Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Thanks Dick. My mistake, I meant BoD...
Time to write those letters - Head and Neck Restraints
- Thread starter pitbull113
- Start date
Thanks Dick. My mistake, I meant BoD...
I suggest when you cool off you'll recognize this is "a done deal". Your best effort are used to find the best way to accommodate this new regulation short-term*, and if you feel the need to pursue the reg itself you have a list of people on the BoD that voted against it so you know who to support (and who to oppose).
While the vote to have SCCA decide what's safe and what's not was laudable, we're not in the safety business and I agree with the lawyers that making those decisions puts us in a FAR greater position of liability than the question of whether to require them or not. Once the Club - we - made the decision to require them, we had to follow suit to an "industry standard". So yet another direction for your energies would be to work to develop an acceptable standard against which the SCCA can accept and against which to lean if it came down to a liability situation.
But getting all hot and bothered and mad on the Internetz ain't gonna do much...after all, we've been doing it for over two years now and see where that got us...?
GA
On edit: forgot my *....Billiel and I share a car, so we share the HANS. Nothing in the regs contrary to that. Andy laughed off a rental HaNS above, but it's a viable scenario, especially if your helmet is compatible with what's available for rental/borrow.
Last edited:
Are we better off to race with a HANS? Was Ken better off to be wearing a HANS when he Hit the Lotus head on at No Name a couple years ago? I think we all know the answer to these questions. Is this where we want to be as regards H&N DEVICES...MOST LIKELY NOT AND HOPEFULLY THE RULING WILL BE MODIFIED TO INCLUDE MORE CHOICES DOWN THE ROAD.
I realize its a done deal 
I was referring to writing something more productive here, already recognizing the rest of what you said.
My teammate owns a HANS and has volunteered its use to me as has the gentleman that owns all the cool stuff I drive on track with UTR. I am fortunate to not have to shell out much, though I'd rather not even have to buy anchors putting $$$ in HANS's pocket. I'm a stubborn prick, what can I say?!
I was referring to writing something more productive here, already recognizing the rest of what you said.My teammate owns a HANS and has volunteered its use to me as has the gentleman that owns all the cool stuff I drive on track with UTR. I am fortunate to not have to shell out much, though I'd rather not even have to buy anchors putting $$$ in HANS's pocket. I'm a stubborn prick, what can I say?!
Matt93SE
New member
I'd be happy too if I didn't have to fly cattle class!
seckerich
New member
Not the best example when you post a picture of a guy who had a previous bad neck injury and act like it was a Hanns failure after the GA crash.
Does suit your agenda though.
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Yea, Chris...read the fine print. Dick Patullo, the NER director, (you know him.
) really went to bat on this. He tried his best, and he's a smart guy who understands the big picture, and can communicate his points effectively, I think. He read your letter, and others, no doubt. I haven't spoken to him, but I'd bet he made a point of bringing up members wishes.All of his comments have shown he 'gets' the situation.
Trust me, I hate this too. Looks like my blown car with no motor parts available will ALSO need a new H&N restraint to replace one that actually functions at the top of the performance pile, AND likely a new seat, mounts etc etc. I'm looking at thousands to race again. But that's the way it goes.
I'm afraid it's one of those deals that has only a few options,and they are all evil to some degree.
Moreover, we've seen this train coming down the tunnel for years and the membership has been (mostly) apathetic about SFI influence.
Horse <------- Barn
Dick and others (including, to his credit, Jim Drago) worked to get folks thinking more critically about the question but it's a done deal.
It's too late now for the short term but do NOT be surprised when in a couple of years, there's a climb-down on this policy. It will take someone dying, because that's just the way Risk Management works, or continued realization in the "industry" that chooses which "standard" to follow that they've collectively gone off half-cocked, but it will happen.
The market for used SFI H&N systems will be pretty depressed at that point but the good news for the sticker-makers will be that by then, we'll be required to have our rollcages built by SFI-member constructors so they'll still have a revenue stream.
K
Horse <------- Barn
Dick and others (including, to his credit, Jim Drago) worked to get folks thinking more critically about the question but it's a done deal.
It's too late now for the short term but do NOT be surprised when in a couple of years, there's a climb-down on this policy. It will take someone dying, because that's just the way Risk Management works, or continued realization in the "industry" that chooses which "standard" to follow that they've collectively gone off half-cocked, but it will happen.
The market for used SFI H&N systems will be pretty depressed at that point but the good news for the sticker-makers will be that by then, we'll be required to have our rollcages built by SFI-member constructors so they'll still have a revenue stream.
K
i happen to cross paths this a.m. with a CRB type (not sure if currently serving but has not too long ago) and the comment was that this was required by the insurance company. which makes me wonder why the BOD vote was needed then...
when i said that i was looking at Midwest Council of Sports Car Clubs, it sounds like they might have to as well since most everyone has the same insurance carriers.
thanks again Dick for your efforts.
when i said that i was looking at Midwest Council of Sports Car Clubs, it sounds like they might have to as well since most everyone has the same insurance carriers.
thanks again Dick for your efforts.
spawpoet
New member
Unless they have the SFI sticker, they are worthless for use in SCCA sanctioned events. As I understand things, new Defenders haven't had the sticker for some time now. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
All the units we are shipping have SFI 38.1 stickers.
JeffYoung
New member
Because even if the insurance company requires it, the BoD still has to approve it for the Club. We could (we won't, but we could) go a different route and not make the requirement and lose the coverage, or seek coverage elsewhere.
FWIW, I think the Club's hands were effectively tied on this. Just too risky not to go with something that certainly appears to have become an international standard. I like Gregg's device, and his science seems spot on, but I have to agree with the Club it is far riskier not to follow the herd here, than to do otherwise.
FWIW, I think the Club's hands were effectively tied on this. Just too risky not to go with something that certainly appears to have become an international standard. I like Gregg's device, and his science seems spot on, but I have to agree with the Club it is far riskier not to follow the herd here, than to do otherwise.
Jeff,
Thanks for the kind words re the product. (It's not mine, btw, but that's another subject.)
With all due respect to those involved in the decision, the SCCA is behind the curve on this one as many sanctioning bodies, a.k.a. the herd, are going the opposite direction in either expanding their mandate beyond SFI/FIA, or considering repealing those mandates all together.
Also, does anyone have a problem with the fact that most state laws do not allow the insurance carrier to pay punitive damages in cases of gross negligence, or that in the case of the SCCA, IIRC, counsel is also the insurance agent?
I suspect we've been involved in more lawsuits than has the SCCA, and I have never heard any counsel suggest one knowingly and willingly limit access to safety. Never. Someone needs to get their head in the game.
Thanks for the kind words re the product. (It's not mine, btw, but that's another subject.)
With all due respect to those involved in the decision, the SCCA is behind the curve on this one as many sanctioning bodies, a.k.a. the herd, are going the opposite direction in either expanding their mandate beyond SFI/FIA, or considering repealing those mandates all together.
Also, does anyone have a problem with the fact that most state laws do not allow the insurance carrier to pay punitive damages in cases of gross negligence, or that in the case of the SCCA, IIRC, counsel is also the insurance agent?
I suspect we've been involved in more lawsuits than has the SCCA, and I have never heard any counsel suggest one knowingly and willingly limit access to safety. Never. Someone needs to get their head in the game.
Thank you for your input.Not the best example when you post a picture of a guy who had a previous bad neck injury and act like it was a Hanns [sic] failure after the GA [sic] crash.
downingracing
New member
I sent my letter asking for them to consider a tier-approach to this safety item. Like fuel cells, cage thickness, fire systems... We already have multiple levels of safety requirements for different cars/classes. Using this same approach for this requirement could be an option. Require it for some cars/classes and recommend it for others.
I'm sure it will be "Thank you for your input". I'll look around this winter for the cheapest option that has the label. It will not be a HANS - It will be the cheapest thing I can find to satisfy the rule. Next it will be required for PDX - If I need one in a Civic, the Vette driver MUST need one!
I'm sure it will be "Thank you for your input". I'll look around this winter for the cheapest option that has the label. It will not be a HANS - It will be the cheapest thing I can find to satisfy the rule. Next it will be required for PDX - If I need one in a Civic, the Vette driver MUST need one!
Links? what is the basis for that remark? and by opposite in expanding you mean additional H&NR or expanding as in SFI/FIA cages to which all this "safer" stuff has to be attached to?
how very scca fastrack of you!
tdw6974
New member
Hans Device HNR
This owner mandated the use of the Hans Device when we moved to from ITA to ITS. That was for the 2006 Season. In the October Enduro 17 seconds in Our Driver " Our Son" was hit by someone trying to win a 3 hour race in 17 seconds. The collision caused the Hans device to preform its job 5 times. IT WORKED. He will not race with out it. Required or Not. Tom Weaver my opimion win lose or draw After all I've been around so long I can remember the battle uproar when Fire extinquishers were first mandated.
This owner mandated the use of the Hans Device when we moved to from ITA to ITS. That was for the 2006 Season. In the October Enduro 17 seconds in Our Driver " Our Son" was hit by someone trying to win a 3 hour race in 17 seconds. The collision caused the Hans device to preform its job 5 times. IT WORKED. He will not race with out it. Required or Not. Tom Weaver my opimion win lose or draw After all I've been around so long I can remember the battle uproar when Fire extinquishers were first mandated.