"Anima" (anima)
03/03/2016 at 12:39 • Filed to: f1
3
23|
"Anima" (anima)
03/03/2016 at 12:39 • Filed to: f1 | 3
| 23 |
The F1 ‘halo’ concept that was tested today by Ferrari is the wrong step to make.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Not because it ‘erodes the spirit of F1' or because ‘it looks silly’. Which it does, but we’ll be used to it by the 4th race of the season. But because it shows exactly the half-arsedness that has come to encompass F1 in the recent years. The fear to
actually
change something.
It is time for closed cockpits in F1.
It’s been talked about for years and every time the usual arguments are being drudged up: It’s not the ‘formula’. The drivers won’t be able te get out if the car flips or another car is stuck on top of it. We won’t be able to see the drivers anymore! They look awful! It’s just the risk of the sport.
Lets take a look of these argument one by one.
It’s not the ‘formula’.
F1 is an ever evolving sport. Put a current F1 car next to one from the 60's and try to find the similarities.
For it to stay an openwheeled series there is no need for it to remain an open cockpit series too. It has changed so much over the years and while it may look like a huge change , in 10 years time we will look back and wonder why we only just now changed it.
The drivers won’t be able to get out if the car flips or another car is stuck on top of it.
This is assuming a jet fighter style canopy which opens upwards, which could be solved by making a break away seam in the middle like
!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
for instance.
And to be frank, if there is a car on top the other car, wouldn’t you rather it’d be on top of a canopy instead of the drivers helmet. We came awfuly close last year with
!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
.
It is the old ‘If you don’t wear seatbelts you’ll get thrown clear of the wreck’ argument.
You can’t tell me that with the engineering brilliance that makes up Formula 1, we won’t be able to design a working canopy if the FIA and the teams put their mind to it.
We won’t be able to see the drivers anymore.
How much do we see of them now? We only see the top of their helmets and maybe their hands. While we do see more of the driver on tv this mostly because of cameras placed on the car. There is no reason why these same cameras wouldn’t be able to film inside the canopy. It isn’t the 80's and camera’s aren’t huge bulky things anymore.
They look awful!
I’m just going to leave this here:
It’s just the risk of the sport.
This is the worst argument of them all. It is the attitude that killed so many drivers in the early days of the sport until we decided that would no longer do and started to change. This would be a natural progression of that change. If there is a clear way to prevent injuries (or worse), that won’t impact the racing, why wouldn’t we pursue that possibility.
We can’t write of closed cockpits as a
‘
knee-jerk reaction’ any longer.
Is it the ideal solution? No, but it is by far the best we have.
The halo design is not a solution, it is just a placeholder for the FIA to say: Look, we did something. It isn’t going to prevent what happened to Massa in 2009, nor will it prevent what happened to Jules in 2014.
It is the last in a series of half-hearted changes the aging and increasingly out of touch leaders of F1 have made. Trying to fix things that aren’t broken and never really pushing for an actual change. Always compromising and taking steps away from the core of the sport. The reason why we watch and what would bring in the fresh crowd and views F1 so desperately needs, which can only be achieved with the drivers feeling safe:
Fast and close racing.
Master Cylinder
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 12:51 |
|
I don’t really follow F1 all that much, so I just wanna say that I think the halo looks hella dumb and closed cockpits look sweet. People wanna see sweet-looking racecars. Ergo, use the closed cockpits. And add rocket boosters.
|
Anima
> Master Cylinder
03/03/2016 at 12:54 |
|
Every closed cockpit concept I’ve seen looks absolutely stellar.
jariten1781
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 12:55 |
|
Close cockpits...may go that way. Add fenders to prevent ramping would be the next logical step. Why not jump to the end state and make what are essentially sprint versions of LMP1 cars?
gin-san - shitpost specialist
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 12:56 |
|
These discussions always break down into some useless argument between fans with different perspectives on what F1 should be.
I think the regulations need to be scrapped and worked on from the ground-up. In the long run, I see F1 using even more extreme versions of what we see in LMP1 racing, which is enclosed wheels and cockpits. For me, as long as the speed is there and the cars can deliver close racing, I really couldn't care less about open/closed cockpits or not.
ESSSIX GmbH - Accountant/Wagon Thumper
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 12:57 |
|
I have a thing for thongs...so this strokes me in the right ways...
