NemesisC5

Seems to me a canopy would offer better protection with less exposure to flying debris. If you go through a process to develop a solution that prevents injuries and saves lives it makes sense to me that you strive for 100%. However, a canopy would need a cooling solution for races in hot climates.

1991Z07

And creates a visibility problem with rain and/or oil when someone's engine lets go in front of you.

Zoxxo

A "100% solution" takes into consideration not just the driver but everyone else at the track as well. That's the real sticking point with this stuff.

Two of the problems with canopies are (a) rapid extraction of the driver after an accident (especially if the car has overturned or buried itself in a tire wall) and (b) things that strike the canopy can/do/will bounce off - often high in the air and at unpredictable angles. Saving the driver just to kill a spectator probably isn't the first choice option.

Z//

NemesisC5

Good point on the extraction.
However every point on the car is a potential "strike point" to bounce an object. A canopy will create more surface area available to strike but so does the halo exhibited on Kimi's car. Crashcar/Nascar has 43 cars with plenty of surface area to launch projectiles every weekend into an ocean of spectators sitting trackside with not much except a car and occasional tire hitting fans. The incident with the spring hitting Massa was an exception.

1991Z07

But tires and other debris aren't. The halo isn't a foolproof system...they have to make compromises for driver extraction and visibility when weather conditions are just right.

Imagine them in...say, Singapore with 98% humidity with a night race and they hit a cool spot when the entire canopy fogs over. How safe is that gonna be for the driver? Add to that cooling requirements for the drivers because now they are in a glass sauna...

There have already been suggestions that they put bullet-proof glass panels in the halo to stop smaller objects. I'm sure they will be tested and the pro's vs con's weighed for each before they implement it.

NemesisC5

But tires and other debris aren't. - tires and other debris can launch off any contact point on the car like they do now

Imagine them in...say, Singapore with 98% humidity with a night race and they hit a cool spot when the entire canopy fogs over. How safe is that gonna be for the driver? Add to that cooling requirements for the drivers because now they are in a glass sauna... - that was a concern I voiced in my post as well. Regarding fogging of the canopy there have been dramatic advances in anti-fog coatings in the last 2 years. I saw new safety eyewear by 3M this week that we couldn't fog going directly from heat to very cold in seconds...same from cold to heat.

F1 is one of only a handful of international series that don't have enclosed cockpits. Every series has basically the same challenges they had to overcome and compromises they have to live with and in the end F1 will to. waiting to see as we all are.

BrianCunningham

Parts are still going to bounce off the other 90% of the car

at least with some sort of protection solution the driver is still awake

1991Z07

My point was...tires and debris that size striking a drivers head and it's all over. Right there...done.

If it strikes the halo it deflects it AWAY from a drivers head, and they are still conscious and can safely bring the car to a stop.

Massa's impact with the suspension spring knocked him out...and he went full speed and t-boned the barriers which even further complicated the injuries. Not only did he have a blunt impact concussion, but a high-g deceleration event (which squished the area of his brain that had the original impact).

Zoxxo

I would suggest that ALL of the incidents used to justify this stuff are exceptions. Divide the number of miles raced by open-wheel cars over the past 20 years all over the world by the number of drivers seriously injured or killed by this "problem" during the same period and things can be seen in a more realistic context. (Again, remove Bianchi from the calculation since his thing really was extraordinary and none of these "solutions" would have had any effect in that case.)

This head protection stuff makes somewhat more sense in IndyCar where the walls are close to the track and are actually hard walls with minimal-to-nil absorption value. In F1 the tracks have been designed to (usually) have the cars' impacts with stationary stuff take place some distance from the racing surface and in most cases with tire walls and the like that ease deceleration and help to trap errant components. Besides, IndyCar has already kind of surrendered its claim to being "open wheel" what with all the bodywork around the wheels.

Can auto-tension seat belts and airbags be far away? Soon F1 will be the safest racing in the world. No one will be watching it but it'll be safe as hell. Safe, green, quiet, predictable, politically correct and dull as dirt.

Z//

NemesisC5

I agree on all points

I agree, these incidents are exceptions as the cars have been constructed increasingly safer almost every year. The fortification of the monocoque along with crush zones have been huge contributors. Drag boats, F1 boats and hydroplanes all employ monocoques with canopies to protect drivers and IMHO consider them with similar death potential as F1.

1991Z07

Yes...racing is dangerous, but what if it were YOU in that car. Wouldn't YOU want a significantly higher chance of surviving that accident, even IF it were such a low statistic?

If they'd have had a halo on Senna's car, he would have had a MUCH higher chance of surviving that impact.

And these are just F1 deaths in this page...not a small statistic at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...One_fatalities

Zoxxo

What accident are you talking about?

And he'd have had a 100% chance of surviving it if he'd been on the beach instead of doing what he, a sentient adult capable of assessing risk and making informed choices, CHOSE TO DO. No one is forcing any of these folks to drive these cars. On the contrary, there is a loooong list of folks wanting to do so despite all the wailing and gnashing about how unsafe it is (which it is not any more.)

I find precious little difference between this stuff and the folks who buy a house near an airport (or race track) and then, after the fact, start complaining about the noise. If you find open-wheel racing dangerous and scary then don't freakin' do it. Go race tin-tops or WEC or the like.

You'll notice that there is no dearth of F1 drivers who get kicked out of the "scary" F1 who can't get on the phone fast enough to IndyCar teams so they can REALLY confront death on a daily basis.

There has been exactly ONE F1 death from head injury that MIGHT(!) have been prevented with this halo nonsense since 1990 and that's Senna. ONE.

Seriously? You're listing ALL fatalities of any sort including Goodwood exhibitions and "club racing" and with zero effort to determine if this new "solution" could/would have played any role whatsoever in preventing said deaths?

Just ban racing altogether and be done with it. Then nobody can EVER get so much as a scratch from the darned things. More time to read up on the life of Ralph Nader.

Z//

froggy47

I recently watched this documentary, mostly because i used to sky dive, and thought a mention of it might fit in this thread.

http://www.cnn.com/shows/cnn-films-sunshine-superman

Carl Boenish, the "father of base jumping" was safety conscious and died doing what he loved.

The line between safety and "well let's just call it a day and ban it" is a fine one.

Each of us makes our own decision and choice about how we live, how we recreate, whether we play golf or run a car on a track.

The "forces" driving whether to halo or not (or some other covering device) are IMO mostly external to the men who drive the cars.

I would hope that at the end the drivers get "most" of the say about "enclosing" or not.

I'm not sure that will be the case.

1991Z07

Go ahead and bury your head in the sand...the FIA is looking beyond F1.

GP2 just had another death in the last few years, which is also under the FIA's banner.

Vettel feels that at least 2 drivers in recent years would still be alive if this had been in place...Henry Surtees (GP2) and Justin Wilson (IndyCar).

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/...bastian-vettel

I would add Dan Wheldon into that as well...he would have had a lot better chance of survival, at the least.

Just because it's a dangerous job doesn't mean you shouldn't try to make it safer. Using your attitude, everything that Jackie Stewart did to reduce fatalities was a waste of time? When 2-3 F1 drivers were killed EVERY YEAR? Your position is BS...

If safety measures should be scrapped and let the drivers beware is your attitude...then you must not ever go out on a track and mix it up with other drivers.

They have family that they want to go home to...their job is just having the most fun you can have with clothes on and it has inherent danger.

There have even been a few decapitations in F1 that, had the halo been around, wouldn't have happened. People like Chris Bristow in Belgium (1960), Helmuth Koi**** at Watkins Glen (1974) and Tom Pryce in South Africa (1977).

Head injuries is another category: Mark Donohue, Austria (1975) - fencepost, Roland Ratzenberger, San Marino (1994) - nearly decapitated going under the Armco and Senna, San Marino (1994) - wheel and suspension.

One can never take 100% of the risk out...but if you don't think it's worth it then we are in disagreement.

VetteDrmr

There are two key differences with the unlimited water-borne races and auto races: there's essentially a 100% chance of being hit by high speed water in an open cockpit design, *and* the drivers need a supply of air if the cockpit area sinks. So they intentionally designed the cockpits to be self-contained, and the canopy supported solutions to both those issues. Plus the optics didn't have to support much vision other than a narrow field of view straight ahead.

