Who in the world said that? I said the racing is more challenging. That should be obvious to anyone. Touch wheels and you may go for a ride. Rub fenders and eh. Big deal.
This is precisely because "sending someone for a ride" with all the possible consequences needs to be avoided that I advocate enclosed wheels. It certainly not for aesthetic reasons!! Indycar has started to tackle the problem, but only for the rear wheels. I think it may save lives, and it's all that matters. You make my point by saying that you get away with rubbing fenders.
New Indycar has no rear bumpers amigo; just confirmed it with someone negotiating an order. Of course that isn't all that matters. If all that mattered was being safe, we would all stay home. The reality is that the head is not the most vulnearable part of the body in a modern single seater anyway. It's the back. But people see the exposed head and the big dramatic crashes or deaths and think that something needs to be changed. The energy would be better directed to other safety measures without changing the formula.
It's a real pity in my book if Indy goes backwards. A sport doesn't have to be lethal to be attractive. As Stewart once said "In any sport, everybody wishes to show he is the best, but not necessarily wants to die for it". So any measure to improve safety is supposed to be welcomed. Racing cars already benefit from decades of experience and safety improvements; why should we stop that now? On what principle? Would you race in jeans and T-shirt, with string gloves? Would you like your cockpit to be surrounded by aluminium fuel tanks ready to burst at the slightest contact? Do you want to race on unmarked tracks with no run-offs, no guardrails? Of course no fire protection and marshals in city attire like in the "good all days"? Cockpit intrusion has caused death, won't you agree? Because there is nothing to protect the head from flying objects or in case of severe overturning. Just a lose wheel can kill you, and it has already happened several times. And when we have dealt with that, we can concentrate in reducing spinal injuries.
Now you're being silly man. I'm fine with any changes that don't change the fundamental racing itself. Obviously fire suits don't change how drivers race. I don't care for head protection personally, but it won't change the way people race each other substantially. Runoffs etc - eh, big deal as everyone is racing on the same track. But there are still many tracks with no runoff out there. Putting fenders on the car will change everything. There have been many more severe injuries caused in single sweaters from overlooking basic safety than people who have died from being struck in the head. Most recently look at the Billy Monger accident. Why did it happen? Because the FIA allowed metal jack points on the crash box which acted as a knife and cut through Monger's car. Totally stupid; totally avoidable; CLEARLY not crash tested properly. So now they are redesigning the jack point and adding another intrusion panel to the front of the car. The FIA mandated safety seat is also a total joke and actually limits safety and does not help it. In fact it has never once been used to my knowledge for extraction. You also have the issue of weight. The more these things weigh in the name of safety, the harder they are to slow down and the bigger the impact.
Bring back goggles and scarves I say. All this mamby pamby "safety" nonsense has ruined the sport. Burning wreckage and coffins separate the men from the boys.
There is zero evidence that the "wheel pods" do anything to make the cars safer. However it is a fact that they make them hideous. Backwards...lol - william wrong as usual.
Nobody is right and nobody is wrong. This is a forum where people exchange opinions. Once you will understand that, we will get along fine.
The cockpit does sound feasible, but it doesn't guarantee anything. F1/motorsports are dangerous. There are only so much you can do about it.
Sebastian Vettel will be the first Formula 1 driver to trial the shield cockpit protection device when he runs it in Friday practice for the British Grand Prix. Sebastian Vettel to be first F1 driver to try shield at Silverstone - F1 - Autosport TenTenths Motorsport Forum - View Single Post - Tech Issue Closed cockpits- Closer to reality then we might think?
HAHAHAHA! That's the funniest thing I've read in awhile. I'm gonna use that today in my next contentious meeting.
Definitely better looking than the 'thong'. In fact, infinitely better looking. But I'm afraid at that ultra steep angle will cause severe optical distortion, not to mention reflections. Let's wait to see what Vettel says. They could reduce the angle a little IMO, and still being able to deflect almost anything, with the same ability to just kick it up the drivers' heads. No way I'd be able to drive with a thong, but again, maybe drivers don't find it that distracting, and/or don't mind the vision obstruction it incorporates. We'll see what happens.
The optical distortions are a non issue. Refer to any modern fighter jet for evidence. This idea is certainly the more elegant solution if it works, is rigid/strong enough and allows for rapid driver extraction when the car is upside down.
Who told you modern fighter jets don't have distortion? Of course they do; simple physics. It's a well known compromise. If you want no distortion, it has to be a flat windshield perpendicular to your line of vision. Read any research paper on the subject. Figher jets deal with that in ways a race driver can't. Anyway, guess what? Vettel got the screen off after a lap due to distortion.
This whole idea is a typical over reaction to the Bianchi crash, the causes of which....driver error and misplaced track equipment....would not have been mitigated by either a shield or a halo; nor, unfortunately, would either have changed the tragic result.
Well the halo/shield would have no effect so I assume you're referring to the Bianchi crash. Ultimately it was Bianchi's driving too fast for conditions that put him off the road. Racing in the rain is part of the sport. It's one of the things that sets F1 apart from some other racing series.
true and agree, but what I am referring to was that maybe Charlie could have called for a SC instead of a VSC? Besides, this shield would deflect blown tyre shreds or shards of carbon fibre.....I don't think it would deflect a forklift or crane vehicle. The Halo(thong) has its issues one of them being driver exit que 2016 Alonso's Melbourne crash and where his car ended up; would he have been able to exit out of the car with the Halo???
It was quite an issue for Vettel today apparently: (From: Sebastian Vettel suffers dizziness in first trial of new F1 Shield | F1 News ): Sebastian Vettel cut short the first-ever trial of F1's new Shield head protection concept after the cockpit screen made him feel "dizzy". As the sport continues to evaluate what system to introduce onto cars in 2018, Ferrari became the first team to trial The Shield at the start of Friday's opening practice session at Silverstone. However, Vettel returned to the pits after just one lap with it attached to the front of the cockpit after encountering visibility problems. "I got a bit dizzy," the championship leader told Sky Sports F1. "Forward vision is not very good. I think it's because of the curvature, you get quite a bit of distortion, plus you get quite a bit of downwash down the straights pushing the helmet forwards. We had a run planned with it, but I didn't like it so we took it off." He added: "I didn't like it, especially looking forwards."
How exactly is this shield supposed to improve driver safety? I'm genuinely interested because I haven't read anything that describes what they are trying to achieve. In the event of a rollover or a wheel flying through the air it won't do a thing. What about rain? ...seems like maybe vision will be impaired. What about tire clag or debris that now sticks to the shield? ...is that a possibility?...I don't know.
