FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[tpherson]

I think the problem is not with the car, but with the tracks. The forces involved in driving in relatively small circles at 220 mph is tremendous. I don't watch Indy Car any more because most of it is just insanity, not racing. They have done everything to raise the "spectacle" in order to increase ratings, and this is what you end up with. The human body is not constructed to withstand the g-forces of hitting a wall at 200+ mph, regardless of car construction. With cars traveling at that speed, wheels interlocking on a regular basis, its bound to happen. These tracks are not the Indianapolis motor speedway, with safer barriers in all the coreners and corners as wide as an 8 lane freeway. Too small, too tight, too danergerous.

I balme the promotors and team owners for this death. Indy Car has become nothing more than a side-show daredevil act.

[acosmichippo]

Webber feels approximately the same way.

http://en.espnf1.com/redbull/motorsport ... 62055.html

"I've never raced on an oval track but I've spoken to a lot of the guys who have," Webber said. "One thing they don't like is the element of pack racing, especially on a short oval such as Las Vegas. Running three wide on a track like that is not really racing. You're just getting a slipstream. Drivers look to move into a different lane - from the top to the bottom of the track, say - and things can happen.

"At certain speeds, that is fine and no-one gets badly injured. But when you're doing 220mph in an open-wheeler, the cars can leave the ground by five or six metres and someone's going to get seriously hurt. To have 30-odd single-seaters, nose to tail, with cold brakes; it's too much. Drivers feel this needs looking at. In the accident that killed Dan, nearly half the field were running together and half of them ended up in the air. That's not right."

[Vetteldaman]

Bloody awful! This is just the knee-jerk reaction after another death. F1 is an open cockpit series, always has been, always will be. I don't think this would be a suitable solution.

I have to agree with you. Not only is it horrible looking but how much risk do they want to remove from the sport? I think the risk of death is what makes this stuff exciting. Of course we want the drivers safe but we still want what F1 is. Open wheeled and open cockpit. I guess I'm thinking slippery slope. Next thing is 200 mph is too fast, then 150 is too fast then 100 all for the sake of driver safety. What safety precautions are ok to implement and which ones will lessen the excitement of the sport? I don't have the answers, this is just my opinion on the subject.

[acosmichippo]

how would having a cockpit lessen the excitement of the sport?

[Vetteldaman]

how would having a cockpit lessen the excitement of the sport?

For me it's as much about how it looks as it is racing. Seeing the drivers head in an open cockpit is part of what formula one is to me. I mean it's all personal opinion but the next step could be adding fenders would make it safer. Wheels wouldnt fly off. Is that still F1?

The sport is very safe all things considered. If that Indy crash happened on the streets in normal cars at half the speeds there would have been more dead.

BTW, I'm a recent F1 fan so I am by no means an expert. I got into it at the end of last season. I havent missed a second of any practice, Q or R so when I say i got into it, I mean im really into it. But was there any driver other than Senna that died from getting hit in the head? I know Massa was injured but any other deaths?

[Rattlehead22]

BTW, I'm a recent F1 fan so I am by no means an expert. I got into it at the end of last season. I havent missed a second of any practice, Q or R so when I say i got into it, I mean im really into it. But was there any driver other than Senna that died from getting hit in the head? I know Massa was injured but any other deaths?

While not technically an F1 car, Henry Surtess was killed in 2009 in a Formula 2 car when a loose wheel came off another car and hit him in the head.

[LewEngBridewell]

BTW, I'm a recent F1 fan so I am by no means an expert. I got into it at the end of last season. I havent missed a second of any practice, Q or R so when I say i got into it, I mean im really into it. But was there any driver other than Senna that died from getting hit in the head? I know Massa was injured but any other deaths?

While not technically an F1 car, Henry Surtess was killed in 2009 in a Formula 2 car when a loose wheel came off another car and hit him in the head.

There was of course the 1960 Belgian Grand Prix at Spa, when British racer Alan Stacey was hit in the face by a bird on lap 25. He died in the resulting crash.

This came immediately after Chris Bristow was decapitated when his car rolled over in almost the same place as the accident described above.

[tpherson]

I think there is a huge differnce between what we see in F1 racing and what they were doing at Las Vegas. While you do see speeds over 200, in very few instances, if any, are F1 drivers going at that speed heading for a concrete wall with a car on both sides less than a foot away, hoping that all three can make through the turn. F1 tracks, in general, have huge runoff areas and meet very high safety standards. Las Vegas is a Nascar track, bigger heavier cars going much slower.

It may be racing, but I hardly call it sport. I guess we could just have high speed, high tech, Roman Chariot Races. Is Dario Franchitti the new Ben Hur? Is that what people want? I guess with the popularity of cage fighting and the like, maybe that is what people want, perhaps that just is a reflection of where we are as a society.

I love racing. Crashes are part of it. It is a dangerous sport. But it does not have to be un-neccesarily dangerous. I think in hindsight a lot of people can see that it was crazy for them to be racing on that track.

[tpherson]

But, fundamentally, if you are racing around an oval with concrete walls and lots of cars going at very high speeds in close proximity, it is going to be a recipe for large accidents, particularly with open-wheel cars

- Adrian Newey

[QuoththeRaven]

I think we have to accept that the only time there will be enough pressure to take the next leap in safety is when an important and famous driver dies in a crash because of the open cockpit. Nothing else will couple the pressure on the ruling body while also silencing the critics needed to move forward.

I swear, sometimes I believe there are people who lament the fact that formula one no longer loses one driver, dead, per year due to spectacular accidents.

[FerrariFan63]

What we actually need is for those who know what they are talking about to properly investigate whether closed cockpits truly are safer. I would not mind closed cockpits if they truly do improve safety.

It has been decades now since there has been a fatal accident in F1. No physical sport can be made 100% safe, but F1 seems to have done what is necessary to reduce risks.

[bud]

What we actually need is for those who know what they are talking about to properly investigate whether closed cockpits truly are safer. I would not mind closed cockpits if they truly do improve safety.

It has been decades now since there has been a fatal accident in F1. No physical sport can be made 100% safe, but F1 seems to have done what is necessary to reduce risks.

From the original thread on this subject in the pits sub forum

FIA did a test on a Aircraft canopy with an F1 Wheel at 225Kph

http://vimeo.com/26098946

[FerrariFan63]

From the original thread on this subject in the pits sub forum

FIA did a test on a Aircraft canopy with an F1 Wheel at 225Kph

http://vimeo.com/26098946

That they're doing tests is encouraging, because if they find ways to improve safety, presumably they'll apply them. However, testing the strength of the canopy is one thing. Evaluating the overall safety change from introducing them is another. As has been mentioned on this thread, drivers inside a crashed car with a damaged canopy may be unable to escape as fast as in an open car. Also the risk in F1 is not just to drivers, but also to marshals and other personnel. Hence my statement that we really need to know whether things such as canopies will improve safety.

[bud]

yeah there are pros and cons for having them, like you mentioned some of the problems that will be faced with Canopy's.

The cars would have to have windscreen wipers, and emergency access perhaps dare I say it... Doors!

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

There's an old saying, Bad news makes worse law. Until all the data are analysed, there is no proof a closed cockpit would have helped Dan Wheldon. The crash data might also show it would not be practical (or even possible) to build a canopy that could survive the application of that much force.

Three things can kill you in a crash. 1. Fire. 2. Something intruding into your "living space." And 3. Unsurvivable G-forces.

Number 3 is why they engineer road cars with "crumple zones" and why an F1 car has a "survival cell." The brain is just a gelatinous mass and too many Gs will scramble it, regardless of whether the skull remains intact. Too many Gs also can dislodge the aorta, which generally is an unsurvivable injury. It also can bruise the kidney so severely tissue necrotizes and leads to renal failure which. If you build an unyielding cage around the driver to avert #2, that promotes the likelihood of #3 occurring. This is precisely why helmets are not made of steel. Like most engineering, it is a delicately balanced compromise.