New HALO system tested
Discussion
Vaud said:
Megaflow said:
It is only my opinion, but I don't believe it would have helped him. That wheel loader weighed 8 tonnes. Very little is going to stand up against that when moving at the speed of an F1 car.
Agree that it should be treated as an immovable object for the purposes of a crash, but he was doing 126 kph. It might have made it survivable? Was it the deceleration that caused the basal fracture, or the impact with the crane?NoddyonNitrous said:
Vaud said:
I don't know anything about the structural forces, but I wonder why they are attaching the front strut it to the cockpit front, rather than just backwards to just below the airbox.
So that there is space for the driver to climb in and out?And therein lies the challenge.
In this particular instance it should be left up to the drivers, not the FIA.
Meaning: Formula 1 is an open-cockpit series, things might hit your helmet. If you're okay with that then carry on, if you have a problem with that risk then go do something else.
Meaning: Formula 1 is an open-cockpit series, things might hit your helmet. If you're okay with that then carry on, if you have a problem with that risk then go do something else.
ajprice said:
Edited by BarbaricAvatar on Thursday 3rd March 23:24
BarbaricAvatar said:
In this particular instance it should be left up to the drivers, not the FIA.
Meaning: Formula 1 is an open-cockpit series, things might hit your helmet. If you're okay with that then carry on, if you have a problem with that risk then go do something else.
Thats just not fair. In fact its cruel. What right to you have to inflict such risk on others for your own pleasure?Meaning: Formula 1 is an open-cockpit series, things might hit your helmet. If you're okay with that then carry on, if you have a problem with that risk then go do something else.
Sixpackpert said:
Doink said:
Wrap a lexan screen around the front of it and it automatically looks better and you can still climb out the top of it, why are the FIA scared of screens? If its escaping while upside down then the halo on its own impedes that already
How do you keep the screen clean??
Sixpackpert said:
Doink said:
Wrap a lexan screen around the front of it and it automatically looks better and you can still climb out the top of it, why are the FIA scared of screens? If its escaping while upside down then the halo on its own impedes that already
How do you keep the screen clean??Firstly.. I think safety is a very important factor in F1 and every effort should be made to make sure it is safe and any obvious failings are identified and resolved. I don't want to see anyone injured or killed.
I don't want to be shot down as some caveman, blood sport loving knuckle dragger by opposing HALO.
As much as I believe in the sport being safe, I think there also needs to be a balance to how it is approached. There are many areas of risk, but the probability and threat of the risk needs to be assessed correctly.
I personally think the HALO is a step too far and looks utterly awful. If the risks are that high for open cockpits then this is nothing better than a compromised approach to solving it, based most likely on the fear or losing the 'open formula' style. If it needs doing, then do it right.
The 2017 or delay it to 2018 rules, would provide a good opportunity to incorporate a properly resolved cockpit style solution. The mock ups by some teams of F1 cars of the future actually looked pretty good.
There is no proper evidence that this Halo device would have actually helped in any of the 5 incidents usually listed as the good reasons for having it. At least 2-3 of them could virtually be taken off the list as optimistic that HALO would have helped. It then comes back to balancing the risk and threat.
You can never remove the risk, but current F1 does go along way to managing it well. It is a dangerous activity and all the drivers have spent their life knowing this. It is also an activity that no one is forced into doing.
I'm glad some of the current crop of drivers are now speaking up and objecting to it.
One other idea I thought of then found a similar thing from Lola (google images - 'F1 cockpit protection, Lola'), would be to make an ultra strong 'driver cap' which is part of the current removable head protection. Once it place it offers greater protection from objects coming down onto the cockpit. I'd still leave the front open though (perhaps look are better helmet design with thicker visor or frontal impact protection. Perhaps a small lip/screen).
As for Halo, it's a no from me.
I don't want to be shot down as some caveman, blood sport loving knuckle dragger by opposing HALO.
As much as I believe in the sport being safe, I think there also needs to be a balance to how it is approached. There are many areas of risk, but the probability and threat of the risk needs to be assessed correctly.
I personally think the HALO is a step too far and looks utterly awful. If the risks are that high for open cockpits then this is nothing better than a compromised approach to solving it, based most likely on the fear or losing the 'open formula' style. If it needs doing, then do it right.
The 2017 or delay it to 2018 rules, would provide a good opportunity to incorporate a properly resolved cockpit style solution. The mock ups by some teams of F1 cars of the future actually looked pretty good.
There is no proper evidence that this Halo device would have actually helped in any of the 5 incidents usually listed as the good reasons for having it. At least 2-3 of them could virtually be taken off the list as optimistic that HALO would have helped. It then comes back to balancing the risk and threat.
You can never remove the risk, but current F1 does go along way to managing it well. It is a dangerous activity and all the drivers have spent their life knowing this. It is also an activity that no one is forced into doing.
I'm glad some of the current crop of drivers are now speaking up and objecting to it.
One other idea I thought of then found a similar thing from Lola (google images - 'F1 cockpit protection, Lola'), would be to make an ultra strong 'driver cap' which is part of the current removable head protection. Once it place it offers greater protection from objects coming down onto the cockpit. I'd still leave the front open though (perhaps look are better helmet design with thicker visor or frontal impact protection. Perhaps a small lip/screen).
As for Halo, it's a no from me.
EagleMoto4-2 said:
Vaud said:
Megaflow said:
It is only my opinion, but I don't believe it would have helped him. That wheel loader weighed 8 tonnes. Very little is going to stand up against that when moving at the speed of an F1 car.
Agree that it should be treated as an immovable object for the purposes of a crash, but he was doing 126 kph. It might have made it survivable? Was it the deceleration that caused the basal fracture, or the impact with the crane?(I agree that it should been doing 50-60kph but that's another story)
Sebastian Vettel said:
In principal, I agree it doesn’t look very nice. It’s not the picture you are used to for Formula 1 for a long time. But equally if it helps increase the safety and helps saving lives… There would be at least two drivers in the last four years that I remember would still be around, Henry Surtees and Justin Wilson, if we had this type of system. I think it can be as ugly as possible - nothing justifies not having these guys around any more.
There are clearly differences in opinion among the senior drivers. Lewis and Hulk are against, Seb and Rosberg are in favour. I haven't heard JB or Alonso's views yet. Kimi probably doesn't care. http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/24181/10191032/le...
"if it does come in then I hope that we will be given the option of not using it because I will not be using it on my car"
Hamilton talking about the halo
Brilliant!
He's clearly afraid to diss F1 after Bernie gave them a talking to. But I think drivers should speak their minds if they feel something is wrong with the sport.
"if it does come in then I hope that we will be given the option of not using it because I will not be using it on my car"
Hamilton talking about the halo
Brilliant!He's clearly afraid to diss F1 after Bernie gave them a talking to. But I think drivers should speak their minds if they feel something is wrong with the sport.
mollytherocker said:
BarbaricAvatar said:
In this particular instance it should be left up to the drivers, not the FIA.
Meaning: Formula 1 is an open-cockpit series, things might hit your helmet. If you're okay with that then carry on, if you have a problem with that risk then go do something else.
Thats just not fair. In fact its cruel. What right to you have to inflict such risk on others for your own pleasure?Meaning: Formula 1 is an open-cockpit series, things might hit your helmet. If you're okay with that then carry on, if you have a problem with that risk then go do something else.
If the drivers can't accept that there is a risk then they should be doing something else with their lives. Besides, if i was given the opportunity to drive a modern F1 car for a season with all the risks i'd grab the chance with both hands.
(Granted i'm more of a Maldonado than an Alonso, but i'd still love to do it)
EagleMoto4-2 said:
Vaud said:
Megaflow said:
It is only my opinion, but I don't believe it would have helped him. That wheel loader weighed 8 tonnes. Very little is going to stand up against that when moving at the speed of an F1 car.
Agree that it should be treated as an immovable object for the purposes of a crash, but he was doing 126 kph. It might have made it survivable? Was it the deceleration that caused the basal fracture, or the impact with the crane?Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff