Proposed 'shield', halo alternative, unveiled
Discussion
king hell is that actually what it'll look like?p1stonhead said:
Why wouldn't they put the upright supports off to either side instead of right in the middle?
I guess the apex of corners is more importnant to be able to see?
The drivers have always said in the past that the aerial and pitot tube down the centre line has never particularly bothered them as you just get used to it and look past it. It could be that the same is true here. I guess the apex of corners is more importnant to be able to see?
I'm sure we'll all get used to it - drivers and fans alike. It's not like we can do anything about it other than to stop watching.
I don't think the pic above is the correct perspective. This should be more how it should look from the driver's perspective:
Slightly raised camera angle:
I prefer the aero screen than halo but do FIA have another option that can be implemented next year? The halo was always a covering the backside option for the FIA.
Slightly raised camera angle:
I prefer the aero screen than halo but do FIA have another option that can be implemented next year? The halo was always a covering the backside option for the FIA.
p1stonhead said:
Is this to stop a Senna/Surtees type incident happening if the wheel tethers fail?
Yep, it's supposed to deflect big objects such as the wheels like this:
I'm not sure it would help in the case of incidents like Massa though. It could even deflect small objects on to the drivers with equally serious consequences, I'd imagine. If something like that happened, would the FIA have wiggle room in court? I doubt it.
Dr Z said:
p1stonhead said:
Is this to stop a Senna/Surtees type incident happening if the wheel tethers fail?
Yep, it's supposed to deflect big objects such as the wheels like this:I'm not sure it would help in the case of incidents like Massa though. It could even deflect small objects on to the drivers with equally serious consequences, I'd imagine. If something like that happened, would the FIA have wiggle room in court? I doubt it.
p1stonhead said:
Why now though after so many years of wheel tethers? Did a specific failure trigger it?
I think it was a spate of incidents including Surtees/Wilson that triggered FIA into action. There were rumours that FIA wanted to protect itself from litigation as there were also reports of Bianchi family suing them.I remember reading also that FIA will mandate all lower single seater formulae to adopt a halo device as standard.
Dr Z said:
I think it was a spate of incidents including Surtees/Wilson that triggered FIA into action. There were rumours that FIA wanted to protect itself from litigation as there were also reports of Bianchi family suing them.
I remember reading also that FIA will mandate all lower single seater formulae to adopt a halo device as standard.
Including karts?I remember reading also that FIA will mandate all lower single seater formulae to adopt a halo device as standard.
Dr Z said:
I don't think the pic above is the correct perspective. This should be more how it should look from the driver's perspective.
I think the point was that there are tracks that have inclination changes so steep that you have to look 'upwards' to see the road ahead of you. I have never raced, but I used to take my car out on the track at Brands Hatch occasionally to park it behind posts on the GP circuit. As you go down Paddock Hill bend the track on the other side rises up like a wall of Tarmac in the windscreen in front of you. To see clearly all the way to Druids you would need to lean forwards against the steering wheel and look up. I should imagine the same would be true of Eau Rouge.I was keeping my car down to the (ahem) recommended safe speed for this little trip. I couldn't start to imagine what it must be like to be doing such a thing at the best part of 200 mph.
Evangelion said:
Including karts?
Not in karts. Roofless Toothless said:
I think the point was that there are tracks that have inclination changes so steep that you have to look 'upwards' to see the road ahead of you. I have never raced, but I used to take my car out on the track at Brands Hatch occasionally to park it behind posts on the GP circuit. As you go down Paddock Hill bend the track on the other side rises up like a wall of Tarmac in the windscreen in front of you. To see clearly all the way to Druids you would need to lean forwards against the steering wheel and look up. I should imagine the same would be true of Eau Rouge.
I was keeping my car down to the (ahem) recommended safe speed for this little trip. I couldn't start to imagine what it must be like to be doing such a thing at the best part of 200 mph.
It's a fair point. The halo was tried at Spa and at several other tracks by most teams. No visibility concerns were reported at the time. I think the drivers found it strange at first but quickly got used to it.I was keeping my car down to the (ahem) recommended safe speed for this little trip. I couldn't start to imagine what it must be like to be doing such a thing at the best part of 200 mph.
In any case, the GPDA pushed for some form of protection, and particularly for the halo. The guys who are taking the risk 20-25 weekends a year want to run with it, or to be fair, were shocked into accepting it.
One of the good pieces of advice my old man gave me was never to get involved in something you don't know how to get out of.
Once the halos have been adopted, and if they prove less than acceptable, how possible would it be for the FIA to get rid of them? If they were to go back to open cockpits and then there is a bad crash and a driver gets killed or injured by something a halo would have prevented, then the legal implications are enormous.
It might prove harder move to remove them than to introduce them.
Once the halos have been adopted, and if they prove less than acceptable, how possible would it be for the FIA to get rid of them? If they were to go back to open cockpits and then there is a bad crash and a driver gets killed or injured by something a halo would have prevented, then the legal implications are enormous.
It might prove harder move to remove them than to introduce them.
Thats the main reason they've gone back to the halo, apparently the Bianchi family are preparing to take the FIA to court, the FIA want to be seen doing something and they've been banging on about head protection for the last 8 years and just recently have come up with the halo and the screens and after some testing feel the halo was the better solution and IF they dont implement it and another driver is killed the lawyers will have a field day in court citing the fact the FIA recognised or were aware of the danger of being hit, carried out testing on suitable protection but then failed to implement it, HSE would have a field day if an employer was aware but failed to act on a danger
I dont like the halo but the FIA had no choice
I dont like the halo but the FIA had no choice
Doink said:
Thats the main reason they've gone back to the halo, apparently the Bianchi family are preparing to take the FIA to court, the FIA want to be seen doing something and they've been banging on about head protection for the last 8 years and just recently have come up with the halo and the screens and after some testing feel the halo was the better solution and IF they dont implement it and another driver is killed the lawyers will have a field day in court citing the fact the FIA recognised or were aware of the danger of being hit, carried out testing on suitable protection but then failed to implement it, HSE would have a field day if an employer was aware but failed to act on a danger
I dont like the halo but the FIA had no choice
And the funny thing is, if Bianchi had had Halo on his car, it is very unlikely it would have made any difference to the outcome.I dont like the halo but the FIA had no choice
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff