If communications devices are allowed or demanded in the future, how will the AMA rewrite their rulebook/s to allow communication devices be legally added as accessories to helmets?
Aside: AMA Supercross Championship Rulebook 2.4.2.b already prohibits communication with a moving motorcycle. I’m not talking about that.
AMA Supercross Championship Rulebook:
2.1.3.e. Helmet-mounted cameras, devices or accessories of any type are prohibited.
AMA Racing Rulebook Complete (Amateur):
1.2.F.7.a. All helmets must be intact, and no modification may be made to their construction that alters the helmet from the condition it was tested and approved. The helmet is made to provide protection and is not a platform to attach foreign objects. For example, cameras or other accessories are NOT permitted to be attached to the rider’s helmet.
The Supercross Rulebook demands that riders or teams add the Eject system to their helmets. Some helmets don’t already come with the Eject system installed. An Eject system is an added accessory.
2.1.3.d. Helmets used by Riders in competition must be equipped with the Eject® Helmet Removal System. Riders will be responsible for ensuring that the device is properly installed and operable during all on-track activities. Helmet removal devices and installation information are available at Technical Inspection at all Events.
I think the rules are pretty clear.
And they dont need changing.
They’ll tell everyone at a riders meeting.
Most all comms in motorsport is done with ear pieces, not a speaker in the helmet.
They used them once for monster cup one year so I'm sure there are provisions for in ear communication, just nothing attached to the helmet that could make and injury worse if it catches on the ground and pulls a riders head the wrong way.
The Shop
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
Free shipping: VITALMX
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
One thing's for sure: pit boards (even made of carbon fiber, lol) are totally 20th century.
Have we seen that in motocross or supercross, yet?
https://racerxonline.com/2019/10/14/cardo-systems-radio-to-rider-commun…
Bring back the helmet camera before in helmet comms
The cardo has a jack you can plug ear buds into.
Try passing a factory rider who has comms and six spotters all around the track......
yet... there seems to be one team using it on the down low..... how closely are they inspecting the helmets now days??
but it still has to mount on the helmet? Or do you carry in your pocket and used wired head phones?
any body got the SCOOPS on that info ?
Enketchum, you missed the super-secret rulebook for Monster Energy teams. It says quite clearly in Chapter 86, subsection F, rule B, paragraph 2, line 1 that: Any factory rider, while under the auspices of a Monster Energy-sponsored team may have a working team-to-rider communication system installed in his helmet. It must not be visible and can only be operated while the green lead-in lights are steady or the yellow lead-in lights are flashing, or when the chartreuse flag is flown, but only if a) there is also a downed rider on the track, or b) if there is no hazard on the track; and/or c) the team really wants to use it. Like, really.
Pretty straightforward, actually. Of course, enforcement depends on the AMA Referee.
Well if it’s in the AMA rule book I am sure it would be enforced uniformly across the board
The rule also says that every rider needs the Eject system in their helmets too. That is an AMA approved aftermarket accessory. So they would just change the rule to allow a certain com system. It could be that simple if they want it to. I've worn noise canceling earbuds with a helmet and Bluetooth connection to a cell phone or 2 way radio is possible. So nothing would need to be on the helmet itself. Mount the radio part behind the front plate on the bike or on the opposite fork leg like a transponder. I think it would be possible to do without an increased liability, but I'm not a lawyer.
You may have exposed the true reason for the pushback on the coms. The possibility of liability by adding something to the helmets that has not been tested by the builders of the helmets . Might be that simple. Even wearing the earbuds may worry them as far as liability goes.
I saw Alpinestars has a Alpinestars branded system for their street helmets coming out soon. So maybe if enough off road helmet companies made OEM coms that were tested when they test the helmets that could help bring the coms into racing if liability is stopping them from having them now.
