saw an example of one of these at the bike show last year looked to be a top bit of kit, the demo was very good and the chap on the stand knew his stuff. He said something about kitting out the Olypic equestrian team with them and that they may be compulsary at the next Olypics. The price wasnt crazy and the demo included the recharging and repacking procedues. He also said there was a repair service available.

The system was available as a bladder or as a combo with a jacket.

Good stuff liked the earlier comment re a grant would be a bonus if the government did something positive for bikes.:scooter:

It appears that many bikers along with Fastship and myself are not prepared to just grease our arses and bend over and just take whatever crap is thrown in our direction unlike tommytitfromleeds and Alexletit

:oops2::censored:

OK, before things get too personal, lets accept a few things.

Being told what to do and how to do it has never solved any problems. Being told you can't smoke weed has not changed a thing. Being told you couldn't drink after 11pm (in the UK) led to binge drinking and forcing people to wear this type of jacket or another will not solve much either, IMO. That said, I will happily buy an air jacket of my own free will if I have the cash...

However, as stated above, I don't think legislating yet more safety features will help. It passes the cost onto the biker and avoids the real cause of the problem. All thqt said, there is a proble on the roads... Traffic levels a soaring, and driving standards (certainly in the UK) are falling ( I don't think they've ever risen here in Tallinn...:rolleyes2:).

If they want to reduce accidents, be it for cars or bikes, then they need to spend money on education and awareness.

Perhaps make 6 months on a scooter compulsory for anyone taking a driving licence.... Riding bikes has made me a better cage driver, for sure. Car drivers may then know what its like to be on the receiving end of thoughtless driving. Perhaps they might enjoy the observation skills, and forward planning that makes defensive riding the best protection of all....

No need to get personal, or if you want to take it to the Bar mate, I'll happily see you there.

I, like you, saw a report on the Beeb about these (actually both the early morning and 6pm news articles), and simply wanted to add in the extra information about Dr Parfitt, that I'd got from the first report, namely that the guy isn't some silly do-gooder with no idea about biking, but is in fact a biker himself. If anyone knows about the risks I imagine it's a biking A&E doctor, who's no doubt had to sew back together more than his fair share of bikers.

Arguing that somehow accepting a safety device is an act of spineless openness to being shafted left, right, and sideways by an over protective nanny state is what angers me. If you want to find an argument against it find something more objective, or alternatively say that you've tried one on and hated the feel of it, but don't just say "oh Alex you t*t".

EDIT: I'm sure there's plenty of times when we can show that making safety devices compulsory has indeed solved some problems, look at legislation for the wearing of seat belts, very few people seem to object to that being a point of law, and it does seem to have brought down injury and fatality rates.

Costs? I guess if you make these compulsory you'll increase demand, if you do that you'll encourage supply, and if you do that you'll bring costs down. If you look at existing prices £300-£400 or so they're not that much more than a decent jacket anyway. Increase demand and the chances are prices will drop so we'll hardly notice the difference in price at all.

I honestly cannot stop laughing...this by far is THE best thing I have ever been called!!! tommytit, classic! :rofl:

I love it when people cannot deal with a counter argument, they just end up name calling! Whether your 6 or 60 you cannot beat a bit of name calling! hahahaha...tommyTIT....love it!



EDIT
Plus; can the UK governement REALLY enforce this???? I mean whats the punishement going to be? At the end of the day it is your life. Along with the thread about tracking overseas movements (am I really to believe this has not been happening since the birth of advanced surveillance????) I find these hard to worry about and take seriously. please do not reply with "well you should take it seriously".

Think the snow is getting to people you know, why don't we all go for a ride????

OK, I made an excessive generalisation: there are some safety features that are good. Injuries have surely come down courtesy of seat belts, and lids but would it not be better if accidents were to come down instead? Seat belts do nothing for accidents involving bikers, cyclists and pedestrians, only the cage drivers...

I don't think trying to control things is the answer.... I think its just an easier thing to resort to and requires less fore-thought, planning, is easily implemented and the politician can claim proactiveness...

As for prices, if things are compulsory, where is the incentive for companies to drop prices significantly? If we have to buy it, its not like we can boycott an expensive accessory that just because its pricey.

Take lids. Decent lids are now more expensive than ever. Back when I bought my first lid, I bought the best I could: a Shoei X8R in 1992. It cost about £300. How much is top range Arai nowadays? I don't scrimp on bike kit: I get the best stuff I can afford and don't regret it, but its still a heck of a blow to my wallet when its jacket, lid or boot time comes round again

If they want to make it compulsory for us to buy kit, however good it might be: its essentially a stealth tax: I think bikers should get a government grant for new kit every 3 years or based on NCB to reflect the what we have not cost the NHS in specialist help...

Let me put it this way. If it became compulsory to wear such jackets, I am sure that many people would benefit in a prang, and I would not cry for some lost freedom, but it would not make accidents any less likely, and I think that is a missed opportunity...

