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

[Matt]

Or just add more lights?

Doesn't seem to affect touring cars.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Matt

That helmet also is sitting much higher than it does when the driver is actually in the car.

It shouldn't be if the test is to be accurate.

[Moneyseeker]

To my mind they are trying to 'retro fit' a protective design onto a current F1 chassis. Surely if they wanted to make this a goer they would have to design the car around the cockpit and make it a bit like an LMP1/2 design and incorporate driver entry and exit/extraction from the side. Obviously this brings cockpit cooling and misting into the equation, but looking at the Red Bull option I imagine that will be pretty hard to see through in a wet race.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It shouldn't be if the test is to be accurate.

Yes, but compare where it's sitting to where Ricciardo's helmet is in the car.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Matt

Yes, but compare where it's sitting to where Ricciardo's helmet is in the car.

It looks like Ricciardo's helmet is lower than the dummy head in the testing rig, so if they want to do the test properly they should lower the dummy head, to the same height as Ricciardo's helmet.

[rustyfan]

Massa apparently prefers the halo concept, which is ironic seeing as it most likely wouldn't have prevented him from being hit by the spring at Hungaroring.

[Armco Bender]

It looks like the Batmobile.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

It looks like the Batmobile.

Which one?

[dsg]

F1 is an open cockpit formula so they should abandon these screens. The most appropriate solution is to make the drivers helmet much larger and stronger and mount it to the car.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Matt

Or just add more lights?

Doesn't seem to affect touring cars.

I remember a race where a sunstrip did obscur the lights. In the next race the
team cut a section out of it! The suns trips were massive. It's rare, but worth checking. The problem is it may well vary by track.

I don't think this is a big issue though.

[S griffin]

I feel the best option is the screen. It don't look too bad, especially compared to the halo and the only thing they need to sort out is if the screen gets dirty through oil or water.

Not the first time we've seen a screen on an F1 car, remember the Protos?
And McLaren and Ferrari have tested it in the past

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by dsg

F1 is an open cockpit formula so they should abandon these screens. The most appropriate solution is to make the drivers helmet much larger and stronger and mount it to the car.

[lukej]

The amount of road blocks people put up to this to cover their own prejudices is ridiculous. For all the anti-canopy claims I've read, there's not a single one that actually stands up to a logical counter argument or rigorous examination of fact.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for reasoned debate and the discussion of real issues because this needs to ensure drivers are actually safer but for the most part the objections being spouted are poorly thought out disguises for "I like F1 the way it is"

When it comes down to it though, a closed cockpit works in prototypes so it can be made to work here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bjohnsonsmith]

There's a July 1 deadline for teams to agree on which cockpit protection device for the 2017 season.

http://classic.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/124054

However, Bernie is against any form of cockpit protection.

http://classic.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/124057

[ScotsBrutesFan]

If that is right,. then surely the FIA should be urging one of the other design teams to show what a full enclosed cockpit could look like. I appreciate that to mock one up for running on a track would be incredibly difficult but proper design renderings would be good to see.

[Casper]

I find it curious that BE is against every new change that anyone else thinks up but his ideas are excellent and should be implemented.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Casper

I find it curious that BE is against every new change that anyone else thinks up but his ideas are excellent and should be implemented.

Control freakery?

[TrapezeArtist]

Necessarily, both the halo and the aeroscreen are lash-ups designed to fit onto an existing car with minimal modification. Either one will be much better integrated if it becomes part of a 2017 car.

The big question for me is, how is the thing going to be mandated? Will the design of the halo/aeroscreen be precisely specified and the teams have to fit their car around it? Or will there be a set of limit dimensions and performance criteria and then the team can solve the design problem however they like?

Some people have questioned what will happen if the aeroscreen is contaminated with oil or water. I think a hydrophobic coating (you can buy a bottle of the stuff for a few quid, but I'm sure the F1 teams will find a way of spending thousands on it) will ensure water is not a problem. Oil and bits of tyre rubber might be a bit more of an issue. For the most extreme circumstances they may have to devise a plan for cleaning the screen if someone has an engine blow up right in front of them. They might also have tear-offs that are routinely removed at tyre stops.

Least important point on the subject: the aeroscreen looks nicer than the halo.

[Purist]

As with Indy Car, and other similar series in their basic form, the point is, open-wheel, open-cockpit cars are an essential part of the "raison d'etre" of F1.

Yeah, LMP1s have enclosed cockpits; this ain't Le Mans, this is F1! The issue is one of diluting/destroying the underlying identity of the series/sport. You're giving something up without gaining anything new or different. It's an inherent loss of distinction.

What value is there in making F1 into LMP1 or Group C, when those already exist and have established identities and followings of their own?

I can live with a higher cockpit surround, maybe something up to the level of what CART had in 1982 or so. Beyond that, no. I'm here to watch F1, NOT a 1978 Alpine-Renault A442B.

I'll say the same thing if IndyCar tries this, or tries to truly make of itself the new Can-Am II.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Originally Posted by Purist

As with Indy Car, and other similar series in their basic form, the point is, open-wheel, open-cockpit cars are an essential part of the "raison d'etre" of F1.

What value is there in making F1 into LMP1 or Group C, when those already exist and have established identities and followings of their own?

The only people making this leap are those who can't separate the following

LMP1 = covered wheels
LMP1 = A roof
LMP1 = doors

F1 = open wheels
F1 = canopy/screen

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Purist

As with Indy Car, and other similar series in their basic form, the point is, open-wheel, open-cockpit cars are an essential part of the "raison d'etre" of F1.

Yeah, LMP1s have enclosed cockpits; this ain't Le Mans, this is F1! The issue is one of diluting/destroying the underlying identity of the series/sport. You're giving something up without gaining anything new or different. It's an inherent loss of distinction.

What value is there in making F1 into LMP1 or Group C, when those already exist and have established identities and followings of their own?

I can live with a higher cockpit surround, maybe something up to the level of what CART had in 1982 or so. Beyond that, no. I'm here to watch F1, NOT a 1978 Alpine-Renault A442B.

I'll say the same thing if IndyCar tries this, or tries to truly make of itself the new Can-Am II.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Purist

As with Indy Car, and other similar series in their basic form, the point is, open-wheel, open-cockpit cars are an essential part of the "raison d'etre" of F1.

Yeah, LMP1s have enclosed cockpits; this ain't Le Mans, this is F1! The issue is one of diluting/destroying the underlying identity of the series/sport. You're giving something up without gaining anything new or different. It's an inherent loss of distinction.

What value is there in making F1 into LMP1 or Group C, when those already exist and have established identities and followings of their own?

I can live with a higher cockpit surround, maybe something up to the level of what CART had in 1982 or so. Beyond that, no. I'm here to watch F1, NOT a 1978 Alpine-Renault A442B.

I'll say the same thing if IndyCar tries this, or tries to truly make of itself the new Can-Am II.

So I am very confused now. When endurance prototypes used open cockpits, was I watching F1?

Richard

[Purist]

SBF:

Covered Wheels-Have you seen the new Mahindra/Pininfarina Formula E concepts? Have you seen the DeltaWing (originally IndyCar concept) in IMSA? Are you familiar with Can-Am II, Thundercars in the UK in the '80s, or the machinery Interserie began to use in the mid '90s? Formula E and IndyCar have already closed in the wheels to a significant extent.

It is a clear, visible trend in "formula" series.

Doors-You need a hatch of some sort to get out of a closed cockpit.

Roof/Canopy-A number of the Group C/GTP sportscars looked like they had "canopies". I may be using the term loosely here, but then, so does the general population. That smooth, curved shape with lots of opening and visually thin supports was not uncommon. Look at a Peugeot 905 Evo 1, Jaguar XJR-14, Lola T92/10, Allard J2X-C, Spice SE90-SE92. Nissan R9x(C/P/K/V) and P35, and to a lesser degree, the Sauber-Mercedes C9/11/291, Mazda RX792P, Aston Martin AMR-1, and Toyota TS010.

Now that last of the above might seem a bit of a stretch, but keep this in mind. I have been gobsmacked/rendered speechless more times than I can count by perfectly-intelligent people asking me, "Is that a DP or an LMP?", "Is that F1 or Indy?", "Is that NASCAR?", or "What series are you watching?" The point is, even after years or decades of exposure, people STILL SAY THEY CAN'T DISTINGUISH between what they TELL ME are "subtle" differences (as I internally erupt in a mixture of silent laughter and tears in exasperation).

F1 CAN'T survive on the fanatics with a "trained eye" alone. And I'm sorry, but those same people (more casual viewers) will TELL YOU that they can't tell the difference, and it's just ugly. And they don't care about all your intricate technical explanations; they just want their entertainment/enjoyment from a game/sport they know and recognize.

RC:

I'd say that the delineations were clearer then; we haven't had a new-design, open-top, top-tier Prototype Sportscar in a while now. At this point, new LMPs are all required to be enclosed, and "formula" cars can't decide what they are anymore, it seems at times. Sometimes, they just look to be trying to resemble some of the various Hot Wheels concepts from the past 20-25 years.

The real point is, Sports Prototypes had been those things (open and closed) since just about ever. The same goes for F1, with a few exceptions, back when they were allowed to do such things. Then again, most F1 cars were still open-wheeled when Mercedes ran their W196R Streamliner in the mid '50s. So even if one car was that way, the whole field was NOT. That mix could still be a point of differentiation for F1 back then. Now, F1 is trying to turn into something that already exists, has existed, or was/is/will soon be proposed.

It make no sense to make a change that is going to muddy the waters further.

[Purist]

As far as safety goes, crack down on shitty/careless/bonehead driving on the track, and you'll prevent exponentially more injuries and save many more lives than any canopy is going to accomplish in terms of protection.

The canopy is a red herring in the face of some FAR more glaring failures than a comparatively TINY number of freak accidents.

[Matt]

Only because it was mentioned, I must post the best looking fendered racecar of all time: