nikos force
01/09/2008, 15:10
full copy apo to periodiko BIKES ...
'' WHAT EXACTLY IS SHARP ''
predictably is is a contrieved acronym : safety helmet assessment rating programme . we favoured the pithier safety helment assessment test but no one seemed interested. All helmets sold in dealers have to pass the basic british standard or the equivalent european standard so are legally OK ...The sharp system aims to tell you ,which helmets are much better than ok by grading them from one to five stars ( five being the safest ).
and safest is a key word ,one of the controversial aspects of the sheme is that attempts to scientifically link its labatory crash tests to real world accident data . This means sharp can argue that if everyone wore a five stars helmets , 50 fewer of us a year would die from head injuries. In theory its a great idea . In practice its very hard to do .
SO WHAT DO THE RATINGS MEAN ??
in the original transport reasearch lab (TLR) report , the rtings related directly to the number of lives that would be saved if everyone wore that helmet . so if all of us wore five stars helmets 25 fmore lives would be saved than if everyone wore four star helmets ,which would save 25 more lives than three star lids and sso on .
however the latest explanation of how the rating are arrived at (called a test protocol) has not been made public and the department for transport (DFT)have yet to reply to BIKES questions.given that the sheme's first batch of results have been made public ,this seems odd .
Also ,whereas the original TLR report claimed 100 lives a year could be saved by everyone wearing 5star helmets, the figure has now dropped to 50 . no explaination has been given .Something has happened to the test protocol ,but the DFT wont tell us what .
SO ITS A GOVERMENT SHEME ????
yes it was originated ,paid for , and is the full responsibility of the DFT. They looked at 2 statistics 1) bike accidents account 18 per cent of deaths despite making up just one per cent of uk traffic . 2) eighty per cent of motocyclists killed, die of head injuries.If you are under pressure to reduse road casualties ,the conclusion is obvius : make them wear safer helmets.Hence sharp. The DFT also hopes the sheme will encourage manufactures to make safer helmets in oerder to get more stars and , presumably, more sales.
ITS SUSPICIOOUSLY LIKE THAT CAR ACCIDENT THINGY, NCAP. IS THERE ANY CONNECTION ??
Yes.ncaps success is getting drivers to buy safer cars nad forcing manufacturers to focus more on safety,undoubtebly encouraged the DFT to try sharp in the first place ,and is probably why the rating system is so simple.
But sharpstest are much more straight -forward THAN THE VAST RANGE OF NCAPS ONES.hELMETS WONt be getting extra marks for beeping fi your pillion hasn't got both hands on the grab rail .
However the ncap system was reviewed ,agreed and implemented by experts from dozens of european countries and is based on bog -standrd SCIENCE . SHARP IS PURELY BRITSh sheme ,some of the maths is adventurous, and the way in which test results are linked to star ratings has not been made public
'' WHAT EXACTLY IS SHARP ''
predictably is is a contrieved acronym : safety helmet assessment rating programme . we favoured the pithier safety helment assessment test but no one seemed interested. All helmets sold in dealers have to pass the basic british standard or the equivalent european standard so are legally OK ...The sharp system aims to tell you ,which helmets are much better than ok by grading them from one to five stars ( five being the safest ).
and safest is a key word ,one of the controversial aspects of the sheme is that attempts to scientifically link its labatory crash tests to real world accident data . This means sharp can argue that if everyone wore a five stars helmets , 50 fewer of us a year would die from head injuries. In theory its a great idea . In practice its very hard to do .
SO WHAT DO THE RATINGS MEAN ??
in the original transport reasearch lab (TLR) report , the rtings related directly to the number of lives that would be saved if everyone wore that helmet . so if all of us wore five stars helmets 25 fmore lives would be saved than if everyone wore four star helmets ,which would save 25 more lives than three star lids and sso on .
however the latest explanation of how the rating are arrived at (called a test protocol) has not been made public and the department for transport (DFT)have yet to reply to BIKES questions.given that the sheme's first batch of results have been made public ,this seems odd .
Also ,whereas the original TLR report claimed 100 lives a year could be saved by everyone wearing 5star helmets, the figure has now dropped to 50 . no explaination has been given .Something has happened to the test protocol ,but the DFT wont tell us what .
SO ITS A GOVERMENT SHEME ????
yes it was originated ,paid for , and is the full responsibility of the DFT. They looked at 2 statistics 1) bike accidents account 18 per cent of deaths despite making up just one per cent of uk traffic . 2) eighty per cent of motocyclists killed, die of head injuries.If you are under pressure to reduse road casualties ,the conclusion is obvius : make them wear safer helmets.Hence sharp. The DFT also hopes the sheme will encourage manufactures to make safer helmets in oerder to get more stars and , presumably, more sales.
ITS SUSPICIOOUSLY LIKE THAT CAR ACCIDENT THINGY, NCAP. IS THERE ANY CONNECTION ??
Yes.ncaps success is getting drivers to buy safer cars nad forcing manufacturers to focus more on safety,undoubtebly encouraged the DFT to try sharp in the first place ,and is probably why the rating system is so simple.
But sharpstest are much more straight -forward THAN THE VAST RANGE OF NCAPS ONES.hELMETS WONt be getting extra marks for beeping fi your pillion hasn't got both hands on the grab rail .
However the ncap system was reviewed ,agreed and implemented by experts from dozens of european countries and is based on bog -standrd SCIENCE . SHARP IS PURELY BRITSh sheme ,some of the maths is adventurous, and the way in which test results are linked to star ratings has not been made public