Closed Cockpits agreed for 2017

[Neno]

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..

Being today F1 driver is one of safest jobs on the planet Earth, maybe even in fricking universe. There is actually more chance you die in library by shell of books than you die driving F1 car and it flips 10x times . It is a p*ssy sport. If we argued about F1 in 20th century it would be different thing.

[Nathanael F1]

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..

Being today F1 driver is one of safest jobs on the planet Earth, maybe even in fricking universe. There is actually more chance you die in library by shell of books than you die driving F1 car and it flips 10x times . It is a p*ssy sport. If we argued about F1 in 20th century we would different things.

What is wrong with F1 being "one of safest jobs on the planet Earth"? Does that mean there is no room for an improvement in safety? No! As long as there is a chance of someone being hurt, there is more to be done with regards to safety.

[Andres125sx]

^ This, and add to that I don´t know many jobs where you can break your ribs, crash so hard to loose consciusness, or die (Bianchi). How many people died in a library by shell of books since Bianchi´s death? What´s the percentage compared to people who has been in libraries in that time? Please stop the bs

Also, to me anyone saying risk is part of F1 is extremely immature, risk has always been a part of racing only because we didn´t know how to solve it. If we know how to solve it we´d be utterly irresponsible if not doing it

As a construction manager this always remind me some conversations I frequently had on construction sites, with labourers claiming they´re not going to use the helmet because they´re working on construction sites for more time than I´m alive and never suffered an accident. I always reply the same, those who are 2m under the ground also never suffered an accident, until they suffered it

If you know how to solve something wich can be dangerous, you´d be like an irresponsible adolescent if you don´t do it. Adult people do not assume any risks wich can be prevented, that´s something for adolescents who need to prove theirselves how brave they are.

Racing is about competing and being fastest, not about assuming unnecessary risks. If that´s what excites you, then ignore F1 and play russian roulette

[Neno]

^ This, and add to that I don´t know many jobs where you can break your ribs, crash so hard to loose consciusness, or die (Bianchi). How many people died in a library by shell of books since Bianchi´s death? What´s the percentage compared to people who has been in libraries in that time? Please stop the bs

Also, to me anyone saying risk is part of F1 is extremely immature, risk has always been a part of racing only because we didn´t know how to solve it. If we know how to solve it we´d be utterly irresponsible if not doing it

As a construction manager this always remind me some conversations I frequently had on construction sites, with labourers claiming they´re not going to use the helmet because they´re working on construction sites for more time than I´m alive and never suffered an accident. I always reply the same, those who are 2m under the ground also never suffered an accident, until they suffered it

If you know how to solve something wich can be dangerous, you´d be like an irresponsible adolescent if you don´t do it. Adult people do not assume any risks wich can be prevented, that´s something for adolescents who need to prove theirselves how brave they are.

Racing is about competing and being fastest, not about assuming unnecessary risks. If that´s what excites you, then ignore F1 and play russian roulette

same as in f1, one. and that's atleast one.
http://abc7chicago.com/archive/9464006/

[Andres125sx]

^ This, and add to that I don´t know many jobs where you can break your ribs, crash so hard to loose consciusness, or die (Bianchi). How many people died in a library by shell of books since Bianchi´s death? What´s the percentage compared to people who has been in libraries in that time? Please stop the bs

Also, to me anyone saying risk is part of F1 is extremely immature, risk has always been a part of racing only because we didn´t know how to solve it. If we know how to solve it we´d be utterly irresponsible if not doing it

As a construction manager this always remind me some conversations I frequently had on construction sites, with labourers claiming they´re not going to use the helmet because they´re working on construction sites for more time than I´m alive and never suffered an accident. I always reply the same, those who are 2m under the ground also never suffered an accident, until they suffered it

If you know how to solve something wich can be dangerous, you´d be like an irresponsible adolescent if you don´t do it. Adult people do not assume any risks wich can be prevented, that´s something for adolescents who need to prove theirselves how brave they are.

Racing is about competing and being fastest, not about assuming unnecessary risks. If that´s what excites you, then ignore F1 and play russian roulette

same as in f1, one. and that's atleast one.
http://abc7chicago.com/archive/9464006/

When there are about 1 million times more people on libraries along the year than on F1 tracks, so it´s around 1 million times safer

[void]

I think that Aeroscreen is a better choice than Halo. Halo is a good device for big debris like tires, nosecones but Aeroscreen is provides better safety by being effective on small debris like springs. But both are not effective in a crash like Bianchi had.
In Massa's accident, if he was using Halo maybe the spring could be deflected into his chest and killed him. We are all thinking about big debris, but the small ones can be even more dangerous.

[ME4ME]

Martin Brundle:

They are certainly lucky to be driving such safe cars given that a trip to the wall mostly involves a rush onto the radio button to throw expletives to the team rather than a rush to hospital. And that's a good thing, those many fiery, gory sacrifices over the decades have enabled that. The big questions remain, are F1 cars safe enough now? And does F1 need risk to be attractive to fans?

I'm in the Niki Lauda camp in that I believe the tracks and cars are safe enough, as Niki said to me on the grid we mustn't lose the DNA, the essence of the sport. He's earned the right to that opinion. Open wheel, open cockpit, revered gladiators at the helm.

Fernando Alonso said over the weekend that 'F1 doesn't need heroes' and I totally disagree with him. That's exactly what F1 needs.

On the safety front, first and easily foremost it's about the fans trackside. They are attending and paying to be entertained, not injured or killed, and every effort is and must be made to protect them.

Next up are the marshals and track workers, the event simply couldn't run without their skills and participation, they are mostly unpaid volunteers and likely incurring costs, and they deserve total protection within the reality of their situation close to the cars, and the utmost respect from the drivers.

After that we have the pit crews and those on the pitwall. To an extent they are aware they at taking risks, and there will occasionally be injuries, but I believe all reasonable efforts are made to minimise this along with regular reviews.

Finally the drivers. When you step into or over the side of a racing car you must be aware that you may be injured, paralysed, or killed. If you're not prepared to take that much reduced risk then don't do it. A driver can expect all reasonable efforts to be made such that he can walk away from the vast majority of big crashes, and we clearly have that in F1.

I believe the cockpit closures will create as many safety issues as they solve, are ugly and heavy, and not particularly suitable to filter down to junior racing.

So does there have to be risk? Does it matter if it's more dangerous to drive to a GP venue than drive in it? As far as I'm concerned it does.

If the canopies were optional you know exactly how many drivers would use them. I asked a few paddock people over the weekend an extreme question because I was interested in the answer. If we had a ten lap qualifying race where seat belts were banned how many drivers would take part? What do you personally think?

The cockpit closure will almost certainly appear because liability scenarios will now mandate it. Then something else will happen until finally we have to take the driver out of the car to avoid any further injuries.

I have no data to back this up but I believe that if you cycle to work, ski the slopes, ride your motorbike and suchlike you are taking as many risks as a modern-day Formula 1 driver. But at least you don't have the chore of that champagne-soaked podium to put up with.

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/24096/ ... ore-heroes

I agree with him to a large extent. However a full cover canopy like the MP4-X or RB201X is still my favorite alternative. I hate F1 going with these stop-gap alternatives like the Halo and Aeroscreen.

[dmjunqueira]

Martin Brundle:
Fernando Alonso said over the weekend that 'F1 doesn't need heroes' and I totally disagree with him. That's exactly what F1 needs.

IMHO, F1 may need heroes, but not martyrs.

Hypothetically, If you were psychics and had the chance to put a protection in front of Senna's or Wilson's cockpit before their fatal accidents...Wouldn't you do it?

[ME4ME]

Martin Brundle:
Fernando Alonso said over the weekend that 'F1 doesn't need heroes' and I totally disagree with him. That's exactly what F1 needs.

IMHO, F1 may need heroes, but not martyrs.

Hypothetically, If you were psychics and had the chance to put a protection in front of Senna's or Wilson's cockpit before their fatal accidents...Wouldn't you do it?

All of those who raced then, and those who do now choose to accept the danger they put themselves in. What has happened is unfortunate, your question irrelevant.

Over the years F1 and other single seater categories have managed to solve the most fundamental problems. Modern chassis are far stronger than they ever were. Risk of harm is far lower then it ever was.

Like I said, I prefer a full cover canopy, not some half done temporary solution.

[Frafer]

Martin Brundle:
Fernando Alonso said over the weekend that 'F1 doesn't need heroes' and I totally disagree with him. That's exactly what F1 needs.

IMHO, F1 may need heroes, but not martyrs.

Hypothetically, If you were psychics and had the chance to put a protection in front of Senna's or Wilson's cockpit before their fatal accidents...Wouldn't you do it?

I'd put a better helmet, with carbon fibre helmet that driver have nowadays senna'd be live, look at massa 2009.. wilson case is bad luck at all, i'm afraid to say

[stefan_]

Apart from being a badass design that looks really good, that is not F1. If you bring together the front fenders with the sides of the monocoque, you have more or less an LMP1 car.

Martin Brundle:
Fernando Alonso said over the weekend that 'F1 doesn't need heroes' and I totally disagree with him. That's exactly what F1 needs.

I don't really look too much into what Brundle says in general, but with this he is right. Look at the past - why do we admire drivers like Ascari, Nuvolari, Caracciola, Fangio, Hawthorn, Moss, Hill, Stewart, Rindt and the list can go on. Because they were badass men who were not afraid to drive those bombs with wheels full speed onto roads that you could barely call race tracks.

Nowdays, they even took the thing that perhaps was the most exciting - the engines with their sound.

[ME4ME]

http://static.cdn.mclaren.com/img/conte ... -11-v1.jpg

Apart from being a badass design that looks really good, that is not F1. If you bring together the front fenders with the sides of the monocoque, you have more or less an LMP1 car.

I really struggle with that kind of statement. If you define F1 by what it traditionally used to be, then you can say F1 is dead already. Engines have become part electric. They are fuel restricted. Tyres are made to degrade, and drivers "manage"a race rather than push to the limit.

I like to think of F1 being a constantly developing form of motorsport. The fastest and most advanced.
Giving up open wheel and open cockpit is a sacrifice I think should be made in order to stay ahead. Like you said, it looks badass too. Way better then what currently is the case.

[mrluke]

Apart from being a badass design that looks really good, that is not F1. If you bring together the front fenders with the sides of the monocoque, you have more or less an LMP1 car.

That's the future for the fastest circuit racers on the planet.

The question is will F1 adapt to it or will another series replace it while it becomes some sort of historic "golden years" series.

[strad]

"You know the risks, you accept them. If a man can't look at danger and still go on, man has stopped living.
If the worst ever happens – then it means simply that I've been asked to pay the bill for the happiness of my life – without a moment's regret."

Graham Hill

[Logie]

How is it immature to say you think F1 should not have risk?

Its open cockpit racing and it should stay that way, the drivers know the risks and have the decision to either race knowing what could happen or walk away and go to touring cars or endurance style racing.

Bianchi and Surtees death where freak accidents, which can happen to any one in any sport at any time. Freakish happens, some people get away with it and some lose their lives.

Even if they go with a Halo or a screen type, drivers can still die. Hit a wall at a certain angle or speed, you cant stop your internal organs moving when you go from 140mph to 0 in a second.