 Poster: A snowHead
|
I am undertaking an Open University Design Project looking at Back protectors for skiers and snowboarders.
The feedback I have received is that beginners feel they don't ski hard enough to warrant wearing back protection, but statistics show that they are more likely to receive back injuries than experienced skiers.
My theory is that because they spend a lot of time standing in the middle of a blue run these injuries mainly occur through collisions.
I am looking at designing a very simple, extremely compact, back protector for less than £50 aimed at on-piste skiers. I am looking for opinions and anecdotes from beginners and experienced skiers/snowboarders to see whether this is a worthwhile venture and what you would expect from such a design.
Please let me know what you think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Pukkascott, interesting project ... and great that you are making sure that it is evidence-based - out of interest, where did you get your stats on back injuries amongst beginners?
I did a lot of personal research on back protectors. My seven year old (then five) was tanking down a steep icy pitch and went down hard backwards onto hardpack - he had tried sideslipping whilst moving fast, and caught an edge. He bruised his spine sufficiently for him to spontaneously wince six months' later when someone picked him up - he said 'ouch, that's my skiing injury'. He had started skiing at 2 and a half, so had skied for two seasons (total of 12 weeks). At that point I thought OK, time for back protection - he had always worn a helmet.
I looked at solid protectors eg Dainese - and visco-polymers such as POC and Forcefield, and foam, such as Head. The visco-polymers are expensive but excellent - lightweight but with a good research base - and the POC ones come in vest form - so no straps to bother small kids and always in the right position when put on. Both he and his sister (now 9) took to their POC VPD vests quickly and easily and wear them all the time. My son has been saved from a nasty injury when hit by a skier who was crossing a junction at high speed - an idiot who was skiing beyond his ability. My son was thrown up in the air in a somersault and landed hard. His back protector sure put in a lot of work on that occasion. He was winded and shocked but otherwise unhurt.
I am concerned at the number of kids who wear 'protectors they will grow into' - parents thinking they are saving money but actually putting their children at risk from protectors which are poorly positioned, ride up, and threaten severe injury to the upper neck as the head articulates over the top edge of the protector (researched incidents of severe injury in Northern US).
This gives you some design parameters - lightweight, properly positioned, sized to fit, kinetic performance underpinned by evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I'd suggest that the reason back protectors are expensive isn't because they are expensive to make, but because it's a relatively small market and they can afford to charge a premium as a result.
Motorcycle back protectors start at around £50 and I'd expect there to be more of them sold than skiing specific ones.
It's a valid project, and one I'd be interested in following.
The mechanics of injury in beginners is key here. IF it's due to impact from collisions, where the speed is a significant factor, then you're probably going to end up with designs similar to what's out there.
IF, however, they are falling at lower speeds, then a beginner's back protector need not be built to withstand the same impacts.
The worst case for this study would be to find that the back injuries in beginners are due to twisting and awkward falls and not impacts. I can imagine these sorts of injuries would not benefit as much from an armour protection, but more like a brace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Existing back-protectors aren't expensive or movement inhibiting when you consider what they are designed for. How many people end up with serious spinal injuries from collisions on beginner slopes however? Don't forget that beginners may also get injured because they aren't fit for skiing/boarding - plenty of opportunity to strain yourself when you haven't learnt to relax into a fall or whatever. I'd argue that they aren't for the odd slipped disc or tweak (uncomfortable as they may be) but prophylactic against life changing injuries which are thankfully rare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| feef wrote: |
| I'd suggest that the reason back protectors are expensive isn't because they are expensive to make, but because it's a relatively small market and they can afford to charge a premium as a result. |
That, would leave the market wide open for our OP to get in on the low end. Low price may help increase sale. If volume picks up, there's plenty of money to be made.
Helping a few skiers to survive nasty collision and some profit. Not a bad idea.
Don't be surprised current high priced back protector manufacturers may lower their price to compete though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Does someone really think that 100-120eur for pretty much best thing you can buy is expensive? Especially considering they last literally forever. And I'm not going into this what they can save you off, but just plain amount of money. Considering ski gloves, which last season or even less, are more then this, I really don't see back protectors as expensive one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pukkascott, I think i'd second what feef has said here. I'd suspect that the majority of beginner collisions take place at relatively low speed, so back protection from that aspect wouldn't be so much of an issue, and that back injuries would probably come from a twisting fall (either from the collision or from some other fall).
Another aspect you may want to consider is people learning park disciplines. Falls are common there and often from height or onto hard objects - some of the nastiest back injuries i've seen resulting from snowsports have been from bad landings from jumps or falls on rails or boxes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the initial responses with some very valid points. I conducted a questionnaire survey before with a mixture of experienced and beginner skiers none of whom wear protectors (unless racing). The major thing stopping beginners from buying a protector was cost.
Currently I am looking at a device that particularly prevents serious spine injury and is priced low enough for beginners (who may not be committed to a life of skiing) to buy it without too much thought. It will be basic but would prevent serious injury from collisions.
Keep the comments coming!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
You can buy motorcycle jackets with built-in back protection. I would look into producing a ski jacket that can take the same. My motorcycle jacket for example (made by buffalo) just has little pockets that can take the back-protecting pads and so it's an optional extra and can easily be removed. I've occasionally wondered why the ski jacket manufacturers aren't doing the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mines built into my rucksack. Added very little to the price of the pack. I always wear it and don't know its there nor does anyone else
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
kieranm, The difference between motorcycle clothing and skiwear is the fit. Motorcycle clothing is usually quite close fitting which ensures protection from injury but also that the armour remains in place. This can be done as motorcycling tends not to be a particularly aerobic "sport" with not much body movement. When you get into rallying, enduro and moto-X then the armour then becomes a layer in itself, normally as a pressure vest or back protector with separate arm and shoulder armour.
With relatively loose skiwear, it's quite likely that the armour will move out of place as the skier moves around. If you were looking at building the armour into skiwear then I'd suggest looking at base-layers with the armour integrated into it. There are some similar to this in concept but it's more to keep the armour in place than to perform as an actual base layer in itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
feef, makes a lot of sense. I must confess that I've often used my motorcycle jacket while skiing though as it has a lot of other practical features (zip in/out thermal and waterproof layers for example) and haven't found the closeness of fit to be problem. I think I prefer it in fact to the more loose cut of ski jackets. Ladies' jackets seem to have a more shaped fit (and all the best colours) so perhaps it is just men's jackets that are looser.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FWIW I wear mountain bike 'body armour' when skiing, mainly for the shoulder protection (I've previously damaged my rotator cuff in a fall), and this has got a spine protector with it. However, I have removed the spine board as it makes wearing a rucksack difficult.
I am pleased to say that the elbow protection worked when I slipped over walking through Kaprun, and I do feel slightly guilty about the scratches I may have left on a car as my skis landed against it. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
feef, is correct here, body armour for both motorcycle and MTB use has to be snug fitting so it doesn't move about. If hard plastic armour moves about it can actually cause injury after a fall (so I was told by my motorbike shop).
I use full, waist up body armour with back protector for bike, mtb and skiing, not because I'm a lunatic, but because I'm self-employed. I am certain the elbow pads have saved me on multiple occasions and I never ski without it now even if I do look like robocop in the cafe at lunch!
Having said that, I'd not but hard armour again as one is supposed to replace it after a fall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Id agree with Richard_Sideways about the Park skills element, my friend broke his back in 2 places at Xscape last year by falling off a box and landing on his back bottom. He had those padded shorts on too but they didnt do any good. Ive got another friend too who fractured a vertebrate in a similar fall. Both were early intermediate boarders.
Personally I usually just have a rucksack with several layers in that softens any blows, its just when its full of cheap bottles of French lager that its an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
gixxerniknik, +1 for the Robocop look.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Pukkascott wrote: |
I am undertaking an Open University Design Project looking at Back protectors for skiers and snowboarders.
The feedback I have received is that beginners feel they don't ski hard enough to warrant wearing back protection, but statistics show that they are more likely to receive back injuries than experienced skiers.
My theory is that because they spend a lot of time standing in the middle of a blue run these injuries mainly occur through collisions.
I am looking at designing a very simple, extremely compact, back protector for less than £50 aimed at on-piste skiers. I am looking for opinions and anecdotes from beginners and experienced skiers/snowboarders to see whether this is a worthwhile venture and what you would expect from such a design.
Please let me know what you think. |
OK - we ski with a backpack that has a back protector built in - Deuter. Have done for some years, mostly influenced by Snowhead 'Snowcrazy' who made the point that youngsters often play in the snowpark and may be at greater risk of back injury. Now we all use the same packs - it has just become part of the 'uniform' like a helmet.
Good luck with the research.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I'm your typical one week a year piste skier. I usually ski with my wife and two kids (11&13). To be honest I had never heard of back protectors until a few months back when I read about them on here. I think that I am still a long way from going down the back protector route for any of us. With the very significant exception of arseing about in a snow park I have never considered that the risk of a back injury was significant enough to worry about. Like most people a helmet is a relatively recent addition to my ski wardrobe. I don't want close fitting clothes. I really don't want a backpack. And whenever possible I will ski in a T-shirt alone.
So, for me and my family I am not likely t consider a back protector. Supposing, for the sake of argument, that ski hire shops were to throw them in with the rental 'for free' then I still doubt I/or my family would use one. This may well be very naive, but that is my current view.
| Quote: |
I'd suggest that the reason back protectors are expensive isn't because they are expensive to make, but because it's a relatively small market and they can afford to charge a premium as a result.
|
Not sure the logic here is correct. If supply is constrained then prices can be pushed artificially high. However, if the market is small (demand is constrained) then charging a premium is unlikely to be an option. Small market, limited economies of scale, higher fixed costs. I suspect that they charge more because they NEED to charge more.
A low price competitor like Pukkascott, without manufacturing or distribution clout may really struggle to compete. Just plucking stats and thoughts out of the air, but I can't imagine that the UK market for back protectors is currently more than about 1,000 per annum. Retail price of £50 = wholesale price of £25. You might need to manufacture them for £15 to cover operating costs. This gives you an operating profit of £10 per item. £10 multiplied by 1,000 units = £10,000 Take away any initial design, tooling costs, and a couple of trips to China and it's unlikely to be worth the effort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Incidentally, most of the skiing back protectors for sale on the web seem to be in the £20-£50 range anyway.
| Quote: |
My theory is that because they spend a lot of time standing in the middle of a blue run these injuries mainly occur through collisions.
|
I can't help feeling that serious back injuries are comparatively unlikely to occur like this. Surely the direct impact in these instances is more likely to be to knees, hips, shoulders etc. The only time I might worry about hurting my back would be when I was moving fast and went down bum first in a schuss or similar. Same applies to my children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| foxtrotzulu wrote: |
| Quote: |
I'd suggest that the reason back protectors are expensive isn't because they are expensive to make, but because it's a relatively small market and they can afford to charge a premium as a result.
|
Not sure the logic here is correct. If supply is constrained then prices can be pushed artificially high. However, if the market is small (demand is constrained) then charging a premium is unlikely to be an option. Small market, limited economies of scale, higher fixed costs. I suspect that they charge more because they NEED to charge more. |
When you look at the kit provided by t he big name manufacturers such as Dainese, for example, you'll see that it's the same stuff with a different colouring and maybe a different fabric next to the skin, but the pricing is different for different markets. The pricing is set at what they believe the market can withstand, it's not really about undercutting the competitors as much as them all making the most out of it while it's still a relatively small market. If you're only going to sell 50 white back protectors rather than 150 black ones, then charge more. Not because of economies of scale, but because you can.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
True, up to a point. Usually it works the other way around. If you cant sell the 150 units but can only shift 50, then the normal approach is to reduce your price and sell more. Your approach suggests that rather than Pukkasott producing low cost items he should accept that the market is inelastic and produce even more expensive higher quality goods.
However, from a quick glance around the web teo thoughts occur to me:
1. Ski back protectors are not especially expensive. They seem to start at around £18 and go up to £260 with the media price being around £60.
2. Ski and motorbike spine protectors appear to be much the same price.
Pukkascott, If I were you I would save your money. The market you describe does not yet exist. Even if you are just ahead of the curve then you will have to create the demand (at significant cost) and there is nothing you can do to compete with the big boys. They have the manufacturing clout, tooling, marketing, distribution. In addition, if we all decided we needed back protectors to ski on piste why would we not go and buy the existing protectors that already sell for well under £50? Apologies for being rather negative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
foxtrotzulu, loke you and outside park use or snowboards who have a very different fall profile, I am not at all sure they are a must use bit of kit for skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| foxtrotzulu, loke you and outside park use or snowboards who have a very different fall profile, I am not at all sure they are a must use bit of kit for skiing. |
Agree & not even particularly for snowboards as it's most likely coccyx or neck (from whiplash) that would be impacted in a typical heelside fall. If you think the type of skiing you do might have you slamming into trees or rocks or long slides from speed on firm pistes maybe worth considering. None of that is a beginner market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Thanks again all. Here are some comments on them.
This is a design project that is not necessarily going through to production, indeed part of the process is discovering if the design is economically sound. As foxtrotzulu points out, most back protectors are now discounted but two months ago they were selling at full price. The challenge here not to make profit but to produce a product that will save a small proportion of people from major back injury at very low cost.
I wear a back protector on my motorbike (self-employed like gixxerniknik) and have worn it skiing the last two years since a friend of mine fractured vertebrae in a crash. I have never had a back injury from skiing but if I do I want to minimise the damage, if only to carry on working.
Putting protection in a ski jacket was rejected as an idea because a) as feef points out, the jackets are loose fitting and the armour may not be in the right place and b) my survey revealed that skiers do not want to be restricted in their choice of jacket and feel that the colour of a jacket is more important than having protection!
Foxtrotzulu is also right that the majority of injuries on the piste are to knees and hips, but it is surprising how high the percentage of back injuries are. Have a look at page 43-44 of this report from the The Swiss Council for Accident Prevention http://www.bfu.ch/PDFLib/1798_75.pdf [10% for those who wish to skip the report]
In this report helmet wearing has gone up from 16% in 2002/3 to 84% in 2011/12, but wearing back protection has only increased by 12% in the same period.
Hope this answers some of the questions and gives my reasons for doing this.
Please keep the comments coming as they are all very useful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting report. Particularly interesting that the share of head injuries has not decreased despite the increase in helmet wearing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| foxtrotzulu wrote: |
| Interesting report. Particularly interesting that the share of head injuries has not decreased despite the increase in helmet wearing. |
Not really... There's been a corresponding increase in the aspects of the sport with the highest risk of injury, i.e. park and freestyle, so the proportion will stay roughly the same
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
feef, trust me, I wasn't suggesting helmets are not a great idea. I had just assumed the proportion of head injuries would fall.
I have seen more injuries in snow parks in the last 2 years than in 35 years of piste skiing. Who on earth thinks it's a good idea to stick a dirty great steel rail in the middle of a nice soft piste?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
foxtrotzulu, probably the same sick minds that bemoan the excessive grooming, and lament the loss of the mogul fields. The attraction, number and quality of parks will only increase after next olympics if the new slopestyle competitions take off, particularly among the UK tourist travellers if Team GB perform well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Richard_Sideways, what's "sick"about enjoying the demands of ungroomed pistes and lovely bumps?
Man up.
feef, has there? I'm unconvinced. Show me the numbers.
Btw - clear message from Swiss stats.
Do not toboggan.
I wear a helmet and it has saved me from about a dozen unpleasant encounters with skis in the street this season. Well worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| under a new name wrote: |
feef, has there? I'm unconvinced. Show me the numbers.
|
I don't have figures, but I'll frequently see an ambulance attending at the SnowDome on freestyle night, when I never see one attending on other nights when the terrain features aren't in use.
It sounds like a useful study actually, I might add it to my todo list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Hi Pukkascott,
Just to pop a couple of thoughts out there for you, there are already a number of sub £50 spine guards on the market, plus also base layers which have built in protection for the spine and other key areas of the upper body, these are also sub £50. The additional costs which most people look to have missed are approval and certification of these products, this costs money and is also a necessity if you want to retail them.
| Quote: |
A low price competitor like Pukkascott, without manufacturing or distribution clout may really struggle to compete. Just plucking stats and thoughts out of the air, but I can't imagine that the UK market for back protectors is currently more than about 1,000 per annum. Retail price of £50 = wholesale price of £25. You might need to manufacture them for £15 to cover operating costs. This gives you an operating profit of £10 per item. £10 multiplied by 1,000 units = £10,000 Take away any initial design, tooling costs, and a couple of trips to China and it's unlikely to be worth the effort.
|
I think you might find that the production costs in China or far east are less than this, the market these days is world wide so production runs would be in the 10's of thousands, plus there is another factor in pricing which is the distribution, you have Factory first, then Company, then Distributor, followed finally by retailer, you can of course skip these and just sell direct but it would be difficult to do this unless you had an outlet that was geared up for it.
The other point worth noting is that the larger companies are not as interested in cheap solutions to the problem as there is not enough money in it, as an example if you had a production run of 100,000 units and aimed to sell at £25 you would need to get the manufacturing costs down to about £3 (not impossible) this might give you as the company approx. £1 to 2£ profit per item which would be worth while.
If you have a great idea come design then it maybe better to license it to one of the big boys, then site back and enjoy £1 for every item sold much easier way of making money 
My own personal solution would be to have something totally different to solve the problem, such as Spine protection on a roll, cut to size then stick on, super cheap to produce 
Good luck with the project
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Ahh how we all love silly season... The smell of freshly frayed nerves, and the first buds of a fresh crop of helmet threads...
Oh to be on Snowheads, now that spring is here...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Hi Livetoski. Part of this module (this is a Design Diploma as part of a degree in Technology) is looking at all the marketing issues and we look at a lot of examples of innovations and how they got to market. Unless your name is Dyson you are extremely unlikely to get anything to market in great numbers by yourself and most inventors get to the point when they hand the job over to companies with an established network.
However schemes like Kickstarter are bringing some independence back to the market and I am looking forward to receiving a gadget soon that I invested in 18 months ago.
Whether my idea (2 of them at the moment) is economically viable or not is part of the module (but I don't fail if it's not!). Either way I promise I will show it here after the course is completed and will wear the final prototype in Tignes next year!
Back to the drawing board.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Pukkascott, Pebble?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
feef, Pebble???????
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Yes, Pebble. Christmas list #4.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pukkascott, I got mine a few weeks ago. I'm not disappointed 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