Have a good one,
Mike

NemesisC5

I've watched both unlimited hydoplanes and F1 powerboat racing for years. The F1 boats are most similar to F1 cars and I feel this article draws several relevant comparisons between the cars and boats including a couple of comments from Niki Lauda. The canopies are there primarily to protect the driver from water impact if the boat flips and driver is hammered to the water and not only high speed spray. In F1 powerboat racing the boats mix it up with both left and right turns and peripheral vision is highly necessary to keep from running into your competitors just as F1 cars. With unlimited hydroplanes your comment regarding peripheral vision is far more accurate but not 100% correct.

http://eandt.theiet.org/magazine/201...EtOtherStories

F1 powerboats - full-throttle technology

17 June 2013 By Sean Davies

Formula 1 powerboat engineering is a delicate discipline, and one small misjudgement could make the difference between victory and disaster.
"It's like driving a Formula One car across a ploughed field." The words of three-time world champion Niki Lauda after driving an F1 powerboat shortly after his third triumph in the 1980s. And that sums up the powerboat experience perfectly: a 400hp Merlin two-stroke engine propelling a 400kg catamaran at speeds of up to 150mph on a cushion of air held to the water by scant millimetres of adhesion that prevent a catastrophic failure.

One man that knows all about F1 powerboats is Jonathan Jones. The Wales-born racer lifted top honours in 1986, 1989, 1991 and finally 1998. Nowadays Jones is owner of Dragon F1 Powerboats. "When you are racing a car you are always in contact with the road," Jones explains. "When you are racing a Formula One powerboat you don't have that security. It's a six-metre catamaran that runs on a cushion of air. It looks like an aircraft because you are totally enclosed in a cockpit. You are strapped into a cocoon with a five-point harness, crashboxes either side in case of an accident and a life-support system in case it turns over.

"With a powerboat you are running on a cushion of air with probably only the last 5cm of the boat actually making contact with the water." To control the boat the driver has buttons on the steering wheel and the floor. These control hydraulic rams that move the outboard engine at the back of the boat in and out as well as up and down. The more you move the engine out the more air is trapped inside the tunnel - the area between the two sponsons - and the faster you accelerate.


Being in control

"There is a fine line between getting it right and running on a cushion of air and totally losing control," Jones explains. "You don't want a lot of contact with the water because it creates drag, but at the same time you need some contact otherwise you lose control of the boat. You are trimming the boat by moving the engine in and out and up and down as you try to get the boat to glide millimetres off the top of the water.

"Sometimes if you alter the angle by even one or two degrees it is the difference between running the boat perfectly without any drag and getting too much air under the hull causing the boat to blow over."

The engine is on a pivot system and the hydraulic rams move it in and out. "When we move the engine out at the back it lifts the front of the boat and the more air runs in the tunnel," Jones says. "The more air you get in the tunnel the more lift you get and the greater acceleration you get.

"You come out of a corner, you trim the engine out by about 15 degrees, it lifts the nose and you capture the air in the tunnel, accelerate off the corner and try to control the boat to keep as much air in the tunnel. After about 250m you start bringing the nose down by trimming the engine in, which lowers the nose and the boat levels out as you reach top speed. You approach the corner, which is a single turn buoy about half a metre wide and you are only half a metre away, at about 125mph, take the turn and exit at about 100mph. I've measured the lateral G-force at 6.5Gs, but it happens very quickly."

There is instrumentation on board but driving the boat is down to the driver and the way he feels the boat through his backside. "The driver will play with these buttons about 100 to 120 times a lap, and each lap will last 60-90 seconds depending on the circuit," Jones says. In effect this is altering the suspension by altering the angle of the boat.

Under the 'bonnet'

The powerboats have no gears or brakes. Power is via a foot throttle but without a gearbox it is a direct drive off the 400hp engine. The engine revs are limited by the ECU box, supplied by the series organisers, to just shy of 10,000rpm. In the past these engines revved up to 12,500rpm but they didn't last very long.

All boats have telemetry on board but by F1 car standards it is fairly rudimentary. It tells the engineers how the engine and boat are performing - measuring rpm, speed and exhaust temperature. "We don't use real-time telemetry, but data that is downloaded at the end of each run," Jones says.

Because the engines don't have a gearbox, different propellers are selected for different circuits to optimise power delivery. All the propellers are four blade surface propellers. "This means that when two blades are out of the water the other two are in the water," Jones explains. "The amount of cavitation on these propellers is very slight, probably only 10 per cent slip. These will push the boat on at a speed comparable to an F1 racing car.

"I took part in a TV programme about 15 years ago called 'You Bet', in which I took on a Formula One car. We went down to London's Docklands Airport. We had the car running on the runway and the powerboat in the dock alongside it. We were doing dead starts for a quarter mile and I just beat the car over three runs."

Although the acceleration is good on a powerboat, the top speed is not as high as an F1 car. "We can run upwards of 150mph, but when we are competing it's about 130mph," Jones says. "We are looking for acceleration and mid-range, rather than top speed.

"The types of circuits are similar to F1 with a long straight followed by left and right'hand corners, so you need to pick the right propeller. You can pick one for acceleration but it might lose out on top speed; you need to find that happy medium. At each race you have a choice from about a dozen propellers."

Jones continues: "These propellers are forged from advanced materials. They are extremely thin, as sharp as a razor, and they vary in pitch and diameter. Teams would buy the blanks and modify them."

Boat specifications

Aside from Jones' company, there are several boat builders around the world - DAC and BaBa in Italy, Seabold from America, Molgard from Denmark and Moore from France. The boat is carbon fibre and the total package including engine weighs 400kg. When you finish the race the boat and driver must weigh 525kg so boats often carry ballast.

As well as the weight restriction there is a minimum length - 5.2m - but the boat can be as wide as you like and incorporate any shapes. The other restriction is the safety cell - the cockpit that the driver sits in. That cell has to pass impact testing, much the same as with F1 cars. The minimum is 3,000 Newtons.

On the outside of the cell is the crash box to absorb energy in collisions. "About eight or nine years ago there were a number of accidents where one boat would hit another," Jones reports. "Because the cell is so rigid, it's made out of 15 layers of carbon fibre and about ten layers of Dinamar, it has no give so that when one boat hit another the driver absorbed all the impact himself, causing his insides to get torn apart. That led to the introduction of the crash box, an area outside the safety cell itself, which comprises of 15mm of impact foam so in the event of a collision it absorbs the energy."

Formula One powerboat racing is the pinnacle of powerboat racing. Twelve teams each with two boats compete at ten events each year. This season begins in Brazil in early June and rounds follow in Ukraine, China, Qatar and the Emirates.

Powerboat racing

The start in a powerboat race is vital. With overtaking difficult there is a premium in reaching the first buoy ahead of the opposition. It is a dead engine start off a pontoon, which is slightly angled towards the direction of travel. "Within a qualifying lap that lasts between 60 and 90 seconds, depending on the course, there is less than a second covering all the competitors," Jones adds.

"Overtaking opportunities are limited, maybe someone runs wide at a corner and you can duck inside them, or being braver than the other guy if you are running into a head wind and the boat is almost out of control - the guy with the biggest ***** would hang that boat out for a moment longer."

Over his several decades at the pinnacle of the sport Jones has seen the evolution of the boats with safety coming more to the fore. "When I started racing the boats were pretty similar to those raced today, but they didn't have the safety cocoon that drivers sit in," Jones explains. "You were strapped in, but you didn't have a life support system and you didn't have an air-bag system.

"If another driver hit the side of you, you'd had it. If you blew the boat over, you shot 40ft in the air at 130mph and when you hit the water you ended up in hospital at the very least - that happened to me many times."

In 1986 they introduced the safety cell and the canopy, which is an integrated quick-release part of the cockpit itself. It has to have a 10mm polycarbonate screen. In the event of the boat turning over and submarining it protects the driver from the force of the water.

If the boat is involved in an accident or turns over it generally turns upside down. Within five seconds an air-bag system is deployed which consists of a large bag situated behind the cockpit. At the same time two rams at the back of the boat allow water to enter the back of the boat forcing the rear to sink, allowing the airbag to hold the cockpit above the water. This allows easy access for the rescue teams.

But even though the safety has improved, nothing diminishes the buzz from racing a powerboat. "The thrill of driving the boat across the water at high speed, the sensation of acceleration and cornering is mind blowing," Jones says.

