What do you mean by non approved? Like a velvet hunt cap? Or a helmet made in Europe to standards that are actually higher than our current ASTM standards and imported into the US by riders through the many popular websites?
1 Like
I am quite sure everything has been discussed somewhere by some set of folks.
And, I wouldnât try to âboil the oceanâ solving all problems however. Improving safety will increase costs initially. This is a fact of engineering life. Over time, competition against a standard will then decrease costs. I doubt anyone would say out loud that they donât care about rider head safety because it might increase costs to event.
There will always be ways to cheat and the cheaters will find find them. But, that shouldnât be used as an excuse to do little to improve safety. Again, for USEF one can have an arbitrarily old helmet in any condition as long as it met ASTM/SEI specs sometime in the dusty distant past. I donât know why USEF couldnât start with 2 simple things: (1) age out old helmets, like other organizations in the world do, and (2) simply check the manufacturing certification/age decal in the helmet when the rider picks up their packet. If thatâs too much to handle or contemplate, or the consensus is that there isnât cheating, then just do #1 and start purging the system of old helmets. Having USEF more aligned with other international organization might be good. Or maybe not? And, again, cheaters will cheat and use random things on their heads. But, that liability is on them. Rhetorically, in say 5 or 10 years, will USEF sanctioned helmets made before the rider was born still be allowed? I donât mean to be too snarky, so please donât take it that way. Iâm just asking questions about continuous safety process improvement. Thatâs all.
2 Likes
@Jarpur these did exist, and were/are used for motorcycle helmets, called Shok-SpotR. They were about $19, an inexpensive G-force tell-tale indicator. Not sure if theyâre still around. Perhaps.
Not all things which improve safety have to be mandated by USEF. There seems to be an over arching liability concern which is if something is mandated and it doesnât work, then the rider or next of kin come back at USEF.
But, how did we get through that knot hole with MIMS safety devices? There are scenarios where a MIMS (which are required on certain obstacles) will fail to trigger based on the angle of attack (been discussed elsewhere) and a rotation could occur. Does that mean USEF is now liable? I think not. MIMS does not solve all possible problems. It solves some, so itâs helpful and overall safety is improved. Thatâs all.
1 Like
Ones that are not ASTM/SEI certified.
Doesnât matter if theyâre certified to VG1 OR PAS015 or both, if theyâre not ASTM certified, theyâre not legal at US recognized shows that use that as the minimum.
Emily
1 Like
I found this interesting letter from the NHTSA to the manufacturer of ShokSpotR.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/shokspotr
Reading it, they say (among other things) that
âA manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative . . . any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard . . . . " It appears unlikely from the nature of your product that it would be attached by commercial businesses instead of helmet owners. However, if your product were installed on helmets by a manufacturer, distributor, dealer .or motor vehicle repair business, that could constitute a potential violation of the âmake inoperativeâ provision of 30122.â
Apparently, attachment of a device (by the helmet maker) that notifies the user that the helmet has been compromised and should be replaced is making the the helmet inoperative and is therefore not allowed! That seems counter productive to me.
The NHTSA also seemed concerned with the 6mm thickness of the SpotShokR.
I can imagine that, if the motorcycle market was taken away from the manufacturer, then the equestrian market might not have been large enough to sustain continued production.
1 Like
@Xctrygirl this is a very helpful conversation for me. Thank you.
Just a point about helmet stickers. In racing, your helmet is checked when you come to the race, as is all the safety equipment. It is checked for conformance to the spec. The specs change every 5 years. People know to discard their helmets at that frequency. The sticker has the competition and the date. It is only good for that particular competition at that particular time. You get a new one at each race. People collect them on their helmets, not unlike ski lift tickets. 
Yes, exactly. Iâm in a country that uses a sticker system. They change the sticker colour every few years. But all the sticker does is provide confirmation that the helmet met the required certification when it was first sold. It doesnât tell you how old it is, whether it has been fallen in. I could present an 11 year old helmet that has had multiple direct impacts and officials would tag it, if it has the right certification standard inside.
On the national federationâs helmet safety page, they literally have a photo of someone wearing a tagged helmet that looks like the rider has fallen off and hit the dirt. A sticker system alone means very little for safety.
