Helmet-cams

Bedshaped

Been watching a lot of cycling accident cams on youtube, trying to educate myself mainly, and it seems pretty much accepted that a helmet cam is 100% needed if you're commuting in London's city centre. In the greater London area for 2014, and out of 0.6m journeys, there were 419 serious injuries and 13 deaths.

watch?v=tBLPb0LzQnA

We don't have statistics of serious injury but in the whole of Dublin there were 3 deaths in 2014.

So as someone who commutes in and out of Dublin city everyday; do you think a helmet camera is an important tool for safety and accountability in Dublin city?

(I'll add that I haven't been in any accidents, although a few close-calls, close passes and left hooks)

Buchaill_Mor

I find Bus and Taxi drivers tend to leave more room when you are obviously wearing a camera. Van drivers are 50/50 if it makes a difference/no difference or verbally abuse you. Personal experience.

Beasty

A helmet cam is not going to protect you (and can actually put you in more danger - Michael Schumacher being a case in hand)

Alanstrainor

I've had a helmet camera for years (3+ I think...maybe longer...) and I'm torn.

I got one because of a bad accident that I claimed for, and it was dragged out for a number of years before a settlement was offered, which I accepted. I felt that it was a very clear and cut case (passenger door opened in moving traffic into my face). But nonetheless it was dragged out. I felt that had there been footage it wouldn't have been.

Since then I have had a camera on my head, in fact I currently ride with one rear facing saddle cam too. But I have had no use for any footage in probably 15,000km commuting over the years. Which is the bit that has me torn. For me it's partially there as a deterrent for any close passing or silly/agro behaviour. And of course it's there for a worst case scenario too.

EDIT:

Beasty wrote: »

A helmet cam is not going to protect you (and can actually put you in more danger - Michael Schumacher being a case in hand)

Ah come on now...

conkennedy

Schuey's cam was mounted on the side of his helmet and that's where he impacted on the rock. It's argued that if the camera was not there, the crush wouldn't have resulted in such a devastating injury. i.e. the camera couldn't "crumple" therefore impacted against his skull causing the severe injury.

Helmets are supposed to break and absorb impact, cameras are not.

Now, back to the topic in question. I think, unfortunately, they are a necessary evil. There's so much negative press about cyclist, and a camera hopefully will capture dangerous activity on the road.

I also believe, as mentioned above, motorists will take more care if they know they are being videoed.

Evidence is everything.

And yes, 99.9% of the time there's nothing to note, but for the other 0.1% they are priceless IMHO.

I've had that 0.1% incident, camera got everything (even though the impact knocked me out and I don't remember what happened before or for the best part of 45 minutes later), the video showed motorist at fault and everything I did was 'textbook rules of the road'. If it wasn't for the video, the incident would have gone unreported.

My own view it the helmet mounted cameras look odd! I use a K-Edge garmin/go-pro mount - much neater, keeps your handlebars much freer!

Chips Lovell

Each to his own. If you want to use one, it's no harm, but I wouldn't agree that they're essential.

The day I find that a helmet-cam (or indeed a helmet) is absolutely necessary for cycling to work is the day I'll start taking the car.