Slalom Safety

[boarditup]

On another board, there has been a lot of discussion (disintegrated to say the least) regarding slalom safety.  I have been using a trick release for all towed watersports, including slalom.  I have a release on the tower for board sports, and one on the pylon for all others.  The observer will pull the release at any fall.  I have a large scar on my left wrist from 25 years ago when I got caught in the handle.  Also, with wakeboarding and kneeboarding, handle passes and 'ole tricks can wrap the rope around the body as well as the arm through the handle routine.  Since I am not a real competitive skier, I don't have a problem with the observer pulling the release when they see a potential issue.  I don't try to scratch out the miracle save, my lower back is too fragile.

I can see the utility of the guard.  I also see the utility in the ridgid handle shaped so that you cannot pass the arm through (Accurate makes a one for wakeboarding - not quite, but you can see the potential).  I also see the potential of wrist injuries from the restricted area being a pinch point at some angles.  My solution is the release, and that depends on an observent and competent operator. 

What other options are there?

[Horton]

As an ex-tricker I have used releases a lot. I do not like the idea of a release for slalom. The injurys we are all talking about are quite rare although very scarie. I would not trust many people to hold a release while I load the rope. I would expect there to be a lot of injurys from pre-releases.  Additionally I think these bad falls happen so suddenly that a release person would have trouble stoping it.

Figure that I have skied for 35 years and never needed to be released..... What are the odds that after thousands of passes the one time I do need to be released the pin person gets it right.

 

[DW]

The potential for a release pin to jam on a fully loaded slalom rope is probably not negligible, therefore perhaps not making it the optimal solution.  No data to support, but my guess is a fully loaded slalom rope has more tension load than a trick line.

One question needs asking by whomever considers purchasing a safety addition, which is the worse case, with or without the addition.  In the case we are all referring to, multiple finger or wrist injuries or one neck injury.

[boarditup]

The release I use is one for show skiing.  It is designed to safely release under loads exceeding any three skiers could ever pull.  With typical trick releases, your fear is correct.  Different equipment.

 What I am looking for is some out-of-the-box thinking.  You have the handle end that there are a few ways to make it work.  You have the boat end.  Anyone else?

[Chuck_Dickey]

Would this type release work better?

Mechanical release designed to release under load. Release person must hold the skier instead of release the skier.

http://www.masterlineusa.com/Masterline/Releases/2-Robbins-Trick-Release

 

[eleeski]

I have thousands of hours with the ARE style release. The release never failed on me - but the operators often did.  And a few injuries came from early releases.

The Robbins release is great for tricks. Get one. But I did get a pretty nasty gaak with the Robbins release with a competent release operator (Kirk - he is one of the best) while working on a sketchy trick (so he was trigger happy). Broke the toe harness before anything serious broke on me. The point is: no release operator will save EVERY injury.

Any handle guard whether it is Thomas' or Accurate or a toe harness will prevent some injuries. Some are better than others. But some risk exists with all guards.

There are risks with everything in life. Not skiing will make you fat, heart diseased and could kill you. So can a fluke fall waterskiing. Brett's accident is very rare. Handle awareness might help keep body parts out of the handle and reduce even more the risk of repeating Brett's accident. Slalom skiing is a reasonably safe sport - accept the risks and enjoy the rewards.

Eric

[Roger]

I think Eric said it very well (especially the last paragraph). Personally, I never let go of the handle until the boat takes it from me. When I know I'm going down, I hold it away. I believe this reduces the danger of through the handle injuries. However, it does little for in the rope injuries. Last year when Jeff Smith (from Michigan) got the rope around his arm, the first thing I asked him when I saw him was if he let the handle go in the fall. He said he always holds onto the handle for the same reason I do, but he fell into the slack rope and it got looped around his arm. He was fortunate that it was his arm and not his neck; also it was standard rope and not spectra (I will not use spectra on a slalom handle without a full vinyl covering).

This is a motion sport. In any motion sport there is risk. I believe the risks to be acceptable if you consider the millions of slalom sets every year and the relatively low number of serious injuries.

[DW]

Agree completely that risk is inherent with any sport or endeavour and I certainly enjoy the sport.  I don't necessarily agree with Roger's last comment, and here is my logic.  How many laps or corners have all the oval track race cars executed in the last 20 years, I would put that estimate much higher than number of skiers that have passed through a slalom course or even been on the water.  A safety device, actually several of them, have been invented and developed over the last decade that, when used and now mandated, has eliminated the broken neck inujury that took the life of Earnhardt, Petty, Roper, Irwin and Bonnett, therefore saving several lives that numerous people have witnessed on tv in identical accidents.  If a device or invention can be developed to eliminate the injury or reduce the level, it behooves us all to use it and promote it.  Why would I accept a sport ending injury if there is a device that would prevent it?  If there is not, then what is the downside to looking to find, invent or develop such a device.  There are many clever minds on this board, many people that are the experts of the sport and with that, like in many other disciplines comes a level of responsibility within the sport to move the safety level up.

[Horton]

I think you guys are all thinking clearly but I would not want to be the one to R&D a release device for slalom. I am afraid that the cure may be worse the the problem.

[scoke]

 

This is a solid thread with some realistic concepts and ideas in it.

 

Unfortunately i have to respectfully disagree with DW regarding the car racing vs buoys. The math simply doesn't work.

 Think about the millions of buoys that have been turned by all the skiers over time compared to the deaths. There has been about 1-2 deaths a year, reported of course, per how many buoys that is? it's a staggering statistic of buoys turned vs deaths.

 Comparing it to nascar or racing just doesnt hold up. Sure they have highly publiscied races as well as deaths but they arent racing every single day at 400+ sites around the country like water skiers are skiing.

 Just not a straight comparision on the statistics side of things.

 Warranting a mandatory safety device or release would take quite a bit more near identical accidents then 1-2 per year deaths vs millions of buoys. The warrant just isn't there. I am not saying precautions can't be taken but honestly it's more of a knee jerk situation then a rationlized warranted case study.

 

 

[Roger]

DW,

No argument from me. My last comment was "I" as in personal choice. I am all for safety devices that prevent injury, but I will need to see it in use and decide for myself about it's merits vs. possible new issues it might bring.

My last major motion sport was skydiving and I saw more than one new safety device take lives before being perfected. They were all introduced in response to fatalities and were to correct the issue leading to the death, but sometimes they brought about an unforseen issue no one thought of until it caused another fatality.

I applaud those that are trying to create a solution to this problem, but reserve the right to inspect it and see it in use for a while before I promote or use it...

 

[DW]

Roger,

You are probably thinking top level Nascar racing alone.  In the US, there are several thousand race tracks across the country hosting several races on three to five nights per week where each race, heat, practice session has upwards of 30-50 cars per session.  You have to look at all the different classes of cars that engage in this type of racing which includes Woo, Sprint, Midget, Nascar regional, Nascar national, local stock car classes such as late models, bandolero's, dwarf's, etc. and on and on.  There are several thousand race cars on the thousands of tracks across the US at any given time, so yes, they are doing it at that rate and have a longer season in general.  I thought about it before I made the post.   

The point I am trying to make concerns the effect on racing of the HANS device and some of the other similar units.  The result of the 40+ g forward impact stopping load on the basal skull fracture has been nothing short of astounding.  Since the device has moved the bar to zero deaths w/ the HANS, the exact number of laps or corners pre HANS is less statistically significant on the calculations for the effect of the device.  Perhaps, the device that could provide a similar result is out there and if so, it would be a shame to have an injury occur that could have been prevented with some sharp minds thinking and developing something.  I certainly agree that with any development there is also a risk involved, but mankind would never have made it to the moon without trying.

You last concern is very valid, and goes to the audience on boards like this.  The experts in the feild need to be the ones reviewing and making intelligent decisions on the true value of any new device brought in to the sport.  The Kite Tube fiasco of a couple of years ago is a perfect example of the deployment of an untested device.

[Roger]

DW, I think your first two paragraphs are in response to Scoke rather than me...

 

[Thomas Wayne]

I can't imagine using a rope release for slalom skiing - I ski too hard forthat. On occasion I have bitten off more than I could chew and have hadto let go as I approached the wake ("lean lock"). That is onepainful fall, and though I've never broken my ribs it is quite obvious that isa possibility. I've ruptured eardrums, blown out contacts and had my bellseriously rung with those types of falls, and I really am not willing to makethat a more regular part of my skiing. This is just my personalviewpoint, of course.

