Closed Cockpits agreed for 2017

[Tonezone]

Thought I read somewhere that Kimi struggled to get in and out of the cockpit with Halo device.
Apparently the 2017 version will have a hinge fitted to it. One of the criticisms of the fighter style cockpit canopy (the better looking option) is that it's hard to open if the car lands upside down in an accident.
Given that the Halo is meant to have a hinge, I can only imagine that it needs to lift up, so won't that make the Halo useless in a similar event?

I reckon you can have a canopy that slides open like a Mustang P51. The chassis tubs these days are table top flat . A simple rail installation will enable the canopy to slide forward. A roll over hoop above the steering wheel area but outside the canopy, ensures the canopy will have space to slide forward if the car comes to rest upside down.

[FW17]

I don't recall (did not think) the halo being "advertised" as preventing injury in that situation, the focus seemed to be on pieces of cars - not a whole car. I will defer to the explanation of others about the deficiency of the halo in preventing injury in that situation. My biggest problem is that the halo is a bandaid fix that doesn't go far enough. If the drivers require more protection they should be given something that will actually protect them, regardless of aesthetics.

The Halo protection is also meant to stop driver's head against a another car. The Halo will provide some degree of deflection to the object.

While I would argue for a polycarbonate windshield between the chassis and a Halo, and for a gusset to be altered for better vision, I think it is a great start, something that should have been done 5 years back.

It is a band aid but it is set to improve over the years with batter material and fabrication. I quoted some time back that the cockpit side protection in 1995 (specially on the Ferrari) looked very ugly.

[turbof1]

It is a band aid but it is set to improve over the years with batter material and fabrication. I quoted some time back that the cockpit side protection in 1995 (specially on the Ferrari) looked very ugly.

That it doesn't look that ugly today is largely because a loophole back then allowed for a different intepretation. The FIA ultimately wrote the loophole solution in the regulations, but I don't think you'll face a similar situation with the Halo.

[Just_a_fan]

The Halo protection is also meant to stop driver's head against a another car. The Halo will provide some degree of deflection to the object.

If it's strong enough to deflect a flying car, it will be so strong and rigid that it will be like the helmet hitting a solid object anyway. Look at the cockpit sides - they are designed to deflect a flying car and also have several cm of padding on the inside to allow for controlled deceleration of the driver's head. Perhaps that's why the halo sits so far away from the cockpit - any closer risks a fatal head injury from the safety equipment!

The whole thing is just horribly thought through and implemented.

[Just_a_fan]

Thinking through the whole problem, it seems to me that they could just implement the full height side protection that was originally proposed but circumvented by Newey et al. Make the protection come forward sufficiently to fully protect the driver from something coming across the front of the car such as the image of one car over another posted earlier. Sure, the wing mirrors would be obscured but that could be dealt with by the use of virtual mirrors projected in the helmet, backed up by the sort of warning lights that are increasingly common on road cars. A failure of the system would be an enforced pit/retirement requirement. Easy to have telemetry available to the stewards to show if a driver's system fails. A black flag could then be shown. The driver's head would then be fully protected except for a small region at the front - which could be dealt with by a cantilevered hoop to intercept debris. The whole thing would be removable as now so wouldn't present an increased problem for the marshals in the event of an emergency extraction.

[livinglikethathuh]

The whole "canopy" may be jettisonable in the event of a rollover. When a rollover is detected, a spring loaded device can launch away all/part of the canopy so that the driver can get out. The roll hoop is already protecting drivers from the car itself.

Also. If it's debris, car parts etc. that is the consideration, a plexiglass canopy will do the job. F1 front wings are ~10 kg, aircraft canopies are rated for 5 kg frozen chickens flung at 500 kph. Same canopy can probably stop a 10 kg front wing coming at 250 kph. (Same momentum, half the energy)
If it's whole cars (be it other cars(Raikkonen Austria 2015) or the car itself (Bianchi, rest in peace) ) to be stopped by the canopy/halo, well I can't see any solution that can handle so much load without adding 200 kg to the car. LMP1 cockpits can't handle that. Road car A columns can't handle that, either. It's therefore much easier and logical to eliminate that type of threat. Don't allow cranes inside racetracks? Properly enforce double-yellow conditions? Add crash structures onto foreign vehicles on track? Redesign cars so they don't go on top of each other? (Low noses are a factor here) Dunno.
And these things look butt ugly.

[FW17]

Cant wait to see the Red Bull's 'jet fighter' design

Claire Williams says if cockpit protectors are to be introduced in F1 they must suit the look of the cars and has backed Red Bull's 'jet fighter' design but wants all protectors to be given time and thorough testing.

The Williams deputy team principal gave her backing to the cockpit protectors after Ferrari debuted its 'halo' cockpit design on installation laps for both Sebastian Vettel and Kimi Raikkonen during pre-season testing.

The concepts have divided opinion within the F1 paddock with Nico Rosberg and Vettel vocal supporters while Lewis Hamilton and Nico Hulkenberg have held the opposing viewpoint.

Williams has stressed all cockpit concepts are in the very early forms and need testing but having seen various efforts from Ferrari, Mercedes and Red Bull, is a supporter of the Milton Keynes-based team's design as it matches the style of F1 cars.

“I really like Red Bull's jet fighter concept,” Williams said. “If we are going for these new racing cars that are supposed to look futuristic, put a jet fighter type thing around it. I think that is exciting. But then you have to worry about water and condensation and all that kind of stuff. It is still a work in progress.

“I think it is really early stages. I have obviously seen both proposals. They are still in conceptual stage and they are still in full analyse stage with the FIA Institute. Most importantly it is which one provides the most safety for the drivers and until that has been determined I am in total support of whichever concept works best.”

With technical regulations yet to be decided upon for 2017 and beyond, the cockpit protectors are not confirmed to enter the F1 arena but have received a strong backing after the deaths of Justin Wilson and Henry Surtees which are believed could have been avoided with the use of cockpit protectors.
Read more at http://www.crash.net/f1/news/228292/1/w ... 38177sh.99

[theblackangus]

The whole "canopy" may be jettisonable in the event of a rollover. When a rollover is detected, a spring loaded device can launch away all/part of the canopy so that the driver can get out. The roll hoop is already protecting drivers from the car itself.

This will cause (large) flying debris that could be hit by another car/driver. I don't think ejection of the canopy would be a good solutions. At best this could cause other collisions at worst it could eject directly toward another car.

[livinglikethathuh]

You're correct that a jettisoned canopy may be a hazard to another driver. But how often do cars rollover on the track, in the path of other cars? Aren't the cars most likely to have left the track as they start rolling?

[djos]

Any canopy jettisoning system would imo need to be under the control of the driver and track marshals only, it couldn't be automatic for what I think are obvious saftey reasons.

It's prolly far better to simply have a simple release system accessible by both the driver and the marshals.

[RicME85]

Airbags under the bodywork which turn the car into a zorb when deployed

[ringo]

I think the canopy is not a safe design.
We are forgetting that the F1 cockpit is very narrow, unlike other cars with canopies. The cockpit would need to be much wider and longer for the canopy to be a safe solution.
The driver just doesn't have enough freedom to move his limbs and get leverage off the sides of the chassis to take himself out the car.
The driver must be able to demonstrate that he can come out of a burning car in what 15 seconds is it?

The canopy only will work with a lemans LMP sized cockpit.

Other than that the halo is admittedly the best option we have now. It's ugly but it works. Any small object coming through the halo will more than likely be less lethal than a big wheel.

I think my bollard concept is viable option

[ringo]

@ringo,

How about an airbag just ahead of the driver that inflates upwards ? It would definitely help deflect objects, not too useful for anything else tho.

The air bag can be shredded by tyre wires or carbon fiber shards. A solid post i think should be able to deflect most objects.
Or who knows a thick windshield?

[aleks_ader]

Why not just also for sake of low cost modify the existing WEC monokok? Yes it is a bit bulky. But without huge sidepods and the F1 car with super small coke-bottle could look sleek. Also the dimensions of monokok could be very very restricted and tightly regulated. Even the standard "canopy" with "policarbonate" doors would do the magic.

I see here the biggest cons against only with fire and potential poinsoinig due gas exposure (monoxide) or suffocation...

[Mamba]

LMP 1 monocoques are nearly big enough for two drivers. There is plenty of room to shrink them down. In F1 we don't need the ability to race in the car for periods much longer than 2 hours. LMP 1 cars have aircons, water gizmos and a bunch of other stuff beside the driver. I'm pretty sure that F1 designers will be ably to shrink a LMP 1 monocoque to nearly F1 width.

For fast extraction, why does nobody mention that all fighter aircraft have detonation cord (not too sure what the correct name is) down the middle and around the sides of the canopy. If they go off the shatter the entire canopy. If fighter pilots - who more of their body exposed during ejection (when the canopy blows) are safe when the canopy blows, then I am pretty sure that a F1 driver would be more than safe.

There could even be an small explosive device fitted (as already used in fighter aircraft) that explodes at a very high frequency that shatters the canopy in that way.

Canopies are much safer than the HALO idea and there are many PROVEN ways for getting someone out of them fast.

MAMBA