Why is nobody discussing Bottas' Halo problems?

[strad]

it was just a freak accident

.
That's just it.
There will always be the "freak accident".
Just keep going and trying to end the "freak accident" and you'll wind up with no racing.
AND don't forget that every time the drivers see that they are safer they push to even more unsafe behavior.
Listen to Button
http://www.stradsplace.com/VIDEOS/Button-on-danger.mpg

[Jolle]

it was just a freak accident

.
That's just it.
There will always be the "freak accident".
Just keep going and trying to end the "freak accident" and you'll wind up with no racing.
AND don't forget that every time the drivers see that they are safer they push to even more unsafe behavior.
Listen to Button
http://www.stradsplace.com/VIDEOS/Button-on-danger.mpg

several deaths because of large objects hitting drivers in several open wheel classes isn't a freak accident anymore. A small part hitting you in just the worst spot on your helmet is a freak accident.

And that better safety will lead to less safety because that drivers will take more risk... that is just stupid, naive and very very ill informed.

[djos]

This must be the worst. concluding from a single frame that Surtees still would be hit by that tire. He was traveling fast, the tire would have easily hit the front of the halo and deflected off him. He would even finish the race with a few stories to tell!

The single frame was just for comparison with a Halo equipped Car - go watch the video's and you can see clearly the wheel arcing down onto his cockpit - the wheel trajectory is a bit like a sine wave, it didnt hit him from the side, it hit him directly on top of his helmet.

I'm not advocating the status quo, Im advocating for fighter cockpits - they are imo the safest option especially when you have a high energy impact like Alonso did in Melbourne where he was very lucky not to be injured by flying debris from his own car and the eventual upsidedown collision with the tire wall.



If they can go from open cockpits to fighter canopies in F1 power boats, where there is a risk of drowning, then they can do it for F1 where there is a risk of fire.

[Jolle]

This must be the worst. concluding from a single frame that Surtees still would be hit by that tire. He was traveling fast, the tire would have easily hit the front of the halo and deflected off him. He would even finish the race with a few stories to tell!

The single frame was just for comparison with a Halo equipped Car - go watch the video's and you can see clearly the wheel arcing down onto his cockpit - the wheel trajectory is a bit like a sine wave, it didnt hit him from the side, it hit him directly on top of his helmet.

I'm not advocating the status quo, Im advocating for fighter cockpits - they are imo the safest option especially when you have a high energy impact like Alonso did in Melbourne where he was very lucky not to be injured by flying debris from his own car and the eventual upsidedown collision with the tire wall.

https://cdn-7.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... -crash.jpg

If they can go from open cockpits to fighter canopies in F1 power boats, where there is a risk of drowning, then they can do it for F1 where there is a risk of fire.

http://img.bhs4.com/98/C/98CA45A0231432 ... _large.jpg

FIghterjets, Powerboats, LMP1, etc are very different then F1 racing. Visibility is very poor at powerboat racing compared to F1, but they are racing simple tracks compared to cars, with more emphasis on having their boat in trim then positioning perfectly for the buoy (which is painted bright orange otherwise they would miss it). It's like racing on the avus ring...

For LMP1, races are full of crashes caused by "missing" cars in their view. And fighter jets are more used to fly on instruments then "TopGun style" looking outside.

Canopies have a few disadvantages. They are less sturdy then a rollbar/halo. They can't be part of the survival cell (also because it's basically a door). It would be effective for small/middle sized debris, but won't hold a car. Then there are fumes, heat and visibility due to rain/oil. Imagine a faulty battery pack with a driver in his special bubble.

safety works best if it's simple. A canopy looks cool, but it would need more other features to make it work, which will make it more heavy, much more expensive and could fail.

Small debris looks dangerous, but in fact hasn't harmed anyone is quite a while. Since Massa's accident the helmets are made stronger and if flying pieces of carbon would be a problem, an protective (kevlar) fiber layer, combined with a chest plate (like in MotoGP) in the suits would be a much cheaper, simpler solution, transferable to other series without trouble.

The Halo ticks all the right boxes except one, looks.

And I've watched the Surtees video again, the tire would have been deflected by the Halo.

[djos]

FIghterjets, Powerboats, LMP1, etc are very different then F1 racing. Visibility is very poor at powerboat racing compared to F1, but they are racing simple tracks compared to cars, with more emphasis on having their boat in trim then positioning perfectly for the buoy (which is painted bright orange otherwise they would miss it). It's like racing on the avus ring...

For LMP1, races are full of crashes caused by "missing" cars in their view. And fighter jets are more used to fly on instruments then "TopGun style" looking outside.

Canopies have a few disadvantages. They are less sturdy then a rollbar/halo. They can't be part of the survival cell (also because it's basically a door). It would be effective for small/middle sized debris, but won't hold a car. Then there are fumes, heat and visibility due to rain/oil. Imagine a faulty battery pack with a driver in his special bubble.

safety works best if it's simple. A canopy looks cool, but it would need more other features to make it work, which will make it more heavy, much more expensive and could fail.

Small debris looks dangerous, but in fact hasn't harmed anyone is quite a while. Since Massa's accident the helmets are made stronger and if flying pieces of carbon would be a problem, an protective (kevlar) fiber layer, combined with a chest plate (like in MotoGP) in the suits would be a much cheaper, simpler solution, transferable to other series without trouble.

The Halo ticks all the right boxes except one, looks.

And I've watched the Surtees video again, the tire would have been deflected by the Halo.

The view from inside an LMP1 car Is mostly not much different from an F1 power boat.

Most LMP1 crashes are caused by the slower cars, not the LMP1 cars.

[NathanOlder]

You cannot use a British Formula 3 or indy car accident to make a claim to why Halo's are needed in F1.

Indy Car nose cones seem to come off complete, and the nature of an oval means crash damage in the wall always slides back ACROSS the racing line. Its not like that in F1.

Wheel tethers are amazing in f1 and if people are that fusses, just double them in strength again to be absolutely sure.

So Surtees accident is almost impossible to happen now in F1. Wheels being tethered and wheel nuts even when not on correctly retain the wheel (sainz abu dhabi)

Wilsons accident in Indy was debry coming back accross the track and a large piece of bodywork in 1 piece, it was a high speed crash and the bodywork didnt shatter like you see in F1. When was the last high speed crash where a nose cone or wing didnt disintegrate. Vettel in singapore this year was slow speed.

Halo doesn't bring much to the table, but it does bring other problems. So it may help in 5% of cases, but it adds another 5% of problems.

[NathanOlder]

Does anyone have any stats on number of wheels that became detatched from a car for the last number of years ?

[Jolle]

Does anyone have any stats on number of wheels that became detatched from a car for the last number of years ?

This year at least once (Perez, Baku), one lost nose cone on the racing line (Vettel, Singapore) and one potential accident to the head (Wehrlein, Monaco).

2016: Hulk lost a wheel (don't know what race) and Gutierrez (can't remember the race, somewhere end of season)

2015, Kvyat in his big crash lost two wheels I believe, Grosjean the same, Sainz had a scary moment with the barrier, Hulkenberg had Ericsson driving over him, Kvyat lost a nosecone (not on the racing line this time) in another crash.

So, once or twice a year plus one or two scary moments which would be less scary with proper head protection.

[turbof1]

Does anyone have any stats on number of wheels that became detatched from a car for the last number of years ?

This year at least once (Perez, Baku), one lost nose cone on the racing line (Vettel, Singapore) and one potential accident to the head (Wehrlein, Monaco).

2016: Hulk lost a wheel (don't know what race) and Gutierrez (can't remember the race, somewhere end of season)

2015, Kvyat in his big crash lost two wheels I believe, Grosjean the same, Sainz had a scary moment with the barrier, Hulkenberg had Ericsson driving over him, Kvyat lost a nosecone (not on the racing line this time) in another crash.

So, once or twice a year plus one or two scary moments which would be less scary with proper head protection.

That's definitely too much. I also think additional tethers at this point are useless given we already have 4 and I don't see those all breaking off, meaning loose wheels have a different cause.

Driver head protection is also the last missing piece. The rest of the body is pretty much protected from physical trauma (with the exception of injuries by dramatic deaccaleration). It doesn't make sense when the whole body with the exception of the head is enormously protected but the driver's head is exposed like that.

I also saw some posts here that head protection would lead to drivers taking more risks. That's obviously nonsense. As mentioned drivers are already very well protected, and injuries to the head do not occur in your normal run-off-the-track or bash-in-with-your-competitor. Head protection isn't going to make drivers take more risk or feel more at ease. Next to the fact of course we aren't against crashes. It's always awesome to see them smash the cars to bits, as long as we see the driver exiting the car hot headed and uninjured.

So yes, head protection is needed. Only, I find the Halo not a complete solution.

[jjn9128]

Sorry but you absolutely can and should use other open-cockpit series to highlight any potential weakness in the safety of F1, it would be stupid/dangerous/irresponsible not to.

Perez's whole wheel AND half shaft came off his car in Azerbaijan earlier this year and was bouncing around at head height - had Grosjean/Magnussen (a Haas) been a second further up the road that would have been a very different incident. We've had wheels fall off the cars when the retained nuts had issues, Williams lost a few a couple of years back. Sainz left the pits with a completely unattached wheel in Abu Dhabi, the gun man hadn't gone near the nut when Sainz was released, the only thing that prevented that wheel falling off was the wheel drum to rim clearance and the slow pit exit which meant he felt the issue so didn't try to take turn 3 flat out.

Whole nose assemblies come off in F1 too - Kvyat at Austin in 2015 and Vettel in Singapore earlier this year. I think this is because the crash testing is only done straight ahead there's no incentive to add weight to the mounts to protect against glancing blows. Personally I would add a 30 or 45 degree nose crash test.

'Fans' have had no issues with any other safety advancements over the past 20 odd years, very few people complained when the cockpits sides were raised 20mm in 2016, no one suggested that modern drivers testes are smaller than their predecessors when the zylon panels were added to the chassis sides to prevent suspension intrusion, no one was moaning about health and safety gone mad when the side impact protection was standardised and the crash tests updated so that cars can't hit the track before all the tests have been passed, no one suggested that it's against the DNA of the sport when the kevlar fuel cells (practically bulletproof) were introduced, no one suggests the FIA is just protecting against litigation when helmet or overall standards are upgraded, no one said they'd stop watching F1 because the cockpit leg padding thickness was increased.

Don't kid yourself this is all about looks. Just because it hasn't happened in F1 doesn't mean it can't, wont or circumstances/blind luck have meant we had a near miss instead. I blame some drivers and the motorsport media for spreading misinformation and turning what should be a rational decision into an emotive topic. There's a lot of bravado with the public facade of F1 drivers, I imagine a lot of them say different things about the halo behind closed doors - where Vettel says in private meetings 90-95% of the drivers are for it. I don't think it's a coincidence that the most vocally supportive of the halo have been some of the older drivers!

[NathanOlder]

So all the issues are with wheels coming off, so why not focus more on stopping that from happening, The problem is the wheels, not the open cockpit. As for driver head protection, they already have it, been used for decades, its a crash helmet.

And yes i think the Halo looks as bad if not worse than the Lotus twin tusk nose, or the Force India black dong. The Halo WILL cause problems when the car is upside down. Being trapped in a car upside down is terrifying , being hit on the head by a wheel (never seen it in F1) is far less likely.

As for the drivers, Massa has his reasons for wanting more head protection, Grosjean has always been a coward (in F1 terms) If you went back only as far as the 80's and told Mansell, Senna, Piquet that you were going to put this thing on their cars, you would have left the room wearing the Halo yourself.

So you want to see Halo's in all single seaters ? including Karts ? as they all have the same risk, if not more due to the cars not having as strong safety features.

The whole Halo philosophy is like making people wear bullet proof vests, when what you should do is tackle the real problem and ban all guns/ammo.

[Jolle]

So all the issues are with wheels coming off, so why not focus more on stopping that from happening, The problem is the wheels, not the open cockpit. As for driver head protection, they already have it, been used for decades, its a crash helmet.

And yes i think the Halo looks as bad if not worse than the Lotus twin tusk nose, or the Force India black dong. The Halo WILL cause problems when the car is upside down. Being trapped in a car upside down is terrifying , being hit on the head by a wheel (never seen it in F1) is far less likely.

As for the drivers, Massa has his reasons for wanting more head protection, Grosjean has always been a coward (in F1 terms) If you went back only as far as the 80's and told Mansell, Senna, Piquet that you were going to put this thing on their cars, you would have left the room wearing the Halo yourself.

So you want to see Halo's in all single seaters ? including Karts ? as they all have the same risk, if not more due to the cars not having as strong safety features.

The whole Halo philosophy is like making people wear bullet proof vests, when what you should do is tackle the real problem and ban all guns/ammo.

The being trapped upside down thing has already be debunked, plus, in a serious accident it’s safer for the driver to be extracted by the medical team then to crawl out himself (if there is no imidiate danger). And yes I would like to see the halo on all open wheel classes, especially F3/4 and BMW especially because there are many kids driving here.

Wheels are just one of the many dangers facing the drivers, as you might have seen in the FIA video explaining how they came up with the halo. If you haven’t seen it, I suggest you do, you might change your point of view on a few things. As for Senna, Mansell, Piquet, they were the first generation making use of the carbon tub, at that point the biggest step in safety since the seatbelt. I don’t think they would have felt comfertable back in the aluminum tins from the 70ies.

I live in a country where guns are banned, we don’t have Kevlar plating, except where guns are used as sport or hunting. You suggest we ban car racing?

If you thing is hideaous, just say so, don’t come up with debunked excuses and car racing should be dangerous.

[NathanOlder]

@Jolle (cant be bohered t quote you, it fills up the pages with repeated messages)

Can you show me the video on someone escaping while upside down. Because all I've seen is videos like Bottas struggling to get out when the car was the right way up.

I still want to see this thing upside down in the gravel. Then imagine if the car is in fire! (And dont tell me cars don't catch on fire, as that happens more than wheels hitting drivers heads)

As for the reasons i dobt like it being ugly , its bit wide of the mark. I never asked for the 2 tusk lotus nose, T Wings ect to be banned, so its nothing to do with visual reasons.

[Jolle]

@Jolle (cant be bohered t quote you, it fills up the pages with repeated messages)

Can you show me the video on someone escaping while upside down. Because all I've seen is videos like Bottas struggling to get out when the car was the right way up.

I still want to see this thing upside down in the gravel. Then imagine if the car is in fire! (And dont tell me cars don't catch on fire, as that happens more than wheels hitting drivers heads)

As for the reasons i dobt like it being ugly , its bit wide of the mark. I never asked for the 2 tusk lotus nose, T Wings ect to be banned, so its nothing to do with visual reasons.

https://youtu.be/AYkGjUHstKY?t=20m18s

[turbof1]

@Jolle (cant be bohered t quote you, it fills up the pages with repeated messages)

Can you show me the video on someone escaping while upside down. Because all I've seen is videos like Bottas struggling to get out when the car was the right way up.

I still want to see this thing upside down in the gravel. Then imagine if the car is in fire! (And dont tell me cars don't catch on fire, as that happens more than wheels hitting drivers heads)

As for the reasons i dobt like it being ugly , its bit wide of the mark. I never asked for the 2 tusk lotus nose, T Wings ect to be banned, so its nothing to do with visual reasons.

https://youtu.be/AYkGjUHstKY?t=20m18s

I very much like that the FIA tries to be very transparent with that presentation (going to watch it in full, haven't seen this yet!). Also a good point is that because the front of chassis is raised above the ground in case of when the car is upside down, there is still enough room for the driver to escape. Next to the fact the tubes can be cut very fast, according the FIA data.