Proposed 'shield', halo alternative, unveiled
Discussion
Clockwork Cupcake said:
It never fails to amaze and amuse when I see armchair experts claiming to out-think people who are not only experts in their field, but are amongst the best of them too.
I imagine that if anyone in F1 stumbles across this thread they will think "OMG! Some random poster on the internet has cracked the problem of dirt on the aero screen! We can ditch the halo now."
You make it sound so hard, FFS its screen, it'll get dirty, clean it then..........why is this so difficult to understand, we even have hydrophobic repellents, WTF is the problemI imagine that if anyone in F1 stumbles across this thread they will think "OMG! Some random poster on the internet has cracked the problem of dirt on the aero screen! We can ditch the halo now."
Doink said:
You make it sound so hard, FFS its screen, it'll get dirty, clean it then..........why is this so difficult to understand, we even have hydrophobic repellents, WTF is the problem
Hmmm... yes. Perhaps they could apply some kind of Dunning–Kruger coating to the screen. That would fix it for sure. Clockwork Cupcake said:
It never fails to amaze and amuse when I see armchair experts claiming to out-think people who are not only experts in their field, but are amongst the best of them too.
I imagine that if anyone in F1 stumbles across this thread they will think "OMG! Some random poster on the internet has cracked the problem of dirt on the aero screen! We can ditch the halo now."
That’s the nature of a discussion though. I know some people like to claim to have all the answers on a subject, that’s not exclusive to the F1 forum by the way. I imagine that if anyone in F1 stumbles across this thread they will think "OMG! Some random poster on the internet has cracked the problem of dirt on the aero screen! We can ditch the halo now."
If we only talk about subjects we are experts in then this would be a very quiet forum!
24lemons said:
That’s the nature of a discussion though. I know some people like to claim to have all the answers on a subject, that’s not exclusive to the F1 forum by the way.
If we only talk about subjects we are experts in then this would be a very quiet forum!
Oh, I don't disagree. I like discussion - that's why I'm still on PH after all these years. If we only talk about subjects we are experts in then this would be a very quiet forum!
By all means let's discuss things, but let's acknowledge that we probably don't know more than actual experts, and that we don't somehow have more data available to us than the experts do.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
Oh, I don't disagree. I like discussion - that's why I'm still on PH after all these years.
By all means let's discuss things, but let's acknowledge that we probably don't know more than actual experts, and that we don't somehow have more data available to us than the experts do.
I think the problem is that plenty of people for whatever reason won’t or can’t admit to not knowing everything. It stifles debate because rather than being open to being proven wrong they stubbornly stick to their point of view and lambast anyone who doesn’t agree. By all means let's discuss things, but let's acknowledge that we probably don't know more than actual experts, and that we don't somehow have more data available to us than the experts do.
I realise all that is largely what you just said so let me just prefix any future post I make on ph by stating that I probably don’t know what I’m talking about so please feel free to prove me wrong!!!
Doink said:
But they triple stint in WEC sometimes in the middle of the night and you never hear complaints, sometimes the sun is low in the day time, again no complaints its the fault of the canopy, fit the aero screen with tear offs, its not beyond the wit of F1 engineers or designers to come up with something, we've put men on the moon, soon be on Mars, and your talking about what happens when it gets dirty..........well fecking clean it then!
they clean the screen at every stop. Triple stinting just means the driver didn't get out until they did three runs, the dirty screen didn't do three stints.Putting men on the moon doesn't change how light travels through s
t.People seem to be forgetting that the FIA hasn't said the Halo is the be all and end all. They didn't pursue the shield at the time because it was massively underdeveloped in comparison to the Halo but they haven't ruled out going back to.
The Halo is a complete non-starter for IndyCar as the sightlines for the drivers are totally different which may also explain why they don't see so much distortion.
The Halo is a complete non-starter for IndyCar as the sightlines for the drivers are totally different which may also explain why they don't see so much distortion.
Apparently the Indy screen is curved in only one direction whereas the Ferrari aero screen was a bit more complex. This is possibly why there is less distortion experienced.
The screen tested by red bull looks a bit more like the Indy screen in comparison. I wonder what the halo would look like if a screen was incorporated into the design.
The screen tested by red bull looks a bit more like the Indy screen in comparison. I wonder what the halo would look like if a screen was incorporated into the design.
jsf said:
What is?
The field of view is not different enough on an oval to prevent the halo being used.
On a banked oval the line of sight is consistently upwards in relation to the car whereas on a relatively flat circuit, the line of sight is lower. The field of view is not different enough on an oval to prevent the halo being used.
Edited by jsf on Saturday 24th February 11:03
24lemons said:
jsf said:
What is?
The field of view is not different enough on an oval to prevent the halo being used.
On a banked oval the line of sight is consistently upwards in relation to the car whereas on a relatively flat circuit, the line of sight is lower. The field of view is not different enough on an oval to prevent the halo being used.
Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 24th February 11:03
jsf said:
24lemons said:
jsf said:
What is?
The field of view is not different enough on an oval to prevent the halo being used.
On a banked oval the line of sight is consistently upwards in relation to the car whereas on a relatively flat circuit, the line of sight is lower. The field of view is not different enough on an oval to prevent the halo being used.
Edited by jsf on Saturday 24th February 11:03
jsf said:
The halo is not in the sight line of an IndyCar driver on an oval.
Mark Miles, Indycar CEO said this in October of the halo;“Forget what each of us may think about it aesthetically or otherwise,” he told the New York Times, “it’s pretty clear that since we’re on ovals and they’re banked, the driver couldn’t see up through it. You’ve got to be able to see up.”
Now my expertise in this field is strictly limited to the armchair, so all I’ll say is this. Many cleverer and better paid people than me have been researching these issues so I’ll defer to their greater knowledge and assume that they know what they are talking about.
https://youtu.be/mdH_-KKP7JE
Bottas first run this year, the field of view is massive and would easily cater for an oval bank of the angle indycars run on. That was filmed from a camera embedded in glasses he was wearing made by Mercedes.
Bottas first run this year, the field of view is massive and would easily cater for an oval bank of the angle indycars run on. That was filmed from a camera embedded in glasses he was wearing made by Mercedes.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff