|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
25 Oct 2014, 23:39 (Ref:3468464) | #376 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
|
Quote:
All this for what, everyone having a knee jerk reaction to something they have little or no information about and if the circumstances are purely de-acceleration a closed cockpit does not stop a driver's head or body from going from high speed to nothing as NASCAR will tell you after their experience with that problem. The only way to deal with that issue is to make sure the cars can't hit anything. |
||
|
25 Oct 2014, 23:55 (Ref:3468469) | #377 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,716
|
Jeremy: Your right that cockpit Canopies aren't the answer to every problem, we now know the Jules suffered a massive deceleration injury, but this topic predates what happened to him.
My understanding is that in Massa's case the big accident was because he had been hit, a cockpit canopy would likely have deflected the object away, or worst case have become embedded in the canopy. The shock of that happening may have cause Massa to the crash off, but it wouldn't have been in the unabated way that he did. We have seen too many near misses from the on board cameras of debris whizzing past at helmet height, or cars going over one another within inches of the cockpit opening. It's only by the racing Gods that none of those incidents were worse than they were. Why keep tempting fate. There is a risk reduction measure out there, it atleast has to be looked at seriously. |
||
|
26 Oct 2014, 00:43 (Ref:3468481) | #378 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,716
|
Casper: redesigning the cockpit area of an F1 car doesn't make it a WEC coupe. You only have to look at Adrian Newey's video game Red Bull X1, sure it was a mock up, ignore the covered tyres....take a close look at the cockpit section. Narrow nose, exposed suspension and steering arms, doesn't look like a WEC at all.
If that's just for a mock up, putting the full weight of the best designers together to do it properly you can be sure it wouldn't look like a WEC car unless they wanted it to. No I'm not a race driver but I have worked on avionics in the defence sector, so I know just how tight the cockpit is around a pilot, their survival cell is only longer due to the size of their ejector seat, and width isn't that much more. All the cockpit cooling and dehumidifying equipment is all with the pilots survival cell. Why aerospace companies, well you pretty much answered that one yourself, in comparison to WEC, they are coupes and have a proper windscreen and a roof above the drivers head. F1 one cars are single seaters and the discussion here is about fitting or redesigning them to have a cockpit canopy. Who better to speak to about cockpit canopies than aerospace companies such as Lockheed, Boeing, BAE, Dasault or their suppliers, that design and implement their usage day in day out. And of course not only do the aerospace companies design cockpits, they also know about getting them off in a hurry as well. As I said in my reply to Jeremy, this isn't a knee jerk reaction, look at the date of the opening post, this thread is over 3 years old. |
||
|
26 Oct 2014, 02:03 (Ref:3468498) | #379 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 11,402
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
26 Oct 2014, 15:25 (Ref:3468724) | #380 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,254
|
But where does it end though? Formula ford with cockpits? Formula 3 with cockpits, cockpits for karts?
|
||
|
26 Oct 2014, 21:45 (Ref:3468843) | #381 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,716
|
Where does it it end, is that really what you feel about safety.
What I suggested above was exactly that, a suggestion based on where I believe F1 should go on safety. In terms of lesser formulae, perhaps levels of safety equipment and head protection for open wheelers should be mandated in a similar way to that circuits have grading. |
||
|
27 Oct 2014, 20:29 (Ref:3469171) | #382 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,254
|
Quote:
F1 has a rather hypocritical approach to safety, they claim to be at the forefront of motorsport safety, yet proceed to race on a track covered in debris. F1 promotes tyres that fall apart and cover the race track in marbles, creating a often very narrow racing line, straying from that can result in cars losing control. They incist on making sweeping changes to classic race tracks, yet they freely pass many street tracks as safe to race on, despite many corners having no run off, it's like it's one rule for Silverstone and another for Monaco, if a corner is dangerous it's dangerous no matter what the location. |
|||
|
27 Oct 2014, 20:54 (Ref:3469175) | #383 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
Quote:
just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean that changes aren't made. |
||
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
27 Oct 2014, 22:36 (Ref:3469205) | #384 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,254
|
Ok, point taken, but nothing specific was done relating to that incident in question, ie the track wasn't changed and the cars remained the same for the 2000 season. The hans introduction was a general movement towards lessening neck / spinal injuries and nothing specific to Neil's death, though granted it would have likely helped, had he been wearing one.
|
||
|
27 Oct 2014, 22:53 (Ref:3469211) | #385 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
this is so far off topic i've given myself an official warn, but it wasn't the track layout that caused his injury, and it wasn't the car either. like it wasn't the track layout or the car that caused jules'.
it's the only one i can think of off the top of my head but didn't kelvin burt's big old shunt in the btcc bring about a few changes at uk circuits? other than that i agree a bit with your general point - my big issue is the frequency of spinal injuries in single seaters and prototype racing and the lack of effort and research into seat materials and so on. until a driver ruins his back in f1 we're not going to see anything done. Last edited by bella; 27 Oct 2014 at 23:14. Reason: now with added sort of on-topicness |
|
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
24 Feb 2015, 21:18 (Ref:3508551) | #386 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Mercedes promises halo for cockpit safety
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns30037.html "The issue then returned to the top of the agenda late last year, when the now stricken Jules Bianchi's helmeted head hit the underside of a trackside vehicle during the Japanese grand prix." |
|
|
24 Feb 2015, 21:20 (Ref:3508554) | #387 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
||
|
24 Feb 2015, 22:02 (Ref:3508567) | #388 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,716
|
And that would prevent a Massa type accident in what way?
There are lots of design concepts going around at the moment I'd love to know whether any of the design teams have a cockpit concept saved on their hard drive. More to the point it would be good to see what the F1 designers think could work practically. |
||
|
24 Feb 2015, 23:22 (Ref:3508603) | #389 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,184
|
I thought the Bianchi incident was cut and dried in that his head did *not* make contact with the tractor. It was the sudden deceleration that did the damage, not contact.
I'm in no way against safety improvements but that bit was pretty definitive. |
|
__________________
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes. When they realise you have, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes. |
25 Feb 2015, 02:25 (Ref:3508654) | #390 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 660
|
From the FIA report - "9. Bianchi’s helmet struck the sloping underside of the crane. The magnitude of the blow and the glancing nature of it caused massive head deceleration and angular acceleration, leading to his severe injuries."
http://www.fia.com/news/accident-panel But agree, don't see how this proposal helps with Jules' or Massa's accidents. |
||
__________________
"We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could produce the complete works of Shakespeare; now, thanks to the Internet, we know that is not true." -Robert Wilensky |
25 Feb 2015, 06:24 (Ref:3508679) | #391 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
This bit of the Bianchi accident was of concern:
7. During the 2 seconds Bianchi’s car was leaving the track and traversing the run-off area, he applied both throttle and brake together, using both feet. The FailSafe algorithm is designed to over-ride the throttle and cut the engine, but was inhibited by the Torque Coordinator, which controls the rear Brake-by-Wire system. Bianchi’s Marussia has a unique design of BBW, which proved to be incompatible with the FailSafe settings. It looks like the BBW system contributed significantly to this accident. 8. The fact that the FailSafe did not disqualify the engine torque requested by the driver may have affected the impact velocity; it has not been possible to reliably quantify this. However, it may be that Bianchi was distracted by what was happening and the fact that his front wheels had locked, and been unable to steer the car such that it missed the crane. |
|
|
25 Feb 2015, 07:50 (Ref:3508698) | #392 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,184
|
Thanks, JABWOA. Obviously I missed that.
|
|
__________________
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes. When they realise you have, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes. |
25 Feb 2015, 08:47 (Ref:3508722) | #393 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,429
|
As most have observed regards the Bianchi incident it wouldn't matter if it was completely enclosed, going under a dead weight at that speed would still result in the same outcome.
As it was it visibly moved the crane by going under the counterweight so even if had stopped dead the result would be similar. Of course this is only speculation by me and an "anorak" will shoot me down in flames, however F1 is certainly safer now than it's ever been and a lesson has been learned, and hopefully a similar situation won't arise in the future. |
||
__________________
Balls of steel (knob of butter) They're Asking For Larkins. ( Proper beer) not you're Eurofizz crap. Hace más calor en España. Me han conocido a hablar un montón cojones! Send any cheques and cash to PO box 1 Lagos Nigeria Africa ! |
25 Feb 2015, 15:56 (Ref:3508877) | #394 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,807
|
seems like this 'halo' solution would work against a rogue tire though.
short of a full canopy (which has its own problems) is one solution ever going to be enough to prevent all types of accidents? |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
25 Feb 2015, 16:38 (Ref:3508891) | #395 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,716
|
It would depend on the size of the diameter of the Halo.
It would benefit a Surtees type accident where the bouncing wheel came from one side. but if the tyre and wheel were coming in on a more vertical angle and with force, how much of the tyre would protrude below the ring of the Halo into the drivers Helmet space. Possibly wedging there, possibly bouncing back out. If it wedged there, presumably the driver would be stuck in the car ? One solution will never prevent accidents, but finding a solution that when assessed provides a safe solution for most instances would be better than further procrastination. |
||
|
25 Feb 2015, 19:11 (Ref:3508935) | #396 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,953
|
Quote:
I can understand why a halo approach was selected (easiest solution to egress and cost issue), but I was expecting it to be more of a low windshield (which has it's own problems such a visibility when dirty). The illustration on the prior page is pretty bad. It will be interesting to see what a real design would look like. I also am wondering what aero tricks might "inadvertently" be included in what is to be a safety feature. Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
25 Feb 2015, 19:47 (Ref:3508951) | #397 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,418
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
25 Feb 2015, 19:59 (Ref:3508957) | #398 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,716
|
A windshield if any height would require to wipers in wet, which will get the "it's F1 not WEC" crowd agitated again
|
||
|
25 Feb 2015, 20:18 (Ref:3508961) | #399 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,418
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
25 Feb 2015, 20:41 (Ref:3508975) | #400 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,953
|
With a halo, I am assuming it has to be far enough forward that there is no chance of the helmet hitting it on a forward impact (restriction of movement via harness and HANS device) but on the sides there will likely have to be padding? Or maybe expand upwards the existing removable padding that loops around the driver now?
Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Closed cockpits | gttouring | Sportscar & GT Racing | 5 | 27 Mar 2003 22:59 |
FIA to introduce a 'spy' into F1 cockpits | Super Tourer | Formula One | 25 | 12 Feb 2003 14:29 |
A step closer to reality... | Gt_R | Formula One | 4 | 20 Dec 2000 07:47 |
Open v. Closed Cockpits...Why? | Heeltoe6 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 4 | 8 Jun 2000 07:04 |