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

[ScotsBrutesFan]

The trouble with that is peripheral vision is virtually zero at the moment between the helmet opening and the raised cockpit sides.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Another point with the Halo, would this be some sort of driver removable device or something that the driver has to climb through to get in and out of the car.
If it's the latter, then our friends who object to the canopy because of roll over situations may not like the halo as it could especially if damaged absorbing a load track the driver every bit as much as an enclosed canopy.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

The trouble with that is peripheral vision is virtually zero at the moment between the helmet opening and the raised cockpit sides.

which is why i have always been a fan of a full canopy solution and i think there is an interesting area here to develop 'smart windshields' technologies. its certainly road relevant too.

costly though and doesnt solve the problem of getting in and out of the car.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

A windshield if any height would require to wipers in wet, which will get the "it's F1 not WEC" crowd agitated again

Winshields have been used in F1 for sometime.

[Casper]

As I said once before in this thread an enclosed cockpit will require ventilation and most probably air conditioning. I can imagine what it would be like in the rainy season in Malaysia in an enclosed cockpit without AC.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

If we are talking about a concept change which includes an enclosed canopy of some description. Then the door is open to introduce whatever needs to go along with it.
Air-con or a bleed air system
OLED screens inside the canopy fed by HD cameras rather than wing mirrors
Perhaps as I suggested previously a HUD system

We don't need the mythical ERS assisted 1000 horsepower, but what can be done is improve on the recovery systems and divert the electrical power for the systems mentioned above through the common ECU

[Casper]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

We don't need the mythical ERS assisted 1000 horsepower, but what can be done is improve on the recovery systems and divert the electrical power for the systems mentioned above through the common ECU

You can never have too much horsepower, the trick is to make it hard to use it all so the driver has to actually work out what to do with it all.

[wnut]

Hydrophobic windscreen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=468L0EijgnY

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_5lj9qV0CE

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by wnut

Hydrophobic windscreen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=468L0EijgnY

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_5lj9qV0CE

The hydrophobic stuff is cool, but what about stuff like oil, rubber and bugs!

Richard

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

The hydrophobic stuff is cool, but what about stuff like oil, rubber and bugs!

Richard

I don't have an answer for this question, some of the treatments form ultra smooth very Teflon like surfaces, so they will probably tend to shed most substances, how good the visibility through them is, I don't know.

F1 can develop the technology!

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

The hydrophobic stuff is cool, but what about stuff like oil, rubber and bugs!

Richard

Some pretty clever stuff around


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-cleaning_glass

For those interested.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

The hydrophobic stuff is cool, but what about stuff like oil, rubber and bugs!

Richard

As has been mentioned before , F1 doesn't need to spend a fortune re-inventing canopy technologies ...speak with Lockheed Martin, Boeing, BAe, MiG, Sukhoi to name but 5.

These companies and their suppliers know how to deal with bug splats at Mach 2 never mind 200mph.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

As has been mentioned before , F1 doesn't need to spend a fortune re-inventing canopy technologies ...speak with Lockheed Martin, Boeing, BAe, MiG, Sukhoi to name but 5.

These companies and their suppliers know how to deal with bug splats at Mach 2 never mind 200mph.

I am not sure if your comment is about concerns of impact damage, or cleanliness/visibility? I am not concerned about impact damage due to dust, bugs, oil or rubber, but rather visibility issues (loss or impairment)

I generally agree that the aerospace applications can bring a lot to the problem, but think the solution carry over can only go so far. I don't think commercial or military aircraft have to deal with the same issues as an F1 car does. Or at least the problem is different enough that the solution might be different.

For example I think aircraft use wipers at low speed (for rain and not all have wipers) and at high speed airflow removes water. Aircraft likely have little in the way of windscreen debris such as oil and dirt. I think the real issue (for F1) is going to be oil and rubber and to a lesser degree dirt/dust/mud.

Today the solution is for drivers to have tear-offs on their helmet visors (I am sure they also use hydrophobic coatings as well). And we have all seen onboard cameras that have a huge glop of rubber or oil smear that blocks the lens. Some use a protective film screen that unwinds/moves across the lens to move the "dirty" spot away from the lens (sort of alike motorized "tear off" system). I don't know if the current cameras still use that motorized system or if they just play the odds that the very small lens is not going to get hit by anything large.

I think all of this is solvable, but I doubt there is a coating or material that will solve this 100%. I expect to see pit members wiping any stubby windscreens during pit stops and maybe even the odd unscheduled stop to fix unexpected visibility problems such as having had to follow a car for a few laps that is misting oil onto your windscreen, or an glop of tire rubber hitting just right in the center of the drivers field of view and becomes an annoyance to the driver.

Closed cockpits have full windscreen and wipers. I think the wipers are mostly for rain, but could be used to dislodge something directly in the field of view (don't know if they can squirt fluid like a road car?) and you clearly see windscreens being cleaned during stops in prototype or GT racing.

Richard

[Richard C]

I forgot to mention above, that this is all in the context of a non-closed F1 cockpit (based upon recent "halo" concept) that has some type of clear windscreen that the driver must see through. I am broadly assuming that there will not be a mini-wiper system, but who knows!?

Richard

[ScotsBrutesFan]

My comments were meant more generally, I quoted you as your comment brought the conversation back not just from water/rain but also bugs etc.

Performance aircraft (single seat jets, trainers, aerobatic aircraft) don't have windscreen wipers as they tend to be curved shaped. The airflow disperses splats from bugs to birds.
The lens of the mini TV cameras are flat so any oil or bug, has to be moved mechanically with the moveable film.

I agree that the aerospace technology may not have an off-the-shelf answer, but my comment goes towards others who seen to think that cockpits or canopies would have to be developed from Scratch.
All I'm saying is ... there are companies out there with experience who could assist given the chance, and that the only way forward would be a formalised test on a Modified or purpose built Test hack.

[wnut]

It is time that the representatives of the self-interested revisited closed canopies!

The way someone logiced it out, if you are wearing your crash helmet and somebody hits you on the side of the head with a baseball bat, you are going to be in a lot of trouble, if you were protected by one of these canopies you would be untouched.

[chillibowl]

it really is only a matter of time.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

it really is only a matter of time.

It is. I also was recently thinking that this could be part of a way to make F1 stand out from other series. While it would be a safety feature first, I can see it also marketed as a unique feature (until other series adopt it). This is assuming you ignore existing closed cockpit racing such as prototypes.

Richard

[chillibowl]

safety would be the priority and also like you i sort of see this as an area where F1 could do something more...maybe something innovative or even road relevant with the concept.

of course this will cost money but also an opportunity for an existing team to win a major supply contract like Mclaren did with the ECU and no doubt the manus are all already working on smart windshield/HUD applications so in a way this could be an extension of that.

at the least, it would add some extra space for sponsor logos negating one of the potential arguments against a move towards smaller wing elements.

[canamman]

I have not gone through the whole thread
but I wonder if fire safety and some sort of
on board fire suppression system would need
to be figured in the equation.

[GingerPixel]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

As has been mentioned before , F1 doesn't need to spend a fortune re-inventing canopy technologies ...speak with Lockheed Martin, Boeing, BAe, MiG, Sukhoi to name but 5.

These companies and their suppliers know how to deal with bug splats at Mach 2 never mind 200mph.

Surely just speak to Audi, Toyota, Nissan or any other closed LMP1 manufacturer?

As an aside, doesn't the F22 have the largest single piece canpoy in existence? That this is some beautiful plastic.

[mikuni]

Bringing this back to the top, after the horrible Justin Wilson incident in Pocono.

Mod: The video is all over YouTube if you want or need to see it. Let's not re-post it here until more is known about Justin's condition

It really is only a matter of time, because while it wouldn't have saved Jules, it surely would have reduced the effect of an incident like Justin's.

[Richard C]

I expect IndyCar is in a tough place given they are using a new chassis and something like a canopy would probably be a big change. What are the odds of a different open wheel series implementing this before F1?

Richard

[NaBUru38]

The DW12 has been used since 2012. It's not far-fetched to launch a new car in 2018.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I expect IndyCar is in a tough place given they are using a new chassis and something like a canopy would probably be a big change. What are the odds of a different open wheel series implementing this before F1?

Richard

IndyCar is still using the DW12 chassis, though engine manufacturers Chevrolet and Honda have developed their own aero-kits, which they've been using this season. However, in 2018 there is meant to be a successor to the DW12.