The concern for who would be talking to the riders and pushback from active racers could be the reason .Maybe they have gone to some of the racers and they themselves have said they wouldn't be comfortable given the way they would be used. I know they have tested in the past and they said he riders couldn't always hear well. I think a system that uses some sort of ear bud that is like an earplug would block enough outside noise. I've heard that some riders have said they do not want to have somebody talking to them. Some like to wear ear plugs and not hear much while others prefer no plugs and being able to hear as much as possible around them. And that personal preference was brought up as a part of why they wouldn't make them a mandatory thing too in the past.
best solution is to just allow it. the riders/teams will figure out the best method that works. the rule makers need to just stay out of figuring out the best method. just regulate it if becomes an issue.
No because it’s BS.
the helmet testing and safety approval is only mentioned in the amateur rule book. The pro rule book does not talk about any of that. strange.
I shared the rule about the Eject system. There are several emergency helmet removal systems out there and SImpson makes one that may have been tested inside the helmet, not sure. That's interesting to think about
Who tested the comms in the past?
Pit Row
what issues could you see coming from it?
none. and shouldnt be regulated. but obviously someone has problem with it to not allow it so far..... guessing someone is worried about it causing safety/distraction issues.....
Raceiver one-way systems have been used extensively in the oval racing scene for years. I would like to see these used for quali sessions. About the size of a 20piece pk of gum.
That rule has been around since long before the AMA cared much about rider safety. Back then, you could wear open-face helmets, and the hay bales were made out of real hay.
Maybe someone is NOW thinking about liability and/or rider safety, but I would bet that the rule remains simply because it's easier to leave it alone than to go through the trouble of writing a new rule and thinking about all the contingencies.
Leave the sport alone. It’s one of the most pure forms of racing left on the planet. No outside world communication, just a mechanic and a board. Moto rules.
I am unsure of which riders exactly. But on a Pulp episode somebody from JGR was talking about they trying them. I think it was Coy Gibbs. There was a Monster cup race that they allowed them in too. Again I'm unsure of which riders used them. I know I've heard riders talking about using them in interviews but I can not remember any names right now.
The rule about helmet cams was made after Brian Moreau was hurt and there were questions around the Gopro adding to the injury. So I think there is some focus on liability now . I hadn't though of them not wanting them used from a point of liability until I started to think about the possibility of some crash happening and a part of a com adding to the injury some how.
With the rule in there about accessories that have not been on the helmet while they went through testing it made me wonder about how liability may be a reason for not allowing them now. The liability fears could be any part of that system. The spotter and how they would be insured for advising the riders. They may be unable to get liability coverage for all of the elements that would be required to make coms work.
It seems so strange that they would be so against them. they could monitor the communications to make sure they were not using them to help block riders from passing a clearly quicker racer if that's the fear. Teams could get around that to a degree I'm sure, but I think it would be pretty easy to see if it was happening often and they could penalize the rider in that case.
If it is just the cost of the systems, I would be surprised if they were unable to find a company that makes the coms to sponsor the series with free coms and support for the coms. Cardo has been involved in some testing they did in the past .
https://racerxonline.com/2019/10/14/cardo-systems-radio-to-rider-commun…
I think they should allow helmet mounted GoPros and helmet comms. Why not?
If they allow helmet comms how long before they have Will conducting mid-race interviews?
I was referring to the rule about radio communications, but you are correct; the no helmet cam thing is relatively new.
They stopped allowing helmet cams after Brian Moreau crashed and there was some concern that the camera dug in and made his injury worse than it may have been without it.
Thee are other ways of mounting the cameras that can give a cool view that is similar to the helmet view. I am hoping that they do more with the 360 cameras that Insta360 makes since they are a sponsor. You can do some really wild stuff with them. It would make it possible to have a VR stream and virtual tickets could be offered. Stick a 360 cam on the track in a couple spots and stream itr so people with goggles or FPV headsets could watch and look around .
Post a reply to: Current AMA Helmet Rules Prohibit In-Helmet Communication