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

[Akrapovic]

Why would a fire be more of a problem for F1 than any other closed car? Again, we're inventing problems to justify not using solutions that other series have used for decades.

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Why would a fire be more of a problem for F1 than any other closed car? Again, we're inventing problems to justify not using solutions that other series have used for decades.

Not fire in itself, but I think it is fair to say that in open wheel racing, wheel contact and a possible upside down scenario is more likely than in other types of racing and thus a combination of such a scenario with fire more likely.

[Akrapovic]

The amount of flying LMPs disagrees with that.

I'll say it again, F1 is just refusing to use solutions that already work because they didn't invent it. They don't want to be seen as copying other series. So the end result is a ridiculous halo which will have minimal effect in most situations F1 has come up against. All because they're too stubborn to use pre-existing solutions to problems that were solved decades ago.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

The amount of flying LMPs disagrees with that.

I'll say it again, F1 is just refusing to use solutions that already work because they didn't invent it. They don't want to be seen as copying other series. So the end result is a ridiculous halo which will have minimal effect in most situations F1 has come up against. All because they're too stubborn to use pre-existing solutions to problems that were solved decades ago.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

The amount of flying LMPs disagrees with that.

I'll say it again, F1 is just refusing to use solutions that already work because they didn't invent it. They don't want to be seen as copying other series. So the end result is a ridiculous halo which will have minimal effect in most situations F1 has come up against. All because they're too stubborn to use pre-existing solutions to problems that were solved decades ago.

Plus 1

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

The amount of flying LMPs disagrees with that.

I'll say it again, F1 is just refusing to use solutions that already work because they didn't invent it. They don't want to be seen as copying other series. So the end result is a ridiculous halo which will have minimal effect in most situations F1 has come up against. All because they're too stubborn to use pre-existing solutions to problems that were solved decades ago.

Richard

[bella]

thinking aloud here, and a question to the assembled. and possibly a bit off topic, but i'll send a polite but firm pm to myself about that

let's say f1 goes full canopy, and ends up with a very similar monocoque/safety cell to the lmp1/lmp2 cars. can we ever see a world where the two basic cells are created to identical regs, and then teams/manufacturers are given a free reign (to a lmp1/lmp2/f1/f2 specific set of regs)?

i do wonder sometimes whether it isn't the actual look or feel of a canopy that's the problem but more the convergence with prototypes and the reluctance for the two to look similar for fear of losing the identity of f1.

[Matt]

F1 cars with modern P car style canopies would be ugly as ****kkkkkkkkk.

A smaller version of this on the other hand...

[gttouring]

I think you hit a big part of the equation. Previously in our story some years ago, when prototypes found the full roll hoop reg loop hole we had essentially full width hoops over a single off set seat. Remember the BMW and the panoz lmp01, the double hoop or pseudo passenger placement was enforced, if I recall it was an FIA thing which in part stated that to create a greater difference and enforce the look of the prototypes and keep F1 being the only top level single seater, never mind it being open wheel. And as canopies became the rule, the "two passenger " look was enforced rather than a more aero efficient single central driver, of course LeMans and enduro driver changes are easier with a slightly off set cockpit.
Imagine the current Indy car field which is creeping towards almost full body with the amount of coverage they seem to require to help wheels from interlocking, getting a canopy on those , they start to get might prototype like.
Creating a unique single seat open wheel body canopy or driver head shield totally unique to F1 is seemingly paramount to creating the safety system itself.
I know prototype racers have gone from single seats to the double seat look off and on, but that example (around 99- early 2000s) is the one I remember from Mulsanne Mike to mention the F1 car not being an LMP and vice versa to be relevant to our discussion.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bella

thinking aloud here, and a question to the assembled. and possibly a bit off topic, but i'll send a polite but firm pm to myself about that

let's say f1 goes full canopy, and ends up with a very similar monocoque/safety cell to the lmp1/lmp2 cars. can we ever see a world where the two basic cells are created to identical regs, and then teams/manufacturers are given a free reign (to a lmp1/lmp2/f1/f2 specific set of regs)?

i do wonder sometimes whether it isn't the actual look or feel of a canopy that's the problem but more the convergence with prototypes and the reluctance for the two to look similar for fear of losing the identity of f1.

Not off topic at all.

In general, I would say it's highly unlikely and mostly to both keep series identity/differentiate, but without compromise of safety. I expect that at least for the foreseeable future, that prototypes may have a larger cockpit (similar to today) and a hypothetical F1 solution being much smaller. If anything... I would imagine it going in the direction of both having very small cockpits vs. both having a larger style like current prototypes. I can't say for sure, but I think the prototype cockpits have been shrinking in general anyhow if you look back as far as the 1960/70's?

All of this inline with what gttouring mentions.

Richard

[bella]

Originally Posted by gttouring

I think you hit a big part of the equation. Previously in our story some years ago, when prototypes found the full roll hoop reg loop hole we had essentially full width hoops over a single off set seat. Remember the BMW and the panoz lmp01, the double hoop or pseudo passenger placement was enforced, if I recall it was an FIA thing which in part stated that to create a greater difference and enforce the look of the prototypes and keep F1 being the only top level single seater, never mind it being open wheel. And as canopies became the rule, the "two passenger " look was enforced rather than a more aero efficient single central driver, of course LeMans and enduro driver changes are easier with a slightly off set cockpit.

i think this is the ideological position f1 finds itself facing now with this situation.

to my eyes it's incredible just how similar lmp1/lmp2 look to f1 from some angles already. if you visualise the cars without certain bits of bodywork the similarity is even more striking. i think to a casual observer, the two passenger thingy wouldn't be something they'd recognise in the closed cockpit prototypes, they really do look to all intents and purposes, a single seater racing car.

the shape of the open top lmp2 cars sans bodywork kind of reminds me of the 80s williams f1 cars with the broad noses. now granted, that's been because prototypes have moved towards the single seat aesthetic rather than the sportscar ones rather than the other way around like richard mentions above.

but i can see why f1 is really hesitating over the canopy thing. ideologically it's a tricky subject, especially with the drama around f1 not being a proper sprint series any more, tyres, yada yada yada. it's the tip of a very big iceberg that definitely needs looking at seriously, and coming out with a cast in stone concept for the future that isn't going to be subject to the same pontificating and crap decisions that the formula has embroiled itself in recently.

[gttouring]

What is this crap decisions and pontificating you speak of? F1 under Bernie Ecclestone? Surely you jest! Seriously I am not sure why Todt being at the FIA helm simply can't make a safety proposal and the f1 cockpit really won't damage f1 at all, they can redo the tub and driver position they can do whatever they want to develop the car around the driver safety cell+canopy in the best way possible, not just a tub crash test and then insert the driver.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by bella

the shape of the open top lmp2 cars sans bodywork kind of reminds me of the 80s williams f1 cars with the broad noses. now granted, that's been because prototypes have moved towards the single seat aesthetic rather than the sportscar ones rather than the other way around like richard mentions above.

[gttouring]

Isn't that the base to the LMPc cars now? I always liked these, but there you have it!

[bella]

this is the williams i was thinking of:



ok you have to squint a bit and use some imagination but it's the low nose/broad top of nose bit that reminds me. it looks quite broad and flat compared to f1 now, so we have been where lmp2 open cockpit cars were/are one point. i think that's what i was getting there.

[Akrapovic]

F1 would never allow it because it's determined to make decisions which make it different from other series, even if the decisions are ridiculous.

F1s qualifying, and halo safety systems are basically answers to questions nobody asked, and they still got it wrong.

[Richard C]

I see the resemblance (nose of that Williams). Some of the current cars have a wide monocoque given the required size of the cockpit (see earlier comments by a few regarding nod toward tradition of two seater), but otherwise, I think the basic chassis and suspension is all very similar. Take the shell off a prototype and you can see it.

I can't remember what series it was (been Googling this morning and it is not helping me), but it was a series here in the US (maybe global?) in the late 1980's? 1990's? In which a ubiquitous open wheel car of the day (Formula Atlantic???) could be converted to a sports prototype with a body kit and run in a totally different class. I "think" I even remember stories of the same car running in multiple classes in the same weekend, but was just converted from one spec to another? I could be remembering it wrong. I wish I could find some images of those, because you can clearly see the classic open wheel single seat style cockpit, but in a enclosed wheel prototype form.

Regardless, the point is that there really is more similarities than differences when it comes to engineering these cars.

Richard

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I see the resemblance (nose of that Williams). Some of the current cars have a wide monocoque given the required size of the cockpit (see earlier comments by a few regarding nod toward tradition of two seater), but otherwise, I think the basic chassis and suspension is all very similar. Take the shell off a prototype and you can see it.

I can't remember what series it was (been Googling this morning and it is not helping me), but it was a series here in the US (maybe global?) in the late 1980's? 1990's? In which a ubiquitous open wheel car of the day (Formula Atlantic???) could be converted to a sports prototype with a body kit and run in a totally different class. I "think" I even remember stories of the same car running in multiple classes in the same weekend, but was just converted from one spec to another? I could be remembering it wrong. I wish I could find some images of those, because you can clearly see the classic open wheel single seat style cockpit, but in a enclosed wheel prototype form.

Regardless, the point is that there really is more similarities than differences when it comes to engineering these cars.

Richard

Still A Thing in SCCA P1. Ralt RT-41

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Matt

Still A Thing in SCCA P1. Ralt RT-41

Thank you. That is it.

Slightly off topic question... Am I remembering it wrong that someone could or did run the same car in different races on the same weekend just by changing configuration? That seems like a lot of work for SCCA club racing, but that is the story I remember.

Richard

[Matt]

You very well could, and I'm sure a few people did at the Runoffs, should be a change of bodywork and possibly wheels and tires and away you go.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by bella

i do wonder sometimes whether it isn't the actual look or feel of a canopy that's the problem but more the convergence with prototypes and the reluctance for the two to look similar for fear of losing the identity of f1.

i would say that i am guilty of both.

we saw this with how many responded with the reduction in engine noise...as a fan base, the majority of us i would think have a very specific and even narrow view when it comes to how an F1 car should look and sound like.

but also when it comes down to it, i want the solution F1 comes up with to be unique because F1 is unique. i know it always wasnt the case but over my life F1 has been the premier bespoke racing series and thats an aspect which i really like about it.

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Regardless, the point is that there really is more similarities than differences when it comes to engineering these cars.

but surely there is an element of truism to that...they are all cars and all cars have common elements so of course they all have more similarities than differences.

following that thought though, i do like the halo concept im some respects.

one of the issues not addressed so far (i think) is that the halo seems to be something that would be easy to implement, affordable, and alleviates enough of the safety concerns that it can be quickly adopted by every lower open wheel category while still retaining an element of uniqueness that comes from the open wheel concept.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

but surely there is an element of truism to that...they are all cars and all cars have common elements so of course they all have more similarities than differences.

I get your point, but... its beyond the "all cars" aspect. Its not like we are tossing in figure eight school bus racing, or mud bog racers! I am talking purpose built race cars, classic circuit racing, piloted by a single driver, four wheels, composite monocoque, mid-engine configuration (minus Nissan of course! ), stressed member ICE and transmission, heavy reliance upon aero, a-arm suspension with push/pull rod and inboard springs and dampers, blah, blah...

The main differences are driven by regulations such as differences in minimum weight, type of allowable aero, allowable power types, and other (in the grand schema) minor things. For this discussion a large difference is cockpit specific safety features.

While historically, prototypes have their roots as "prototypes of road cars", and there have been a mixture of open and closed top versions over the decades within prototype racing. Today, I believe the rules mandate for closed top is for safety reasons only and the connection to road cars has become quite tenuous (short of basic technology such as hybrid power, etc.).

Richard

[wnut]

There were also the CanAm single seaters:

[S griffin]

That's right, I think the last F1 Ensign was converted into a Can-Am

[ScotsBrutesFan]

this is getting into the realm of bodyworked and covered wheel single seaters.
whilst that last image may be worth discussion in terms of an open top to an enclosed cockpit.
Lets try and keep the discussion to possible cockpit improvements in openwheeled single seaters and in particular F1.