FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[darwin dali]

ESPNF1:

The Grand Prix Drivers' Association (GPDA) has called for the introduction of a closed cockpit design in Formula One by 2017 at the latest.

The subject of cockpit protection has been at the top of F1's safety agenda since Jules Bianchi sustained serious head injuries at the 2014 Japanese Grand Prix that resulted in his death last year. Just over a month after Bianchi's death, former-F1 driver Justin Wilson also died after being struck in the head by debris during an IndyCar race.

F1 cars will feature increased safety measures this year after teams were tasked with increasing the height of the cockpit's side protection by 20mm and strengthening the area to withstand a force of 50 kilonewtons (up from 15 kilonewtons last year). However, the GPDA is keen for a more radical change by next year in order to protect more of the driver's head from accident debris.

GPDA president and former-F1 driver Alex Wurz told the BBC there was no reason why closed cockpits should not be introduced in time for 2017.

"Obviously structural changes are required to the chassis but, with almost a one-year lead time, I don't see any technical person speaking against such substantial safety improvements, especially given the last big accidents in open-wheel racing involved head injuries," he said. "So all the drivers, and I, hope that passing the additional head protection will be a formality."

The FIA has been investigating possible closed cockpit designs for several years and it appears a concept known as the "halo" has emerged as the best option. The design features two protective arms above the driver's head that meet in the middle where they are supported by a central strut in front of the driver.

"The research the FIA experts have done is very thorough and the process has brought forward a clear solution," Wurz added. "Now the drivers feel it's time to implement the extra protection at the latest in 2017."

Here are some pics of Mercedes' halo design:






Dunno, this design seems to impede the driver's view.
I guess I'm more of a traditionalist and prefer the open cockpit...

[sagi58]

...Dunno, this design seems to impede the driver's view.
I guess I'm more of a traditionalist and prefer the open cockpit...

I'm in complete agreement with keeping the drivers safer!!

Having said that, how is that design a "closed cockpit"?
There seems to be plenty of open air above the driver!

[myownalias]

I'm with DD; I don't like the idea of a closed cockpit and the Mercedes design just looks stupid and would also certainly restrict visibility of the driver. I'm not even sure that a canopy would have saved Jules' life, I think it's a kneejerk reaction to isolated incidents, how many thousands of open wheel/cockpit races happen each year compared to fatal accidents?

[sagi58]

You're right on a number of counts, MOA but, your observations raise other questions:
* the design does look "stupid", could it be made to look better?
* the driver's visibility is restricted, is there a design that wouldn't?
* knee jerk reactions are emotional, by nature, is there any way we can be pragmatic?
* thousands of races do take place each year, is the risk worth a life?

[myownalias]

You're right on a number of counts, MOA but, your observations raise other questions:?

* the design does look "stupid", could it be made to look better?

Of course it could look better, the current design is not practical or desirable.

* the driver's visibility is restricted, is there a design that wouldn't?

A single piece of clear high impact plastic like an aircraft cockpit canopy wouldn't restrict visibility.

* knee jerk reactions are emotional, by nature, is there any way we can be pragmatic?

These incidents are so isolated that I don't believe it's needed, there's more chance of getting injured/killed skiing as proven by Michael Schumacher.

* thousands of races do take place each year, is the risk worth a life?

Motorsport is a dangerous sport, everyone agrees on that, do we stop cars on public roads because every now and again, someone steps in front of a car and gets killed or injured. Risk is a part of every day life, we can not wrap everyone up in health and safety bubble wrap just in case something might happen.

[sagi58]

Thank you!!

[rob91]

I do not believe it is necessary to have closed cockpits in F1, the chances of a driver being hit on the head by a large enough piece to cause harm in F1 are so incredibly small that it is virtually impossible.

I don't think that the death of Jules Bianchi had anything to do with a lack of cockpit cover, much more to do with his car striking a heavy recovery vehicle at reasonable speed. This type of accident should not have been allowed to happen in the first place and the introduction of the virtual safety car (VSC) probably has gone some way to prevent this type of accident from ever happening again. It is my view, based on what I know of this tragic accident, that no kind of closed cockpit or cover over Bianchi's head would have prevented his injuries, the collision was just too hard for him to survive.

In terms of Justin Wilson's death, his accident happened on a high speed oval, a type of circuit which has no run-off areas on the outside. This means that any car approaching the scene of a very recent crash is very likely to make contact with something or other due to the speeds involved in such races. This is exactly what happened to Wilson, a car ahead of his lost control and crashed into the wall, sending pieces of debris flying through the air into the oncoming cars including his own. The fact that a piece of debris hit him on the head and not another part of his car is just plain bad luck. F1 cars do not race on ovals, in fact the majority of F1 circuits have plenty of run-off areas so that if a car does crash into the barriers it is very unlikely that any pieces of debris will be directed towards oncoming cars. This means that the accident that lead to Wilson's death is something that will never happen in F1 unless they decide to race on ovals with no run-off.

For the drivers to say that F1 cars should have closed cockpits based on a couple of fatal accidents, one of which wasn't even in F1, is a massive overreaction when you consider how much it will cost to develop and design the cars to make a covered cockpit that is safe enough for the drivers to race in, i.e. doesn't impede the driver's view, doesn't trap the driver inside the car in the event of a fire, is strong enough not to break off or collapse on top of the driver, when it will make next to no difference to the improvement of safety in F1. For high speed Indycar oval racing it should be considered but for F1 it just isn't worth it, the costs far outweigh any safety improvements in my view.

[darwin dali]

Well said

[sagi58]

I do not believe it is necessary to have closed cockpits in F1, the chances of a driver being hit on the head by a large enough piece to cause harm in F1 are so incredibly small that it is virtually impossible...

Good point, Rob!! And, until I saw this, I would have thought it was "virtually impossible" for there to be a similar "freak" accident on the road. Yet, it did happen.

Shannon Martin wrote:">Man dead after vehicle hit by flying wheel on Highway 400

Is that "possibility" going to stop any of us from driving? Probably not!
Are car manufacturers going to make major changes to the structure of
vehicles to ensure this won't happen again? Probably not!

My guess is that F1 will do the same!

[darwin dali]

Sorry, bad day at the office

[sagi58]

Sorry, bad day at the office

[madbrad]

BTW here is an anal alert regarding diction: If you care about it, do not use the term "visibility" when describing how well the driver can see out the car. "visibility" means how well other people can see him. Our road cars for example, have reflectors to enhance visibility. Cleaning the windshield will help with my view. If I have poor vision, I get glasses to improve my vision. It does not improve my visibility at all. A bright orange shirt will do that.

Not to defend this design of "roll bar", but I don't believe that design really impedes the driver's view. The horizontal elements are well above the area the driver wants to see. There's a chance he won't even see them. The upper edge of his visor opening may well be lower. The one vertical post in front of him is thin. Looks to be maybe 1/2" tops wide. He will never be oriented anywhere on an angle to that post so the other long dimension of it does not come into play. They could make it longer if they wanted and the driver would not notice. But then it might become an illegal aero device.

[sagi58]

 wrote:">First image of Red Bull F1 cockpit canopy at Russian Grand Prix

Red Bull's Formula 1 cockpit canopy design has broken cover in the pitlane ahead of its trial run in Russian Grand Prix free practice.

The design - which Red Bull is calling the 'aeroscreen' has been fitted to Daniel Ricciardo's RB12 in its garage on Thursday in preparation for its track debut on Friday, with the Australian sitting in the car to get a feel for getting in and out when the screen is attached.

"In FP1 I will do an installation lap with it," said Ricciardo at Sochi on Thursday.

"I'm sure I will get a lot of TV time in the first two minutes of the session!" ...

[overboost]

Here is a side by side comparison of of the Ferrari "Halo" and the Redbull "Aeroscreen".

Which design do you prefer?

I would lean towards the Redbull as it looks better has a windshield and would offer more protection from the small flying parts such as in the Massa incident.

[myownalias]

I don't particularly care for either, but given the choice, I'd go for the Red Bull, it looks better and in my view offers between protection for the driver.