The handle safety panel we've developed, the ARM-GUARDâ„¢, is not the ultimatesolution to slalom safety - only because there IS no such thing... and therenever will be. High end slalom skiing carries certain risks that areunavoidable. But putting your head through the bridle and dying from abroken neck or subsequent drowning IS avoidable, and the ARM-GUARDâ„¢ does apretty perfect job of preventing that, at little cost and pretty much zeroinconvenience.

I have personally skied with one for most of last summer - as soon as mydoctor semi-approved skiing again - and all runs this year. For the last two seasons everyone whoskied at my site used one. Within the first couple of passes it became"invisible" to me, as far as having any sort of negative effect on myperformance. I will NEVER ski without one again. I believe with allmy heart that if I had been using one on July 30, 2006, I would not havesuffered the devastating injury that I did.

Body-part-through-handle injuries are far more common than you mightthink. I have examined every safety study available, and I can tell youthat dozens and dozens of skiers are injured this way every year. Onaverage, more than a dozen skiers each year suffer this type of injury inCalifornia alone [according to safety studies from 2002 - 2007]. Deathsare more rare, but one thing to consider is this - no matter how unlikelyit is, if it happens to you it might as well be 100%! Survivinga head-through-handle fall is your least likely outcome.

You can talk and brainstorm and argue forever about how to make our sportsafer, but at the end of day all that talk does nothing. Only actionyields results, and that's why we're doing something. I've said it beforeand I'm sure I'll say it many more times in the future:

If Brett Yager had been using a handle safety panel on May 2, 2008 he wouldnot have died as he did. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

Thomas Wayne

[alex38]

Thomas, where can I get one?

-Al

[Chuck_Dickey]

Thomas,

Not trying to be critical of your design, I'm all for it and yours seems to be the best going. You may have addressed this question before and I missed it, but are you concerned with putting a finger in the mesh or are the holes too small?  Did you ever try a solid panel, maybe something more pliable than polycarbonate, like polyurethane or a PVC coated fabric?

Where can I get one?

[Thomas Wayne]

Alex & Chuck -

Email me at twcues@gci.net and I'll send you out all the info you need to know about getting an ARM-GUARDâ„¢.

To answer Chuck's question, no I am not worried about getting a finger caught in the mesh, and the following photo should explain why. It shows the Lexanâ„¢ safety panel up close, along with a dime, which will not even come close to fitting through one of the openings in the grid. Being diamond shaped, the holes reflect a well-known optical illusion; they are actually far more restrictive than our brains can easily perceive.

 A solid panel would sure be a lot easier and quicker to machine, but we found that design tends to act like a rudder in the water and a sail in the air.  Not desirable either way.

Thomas Wayne

[HO 410]

So the grip safety on the Browning 1911 gave me a little inspiration.

Create a release mechanism inside the handle much like a grip safety (Yes, the kind that magically appears when you say a concept out loud). If there is not a hand on the handle, one end of the bar would be free to disengage from the bridle. Possibly use some sort of cam to keep the handle together until 10 lbs pulls on the bar: so you could still get the handle out on the tips of your fingers in a turn like this...

http://reginajaquess.com/Photos/06Skyview/Copy%20of%20IMG_8904.jpg

I've got some great ideas for wing warping technology that would allow for some crazy awesome airplane performance profiles, unfortunately I've yet to run across the metal reforming technology of the T-1000. When I do I'll be ready for a small-scale proof of concept.

Ideas free of technology are amazing!

 

[Horton]

My hand on grip & gun goes off. Head is in handle & gun goes off. How is that better? I like my Glock GAP .45 better

[Thomas Wayne]

I'm a Sig Sauer man myself.

 The idea of a "break-away" is addressed in our patent application, as a subset mechanism involving one of the safety panel designs.  Using a cam idea as mentioned above, the handle will separate into two pieces - each "half" (actually they overlap) remains attached to its own bridle rope.  There are numerous problems involved with this design, not the least of which is that fact that it would be somewhat of a hassle to reassemble the handle every time before your deep-water start.  Plus, a moment's inattention and you're holding an unusable two pieces as the boat is idling away.

The cam-lock mechanism itself comes from an old patent for a show-skiing handle, which is cited on our patent and can be studied here:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=16&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=((water+AND+ski)+AND+handle).TI.&OS=ttl/((water+and+ski)+and+handle)&RS=TTL/((water+AND+ski)+AND+handle) 

 (Patent #4,280,240)

 

Thomas Wayne 

[skidawg]

dessert eagle .50 cal baby, go big or go home (use to be a jumper)