Helmets for kitesurfing and the bucketing and drag myth

[downunder]

You're welcome.

And what your health history or profession/hobby has to do with bucketing/drag myth? Or your age? Or eating? Or farts (pun intended).

Again, nice pics. You did not thank me for that one tho

Now we getting somewhere, no carving pics but actual test of something which is not topic but ok, your thread...Thanks for posting actual and relevant info.

[FredBGG]

[Sarda]

Does it have these?

"It has impact slap breakup holes on the helmet to reduce slap when hitting the water."

Why would you mislead a fellow kiter (or anyone) on the properties/capabilities of an article of PPE?

Bell funded Snell foundation "research "was it?
Does it "reduce 85% of head injuries" too?
Perhaps "the protective effect of a helmet increases with increasing severity of injury." as well?
Are there vast profits to be made and are you lobbying?

I hope you got paid well?

And the helmets do have these "It has impact slap breakup holes on the helmet to reduce slap when hitting the water."

I have used helmets without the holes and if you slam down hard enough the continuous surface of the shells without holes is more hash.

The holes have a dampening effect and reduce drag.The water penetrating the holes also creates an additional cushion that works with the foam.

Is that absolute bullshit?
Do the manufacturers list them on their website as "vents, ventilation and drainage" ?


Is it absolutely obvious as to their purpose?
Are they similarly located on all land use based helmets of same or similar design?

Where in the CE test and design specs does it state any of the false attributes you are attributing?
I quote from the website "Features" from the link you provided for that particular helmet: "Vents: 17 open holes for ventilation and drainage"

Did you fabricate that bullshit?
Where does that bullshit come from/originate if you did not?
What are you going to do to remedy this, add more bullshit?(see below)


Do you not think that if that was a design feature it would be marketed absolutely everywhere and included/evidenced in its CE certification?

Why are you now ACTIVELY deceiveing/misleading people as to the attributes of that particular item of PPE?

Is that responsible behaviour?
What kind of behaviour is it?
What are the implications of this behaviour?

Do you realise you have added utter nonsense with the "The holes have a dampening effect and reduce drag.The water penetrating the holes also creates an additional cushion that works with the foam." ?

Do you realise you have added an issue with that statement which is NONSENSE?

Do you have issues (psychological) since you claim you are not receiving renumeration?

Do you understand the question/s?

[Matteo V]

I read your above post twice. But I'm still unsure what the problem is?

Is there an issue with someone reading Freddy's post, and hurting themselves because of it?

Or maybe you could condense what you are trying to say to just the main point? Just too much foul language for me to understand what's your issue is, but I feel like I need to know since you obviously feel so strongly about it.

[FredBGG]

Does it have these?

"It has impact slap breakup holes on the helmet to reduce slap when hitting the water."

Why would you mislead a fellow kiter (or anyone) on the properties/capabilities of an article of PPE?

Bell funded Snell foundation "research "was it?
Does it "reduce 85% of head injuries" too?
Perhaps "the protective effect of a helmet increases with increasing severity of injury." as well?
Are there vast profits to be made and are you lobbying?

I hope you got paid well?

And the helmets do have these "It has impact slap breakup holes on the helmet to reduce slap when hitting the water."

I have used helmets without the holes and if you slam down hard enough the continuous surface of the shells without holes is more hash.

The holes have a dampening effect and reduce drag.The water penetrating the holes also creates an additional cushion that works with the foam.

Is that absolute bullshit?
Do the manufacturers list them on their website as "vents, ventilation and drainage" ?


Is it absolutely obvious as to their purpose?
Are they similarly located on all land use based helmets of same or similar design?

Where in the CE test and design specs does it state any of the false attributes you are attributing?
I quote from the website "Features" from the link you provided for that particular helmet: "Vents: 17 open holes for ventilation and drainage"

Did you fabricate that bullshit?
Where does that bullshit come from/originate if you did not?
What are you going to do to remedy this, add more bullshit?(see below)


Do you not think that if that was a design feature it would be marketed absolutely everywhere and included/evidenced in its CE certification?

Why are you now ACTIVELY deceiveing/misleading people as to the attributes of that particular item of PPE?

Is that responsible behaviour?
What kind of behaviour is it?
What are the implications of this behaviour?

Do you realise you have added utter nonsense with the "The holes have a dampening effect and reduce drag.The water penetrating the holes also creates an additional cushion that works with the foam." ?

Do you realise you have added an issue with that statement which is NONSENSE?

Do you have issues (psychological) since you claim you are not receiving renumeration?

Do you understand the question/s?

It is really simple. and this is not a response to Sarda as I really could not give a shit about responding to his petty bullshit.

When someone slams their head in the water the water has to be displaced, moved, pushed away.
When it is a continuous surface this results in a slap effect.
Having holes in the helmet breaks up this surface. While some water is pushed away some water penetrates through the holes.
The holes serve also as drainage because they also let air in so the water can drain quicker around the bottom where the helmet mattes with the sides and back of the head.

Waterski racing helmets have similar hole designs and some advanced ones even go as far as having mesh designs, but they are very expensive and would be overkill for kitesurfing.



The CE helmet testing protocol HAS NO WATER IMPACT TESTING. CE testing only test vertical drop of helmet onto a metal anvil with a 4kg metal head in the helmet.
This is More of a structural test and a deceleration test.

[Pemba]

FredBGG makes good points. I've followed these debates for a while, starting off with no opinion really but I'm now starting to find it difficult to see how (proper, well fitting etc) helmets would not increase safety, especially the flexible type somebody mentioned, difficult to see bucketing being a serious issue there. Apart from being "inconvenient", I'm sure there might still be situations where they might be a disadvantage but there can be little doubt that in many other situations they are a definite advantage. Overall, they must be safer.

[evan]

Is there a company that sells or is willing to invest in a non newtonian rubber (D3O) flexible cap that offers enough impact resistance with minimal surface area?

Seems like those flexible impact absorbing materials are perfect for this so why haven't I found a product with it yet?

[Pemba]

Is there a company that sells or is willing to invest in a non newtonian rubber (D3O) flexible cap that offers enough impact resistance with minimal surface area?

Seems like those flexible impact absorbing materials are perfect for this so why haven't I found a product with it yet?

Probably won't help you but the product I was referring to, which some body else on here posted first, so will know more about, is this:

https://projectsurfhelmet.com/reviews/g ... r-pro-d3o/

[Sarda]

And the helmets do have these "It has impact slap breakup holes on the helmet to reduce slap when hitting the water."

I have used helmets without the holes and if you slam down hard enough the continuous surface of the shells without holes is more hash.

The holes have a dampening effect and reduce drag.The water penetrating the holes also creates an additional cushion that works with the foam.

Is that absolute bullshit?
Do the manufacturers list them on their website as "vents, ventilation and drainage" ?


Is it absolutely obvious as to their purpose?
Are they similarly located on all land use based helmets of same or similar design?

Where in the CE test and design specs does it state any of the false attributes you are attributing?
I quote from the website "Features" from the link you provided for that particular helmet: "Vents: 17 open holes for ventilation and drainage"

Did you fabricate that bullshit?
Where does that bullshit come from/originate if you did not?
What are you going to do to remedy this, add more bullshit?(see below)


Do you not think that if that was a design feature it would be marketed absolutely everywhere and included/evidenced in its CE certification?

Why are you now ACTIVELY deceiveing/misleading people as to the attributes of that particular item of PPE?

Is that responsible behaviour?
What kind of behaviour is it?
What are the implications of this behaviour?

Do you realise you have added utter nonsense with the "The holes have a dampening effect and reduce drag.The water penetrating the holes also creates an additional cushion that works with the foam." ?

Do you realise you have added an issue with that statement which is NONSENSE?

Do you have issues (psychological) since you claim you are not receiving renumeration?

Do you understand the question/s?

It is really simple. and this is not a response to Sarda as I really could not give a shit about responding to his petty bullshit.

When someone slams their head in the water the water has to be displaced, moved, pushed away.
When it is a continuous surface this results in a slap effect.
Having holes in the helmet breaks up this surface. While some water is pushed away some water penetrates through the holes.
The holes serve also as drainage because they also let air in so the water can drain quicker around the bottom where the helmet mattes with the sides and back of the head.

Waterski racing helmets have similar hole designs and some advanced ones even go as far as having mesh designs, but they are very expensive and would be overkill for kitesurfing.



The CE helmet testing protocol HAS NO WATER IMPACT TESTING. CE testing only test vertical drop of helmet onto a metal anvil with a 4kg metal head in the helmet.
This is More of a structural test and a deceleration test.

A link to that waterski helmet?
Contact details?
Expense aside (can you put a price on safety?) Why would a helmet as mentioned above be "overkill" for kiteboarding?
A quick search of "water ski racing" or "jet ski racing" and they should all have it right? And the sites will be affirming your claims?
Surely helmets incorporating a Jarlan type defense would be revolutionary, patented, trademarked etc to hell and back?

How long did it take to Google that in the wake of no supporting evidence of your claims?

Would the curvature of the helmet reduce the "slap" as you put it? At certain angles can holes increase drag?

You state: " The CE helmet testing protocol HAS NO WATER IMPACT TESTING. CE testing only test vertical drop of helmet onto a metal anvil with a 4kg metal head in the helmet.
This is More of a structural test and a deceleration test"

What other tests rare equired to conform to CE EN 1385 ?
Have you encountered standards and standardisation before?

Have you hit rock bottom and still digging?

Just how "petty" are concerns that properties are being attributed to items of ppe that don't exist?
Is it beneath you?

Are you a risk to yourself and others making completly false claims?

Are you on a mission?

Yes?

It's obvious you don't give a shit about anyone but yourself at the moment as you carry on down this road?

Do you need professional help?

Time for some more anecdotes and maybe some poor attempts at humour?

[downunder]

Not worth mate....

Let them use one single helmet for all scenarios, Im sure "she'll be alaright"

If bucketing/drag is a myth, they would not try to fix it with the holes in a first place.

To prove it to ya that your helmet is absolutely no different that this $19 Little Cool Dude, here are some pics:

I could claim that this is also a good protection. But, not going to. You on the other hand...