[Tech Issue] Closed cockpits- Closer to reality then we might think?

[ScotsBrutesFan]

First reaction is that the drivers are going to have to climb in and out over the side pods as many struggle to step out of the cockpit over it's rim and clearing the bargeboards as it is.

Looking more carefully, It certainly wraps around more than the original images of the new shield, and is undoubtably more elegant that the Red Bull screen, but I still don't see how it would help with debris that is coming from an angle above the horizontal. The top of the helmet would appear to still be very exposed.

It'll be interesting to see the trial one mounted on a real car and as said with a driver in it.

[bauble]

How do you test a safety device?

Will they use a launcher to chuck assorted debris, springs, tyres, fibreglass shreds at the driver as he flies down the Hangar Straight at 200mph?

Can I nominate the driver?

Seriously the only thing that can come out of it is how it affects the driver in the car, and his vision and ability to get in and out. in a hurry, and how the marshals can help in the event of a serious shunt.

I can't believe they can ever find anyone foolish enough to drive these lethal projectiles, don't they realise that motor racing is dangerous?

[Mountain Man]

Originally Posted by hondafan37

The F1 set for test at British GP the Shield, this is the first image revealed.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f...actice-927240/

What do you think of the new F1 look?

Its hard to tell as its just a screen dumped on a current car, I suspect they ones designed for it will have a better look and look less like its just been stuck on.

But it still ends up being a farce for me. Its going to be closed cockpits sooner rather than later so I don't know why they dont just get on with it

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mountain Man

Its hard to tell as its just a screen dumped on a current car, I suspect they ones designed for it will have a better look and look less like its just been stuck on.

But it still ends up being a farce for me. Its going to be closed cockpits sooner rather than later so I don't know why they dont just get on with it

Closed cockpits will require a lot of testing so the driver doesn't get trapped, in the event of an accident. Then there's the question of who designs and manufactures it. Is it a standard design made by an outside contractor, so that teams can't gain an aerodynamic advantage or do the individual teams design and make it?

[ASCII Man]

I think the fully enclosed cockpit should be designed by a 3rd party, like Lockheed or something.
Either that or define the cockpit dimensions in the regulations, they sure should make the cockpit area wider to fit it in.

[Akrapovic]

If you go fully closed cockpit, why does it need to be third party? We have fully closed racing prototypes that don't have standard roofs. I don't see the problem with extracting drivers, doors, etc. These are engineering problems that are already solved that people talk about like they're impossible.

The question is not if it's possible to run with these features - it most certainly is. The question is if this is the route F1 wants to go down. The engineering side of it is not a challenge and is already solved. F1 just needs to look outside of its own little bubble to see them.

[ASCII Man]

F1 looking outside of its own bubble is the biggest hurdle, as F1 always wants to reinvent the wheel, even if it doesn't work and/or makes the problem even worse.

[S griffin]

Looks like the Halo has been put on the backburner and the shield is now the one that's looking like the future. Still needs more work IMHO

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If you go fully closed cockpit, why does it need to be third party? We have fully closed racing prototypes that don't have standard roofs. I don't see the problem with extracting drivers, doors, etc. These are engineering problems that are already solved that people talk about like they're impossible.

The question is not if it's possible to run with these features - it most certainly is. The question is if this is the route F1 wants to go down. The engineering side of it is not a challenge and is already solved. F1 just needs to look outside of its own little bubble to see them.

Indeed, prototypes do have fully enclosed cockpits. However, getting in and out of the cockpit of a prototype is completely different from getting in and out of the cockpit of an F1 car. Looking at Alonso's crash at Melbourne 2016, what remained of the car was up against the tyre barrier, with just enough room for Alonso to squeeze himself out. I wonder how easy it would have been for him to have got out of the car, if the cockpit were fully enclosed? I think these are engineering problems that are far from solved.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Indeed, prototypes do have fully enclosed cockpits. However, getting in and out of the cockpit of a prototype is completely different from getting in and out of the cockpit of an F1 car. Looking at Alonso's crash at Melbourne 2016, what remained of the car was up against the tyre barrier, with just enough room for Alonso to squeeze himself out. I wonder how easy it would have been for him to have got out of the car, if the cockpit were fully enclosed? I think these are engineering problems that are far from solved.

Sorry but I disagree. F1 and Prototype extraction is currently very different, but that's only because an F1 car is open topped whilst a Prototype is closed roof. If you put a roof on an F1 car, then suddenly they are not so different and the engineering solutions are already in place. Hatches on either side, exactly like LMPs, which the driver can be extracted through.

Had Alonsos accident happened with a roof then the car would have rested against the wall and he'd have had more room to move about (since the car would've rested against the roof) and had the hatch to move through to exit.

So unless F1 wants to intentionally design a bad canopy and roof system, the problems have been solved.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

There is also the aerospace that I have suggested in this thread previously. That is the option of squibs within the "glass" canopy that can shatter the entire canopy, leaving as much room to get out or be extracted as an open cockpit.

Appropriate safeguards and triggering mechanisms of course

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Sorry but I disagree. F1 and Prototype extraction is currently very different, but that's only because an F1 car is open topped whilst a Prototype is closed roof. If you put a roof on an F1 car, then suddenly they are not so different and the engineering solutions are already in place. Hatches on either side, exactly like LMPs, which the driver can be extracted through.

Had Alonsos accident happened with a roof then the car would have rested against the wall and he'd have had more room to move about (since the car would've rested against the roof) and had the hatch to move through to exit.

So unless F1 wants to intentionally design a bad canopy and roof system, the problems have been solved.

This raises two questions. Firstly, if a canopy is placed over the open cockpit of an F1 car, how does the driver get in or out? The cockpit of an LMP1 car is wider and there are doors on the side of the canopy.

Secondly, Alonso had very little room to get out as it was, so if the car had a canopy how would Alonso have been able to open it, with the car up against the tyre wall?

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

This raises two questions. Firstly, if a canopy is placed over the open cockpit of an F1 car, how does the driver get in or out? The cockpit of an LMP1 car is wider and there are doors on the side of the canopy.

Secondly, Alonso had very little room to get out as it was, so if the car had a canopy how would Alonso have been able to open it, with the car up against the tyre wall?

If the F1 solution is simply stick on a canopy as wide as the driver, that you are forced to lift off vertically, then that is a horrendous solution, and one that is only being introduced to make sure that F1 looks like it is not copying other series.

However even on the assumption that we make a mini LMP cockpit, only as wide as the driver, why are we still talking about covering the car and lifting it off? I don't see why the entire canopy has to be lifted off. If you're encasing the driver in an LMP style canopy, then it suddenly has sides. Sides which can have hatches. We like to call them doors, but realistically they are closer to hatches than doors.



There's a solution that's almost 10 years old that works. It can't just be copy and pasted, but it works. Have them open forward and backwards too. Have the hatches with quick releases on the inside rather than hinged if you'd prefer. There are MANY angles this can be taken rather than just a big solid canopy that lifts off vertically.

Again - these engineering solutions already exist in other series. We've already had people suggest that rain would be a problem (take a look at your road car guys), misting would be a problem. Doors would be a problem. Hatches would be a problem. Problems that other series solved decades ago, F1 is absolutely determined to reinvent the wheel on. Every other series is using round wheels, so F1 might go down the hexagon route.

If F1 is going down the closed cockpit route, the solutions do exist. The real question is whether or not F1 wants to go down that route. And it actually seems more like they'd rather half arse the solution than using the best one available.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If the F1 solution is simply stick on a canopy as wide as the driver, that you are forced to lift off vertically, then that is a horrendous solution, and one that is only being introduced to make sure that F1 looks like it is not copying other series.

However even on the assumption that we make a mini LMP cockpit, only as wide as the driver, why are we still talking about covering the car and lifting it off? I don't see why the entire canopy has to be lifted off. If you're encasing the driver in an LMP style canopy, then it suddenly has sides. Sides which can have hatches. We like to call them doors, but realistically they are closer to hatches than doors.



There's a solution that's almost 10 years old that works. It can't just be copy and pasted, but it works. Have them open forward and backwards too. Have the hatches with quick releases on the inside rather than hinged if you'd prefer. There are MANY angles this can be taken rather than just a big solid canopy that lifts off vertically.

Again - these engineering solutions already exist in other series. We've already had people suggest that rain would be a problem (take a look at your road car guys), misting would be a problem. Doors would be a problem. Hatches would be a problem. Problems that other series solved decades ago, F1 is absolutely determined to reinvent the wheel on. Every other series is using round wheels, so F1 might go down the hexagon route.

If F1 is going down the closed cockpit route, the solutions do exist. The real question is whether or not F1 wants to go down that route. And it actually seems more like they'd rather half arse the solution than using the best one available.

At this juncture no one knows what the F1 solution to a full canopy would be and hopefully, F1 won't go down that road. However, if it does, what ever is decided needs to tested thoroughly.

[chillibowl]

the shield looks much much nicer than the Halo and some protection is better than none so i hope the shield proves to be acceptable enough to be implemented for next year.

[Richard C]

People tend to get hung up on trying to engineering solutions that will solve ALL known and unknown problems current and future. Plus trying to solve using a single solution. For example a common one is... When car is in X position, how will the driver extract himself? That line of thinking has no reasonable path forward if the solution to all problems is always "self extraction".

I am sure we can generate conditions using both the current open and potentially future closed cockpits in which self extraction is impossible. Or rather... would be difficult to do without external help, or requires significant engineering burdens upon the design within the car. The Alonso example is a good one and I think the very recent Pascal Wehrlein Monaco example is good as well. Maybe self extraction in those and other cases may not be the answer?

Combat fighters at 10's of thousands of feet have no "help" when things go wrong. So that is why complex ejections systems exist (explosive canopy release, rocket extraction from the aircraft, automatic parachute deployment, etc.). These cars are designed to race in a relatively controlled environment in which the overall safety goes beyond just the driver and the survival cell. Outside help does exist.

So, design the solution so that the driver can self extricate in the vast majority of common scenarios (including some upside down scenarios). For the exceptional situations in which that may not be easily achieved (car is upside down, large fuel fire and another car or debris is piled on top. Or the car is deeply buried in a tire wall or some other structure. Or even straight up equipment failure of the egress system which prevents the canopy from opening) You should then rely upon alternative safety measures. That may include designs to enable a "shelter in place" strategy until on track help arrives. Frankly I see no other way around that. It is unlikely that any solution will solve all problem. As much as I dislike the non-canopy solutions, they clearly are taking this approach. They are trying to solve for a number of scenarios (generally intrusion from the front) that is less than all of the potential scenarios (intrusion from the top). My beef is that they are not solving for enough scenarios.

And as always... it's good to point out again and again... All of this has generally been solved in other series. F1 loves to pretend they are so unique that their solution has to be unique as well. Just look to other series as to what has worked and what type of extraction scenarios have occurred.

Richard

[S griffin]

Apparently Indycar have caught onto the idea and might be testing the shield soon

[Adam43]

Worth having a look. I'll wait for real photos of it.

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Worth having a look. I'll wait for real photos of it.

Would a video clip do?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfv6AvnD15A

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Would a video clip do?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfv6AvnD15A

If that is the real deal, from an esthetics perspective it's not bad. Clearly that is a computer generated image. Is it speculation/artist rendering from Motorsports.com (which would be meaningless for the purpose of this discussion) or something more official from Ferrari and/or FIA which may be an accurate representation?

Richard

[Matt]

I mean, if you have that whole apparatus on the front of the car, surely you don't need to have bodywork under it, right? Would make it easier to get out of there was an open hole under the screen.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Matt

I mean, if you have that whole apparatus on the front of the car, surely you don't need to have bodywork under it, right? Would make it easier to get out of there was an open hole under the screen.

I suspect they feel they are solving two different problems. For example I suspect they don't expect the screen to do everything the existing safety cell already does. It is just additive and clearly focused nearly 100% on deflection of objects that come directly from the front and not from the top. And even then the drivers will still be still be required to wear a full face helmet (additional intrusion protection). It is rightly using the "defense in depth" strategy with multiple layers of protection.

There is also the practical nature in that it provides structure for attachment of steering wheel, etc. and having the a smaller hole in the structure helps it maintain its overall physical integrity. And lastly... it allows teams to not have to redesign the safety cell ($$$) if new features are additive. Clearly ANY solution will impact aero design.

Richard

[Akrapovic]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report...-to-try-shield

Autosport with a photo. Still has plastic wrap on it.

[Matt]

I'm all about this.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Would a video clip do?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfv6AvnD15A

I'll still up for wait for seeing it real, but I hadn't seen that thank you

Originally Posted by Matt

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEoNQxHW0AESEnR.jpg

]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEoTQaEW0AMGN_a.jpg

I'm all about this.

It's not a bad effort. A bit more tweaking and it could be alright. Again I would still like to see it in context on track, but I recon that could be the sort of thing that is introduced and two races latter it has become normal.

(After loads of whinging or course )

Thanks