Cock pits can wait....
Shane MacGowan's Teeth
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 12:57 |
|
My issue with it is that it won’t prevent Massa or Surtees type accidents. I don’t know that anything feasible on the car would’ve let Bianchi escape injury, that was just a shit ton of energy going right to his head- I don’t think this or a canopy would’ve saved him- that’s a procedural fail to fix. For the vast majority of issues, I think a canopy of some type is going to be the best solution though.
|
Anima
> gin-san - shitpost specialist
03/03/2016 at 13:00 |
|
I agree, I do however feel the open wheeled part of it needs to stay, as it’s the very essence of the formula.
I think we can all agree that F1 as it is now isn’t working and the faffing about and compromising isn’t helping. There needs to be a big change for the sport to survive, not just the next 5 years but also in the future.
|
Anima
> Shane MacGowan's Teeth
03/03/2016 at 13:02 |
|
I totoally agree. Freak accidents will always occur and I don’t think a canopy would’ve helped Jules much. But it would’ve helped with smaller fragments. Something the Halo won’t do. All the test shots you see is them firing a tire at it.
The next step should be an actual step, not the shuffle we are so familiar with in current F1.
|
Anima
> jariten1781
03/03/2016 at 13:03 |
|
There is a huge difference in design philosophy between openwheeled and LMP1 cars, there is however not that big a difference big difference between an openwheeled car with a cockpit and one without.
StingrayJake
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 13:10 |
|
Wouldn’t an upside down car WITHOUT a halo or canopy still be pretty difficult to escape from?
scoob
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 13:10 |
|
The halo looks stupid as fuck. I would prefer looking at closed cockpits. After all, they are like the fighter jets of the road.
Thomas Donohue
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 13:13 |
|
Good post.
One thing I have not seen displayed/explained is how to fit a proper wiper blade on a very small, narrow, rounded, closed canopy that would still allow it to be somewhat functional as a hatch for ingress/egress. I’m sure someone smart will figure it out, but it would seem to me you would need a larger flat front surface for it to be effective.
|
Anima
> StingrayJake
03/03/2016 at 13:14 |
|
It is. It’s possible but not very easy to do quickly.
|
jariten1781
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 13:23 |
|
First half I agree with, second half not so much. F1 in closed cockpits is no longer the extreme edge of the kart spectrum but instead is some hybrid car/kart thing that still has the glaring failure modes that open wheels allow. That’d be the next to tackle if the safety folks get their way (don’t read it that I’m saying that’s necessarily bad). Why not just skip that iteration if you’re going to walk that path? If you do go closed/closed F1 has become something that falls in the car spectrum which really isn't the same sport. Not to say it would be worse (that's unknowable), but it is different and removes the unique character/much of the motorsports positioning they enjoy now.
Shmevans
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 13:25 |
|
I made this reply earlier to David Tracy’s article about the video of Kimi testing the halo but I think it can work here too...
“I haven’t noticed anyone else commenting on how he shakes his head when he comes to a stop in pit lane. Looks like he isn’t very pleased at all. He maybe even taps his hand on the halo to indicate that’s what he’s upset about. So maybe not so good after all.
That being said, a lot of commenters here are looking at this from a very strange angle. More often than not, people are attacking this [proposed] solution citing that it makes the car look like a flip-flop or that they should have fighter-jet-style closed cockpits instead.
First of all, since when did F1 become a beauty contest? Yes, a lot of cars are striking and some (usually vintage) could even be called beautiful, sure. But the modern F1 car is a tool. It’s a tool to go fast and sell energy drinks/fuel/cars/etc. These things are the epitome of function over form and this halo is simply that - function. It should perform the role of deflecting large objects away from a direct blow to a driver’s head while keeping visibility to a maximum. Having one central pillar keeps the overall area being obscured down and also allows easy escape from a burning (or whatever else) race car.
While a closed-canopy would admittedly look fucking cool, it just doesn’t make a lot of sense in this application. These race cars send up a lot of crap off the road and out the back so following anyone would mean your visibility is drastically reduced (much more so that having a thin bar in your way). This is evidenced by the need for their visors to have tear-offs. The difference is that the drivers can reach a visor tear-off when they need to. Being trapped inside the bubble you are trying to clean the outside of, as you can imagine, wouldn’t work so well. Not to mention the obvious problems of getting out of the thing should the worst happen. Things on F1 cars go wrong and stop working all the time - they are after all, in a constant prototype phase. I wouldn’t want my canopy to stop functioning when I really needed it to open. Plus imagine sitting in a glass bubble in Malaysia in the middle of the summer? No thanks.
I personally like this halo idea and think it’s probably the best solution there is (or that I’ve seen at least). As has been said before, the drivers likely won’t even notice this thing in the heat or battle, and even if they do it will simply be another one of several distractions they need to deal with. For the money, I think they’ll learn to live with it. And isn’t being able to live the whole point??”
It doesn’t (or shouldn’t) really matter what the fans thing looks cool . If I’m a driver I want a solution that works best for me in the majority or situations. I think something like this is as close to a good solution as they have at the moment. I know that’s an unpopular opinion but sometimes that’s the way it is. If anyone thinks that F1 designers haven’t explored every possibly avenue of this discussion they are kidding themselves. For the halo to be embraced by the paddock like it has been should speak for itself. If the canopy was a better idea for the times, then Kimi would have been testing that instead.
Bytemite
> Master Cylinder
03/03/2016 at 13:30 |
|
Rocket boosters that shoot out from the side so that you can use them as thrusters to increase cornering speed.
415s30 W123TSXWaggoIIIIIIo ( •_•))°)
> Anima
03/03/2016 at 13:39 |
|
Yeah if they are going to make is safe they might as well go all out. The halo would protect them from tires or a car mounting them. I say it’s down to the drivers, maybe they’ll like it. Maybe they want to be open air. But if they don’t care I don’t see why an LMP car and an F1 car can’t both have a roof, they don’t have to look up, it doesn’t have to be a fighter jet canopy. They just need to open up the view they can actually see. But maybe people want to see their helmet. It’s another controversy and the drivers should make the decision.
|
Anima
> Shmevans
03/03/2016 at 13:44 |
|
THe head shake and him lifting his hand I noticed as well. But then again, it’s Kimi.
While I agree that how ‘cool’ a car looks shouldn’t be the main point (it does matter and helps to sell those energy drinks), I do still feel that the canopy would be a much better solution.
I understand your point about the dirt on the canopy but we have so many closed cockpit motorsports out there, where this isn’t an issue, I don’t suspect it to be one in F1. There is also a very big difference between a 5mm spot of dirt on a windscreen (which can be cleaned in a pitstop, and a 5mm spot of dirt on visor right in front of your eyes.
I think you underestimate the stubbornness of the old guarde of F1. Not everything in F1 is the best it could be and is what te drivers want. I think that given the choice, a canopy would be preferred by the teams in the end. If only for aero purposes.
AntiSpeed
> Shmevans
03/03/2016 at 14:22 |
|
“First of all, since when did F1 become a beauty contest?”
It’s always been a beauty contest. As you say, race cars are “a tool to go fast and sell energy drinks/fuel/cars/etc.” They aren’t going to be very good at selling stuff if they’re so ugly that people stop watching, or if potential new fans look at it and think “that’s kinda cool but those cars are really goofy looking.”
IndyCar has had this problem since at least the last Dallara, and management and die hard fans have their head stuck in the sand, and I think it’s been a not-insignificant factor in IndyCar’s struggle to recover. “Form follows function” doesn’t work when part of what you’re selling is (for lack of a better term) sexiness, which is a big part of motorsport’s image.
|
Shmevans
> AntiSpeed
03/03/2016 at 14:26 |
|
But Bernie isn’t interested in new fans (rolls eyes). Trust me, I think the canopies look cool-as-hell but if that was the best solution I feel like they would be pursuing it harder.
|
AntiSpeed
> Shmevans
03/03/2016 at 14:34 |
|
I’ll take it.
|
Shmevans
> AntiSpeed
03/03/2016 at 14:43 |
|
What the hell is McLaren/Honda doing with their current black and red BS anyway? Bring back the Marlboro look! So good.
|
AntiSpeed
> Shmevans
03/03/2016 at 17:30 |
|
Tobacco advertising laws. The red chevrons are undeniably Marlboro logos. At least it’s better than the earth dream crap they tried 10 years ago.