"You are running the boat on a fine edge all the time. It's not planted to the road like a car or bike. You are riding on a cushion of air and sometimes you just hold your breath hoping you are going to make it to the next corner."

VetteDrmr

That's what I was meaning, you just explained it better.

BTW, I've never seen a F1 boat race that had right hand turns; do you have any video links I could watch? That'd be great!

And, I guess I've not really thought about the thickness of the canopy transparency. My experience has been with F-16/F-22 canopies, which are about 3/4" thick, and optics are a real headache. Don't think we need to worry about a 4 lb. birdstrike at 400 kts!

Have a good one,
Mike

Zoxxo

Oh Great God of correctness, thank you for granting me the privilege of having an opinion that differs from yours.

You do realize that I have zero say in what the FIA does here, right? I have no ability to, or reason to, "bury my head in the sand."

What Vettel "feels" is of no consequence to this topic. Besides, I strongly suspect that Mr. Vettel's position on this would have been very different back in his junior days before he was wealthy and had way more to lose.

You'd add anyone if you thought it would bolster your argument. By the way, just WHY ARE you arguing this? The FIA is doing what you want.

Bite me. Quit making stuff up that I never said (or even thought), attributing it to me, and then saying "MY" position is BS.

My "attitude"?? It's "attitude" to disagree with YOU?? To have an opinion that's considered? I am not your teenage son in dire need of correction.

Jackie Stewart campaigned for changes to the TRACKS; fencing, ambulances, fire trucks, staffing, medical facilities, etc. Note that (to my knowledge) he never said diddly about his OPEN-FACE helmet or his "instant fireball" fuel tank. Much less the fact that his head was sticking waaaaay out in the open. Never even occurred to him (or anyone else) that this was an issue.

If only Stewart had invented the "safety cure-all" halo they could still be racing F1 at the Nordschliefe!

Once again with "attitude". Quit lecturing other adults.

I never said to "scrap" a safety measure. I'm just not in favor of THIS ONE as it forever alters the premise of the series and it's butt-ugly to boot. If I wanted to watch sprint cars I would. And to my knowledge even this one has yet to be officially implemented so it can't be "scrapped".

THEN DO NOT DO IT!!! Justin Wilson had a nice family life. He and his wife knew that what he was doing was dangerous and that there was a CHANCE that he would be injured or killed. FREEDOM lies in the ability to understand and weigh risks and choose to do [xxx] anyway. Or NOT. And it lies in the ability to choose "yes" without the input/interference from some outside nannies who are "looking out for you." It's not recklessness - it is thoughtful consideration and choice by educated adult human beings.

Oh brother.

Gee, no kidding. And no, I don't think it's worth it. I think it's just one more item on the long list of "look like we're doing something meaningful" bits that Bernie and the FIA regularly draw from for PR and distraction purposes. The more the press gets wound up about the halo the less they harp on what a joke the series as a whole has become. ANYTHING to get the public talking about F1 (and most preferably not about that "joke" topic.) It's a solution in search of a problem. They (and you, for some reason) have built this "don't hurt my head!" thing into a huge straw man as this year's PR generator two weeks out from the season opener. SOME sort of story like this ALWAYS crops up when it gets close to Australia.

I'm not going to debate this with you any further. I have my opinion and if that makes you unable to sleep at night, so be it. If you want to believe that my desire for F1 is for numerous guillotine-inspired incidents then have at it.



Z//

VetteDrmr

I will say this about the "halo" that was tested. It could have made a difference in JW's accident, it wouldn't have made any difference in Bianchi's accident (nor would a full canopy), it wouldn't have made a difference in Dan Wheldon's accident (the entire top of the car was cleaned off). I doubt it would have made a difference in Massa's accident, that was a small, heavy piece, and it would have taken sheer chance to hit the halo, just as it would have missed his head if his car was a foot to the left or right.

If FIA wants to make a rule imposing canopies, fine, I'm not that much of a purist. I also think canopies create more problems than the very few they solve.

Have a good one,
Mike

NemesisC5

The yellow pin is a right hand turn


Same here, yellow pin right hand turn. Practice in Dubai 3-2-2016


http://www.f1h2o.com/