HALO Approved for 2018

[NathanOlder]

last year the driver crawls out (imagining how senna crawled out his car in Mexico that year)
This year they Halo traps the driver in the car.

[Restomaniac]

Can I be honest? It seems to me to be continuing due to some still finding reasons to find fault (due to the ultimate problem of it's look) and when they are disproven another reason is found.

If I look back to the beginning my original problem was a driver not getting out if it was upside-down in the gravel and this one has not been cleared yet people dismiss it as if they have seen someone climb out in the gravel. Then people were saying F1 cars never catch fire and havent caught fire through an accident since Berger at Imola, so I posted a video of Schumacher crashing and catching on fire just over 10 years ago but that didnt count for some reason.

I know this is a million to 1 shot but, if a car is upside down, dug into the gravel and possibly on fire at stavelot what would happen ? I'd rather have been Henry Surtees than Roger Williamson every single day of the week .

The car would roll to the side. The only way you would get a car to sit perched in the roll hoop and halo is if you got a crane and carefully placed it like that.
On a moving car? The unbalanced hugely top heavy weight and motion wouldn't allowing it to end up perched like that. The car would have to go in exactly straight, be perfectly balanced (nothing being knocked off in the process of the flipping over) and a be on a perfectly flat surface to not end up rolling to 1 side or the other. You say a million? I'd add at least a couple of 0's to that.

Also is it possible for a belt buckle to fail and not release a driver? By that logic then let's ban F1 seat belts on the tiny chance that a car catches fire and the driver can't get his belts off. How silly does that sound and that's the point, we can all find fault if we want to say 'well in the 1,000,000 or 10,000,000 to 1 chance' but it's stretching the point until it snaps to do so.

[Jolle]

last year the driver crawls out (imagining how senna crawled out his car in Mexico that year)
This year they Halo traps the driver in the car.

Which is understandable but wrong. Look at Alonso after is Australia crash. He wiggled his way out of his car with a collapsed lung and broken ribs, highten the risk of additional trauma severely. He should have got penalty points for that.

[NathanOlder]

last year the driver crawls out (imagining how senna crawled out his car in Mexico that year)
This year they Halo traps the driver in the car.

Which is understandable but wrong. Look at Alonso after is Australia crash. He wiggled his way out of his car with a collapsed lung and broken ribs, highten the risk of additional trauma severely. He should have got penalty points for that.

Once a driver has been in a huge smash like that, asking him to control his self and stay in the car is insane. Human instinct would be, get the hell out as fast as you can.

[NathanOlder]

@restomaniac what are you on about ? I know the car would roll to the side , of course the car would roll to the side, thats exactly what im talking about, as i mentioned earlier in the reference to Senna

last year the driver crawls out (imagining how senna crawled out his car in Mexico that year)
This year they Halo traps the driver in the car.

Senna would NOT have got out that car if he had a Halo. So a Halo CAN trap you in the car, yet guys like Jolle will not accept this, and here we are weeks later still talking about it.





The video the FIA show of someone crawling out with a Halo is flawed,
1 - it had no wheels, if a car still has suspension and wheels attatched it would hold the car so there would be less room to escape.
2 - It was on a hard floor, which is fine if you roll on a tarmac run off. If you roll on gravel or on grass, the roll hoop can dig in and you have less room to escape.

[AJI]

The safety aspects of the Halo can be argued forever from many different perspectives, and apparently, as the human population of the planet earth is the most precious thing of all and critically low at a mere 7billion, we need to do everything we can to save every life... I get that, we're awesome, but my question is; why does the Halo have to be so goddamed ugly?

[F1NAC]

sometimes optimized solutions aren't aesthetically pleasing.

[AJI]

Sometimes the terrible first draft is the final product...

[Restomaniac]

@restomaniac what are you on about ? I know the car would roll to the side , of course the car would roll to the side, thats exactly what im talking about, as i mentioned earlier in the reference to Senna

last year the driver crawls out (imagining how senna crawled out his car in Mexico that year)
This year they Halo traps the driver in the car.

Senna would NOT have got out that car if he had a Halo. So a Halo CAN trap you in the car, yet guys like Jolle will not accept this, and here we are weeks later still talking about it.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/iwWUgdINNgU/hqdefault.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/OzP6nFYdXkE/maxresdefault.jpg

The video the FIA show of someone crawling out with a Halo is flawed,
1 - it had no wheels, if a car still has suspension and wheels attatched it would hold the car so there would be less room to escape.
2 - It was on a hard floor, which is fine if you roll on a tarmac run off. If you roll on gravel or on grass, the roll hoop can dig in and you have less room to escape.

The car would be higher because if the halo so it could have rolled over further. Also F1 cars look nothing like that now plus every still we see like that we can find plenty that show how lucky those drivers were in other aspects at that time .
I can think of 2 straight away with 1 driver. Martin Brundle his utter luck to walk away at Melbourne and when Jos Verstappen nearly took his head clean off. In both cases the Halo would have made him safer and in both cases he could have very easily died.

I can point to a very recent case too. Alonso's car perched on Raikkonen's car. Fernando himself admitted that Kimi was lucky to get away with that one.

This is the point. For every 1 incident you can point to the halo being unsafe due to a very tight set of circumstances you can find 10 to show it's really the opposite.

You say the circumstance you say is a 1 million to 1 shot. That's fine but then that must make the others a 100K in 1 chance. I'm not willing to have the chance of 10 drivers die for the chance of saving 1.

[Restomaniac]

The safety aspects of the Halo can be argued forever from many different perspectives, and apparently, as the human population of the planet earth is the most precious thing of all and critically low at a mere 7billion, we need to do everything we can to save every life... I get that, we're awesome, but my question is; why does the Halo have to be so goddamed ugly?

It's less ugly than other parts of the car so in the grand scheme of things it's not even currently at the top of that list.

This is what I don't understand. The current cars are messy as hell. Yet people are fixated with something less ugly than parts of the rest of the car.

If the current F1 cars had the clean lines of the cars from the 80's/90's I would get it but they don't.

[NathanOlder]

The car would be higher because if the halo so it could have rolled over further. Also F1 cars look nothing like that now plus every still we see like that we can find plenty that show how lucky those drivers were in other aspects at that time

The Halo would just dig into the gravel as well. Its not like a closed canopy. And yes the cars are not like they were back then, They have more protection around the drivers head making it even harder to get out of the cars.

How can anyone say the Halo wouldn't have hindered Senna's exit from that car in the pictures above! its insane!

Also all of the accidents you mentioned, how many would the Halo have helped ? I'll help you out, it starts with a 0.

[NathanOlder]

The safety aspects of the Halo can be argued forever from many different perspectives, and apparently, as the human population of the planet earth is the most precious thing of all and critically low at a mere 7billion, we need to do everything we can to save every life... I get that, we're awesome, but my question is; why does the Halo have to be so goddamed ugly?

It's less ugly than other parts of the car so in the grand scheme of things it's not even currently at the top of that list.

This is what I don't understand. The current cars are messy as hell. Yet people are fixated with something less ugly than parts of the rest of the car.

If the current F1 cars had the clean lines of the cars from the 80's/90's I would get it but they don't.

definitely the cars of the 80's/90's looked better, but I think everyone on the planet will say the Halo looks bad or ugly.
Its only a percentage that say the barge board area looks bad. I personally think it looks aggressive and fast.

[Jolle]

The car would be higher because if the halo so it could have rolled over further. Also F1 cars look nothing like that now plus every still we see like that we can find plenty that show how lucky those drivers were in other aspects at that time

The Halo would just dig into the gravel as well. Its not like a closed canopy. And yes the cars are not like they were back then, They have more protection around the drivers head making it even harder to get out of the cars.

How can anyone say the Halo wouldn't have hindered Senna's exit from that car in the pictures above! its insane!

Also all of the accidents you mentioned, how many would the Halo have helped ? I'll help you out, it starts with a 0.

It could have hindered Senna indeed. But, with the current understanding of safety, it's safer to stay in the car until the safety crew gets you out. What if he had dislocated his neck or spine in the crash? I know you go back to the "driver wants to get out as fast as possible", but that is not the safest way.

Even in the most simple first aid course, book, whatever: don't move!!! wait for professionals.

[Just_a_fan]

Quite frankly my quoting of Newey had only to do with the attractiveness because his job is not to make it pretty just fast.

I was just injecting a little levity in to an otherwise dull and cyclical argument about the halo.

As you say, no one is paid to make racing cars look pretty, only to make them fast.

[TwanV]

The car would be higher because if the halo so it could have rolled over further. Also F1 cars look nothing like that now plus every still we see like that we can find plenty that show how lucky those drivers were in other aspects at that time

The Halo would just dig into the gravel as well. Its not like a closed canopy. And yes the cars are not like they were back then, They have more protection around the drivers head making it even harder to get out of the cars.

How can anyone say the Halo wouldn't have hindered Senna's exit from that car in the pictures above! its insane!

Also all of the accidents you mentioned, how many would the Halo have helped ? I'll help you out, it starts with a 0.

It could have hindered Senna indeed. But, with the current understanding of safety, it's safer to stay in the car until the safety crew gets you out. What if he had dislocated his neck or spine in the crash? I know you go back to the "driver wants to get out as fast as possible", but that is not the safest way.

Even in the most simple first aid course, book, whatever: don't move!!! wait for professionals.

well.. not if your house is on fire. Health and safety 101 is getting yourself removed from the hazardous situation first. If anything blocks that, its unsafe. Ok, not here to start a debate on fire dangers in modern f1, but this argument is (again) not correct.
edit: to preemptively abort another fire-discussion: this in rather humorous because all went well but to be forced to loiter in your car exposed to an intercar collision is something to take into account as well. : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9mXWqLjGd8