

 

post #14 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

 

What happened in the crash.  Details please.  Did he in fact hit his head directly?  Was it a glancing blow that any good Shoei would have effectively countered?  Did he suffer trauma.  Did he slide out, low side, high side, understeer, get tangled up with another rider, suffer tire failure, what?  Why can't any news reporters do a decent job?



The news reporters are doing a fantastic job.   They refrained from making stuff up when they simply didn't know.    What is known has already been reported:

 

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/05/news/video-wouter-weylandt-memorial-at-crash-scene_172277

post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post





You mean kinda like a woodpecker distorts the space-time continuum every time it stabs its head in?  1200gs 500-600 times a day, maybe we should plug them into space ships instead of using them to inspire crash absorbers design. 

 

http://thecwblog.posterous.com/studying-woodpeckers-could-help-understand-co


Too bad we are not woodpeckers; on the other hand I prefer my bain;. woodpeckers are pretty limited in what they can do with their brains.  biggrin.gif

 

post #16 of 22

Thanks for the link.  Interesting looking seem/rut in the middle of the road.  Hitting that at speed while looking over my shoulder could be a cause for concern.

post #17 of 22

A good link. It all looks fairly innocuous; a shit happens thing.  Agree habacomike, cycling, especially at speed, is inherently dangerous.  Unless suited up to look like the Michelin Man, or unless restricted to controlled environments (eg velodrome) there is not much that could be done.

post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

A helmet to protect the brain from the sudden deceleration involved in a head-on crash with an imovable object would require a distortion of the time-space contimuum.  You can scream for that technology, but you will be screaming for a few centuries...or maybe something will turn up on the drug front so we can all race at two mph and think we're doing 200 wink.gif, I think we had something like that in the 60's but I don't remember it too well.

 

Hey Ghost, do you not remember the drug used in the 60's or just don't remember the 60's that well :-).



 

post #19 of 22

There is more than one company trying to develop bike helmets with a built-in airbag and even a helmet system where you don't actually wear a helmet, but have an airbag around your neck which inflates up over your head in the event of a crash. I haven't got much idea of how reliably the triggering system works and whether these system offer significantly improved protection. Nor do I know how lightweight they are. However, experience from automotive engineering suggests that airbags can reduce the fatality rate of crashes. So I think there is some interesting development going on.

 

I don't think better brakes on their own is likely to help much because the main limitation on braking hard on a racing bicycle with very thin wheels is surely tire adhesion? I suppose ABS systems might help, but I think it's difficult to imagine installing something of this weight and complexity on a racing cycle. Just providing a source of electrical power for the system would add weight etc.

post #20 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperkub View Post

I don't think better brakes on their own is likely to help much because the main limitation on braking hard on a racing bicycle with very thin wheels is surely tire adhesion?

I used to think the same thing about discs on mountain bikes... I was dead wrong. It is shocking to switch from a mt bike to a road bike and feel how much worse the brakes are, there is no reason for it. None. It won't always help, but once in a while it would and the biggest benefit would be for recreational 'enthusiast' cyclists. A group who certainly would benefit from safer bikes.
 

 

post #21 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperkub View Post

There is more than one company trying to develop bike helmets with a built-in airbag and even a helmet system where you don't actually wear a helmet, but have an airbag around your neck which inflates up over your head in the event of a crash. I haven't got much idea of how reliably the triggering system works and whether these system offer significantly improved protection. Nor do I know how lightweight they are. However, experience from automotive engineering suggests that airbags can reduce the fatality rate of crashes. So I think there is some interesting development going on.

 

I don't think better brakes on their own is likely to help much because the main limitation on braking hard on a racing bicycle with very thin wheels is surely tire adhesion? I suppose ABS systems might help, but I think it's difficult to imagine installing something of this weight and complexity on a racing cycle. Just providing a source of electrical power for the system would add weight etc.

 

you can easily lock up a V brake or cantilever brake on road or off. The deal with going to disc is that the modulations is a ton better. With better modulation a bike(or anything) will stop better. At least until we have ABS systems on bikes and lets pray that never happens.
 

 

post #22 of 22

 

I think the case of Mauricio Soler more than emphasizes my points in this thread.

 

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/06/news/soler-crashes-out-of-suisse-tour_178763

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Off-Season Sports & The Lighter Side › Cycling › Wouter Weylandt killed in Giro D'Italia