Some recent discussions and resulting research, has left me very concerned about whether or not club racing or tech are really prepared to set rules requiring "safer" safety equipment.

More than ever before the effectiveness of safety equipment is extremely reliant on proper installation and use. Some rules require equipment with no reference to installation - often when installation is crucial to effectiveness. How current are those signing off annually on our log books on the sensitivity of the installation to the effectiveness of the equipment that they check off as present? What kind of liability is there for the club when they require equipment but don't provide guidance on installation? "I met the rule and tech signed off that I met the safety requirements of the club and the required equipment increased the degree of my injury!"

For instance the GCR has set out for us that a seven point restraint harness is recommended. However, it then goes on to allow a lot of flexibility in the installation of the sub straps. Besides potentially eliminating any of the additional benefit the design is meant to offer, additional injury can occur from improper installation.

I came across the following describing the proper installation of a 6 point harness in order to gain the benefits from additional control of the lower pelvis during impact:

The 6-point anti-submarine belts should be such that as the straps continue off-from the thighs to the mounting locations, the straps should travel at a 30-degree angle in relationship to the upper thighs. The straps should have at least five inches of separation between them as they pass through the seat. The further the mounts go rearward the greater the separation that is needed, for instance if the 6-point mounts are through the seat back the minimum distance that they can be apart is ten inches. The 6-point mounts should be at least rearward of the driver’s spinal column. The 6- point webbing cannot come through the 5-point access window, but instead should come through its own individual windows. The orientation and the size of the window in the seat should be such that they will allow the belts to travel forward 30 degrees to the upper thighs without obstructions. Lastly be sure to adjust all straps as secure as possible (leaving no slack) before racing in any and all events. Bold emphasis added.[/b]
That is just one example. SFI 38.1 as well as other H&N restraint products have pretty inflexible installation requirements for their products to be effective. The safety equipment can no longer just be present and bolted to the cage or car frame to be safe.

Consider further the warning for the "state of the art" safety harness:
Please Note: the Schroth Double Belt can provide your driver with the state of the art in safety restraints. It can only do this if mounting geometry is Ideal. Modifications to a standard roll cage will probably be necessary, and failure to do these modifications correctly can result in serious driver injury. Please contact us for answers to any of your questions regarding the installation. We are happy to help assist you in achieving an ideal harness installation.[/b]
Some are going to say, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with them, well it is up to the competitor to ensure that the equipment is properly installed. However, that would a pretty convenient stance for the club to take after they make requirements and strong recommendations on which safety equipment to use removing that choice for the competitor and then dumping the choice for installation method on them.

Is the club really ready and prepared to recommend and require all this "safer" safety equipment without requiring and teching proper installation? Especially when each new piece of equipment increasingly has more complex and exotic installation requirements?