Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Isabel Ziegler on February 8, 2011 at 10:03am

this is the last fire helmet concept!

Attachments:

• fire_page4.1.pdf, 1.1 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brandon Brichetto on February 8, 2011 at 10:34am

The first one has the best design..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Isabel Ziegler on February 8, 2011 at 10:41am

thanks guys what specific things about the first concept do you like??

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on February 8, 2011 at 11:24am

In my opinion helmets can be placed into one of there (very) general categories:
1) Typical American leather New Yorker style (leather and leather/composite variants)
2) Composite/thermoplastic *tupperware* helmet
3) European Style composite/thermoplastic (some with full head enclosure)

The PASS device is now required to be integrated with the SCBA so then when the air is turned on the PASS is activated automatically. (NIST is testing a wireless device that, once the PASS is activated sends a signal to the IC alerting IC to a possibly mayday.)

Your suggestion of moving, or somehow incorporating the PASS to the helmet means, at present that there would need to be a hardwired connection from the PASS to the helmet. This means another potential snag. Also if there is a connection from the PASS to the helmet there is a greater possibility of it being severed and thereby eliminating the necessary speaker.

The PASS device is loud enough, placing a speaker on the helmet could block out the voices of firefighters searching for the FF and likely make hearing any radio transmission impossible.

A light on the helmet would only be visible in situations where the visibility is good. I can't say statistically but most likely in many mayday instances the FF is going to be down in a zero visibility environment. In zero visibility even the big box lights may penetrate no further than a foot or so.

So other than attempting to slightly modify the appearance of the helmet (for the sake of modifying the helmet) I don't see any real advancement in terms of safety or comfort. Just my opinion.

P.S. the "ridges" are technically called 'combs".
P.p.s. None of what I wrote is to imply that changes can't be made, only that they should be relevant. I would posit that the helmet offers the following:
a) protection from falling objects/material
b) thermal protection
c) shed water
d) style/tradition
Of the four mentioned, the last is the most flexible.
Subsets might include:
*weight
*ease of donning/doffing
*streamline profile

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Isabel Ziegler on February 8, 2011 at 12:04pm

Thank you so much, I really appreciate all of your feedback.
I was basing all of my concepts off of the initial feedback from my original interviews. The firefighters that I spoke to told me that they really like the Traditional old school full-leather helmets. I wanted to keep that style. I changed the shape a little and tried incorporating the different features they said they would like. Do you think it would be a pain to have a small wire/ wireless system to have the PASS on the helmet?
Would the pouches on the helmet be useful to you?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Severa on February 8, 2011 at 12:05pm

I like 1 or 4 but agree 1 is the best.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on February 8, 2011 at 12:18pm

Based on your designs, the nails would be nearly impossible to remove wearing structural firefighting gloves as the nail head sits flush to the leather pouch. With the door chocks it's a similar situation, not much of the chock to grab.

My thought is that with the nail and chock pouches stitched to the helmet that over time they could become loose/unstitched, how would that affect the rest of the leather? Also being an integral part of the helmet, in my mind adds yet another snag potential. I use a piece of rubber strap, its elasticity keeps the chocks in place and could at least be cut should it snag.

As for a wireless PASS device it needs to be at least as fails safe as the present ones, and needs to be integrated with the SCBA to activate when the bottle is opened. Going wireless would entail an extensive amount of testing, not to mention the additional expense. The helmet would have to be married to a specific SCBA/PASS manufacturer or, have universal standards put in place so it functions across all makes. Then there's the issue of interference with/from other units, radios, microwaves etc. Personally I'm not sure what would be gained by doing so nor do I see any advantage to having the speaker on the helmet.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tyrone Carr on February 8, 2011 at 2:06pm

hmm, I like concept 1, it would be nice to see your badge holder idea

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason on February 8, 2011 at 4:49pm

Some nice designs.
Keep in mind that any LEDs you put into a fire helmet are going to get destroyed through dropping, abrasion, impacts etc...

The leather pouches are kinda mehh.. Not everyone puts stuff on helmets are puts different things on them. For instance, I don't put my wedges in my helmet and do not carry nails at all.

A pass device integrated would be neat but very hard to fit into a helmet. Besides, if the helmet needed to be replace, you'd have to replace the pass device and vice versa.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Todd on February 8, 2011 at 7:18pm

Not only the noise factor, but even though it's likely not a lot of weight you are adding weight to the helmet. The more weight you add to your helmet the greater the chance of injury, and certainly it's going to cause fatigue.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kenneth R Drum on February 9, 2011 at 7:12am

I wear a MSA Entry Helmet with a rubber bill on the back .. I love this helmet ... It is a shame I can find no more of these ...
Every one laughed at this helmet when I first started wearing it ... Now Everyone wants one .... To bad ...I can not even find a second one for myself ....
It is lighter and reduces fatige caused by most modern helmets ...

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion