Crash detection/contact alerts built into rider com system

Thanks for posting this and being transparent. I don't see how anyone could question your motives, we all make our own decisions. I ride solo over 90% of the time and carry a PLB but the question is always, what if I can't get to it or am not conscious? I've had my share of crashes that didn't go bad but could have. I don't worry too much about that, but I take riding solo seriously and try to mitigate risk where I can. This intrigues me and I'll look into it more. I assume it works only where a phone would work so that somewhat limits its use to me on adventure trips, but for my weekly training rides it's worth considering. Regardless, these forums exist to share information, thanks for doing that. Cheers.

Thanks for sharing. "What if?..." is a great topic that all riders should ponder seriously before venturing solo away from civilization.  The UCLEAR U-Safe is interesting new technology, and perhaps worth re-posting or requesting a forum admin to move this discussion to the "Gear, Equipment & Tools" sub-forum where others might look for technology like this in the future.

I spent an hour on UCLEAR's website this morning looking at U-Safe and the UCLEAR Motion Infinity comms system that it comes with, then read through the user manual, and then asked myself "what if...?"  What follows is my take on the topic.

First, after watching the video I think it's worth noting that Lucas's "benefit" from U-Safe was secondary at best.  He crashed on an MX track and was immediately discovered by other riders and/or track staff.  U-Safe just alerted his girlfriend that he'd crashed, after which she called the track to learn more about the accident and find out which hospital he was being taken transported to for treatment.  His stated benefit from U-Safe was that someone he knew was at the hospital waiting for him when he got there.  The same thing could have easily have been accomplished with a phone call from riding friends, track staff, or emergency responders.  I'm not saying that U-Safe wasn't convenient for notifying her, but it didn't deliver any quicker or better first response to Lucas after the crash.

Second, I think that U-Safe is a great example of delivering incremental capability and value to existing technology (i.e. GPS-enabled mobile smartphone paired via Bluetooth to a UCLEAR MOTION Infinity helmet comms system.) But there are several potential points of failure and some missing critical features that would keep me from ever considering this as a serious solution for summoning emergency responder services (ERS) while riding solo.  Most notable is the inherent dependency on cellular coverage, inability to summon ERS directly (rather than routing through personal contacts), and lack of tracking capability for others seeking to locate you if you're unconscious, dead, or otherwise unable to move or communicate via the mobile phone.  

The potential technology points of failure in the multi-device multi-communications design also add some risk that U-Safe might not function when you need it. I.e. helmet comms system connected via Bluetooth to a mobile phone with GPS connected to a land-based cellular tower, and the CLEARLink Mobile App must be open and operational on the phone.  The relatively short battery life of most mobile phones and the inability to recharge or replace their batteries on the fly is also a concern.  It's unlikely that any handlebar-mounted phone plugged into the bike's electrical system will remain near the bike in event of a serious crash. Mobile phones, especially the ubiquitous Apple and Android devices required for U-Safe to work, are notoriously fragile devices prone to breaking when inadvertently dropped a few feet onto any solid surface.  Ruggedized cases are available for some of these phones, but they're expensive and bulky, leading most people to avoid them.

That said, U-Safe is a great addition to UCLEAR's helmet comms technology and delivers obvious value for those who are positioned to take advantage of it.  But I wouldn't feel confident depending on it as my primary solution for my own "what if...? scenarios.

FWIW I ride my WR250R and Beta 300 two-stroke in remote and rugged Idaho mountains and desert, mostly solo.  Last year I rode more than 1200 miles of remote singletrack on the Beta alone. (My definition of "remote" is beyond cell coverage and 10 miles or more from the nearest maintained forest or other roads.) The ability to communicate my position, status, and if necessary summon ERS, is on my mind (and my wife's) a lot.  For the past several years I've been using a SPOT Gen3 satellite tracker that supports automatic rider tracking at 10-minute intervals via the internet (for my wife), one-way messaging with 3 pre-programmed user-configurable custom messages, and a dedicated button to summon ERS directly with assistance from SPOT dispatch.  This year I've switched to a Garmin InReach satellite communications system that also provides two-way texting capability and interactive communications ability for ERS via a 24/7 dispatch center dedicated for this purpose.

For general reference, I've copied and pasted the info below from an online article in Sierra Magazine.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rescue Beacons 101

PERSONAL LOCATOR BEACONS (PLBS)

If getting rescued is your only reason for buying a satellite-transmission device, the PLB is a good bet. When activated, it transmits your unique ID code (along with GPS coordinates if your unit has GPS capabilities) to the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center, via the same network of satellites that oceanic vessels have relied on for over 30 years. The AFRCC makes a quick, initial investigation and then dispatches the call to the closest rescue center, often the local sheriff’s department. The PLB’s 406-megahertz signal is stronger than the SEND’s 1610 MHz one, which means that overhead obstructions like cloud cover are less likely to block the transmission. Many PLBs come with a 121.5 MHz homing signal, which rescuers can use as a backup to the GPS coordinates.

Unlike SENDs, PLBs don’t require you to buy a subscription, but you must register your device. Over 50 percent of PLBs are unregistered, making it impossible for authorities to contact the user in cases of accidental activation. These beacons lack the messaging options of a SPOT and the two-way messaging of a DeLorme inReach Explorer, but they’re a cheaper option if you can’t afford two-way communication.

SATELLITE EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION DEVICES (SENDS)

Transmitting on a weaker frequency than PLBs, SENDs rely on newer networks of private satellites and dispatch centers. But popular SENDs like the SPOT Gen3 and the DeLorme inReach Explorer differ from PLBs in their array of functions. The Gen3 has five signaling options, but it only allows for one-way communication: There is no way for the recipient of a message to ask for more details. The Explorer, however, can send and receive text messages via satellite. It’s more expensive than the Gen3, but many guides and rescue professionals believe that two-way communication is the gold standard for this technology. Both SENDs require you to buy a subscription.

CELLPHONES

When you have coverage, cellphones are a useful emergency signaling device. Across the country, dispatch centers are slowly upgrading to “Next Generation 911” technology, which allows them to receive text messages via 911. You can often send and receive texts when reception isn’t good enough for calls. Still, when it comes to dialing 911, not all cellphones are created equal. The CDMA network used by Verizon, Sprint, and Cricket sends GPS coordinates to the 911 center, while the TDMA network used by AT&T and T-Mobile does not. Instead, a TDMA phone estimates your coordinates based on your distance from nearby cellphone towers. The more towers the phone can contact, the more accurate that location will be.