The safest jacket you can buy is the one you feel comfortable wearing. Same goes for helmets. Once your mind starts thinking, "the weight of the airbag jacket is uncomfortable", you're more likely to have an accident in the first place as you're not focusing 110% on your riding.

That doctor may well be a biker but saying they'll save X number of lives is a statistic he's pulled out of his a**e. He may well have £700+ to spend on a colour co-ordinated, Dainese airbag leathers (I'm betting he rides a 1098), the rest of us don't. If made compulsory, the cost would kill the UK motorcycle market by making it into a hobby for the rich.

And if the government is going to bang on about compulsory safety kit, how about they knock the VAT off, like they do for workwear required under the H&S Act?

Good points (especially the VAT :clap:).

As for the UK MC industry... From what I've seen living far too long in London and the SE, it already is a hobby for the rich and not the common-minded pursuit it was when I started riding. Don't hold yiur breath to have someone give you the nod heading the other way, and certainly not for some one to stop if you''re sat on the hard shoulder!!

Knocking the VAT off just allows them more profit... it will cost the same, VAT or not... look at helmets.

One "benefit" that's been ignored is that you will have a water proff layer that works:innocent:, whether you want it or not :thumbdown:. Nice on a hot day:eek3:

John

What is the make of jacket used in the BBC clip?

BBC - Newsbeat - Technology - Air bag jacket 'could save lives'

baswacky

I think there is only ONE jacket which is legal for sale in the UK and I believe its the same company which I heard on Radio 2 talking to Chris Evans.

From what I remember, its a British company and they have just signed an 18,000 unit deal with the French police force.... It must be good then :thumbup1:




P.S. Whats with all the arguing on the hubb now ????? Chill :nono:

Good point but that's London for you. Just speak to someone who you don't know and they eyeball you like you've got two heads or something.

"Up norf", I'm pleased to say it's still an affordable pastime. And yes, you will get a nod. Maybe it's got something to do with cheaper property prices so even us peasants can afford a place to store a bike or two. Go to any bike meet and you'll still find elderly Fireblades, FZR1000's and plenty of other sub-£2000 bikes, most of which will still embarrass a £100k+ supercar. With the spiralling cost of insurance and petrol, there's a large number of bikers who will be forced off the roads due to cost leaving motorcycling the preserve of "Hooray Henry's".

Good point about the VAT too and already proven by the pathetic 2.5% reduction in VAT. Are things any cheaper? Point I was trying to make is that they won't take the VAT off as it's not in their interest. Motorcycling is still seen as a luxury and not as a valid means of transport, which is why it's taken so long to allow them in bus lanes.

I think these jackets are a good idea but it should be left to the individual to decide whether they want them or not. Personally, I don't want the government interfering in my riding, any more than I want them to force me to buy a bike with ABS, traction control, speed limiters, GPS tracking, airbags, auto braking to prevent tailgating, etc, etc. That day will come though.

And the point about costing the taxpayer money with my visits to A&E, I will agree to wear one when they start making smokers pay for their cancer treatment, etc.

Interesting. I'm guessing the others are illegal to sell as they contain blank shot gun type cartridges? You can ride a motorcycle in a pink tutu, there is no legislation that defines what is or is not a motorcycle jacket. There is lots of legislation to do with explosive devices. Did the "approved" manufacturer make that clear? If not, perhaps they are more into marketing than engineering?

As there is no defined test as to what these things are supposed to do or even how the air system is supposed to interact with other safety features (armour inside or out for piercing impacts?) I'm staying well away. Imagine what's happen with that lanyard fired version if the zip was part open or the lanyard wrapped round the bike and acted like a cheese wire? What you need is proper research into injuries, a test model of what a jacket should do in a set of different scenarios, a defined set of actions and interlocks for activation and finally a CE approval test that includes the air bag deployment. Stunt men and soda syphon cartidges don't cut it, that's not safety system development.

The first one I'd consider would an inflateable neck brace in a helmet. It could be controlled by accelerometers and buckle interlocks like a car system and would need to be approved, so it would at least do no harm.

Oh, and if you plan to go swimming in one take note, poor life belt designs of the past involved the "survivor" being face down in the water with a broken neck!

Andy

Input
 

Hi guys, for what it's worth I have a stiff spine which means I suspect I'd snap it if I landed on my back in almost any situation. I asked my rheumatologist what would happen if I crashed a bike. He sort of sucked his teeth and commented that I really DID want to kill myself. No I want to get on and live a bit. OK, so I use a very good back protector at all times. I really took interest in first reports of neck braces and air bags in jackets too. But I dislike being told what to do/wear. On balance I decided to concentrate on avoiding every collision at all costs. Much better than any armour. When I rode in winter recently I also chose to use an extra layer rather than the back protector, relying Furygan's layer of rubber. I have thought about this a LOT and avoidance is paramount. I don't think I would use an air bag in daily situations but then I shall also never try wheelying! Linzi.

I agree with that 100%. £300 spent on training, regardless of your experience level or or how good you think you are, is far better that any jacket costing twice that.