Falling rocks? A straight downwards impact to the top of the head if you are not looking up? I don't mean to be sarcastic, but if I'm leading, does wearing a helmet protect me from anything? I wear a BD something or other that is a thin plastic shell. Maybe there is some protection if I were to invert on a fall and hit the back of my head? Someone help me here. I'm just thinking that a side impact would not be protected in any way shape or form

Falling rocks? A straight downwards impact to the top of the head if you are not looking up? I don't mean to be sarcastic, but if I'm leading, does wearing a helmet protect me from anything? I wear a BD something or other that is a thin plastic shell. Maybe there is some protection if I were to invert on a fall and hit the back of my head? Someone help me here. I'm just thinking that a side impact would not be protected in any way shape or form

What you should be asking: "have you ever come away from a day of climbing, regretting that you wore a helmet?"

Good comment, but there times when I've been sorry I've worn a helmet. Two days ago I was climbing a chimney in Boulder Canyon and I could not make the exit move with my helmet on. I took it off. When my second came up, I lowered a sling and hauled up her helmet and mine. When I started the route, I looked at the exit, which appeared wide enough that the helmet would not be an issue. I was wrong.

r.c

UIAA 106:
http://www.theuiaa.org/...106_helmets_2009.pdf

EN 12492
http://www.satrappeguide.com/EN12492.php

Surely, Jim Titt is the man you're waiting for to reply to this thread but meanwhile you can check the requirements in these docs.

That said, I've always wondered when manufacturers start advertising potential advantages of foam helmets for fall protection.

Me? I worn a helmet once in the last 15 years. The protection they offer from impacts is so pathetic compared with the normal race helmets I´m used to I can´t be bothered (and I don´t fall of much anyway) and the impact protection from falling objects doesn´t seem much related to the size of the rocks I play around on.
There are other ways to protect oneself such as don´t stand around chatting at the bottom of the cliff when bumblies are going off route, don´t follow incompetent parties on long routes, belay under nice overhangs and so on.
Wear a hat or not, I´ve no real opinion but one should have no illusions it will keep you alive when you ab off the end of the rope or when a fridge-block comes down the mountain.

Depends on the helmet. Helmets with harnesses in them are designed to protect against objects from above. The design deflects objects as opposed to absorbs impact...

Foam helmets are designed absorb the impact and don't deflect object very well...

I climb in an area with a lot of lose rock. I have personally knocked a block the size of a cooler on my belayer (it hit her knees) ...

As Jim says, there are other ways to protect yourself. In an area such as you describe, if you are climbing single pitch routes, it would make a lot of sense to use an indirect belay, with a ground anchor some distance form the base of the route, safe from rock fall. A direct belay would increase the load on the belayer in a fall. Most commonly, belayers think that standing underneath the climber is a good thing to do, often with claims of dynamic belaying to help the climber in falls. Dynamic belaying is a myth IMHO. Testing here http://user.xmission.com/~tmoyer/testing/Simulation_of_Climbing_and_Rescue_Belays.pdf shows: "Only a small amount of belayer lifting is helpful (~20 cm). More lifting increases fall distance and does not decrease peak force. " Importantly, this is a passive movement rather than an active dynamic belay in response to a fall. It is impossible to time a dynamic belay sufficiently accurately, and to jump sufficiently high (rather than being pulled upwards), to have any useful effect. For this reason it makes sense, to belay away from the base of the cliff when possible.

As Jim says, there are other ways to protect yourself. In an area such as you describe, if you are climbing single pitch routes, it would make a lot of sense to use an indirect belay, with a ground anchor some distance form the base of the route, safe from rock fall. A direct belay would increase the load on the belayer in a fall. Most commonly, belayers think that standing underneath the climber is a good thing to do, often with claims of dynamic belaying to help the climber in falls. Dynamic belaying is a myth IMHO. Testing here http://user.xmission.com/~tmoyer/testing/Simulation_of_Climbing_and_Rescue_Belays.pdf shows: "Only a small amount of belayer lifting is helpful (~20 cm). More lifting increases fall distance and does not decrease peak force. " Importantly, this is a passive movement rather than an active dynamic belay in response to a fall. It is impossible to time a dynamic belay sufficiently accurately, and to jump sufficiently high (rather than being pulled upwards), to have any useful effect. For this reason it makes sense, to belay away from the base of the cliff when possible.

For a helmet to get the CE or UIAA certifications they have to pass three basic tests, one for top impact and penetration, one for side impact and one for strap configuration and strength.

Suspended test with plastic helmets usually fare well in the top impact and penetration tests but barely pass the side impact test. Foam helmets flip it around and pass the side impact tests with flying colors and barely pass the top penetration tests.

Most injuries from falling rock are from the top and most that occur during a fall are side and back blows.

So you decide; are you more likely to be in a falling rock situation or a falling situation? As fas as I know, there are no suspended helmets with a significant foam "ring" surrounding the head. Im not sure why, other than the geek factor.

Climb safe,
Mal

As Jim says, there are other ways to protect yourself. In an area such as you describe, if you are climbing single pitch routes, it would make a lot of sense to use an indirect belay, with a ground anchor some distance form the base of the route, safe from rock fall. A direct belay would increase the load on the belayer in a fall. Most commonly, belayers think that standing underneath the climber is a good thing to do, often with claims of dynamic belaying to help the climber in falls. Dynamic belaying is a myth IMHO. Testing here http://user.xmission.com/~tmoyer/testing/Simulation_of_Climbing_and_Rescue_Belays.pdf shows: "Only a small amount of belayer lifting is helpful (~20 cm). More lifting increases fall distance and does not decrease peak force. " Importantly, this is a passive movement rather than an active dynamic belay in response to a fall. It is impossible to time a dynamic belay sufficiently accurately, and to jump sufficiently high (rather than being pulled upwards), to have any useful effect. For this reason it makes sense, to belay away from the base of the cliff when possible.

and NO you dont want to belay away from the base of the wall on many instances ... if you belayed climbers who constantly whipped on lead or did so yourself you would know this ...

belay away from the wall down low can mean you can get pulled in and slammed if your climber falls at the start of the route, and can cause a decked climber ... especially if you are a lighter belayer

As Jim says, there are other ways to protect yourself. In an area such as you describe, if you are climbing single pitch routes, it would make a lot of sense to use an indirect belay, with a ground anchor some distance form the base of the route, safe from rock fall. A direct belay would increase the load on the belayer in a fall. Most commonly, belayers think that standing underneath the climber is a good thing to do, often with claims of dynamic belaying to help the climber in falls. Dynamic belaying is a myth IMHO. Testing here http://user.xmission.com/~tmoyer/testing/Simulation_of_Climbing_and_Rescue_Belays.pdf shows: "Only a small amount of belayer lifting is helpful (~20 cm). More lifting increases fall distance and does not decrease peak force. " Importantly, this is a passive movement rather than an active dynamic belay in response to a fall. It is impossible to time a dynamic belay sufficiently accurately, and to jump sufficiently high (rather than being pulled upwards), to have any useful effect. For this reason it makes sense, to belay away from the base of the cliff when possible.

Some in this thread have mentioned never wearing a helmet. Not safe advice.

Rob.calm

Plenty of people chose not to wear a helmet but I can´t see anywhere in the thread that they are advising anyone else to follow their example. It is a personal choice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJhngt_wS2Y
Sorry, never learned to make things clicky

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJhngt_wS2Y
Sorry, never learned to make things clicky

Plenty of people chose not to wear a helmet but I can´t see anywhere in the thread that they are advising anyone else to follow their example. It is a personal choice.

Me? I worn a helmet once in the last 15 years. The protection they offer from impacts is so pathetic compared with the normal race helmets I´m used to I can´t be bothered (and I don´t fall of much anyway) and the impact protection from falling objects doesn´t seem much related to the size of the rocks I play around on.

There are other ways to protect oneself such as don´t stand around chatting at the bottom of the cliff when bumblies are going off route, don´t follow incompetent parties on long routes, belay under nice overhangs and so on.

Wear a hat or not, I´ve no real opinion but one should have no illusions it will keep you alive when you ab off the end of the rope or when a fridge-block comes down the mountain.

I've offered very similar opinions in the past and agree with everything you have said here. If history is any judge, you'll probably catch quite a bit of flack from those who claim that anybody climbing without a helmet is an idiot, etc.

One additional thing. To my knowledge, no climbing helmet that is certified under EN 12492 alone is designed to protect a climber from hitting his head in a fall. EN 12492 tests helmets with a maximum falling mass of 5kg falling a distance of 1/2 meter.

Curt

I thought that picture was long lost. How did you find it?

“It was a fatal blow to the head, if he had more protection maybe we would not be here today to mourn him. After what happened, institutions should make helmets mandatory, at least for minors. Much like they have for the kids who practice skiing and snowboarding. "

This is what helmets can potentially protect you from:



http://gripped.com/...o-traversa-accident/

This is what helmets can potentially protect you from:



http://gripped.com/...o-traversa-accident/

... once a softball sized rock fell about 3 meters clipping me on the helmet (knock off by some kind of goat!)...

What you should be asking: "have you ever come away from a day of climbing, regretting that you wore a helmet?"

Thinking a helmet is going to help when you take a 25m groundfall is about as optimistic as thinking a rubber band is going to prevent the fall in the first place.

You obviously know a heck of a lot more about this than I do, but I can't imagine a helmet hurts in this situation, and I can't imagine the impact of a person's head on the ground without a helmet is the same or even less than the same fall with a hard(ish) protective covering.

Does the helmet help absolutely 0%? Does it help 1%? For me, with a helmet, the person's head doesn't hit the ground directly until the helmet is crushed or breaks apart. The way that I understand it there's a buffer there. OK, I can imagine if the helmet causes a person's head to hit at an awkward angle, or if the plastic cuts into the skin. I can see that happening, but I can't see it having zero affect on the overall impact.

There was an accident a few years ago with a popular Boston climber where her partner dislodged a rock that knocked her unconscious. She was belaying with a grigri, so that probably saved her partner's life (because it locked as opposed a tube-style device that would have cratered him). I honestly can't remember if she was wearing a helmet or not. But if she was / were, would the helmet have lessened her injuries?

If the answer is no, then why aren't we seeing an outcry of why helmets are a complete and utter scam?

It's an honest question. I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm also not a statistician an academic researcher, so a lay man's answer is preferred. Thanks...

Greg

I think his point was that if you die of arterial bleeding, a collapsed lung and a caved in skull or you just die of bleeding, a collapsed lung and brain hemorrhaging, you are still dead.

Beyond a certain impact, even if a helmet provides some protection, it still has no effect on the outcome.

I think his point was that if you die of arterial bleeding, a collapsed lung and a caved in skull or you just die of bleeding, a collapsed lung and brain hemorrhaging, you are still dead.

Beyond a certain impact, even if a helmet provides some protection, it still has no effect on the outcome.

I think his point was that if you die of arterial bleeding, a collapsed lung and a caved in skull or you just die of bleeding, a collapsed lung and brain hemorrhaging, you are still dead.

Beyond a certain impact, even if a helmet provides some protection, it still has no effect on the outcome.

Jim, I agree with the argument that you can't count on a helmet saving you in a 25m ground fall.
Do you agree that a helmet will lessen the impact of a fall? Any fall! There is no hope in the extreme cases but what about the marginal ones?
Could make a difference between, a headache and an ambulance ride, walking out of a crag and being carried out..... A lesser blow to the head may be enough to save some lives or at least a few brain cells.

I think this was my point. I've been careless on a mantle under a roof before and knocked my head. With the helmet it was a mere annoyance (though enough to stagger me for a second). I can imagine that without it I would have been off.

Of course, my example here goes back to Jim's thought that paying attention is more important. I don't disagree with that, but I do think that there can be a difference between a concussion and long-term brain trauma from falling rock, for example.

Weirdly enough, I have ONLY knocked my head in cases like this when I was wearing a helmet. Never without a helmet. The helmet extends quite considerably beyond the top of your head, you are not used to your head being quite that big, so you duck, but don't duck low enough.

I am convinced that in those few cases when I hit my head on the roof, against the side of the chimney, etc., while wearing a helmet, even though the impact was definitely noticeable, I simply would not have hit my head at all, if i weren't wearing it.

I wear a helmet in situations where i feel that things beyond my control (falling rocks, etc.) could be an issue. I can be very very careful, but if I am on the route, and the rock falls on me, I do not have an ability to anticipate, duck, move out of the way, etc.

I have never had a rock fall on me in this scenario. But then again, I rarely climb anything other that single-pitch overhanging sport climbs. So i rarely wear a helmet. but I do have one, and I have worn it when I felt it was warranted.

But I am not wearing a helmet to protect me against inverting during the fall, and I am not wearing a helmet to protect me against the ground fall, because those are the cases where I feel that my own actions and my belayer's actions would protect me better than a helmet.

Thanks everyone, since my seatbelt won't protect me from a head-on collision with an 18 wheeler at interstate speeds, I can now happily stop using it at all.

Can anyone point to a single serious climbing accident that was made worse by a helmet?

TE

Thanks everyone, since my seatbelt won't protect me from a head-on collision with an 18 wheeler at interstate speeds, I can now happily stop using it at all.

Can anyone point to a single serious climbing accident that was made worse by a helmet?

TE

Thanks everyone, since my seatbelt won't protect me from a head-on collision with an 18 wheeler at interstate speeds, I can now happily stop using it at all...

Thanks everyone, since my seatbelt won't protect me from a head-on collision with an 18 wheeler at interstate speeds, I can now happily stop using it at all.

Can anyone point to a single serious climbing accident that was made worse by a helmet?

TE

What does a climbing helmet actually protect you from?