1 Like
@conniemary a sticker which is good for several years, based on color as you mention, is meaningless. The ones which I am familiar with are new stickers at every single event. The sticker is only valid for that particular event. It has the event name and date printed on it. You get a new sticker every time. Saying that stickers are permanent misses the point.
Stickers do not tell you whether the helmet is invisibly damaged. They basically tell you the helmet meets the manufacturing date requirement. But, as has been discussed, USEF allows you to have a helmet which is arbitrarily old, in any condition at all. So, stickers are of little to no use in USEF events.
Perhaps the first thing to do is for USEF to start purging old helmets from the system. Best practices clearly dictate that there be a cutoff date where a helmet must be newer than that date. Other international sanctioning bodies recognize this. It would be entertaining to hear the argument that one is safe with an arbitrarily old helmet. I always stop using mine at 5 years regardless.
Who bears the burden of the cost of this proposal? How does the USEF enforce this? Is 5 years set by science or by helmet manufacturers wanting people to buy new helmets?
@enjoytheride. These are great questions. And, I am grateful for this discussion regarding means to increase rider safety.
Right now, USEF allows arbitrarily old helmets in any condition. They only have to be ASTM/SEI when they were made. It is not checked or enforced. I think as time goes on this will become an untenable position for a sanctioning body, particularly when compared to best practices. But, regardless, in the end your safety is your responsibility alone.
Here is a really simple proposal to get things started:
(1) USEF begins a process to purge old helmets. So, as of 2024, helmets older than 10 years are not allowed. The same process to check them can be used as is used now. That is, they are not checked. It is on the rider to have an up-to-date helmet. It is thus their liability and health if they do not. Itâs some weird logic to say that the USEF canât enforce this, so we canât have a time limit, when the USEF doesnât actually enforce this already.
(2) Riders have to buy new helmets at some frequency, say every 10 years. Riders bear the cost. Note that the â5 year time outâ was because the testing standards and science are updated and improved at that frequency. Manufacturers update their helmets along with that. There will always be pushback about any cost. There is on this tread. Iâm still waiting for someone to say out loud that they think they are safe and using best practices in a 20 year old helmet.
(3) USEF can indicate that failure to use a up-to-date sanctioned helmet is grounds for elimination, yellow card, or whatever penalty they think is reasonable. And, they can say that a riders helmet may be inspected for conformance at any time by stewards, including but not limited to registration, in-gates, etcâŠ
(4) USEF currently only requires ASTM/SEI conformance. USEF can announce they will study more constraining safety requirements and will update their requirements when appropriate. That USEF process could consider a cut-off threshold in the VT rank ordering. Or not. It could align or harmonize with other sanctioning bodies. And, so forth.
The issue is the rider doesnât just have to bear the cost of purchasing a new helmet. The rider bears the cost of having someone at each show checking every helmet and the system in place to do so.
You can say itâs worth it but at some point are we nickle and diming people out of competition?
Same with things like microchips, making Starter Recognized, paying jump judges, etc. Each additional measure while small change alone and maybe a good idea increases entry fees or general cost.
3 Likes
@enjoytheride I am not proposing that all helmets be checked. Iâm just saying that they may be checked at discretion of the stewards. The current rules actually allow dress, which the helmet is, to be inspected at the discretion of stewards. So there is zero cost increase to run the event. The riders would have to eat the cost of updating their helmet every 10 years, starting in 2024.
Iâm somewhat curious about why people are happy allowing arbitrarily old helmets, while saying they care about safety.
Maybe because sometimes the best fitting helmet is not readily available anymore?
About 7 years ago I found some Aegis skull caps on sale that fit me really well, much better than my existing CO. (I used to wear International or Lexington skull caps, but those were discontinued in the mid 00s). I bought 3 of them new. One I wore every day, one was for shows, and one sat in the box in my closet. I eventually replaced the everyday one with a cheap ventilated dial-fit model (not due to accident, just due to wear & comfort in summer). Just a year ago I replaced the show skull cap with the ânewâ one from storage. Technically the helmet is 7yrs (now 8) years old, but it has barely been used and kept in climate controlled environment, so I do not feel it is âunsafe.â It met the ASTM standards when it was manufactured, and was a perfectly safe piece of equipment then, so how does it arbitrarily become less safe? I have heard helmet gurus say the 5 year rule is 5 years of USE, not 5 years from manufacture (assuming climate controlled storage, not the back seat of your car).
I understand ASTM standards may change as technology improvesâŠbut I think most discussion has (grumpily) shown that ASTM standards are largely unchanged (thus why British/Euro standards are better) and aside from MIPS, equestrian helmets have the same basic safety components today as they did 25yrs ago. Style and fashion has changed, but styrofoam, plastic shell, and plastic buckles with nylon 3-point harnesses are still the bare bones of all helmets.
BTW, the reason I love these particular skull caps is they are low profile with a less-deep fit. I have a âshortâ head (from top to base) and many helmets sit too deep on my head; when Iâm galloping or in 2pt position off the horseâs back, and I lift my chin level (not looking down), the back of the helmet hits my neck/shoulders/vest and pushes it down over my eyes. I would really like to see where Iâm going while galloping, so I choose a skull cap that fits in a way to allow vision.
FWIW, I wear a slightly deeper fitting (and more recently made!) helmet for everyday use, flatwork, and show jumping, which is 90% of my hours in the saddle. I am actively searching find a MIPS XC helmet that fits my less-deep head, so I intend to replace the 7-yr Aegis with a better modelâŠbut Iâm not sacrificing my vision to do so.
Selecting an arbitrary year to âdisqualifyâ ASTM helmets doesnt necessarily make it safer (though it does give the appearance of "doing something). A 10yr old helmet on its first ever ride is probably a safer choice than a helmet made 2 weeks ago that suffered a severe fall yesterday; but there is no way a steward could know the ânewerâ helmet is busted inside. I see this proposed rule as a solution looking for a problem, and requiring additional resources (personnel + time =$) that are already stretched thin. It comes down to good old rider responsibility⊠educate yourself on fit, standards, and testing, wear what is safest for you, and replace your helmets when wear/use/falls dictates.
8 Likes
I seriously doubt this. There is no way that enforcing a rule that requires helmets be checked and stickered for age does not require more burden on already taxed stewards, or more stewards. Or itâs simply an empty rule that is only enforced when a steward has a free minute.
Expressing concern for additional cost/resources does not mean we donât care about safety.
3 Likes
Where is this done? In theory itâs a good idea to check at every event but in practice would add too much cost/time and it still doesnât address the issue that itâs impossible to detect invisible damage.
Clear messaging on helmet safety would be more useful than stickers.
2 Likes
@conniemary Happy New Year! We can read this rule issued by the British Riding Club for the 2023 hat rules. It discusses the mandatory hat tags. Moving to Pink tags in 2023. (They are not event specific, as they are in racing which, IMHO, is more safety conscious than we are in equestrian sports). The BRC point is they have a safety requirement and itâs on the rider to conform to it. Liability is on the rider. ASTM pre-2004 hats are not allowed anymore. There are plenty of used ones on Ebay. USEF is fine with them.
Also note that BRC, British Eventing, and Pony Club have joined to unify safety standards for hats.
Happy New Year everyone! Letâs Go Eventing!
That rule sounds like the process we have here in NZ. It doesnât mention that you are required to tag before every event. It even says that a pink tag from one organisation will be valid at another organisationâs comps which implies that you would keep the same tag across multiple comps.
I am curious to know if anywhere requires tags/checks for each event. We used to have this at pony club back when standards stickers were on the outside of the helmet but now they are on the inside it adds a bit of complexity.
@conniemary If the pink tags are inspected when the rider checks in to get their packet, #, etc, then the event has a record in their database that rider xyz has an approved and tagged hat. That checkmark, goes along with the others for the particular event and rider (stall # assigned, stall deposit paid, entry money still owed, emergency contact #, etc, etc). So, this achieves the per-event tagging/inspection, regardless of whether tags are on inside or outside the hat. Clearly on the outside makes it visible to all, including stewards, during the event. To keep tags secure on the outside of the hat, one can use a small piece of clear 3M double-sided tape, both of which stick relentlessly to even the rough skull cap surface. Then stick the tag to that tape. Iâve used the 3M tape to secure a helmet camera. But, those are no longer allowed by some venues and sanctioning bodies.
Where are helmet cams not allowed and why?
1 Like
