Discussion
Mr Pointy said:
I think that's going to be a real issue when it rains & when it get covered in rubber & oil. There's a reason visors have tear-offs.
Yes, it will be interesting to see if that problem manifests.I would have thought the modern rain repellents would work very effectively at F1 speeds for rain/spray.
budgie smuggler said:
Indycar are to use a halo/screen hybrid next year.
Looks pretty good to me and should carry the benefits of both.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqAWdmkqe74
Looks like the worst of all worlds to me??Looks pretty good to me and should carry the benefits of both.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqAWdmkqe74
budgie smuggler said:
Mr Pointy said:
I think that's going to be a real issue when it rains & when it get covered in rubber & oil. There's a reason visors have tear-offs.
Yes, it will be interesting to see if that problem manifests.I would have thought the modern rain repellents would work very effectively at F1 speeds for rain/spray.
The Moose said:
Looks like the worst of all worlds to me??
We're stuck with a halo-like system now. It was always clear that any vaguely possible scenario where it prevented an injury would be presented as if it were 100% FACT that it has saved a drivers life.So given the above, this system protects the head from impacts, debris and it looks to my eyes a lot better than formula flip flop we have at the moment.
Mr Pointy said:
Not when you're behind 19 other cars all chucking hundreds of litres of water up at your screen. It's not like trying to keep a windscreen clear while whizzing down the M4.
I'll have to defer to your knowledge there, I don't see how it could be worse than a visor though.budgie smuggler said:
Mr Pointy said:
I think that's going to be a real issue when it rains & when it get covered in rubber & oil. There's a reason visors have tear-offs.
Yes, it will be interesting to see if that problem manifests.I would have thought the modern rain repellents would work very effectively at F1 speeds for rain/spray.
budgie smuggler said:
I don't see how it could be worse than a visor though.
The drivers already have a visor- so at best it's an extra visor. I spent several seasons racing a Caterham with a standard windscreen. When it rained you had to deal with rainwater or condensation on the inside of your visor, outside of your visor, inside of the windscreen and outside of the windscreen. Four layers of moisture to compromise your vision.
HustleRussell said:
The drivers already have a visor- so at best it's an extra visor.
I spent several seasons racing a Caterham with a standard windscreen. When it rained you had to deal with rainwater or condensation on the inside of your visor, outside of your visor, inside of the windscreen and outside of the windscreen. Four layers of moisture to compromise your vision.
Like I said, I think it will be interesting to see if it it's a problem. It just seems unlikely that Indycar would go ahead with it in that case.I spent several seasons racing a Caterham with a standard windscreen. When it rained you had to deal with rainwater or condensation on the inside of your visor, outside of your visor, inside of the windscreen and outside of the windscreen. Four layers of moisture to compromise your vision.
F1 visors have had anti-fog coatings for at least 20 years and I haven't heard drivers moaning about condensation so I can only assume it works.
The aeroscreen has an anti-fog coating and a heating element built in, again, I can only assume that also works.
And if you look at a WEC car, even with the windscreen wipers not going they clear rain and spray no problem.
Please don't think I mean to say you're wrong, or talk your Caterham down, I appreciate your post and I'm sure the car is fast and superb fun to race
Common sense says it may cause problems, but there again these chaps have virtually unlimited budget and the most advanced materials available to deal with it. Edited by budgie smuggler on Tuesday 4th June 15:46
Eric Mc said:
As far as not being able to see the driver, that's been an issue for over a decade.
I was hoping during the initial talk there might be a silver lining in that once you have the protection of the halo in place there'd be scope to open up the bodywork beneath it somewhat. Imagine the driver being able to see who's alongside!Mr Pointy said:
I think that's going to be a real issue when it rains & when it get covered in rubber & oil. There's a reason visors have tear-offs.
gigantic tear-offs! Wouldn't want one of those in your rad!budgie smuggler said:
HustleRussell said:
The drivers already have a visor- so at best it's an extra visor.
I spent several seasons racing a Caterham with a standard windscreen. When it rained you had to deal with rainwater or condensation on the inside of your visor, outside of your visor, inside of the windscreen and outside of the windscreen. Four layers of moisture to compromise your vision.
Like I said, I think it will be interesting to see if it it's a problem. It just seems unlikely that Indycar would go ahead with it in that case.I spent several seasons racing a Caterham with a standard windscreen. When it rained you had to deal with rainwater or condensation on the inside of your visor, outside of your visor, inside of the windscreen and outside of the windscreen. Four layers of moisture to compromise your vision.
F1 visors have had anti-fog coatings for at least 20 years and I haven't heard drivers moaning about condensation so I can only assume it works.
The aeroscreen has an anti-fog coating and a heating element built in, again, I can only assume that also works.
And if you look at a WEC car, even with the windscreen wipers not going they clear rain and spray no problem.
Please don't think I mean to say you're wrong, or talk your Caterham down, I appreciate your post and I'm sure the car is fast and superb fun to race
Common sense says it may cause problems, but there again these chaps have virtually unlimited budget and the most advanced materials available to deal with it. Visors are relatively easy because you have a fighting chance of keeping the internal surface dry provided you keep the driver's breath off it and provide some ventilation- hence only the outside gets wet. If the driver is in a WEC car, his visor is dry inside and out- only the outside of the windscreen gets wet. What I am questioning is that the same principle which works so well on the outside of windscreens would work equally well on the internal surface of an aeroscreen, which has a large opening around the top where there will be turbulent air, tumbling, vortices etc- and no nice high energy laminar flow like that which you get on the surface of a helmet visor or windscreen, to clear the surface.
Mr Pointy said:
I think that's going to be a real issue when it rains & when it get covered in rubber & oil. There's a reason visors have tear-offs.
Indycars do more pitstops than F1 cars so they'll be able to pull the tear offs from the screen at each stop and/or give the screen a clean if needed as they do in sportscar racing.Teddy Lop said:
Eric Mc said:
As far as not being able to see the driver, that's been an issue for over a decade.
I was hoping during the initial talk there might be a silver lining in that once you have the protection of the halo in place there'd be scope to open up the bodywork beneath it somewhat. Imagine the driver being able to see who's alongside!Mr Pointy said:
I think that's going to be a real issue when it rains & when it get covered in rubber & oil. There's a reason visors have tear-offs.
gigantic tear-offs! Wouldn't want one of those in your rad!
Eric Mc said:
I like the idea of transparent sides. It's been tried before -
Portholes I doubt it would pass modern crash tests if the sides of the tub were transparent though. Poly-carbonate is amazingly strong - until it's pre-stressed, which presumably it could be if it formed a structural element of the 'tub'.Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff