Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
stefan_ wrote:Looks better than the halo, but it is still a piece of crap.
Mind my harsh language, but I truly believe that the essence of F1 is open wheels and open cockpits racecars that are driven by men who understand danger and who know what they are signing up to when they decide to be racing drivers. We can see where the level of safety has reached by looking at Alonso's crash, and nowdays a fatality or a serious injury is a freak accident, something that would happen in one-out-of many many chances due to misfortunate elements combined in one moment.
I think other issues are more urgent and need to be adressed, because Formula 1 nowdays is sick. Very sick.
I have raced go-karts for 7 years - I had wheels in my face/head, other racers crash into me and climb on me, spin me, throw me in walls at various speeds. It was dangerous, I could have sustained serious injuries, but it was damn fun and I'll do it all over again if I had the chance.
"I will miss Gilles for two reasons. First, he was the fastest driver in the history of motor racing. Second, he was the most genuine man I have ever known. But he has not gone. The memory of what he has done, what he achieved, will always be there." J. Scheckter
The screen looks no better than the halo, to me. In fact I think I prefer the halo look, if we're forced to have one or the other. But we'll see where it goes. Both concepts have room for aesthetic improvement. I do think head protection is a good step even if it's a bit painful to look at.
This is how unpopular changes are usually pushed through: First show an option that is too hideous to look at (the Ferrari halo), and the soften it up with someting slightly better, the aeroscreen.
I know the FIA doesn't care, but F1 should not go down this route. It looks terrible, takes away from the long tradition of Formula racing and will add even more weight to already overweight cars.
If you want to eliminate danger, put all the drivers behind a Playstation and broadcast the thing on Twitch.
IMHO it doesn't look bad and It's a lot more aesthetically appealing than the halo. I could get used to it without problem. Applause for RBR for making it happen. =D>
Massive preference for the Red Bull aero screen solution. Definitely the best solution from a aesthetic and functional POV. Great to see a team pushing forward the boundaries of F1 for the broader team community.
I for one really would be more interested in viewing the Red Bull solution next year.
I don't think the halo would look as bad as the thing Ferrari tried. They deserve respect for getting the ball rolling and Red Bull deserves respect for trying to make a better looking solution. Ferrari basically threw some carbonfibre together and Red Bull made a whole design. If teams have to run it they will also look at aero and connect it in a smoother way to the chassis.
They might as well change a lot of the aero/chassis regulations to integrate a more composite solution that is not just a "bolt on" safety feature, but an integral part of the chassis for both safety reasons as well as aero concerns.. Might as well go the way of LMP1/2 designs at this point... I'm just afraid the last 3-5yrs or so have taken away from our beloved F1 as a "true" open wheel motorsport at it's highest pedigree... The looks have changed, then the engine and sound, and now this... Death still occurs in closed cockpits and at lower speeds...
How do we feel about Jenson's comment that the aeroscreen will obviously affect the aero a lot if introduced next year, something that Red Bull have "probably been testing a lot lately"?
If it were to be introduced, just how much of an advantage could Red Bull receive from having an extra few months to play with models of it attached? Could they secretly have a "Plan B" 2017 model car sitting in a workshop in case their idea is taken up?
OneAlex wrote:How do we feel about Jenson's comment that the aeroscreen will obviously affect the aero a lot if introduced next year, something that Red Bull have "probably been testing a lot lately"?
If it were to be introduced, just how much of an advantage could Red Bull receive from having an extra few months to play with models of it attached? Could they secretly have a "Plan B" 2017 model car sitting in a workshop in case their idea is taken up?
Well it's a standarized component in a neo-standarized environment (the tub). Aerodynamically it will not be hard to find what's going on and how for instance flow to the rear wing is changed.
The bigger issue lies with the airbox in the roll hoop: that's probably where Red Bull might get an advantage since that area is the most compromised as it's vital to supply the turbo and engine with oxygen, as well as auxilliary cooling. Adapting this area requires a new tub, which is difficult mid season. So if you get it wrong, you have a big problem.
A lot will depend on how further testing goes and how negotiations will go about the adaptation. Ironically, it would have been better if it was fully closed as that eased the issue with the airbox. Still, quick to use solutions like vortex generators aimed at the airbox might solve the problem easily if allowed.
This is the future. My only concern would be drivers taking more risks under certain circumstances, causing a bigger accident than what can happen now.
Education is that which allows a nation free, independent, reputable life, and function as a high society; or it condemns it to captivity and poverty.
-Atatürk
IMHO even if the aeroscreen looks better than the Halo, it isn't better for Formula 1. Most (all?) of the car competitions that has "Formula" in their names have two common characteristics: open cockpits and uncovered tyres. The pilot, in my opinion, must at least receive air on the helmet and not to be in a semi-closed environment.
This is my consideration about this topic if I have to accept that one of the two solutions is going to be adopted, but what I'm really thinking is this:
stefan_ wrote:Looks better than the halo, but it is still a piece of crap.
Mind my harsh language, but I truly believe that the essence of F1 is open wheels and open cockpits racecars that are driven by men who understand danger and who know what they are signing up to when they decide to be racing drivers. We can see where the level of safety has reached by looking at Alonso's crash, and nowdays a fatality or a serious injury is a freak accident, something that would happen in one-out-of many many chances due to misfortunate elements combined in one moment.
I think other issues are more urgent and need to be adressed, because Formula 1 nowdays is sick. Very sick.
I have raced go-karts for 7 years - I had wheels in my face/head, other racers crash into me and climb on me, spin me, throw me in walls at various speeds. It was dangerous, I could have sustained serious injuries, but it was damn fun and I'll do it all over again if I had the chance.
... and what I'm really hoping for is that everything remains as it is.
Putting the Halo/aeroscreen on Formula 1 cars would be like putting training wheels on MotoGP bikes: it could be safer, but it wouldn't be the same sport.
it's called advancement. F1 USED to be VW-beetle-narrow-tired vehicles without wings, without seatbelts, with engine in the front and the driver a non-athletic balls-to-the-walls rich guy with a jacket and a simple helmet and goggles. it advanced from that to seatbelts, helmets, fireproof clothing, neck protection, hans device.
where is the line? why would a protective screen be less 'f1' then a super-advanced survival cell with side impact protection and all additional materials to safeguard the life of an athlete?
look at how advanced F1 has become with Alonso's crash. do we refrain from calling F1 F1 because Alonso did not die, and the technology implemented today actually works? is F1 less dangerous because of it? I dont support the notion that safety should not be implemented and advanced within F1.
i do believe the safety additions should be added for a viable reason. Being hard, i don't think the death of Bianchi actually is decent 'finger' top point to implement this device. That doesn't take away that it is a bad idea to engage in this direction. The bianchi 'incident' is to be blamed on the promotors and charlie whiting. the race should never had taken place at that hour, or atleast should have been flagged many laps earlier. That is the real cause for Bianchi's death. the wet track, the possible mechanical engine jamming from anti-stall, and the non-presence of the safety car in combination with a recovery vehicle were the means. but the cause was the race was going under away still.
this aeroscreen would not have saved bianchi's life. bianchi's face/helmet was not crushed against the side of the vehicle or anything like that. we know the actualy injury so i'll leave it at that.
it does however protect the driver from wheels flying around - even though the technology to prevent wheels from coming off was clearly well executed in the alonso incident. the screen is able to protect the driver from massa-like injuries, from cars sliding on top and potentially crushing the driver. grosjean/alonso, alonso/raikkonen, etc.
not the least, with f1 cars being as advanced today, i think there's the additional thing that drivers take more risks. so we'll always have advancements in safety features.
imagine in 10 years f1 cars having a driver capsule. they'll go all-out and the next step is that the 'safety cell' needs to be enlarged as there are possibly going to be more bianchi-like [not as extreme hopefully] injuries : damage through overly fast decellaration. So in 10 years you can expect the crumble zones need to be enlarged.
and then we haven't even touched the still-ever-present dangers of electrocution.
i feel like that is a danger being around the corner like f1 drivers have been burned to death a long decades ago. many times it never happened. nothing happend. untill it happened. and then, change came. i sincerely hope that is never going to happen but i feel it's a danger around the corner.
so i think safety is something that really does deserve it's presence in F1. if you don't advance, you go back and we're going to have to carry another F1 driver to the grave.
for that matter, i do welcome this aeroscreen. because we don't want to see another F1 driver dead. I don't want to see Alonso's career being halted by the back end of a sauber squashing his face to pulp in his helmet becuase there wasn't a screen in front for the reason people think it turns F1 into a p*ssy-sport.
i don't want Verstappen at the beginning of his F1 career terminated by a axle hammered into his visor if there would have been a screen to protect him from that.
It's bad enough there isn't a Bianchi in a Ferrari batteling for the victory next year against a Verstappen or an Alonso in a Mclaren-Honda.
so again - give me a properly developed windscreen and i'm game.
stretch the roll-hoop pillar to the height where the camera pod is on top now and have the camera mounted inside the rol hoop opening instead and there's enough space for the driver to exit the vehicle.
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"
