depending on the case, we can consider that the GALLET may be more advantageous in rescue due to sharp edges and beyond, we are left to cut the cars. but on the issue of the fires may reduce visibility. when the Bullard give us a greater visibility in the fire but in rescue we have not the Protection of the faces, that gives us GALLET...is not true? then we must use different types of helmets for each type of service?
ill stick to my 4 year old beat up leather helmet made in the US.. at Cairns.....strong and heavy. Never had a problem with rescue calls, fires or anything. Gotta get in a car?... take it off, and set in the roof, it was hitting the air tank, we got new tanks, and it wasnt a problem
besides the gallets look dumb, and the bullard helmet should be left the DOT and construction crews... because they are cheap and plasticy, and not really needed anyways!...
yes but take im off and entry is not and option, its more practic is true, but if you have an acident your secur company will not pay the acident! i know we do it but its not an option...yes thats mine helment i just give the example of the bullard and gallet because these one are the most used in our job...in my opinion and with my experience i like this helment its a little heavy but its practic...i like too the gallet but just to see not too use
Just to echo earlier comments on this thread .. the definition of protection depends upon the scenarios and fire suppression/rescue protocols used. Several years back, we introduced the U.S. version of the Gallet helmet as having a more balanced fit and better protection overall around the head. The model is now offered by other U.S. manufacturers. We have found that the American Fire Service is slow to catch on to this concept, citing that it "looks" too futuristic, too European. Other than that, all NFPA 1971-compliant "traditonal" and "modern" helmets meet or exceed the required levels of protection in accordance with the standard. Other factors are subjective: weight, shell materials (leather vs. composite), durability, looks, color, accessories, etc. Which again begs the question: what are your department's particular needs?
This is from an article in Fire Chief Magazine.
If fire departments don't buy better equipment, manufacturers won't build it. Take the fire helmet. Today's firefighters use the same basic design that their great-grandfathers used. Referring to American-style helmets, a friend from Europe said to me, “You Americans and your cowboy hats. You all think you are John Wayne.” The American fire service seems to be married to the traditional fire helmet. Firefighters burn their ears and these helmets look for any excuse to fall off.
When MSA came out with a safer fire helmet in the 1980s called The Brigade, fire chiefs would not buy them. At least one chief said that while the new design obviously was safer, the helmets looked funny, like they came out of Star Wars. He did not want the helmets even if they were donated because of their appearance. MSA discontinued the line.
My take on the article is that no helmet manufactured in the US provides the 'proper' protection. But I wouldn't want to give up my leather either.
There is no need in my dept. We use this type of helmet, but in my old dept. our commander does not want for example we wore a Gallet, because he said it was not safe in some respects ... But we had a helmet given by the dept. that seemed helmets for children to play! I do not agree with that!
in my current dept. We use this picture of my ... I like this helmet, gives me some security, although a little heavy ... but it is a good helmet!