HALO Approved for 2018

[Manoah2u]

Senna would NOT have got out that car if he had a Halo.

i'm seeing this keeps getting repeated and it's just not true.
come on people.







also, alonso would have had no problem getting out of his car.



there's somewhere in this or another halo thread also an image of escaping the halo upside down. it's not really a 'real' problem. making too much of it.

[NathanOlder]

Manoah2u

Until I see that test done on full car, in the gravel, it means FA to me. If that car in the FIA vid had full suspension and wheels, it wouldnt sit at that angle, if it was in gravel it would sit a little deeper, why is no one seeing that ?

[TwanV]

https://i.imgur.com/4dqbNI2.jpg

With wheels attached and in a gravel trap that is not how a car would be orientated. We will see how this pans out but I believe the halo will be very quickly dropped if this would provoke any unsafe situation in RL.

edit: do you think it's acceptable with safety in mind that the fia didn't do these tests in a more realistic environment? This is just "simulating" the scientific method to get the results they want.

[johnny comelately]

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.

I say this with respect: most (racing) accidents are figuratively speaking" "one in a million" and that's what has to be catered for.
I personally cannot see the halo being as a complete answer to all the possibilities as a canopy.
Again, I ask everyone what would they rather race with? (not armchair)

[Jolle]

I’ve done some racing and some marshaling. I wouldn’t like the canopy because of fumes and dirt/oil, as I had in touring cars and sports cars. I love the open feeling of a open sports car but liked it with a forward extending roll bar like the Halo. I did had a big start crash in front of me one time and I basically drove under his car (or he rolled over my top). Tiremarks next to my head.

[NathanOlder]

Here's a good photo of the WIlliams in the gravel, look at the angle difference between this car and the fake car in the FIA video. This williams sits at about 20 degrees.
add the fact the airbox digs into the gravel a few inches.

[TwanV]

good old Damon! even upside down that FW14B looks fantastic

[NathanOlder]

good old Damon! even upside down that FW14B looks fantastic

FW14B

[TwanV]

good old Damon! even upside down that FW14B looks fantastic

FW14B

haha I stand corrected, the FW16B from 9-"4".

[NathanOlder]

good old Damon! even upside down that FW14B looks fantastic

FW14B

haha I stand corrected, the FW16B from 9-"4".

Still a bloody good looking car. FW14B looked better though

[Restomaniac]

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.

Halo wouldn't have made Kimi's close call not close at all , Wouldn't have made Brundle safer in his lucky barrel roll and wouldn't have saved him not take a glancing blow that really should have killed him? Come on now

Sorry but this is something you are going to have to deal with. Halo is here, it's making the drivers safer and unfortunately it's not going anywhere fast.
As I have said previously so far we have seen so many ideas that have been rubbished on this thread such as the fact that wheel don't come off when actually they still do.

[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.

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.

Everyone? That's a bold statement to make. I think it's ugly but I also think the current cars are.

Like I said ask anyone who knows F1 to close their eyes and picture an pretty F1 car and I doubt many at all would picture a 2018 version. The look of the halo on the current cars due to how they look is being blown out of all proportion.

[Restomaniac]

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.

I say this with respect: most (racing) accidents are figuratively speaking" "one in a million" and that's what has to be catered for.
I personally cannot see the halo being as a complete answer to all the possibilities as a canopy.
Again, I ask everyone what would they rather race with? (not armchair)

Actually I was quoting somebody else.
If a very narrow set of circumstance is 1 in 1 million then other accidents are more like 1 in 100K.

Also at no point have I seen it as a complete answer and I have never said it was.

[Restomaniac]

Here's a good photo of the WIlliams in the gravel, look at the angle difference between this car and the fake car in the FIA video. This williams sits at about 20 degrees.
add the fact the airbox digs into the gravel a few inches.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/05/ ... 613579.jpg

Again with the halo it's height there would have been higher to its angle would have been steeper.

[Restomaniac]

Manoah2u

Until I see that test done on full car, in the gravel, it means FA to me. If that car in the FIA vid had full suspension and wheels, it wouldnt sit at that angle, if it was in gravel it would sit a little deeper, why is no one seeing that ?

I am seeing it.
But where as you see it as a 11 out of 10 I'm seeing it more like a 4 out of 10.

Me and you seem to get on well on here so if I may say I think your utter hatred of the halo is completely skewing your objective view on the subject. If I'm out of line there I apologise.