TBK-Light.com

I would still rather have a SC if there's been an accident and there's a lot of cleaning up to do, or there's debris on the racing line. I just think the VSC is a good idea when a car has broken down on the side of the road, and it can't be easily retrieved, or somebody has spun off and stalled on the outside of a bend. Basically, any small incident that requires marshals or vehicles to go over the wall. A replacement for double waved yellows, I suppose.

I'm glad they're at least introducing VSC for practice sessions. It's stupid to have the session interrupted by 10-minute red flag just because someone stops due to a mechanical failure or a spin. I still hope they someday have a system for local slow zones, as it's silly to have drivers to do 60 km/h at Pouhon when there's a car stopped at Les Combes. Of course in the race it's unfair for some drivers, but so should double yellows have been punishment for those who must slow down. Besides, local yellow zones would bring randomness.

Zone-based VSC could be a good option, but they'd have to be very precise on each car because everyone will be flooring it until they reach the yellow section, which could induce a hilarious accordion bunch-up if a group of cars are following each other closely.



I don't see how those cases are different. Really, its only function is pacing the field - incidentally, that's why I much prefer the American term of "pace car" which seems more accurate IMO.

If there are debris, drivers don't need a pace car driver to show them the way, they can pick their own line provided they don't come in there at full speed. They can also be guided by track workers who usually clean up a safe line to use.

VSC, coupled with competent marshalling and in-car signals, renders a physical safety car obsolete - it would just go there to assess a barrier repair or track conditions, like any other intervention vehicle like an ambulance or medical car...etc.

I still wonder why FIA didn't demanded that all track vehicles (like tractors and service cars) to have a body protection to avoid dangerous situations

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: climate change ruining races everywhere

Because that would help other series well, as well as the marshalls. It is bettee to have a F1 only solution.

or maybe they are unable to see that american racing series have good safety measures to copy

once they picked wheel tethers after that crash involving Villeneuve and R. Schumacher, but in CART was used since 1998

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: climate change ruining races everywhere

The FIA don't copy, they invent, hence "Safety Car" and all the other stuff coming years after other series, which is why this halo thing is a bit of a suprise, them leading the way.

Which is why I'm pretty fucking terrified of it really.

Little testing so the kinks will be worked out in racing conditions with drivers, marshals and fans as guinea pigs.

At least when hans etc come in you knew it was a proven product with the majority of development worked out already (and even then required minor adjustments for f1)
This is a brand new sheet of paper in comparison.

_________________
RIP Birmingham Wheels: here's some of the crash videos I recorded when it was there:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIaKIE ... 5t9d5PvoHA

Twitter:

http://www.twitter.com/paulhadsley

there are a lot of chassis from previous years unused ready to get botched for testing, just fit with a generic endurance engine and go to the track, or just make crash tests to see

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: climate change ruining races everywhere

There's only two realistic situations where it could be bad, and even then they'd be so rare that they probably wouldn't happen save for one or twice a decade...... a bit like hitting a stray wheel or lead filled nosecone....

I don't think hitting debris is that rare, though. I can think of several examples where a driver has been struck by debris, and there must be hundreds of near misses with bouncing wheels and bodywork.

Watching Robert Kubica's Montreal accident from the onboard of one of the Toro Rosso cars really shows the debris field caused by a big accident in a modern F1 car. Again, I'm not saying that I support the halo, or a canopy, but I'm open to the idea of drivers not getting a face full of wheel. I wonder if we'd have been having this discussion with higher cockpit sides if TBK had existed in 1994?

raising the cockpits made sense (to me at least) as people still crashed and it kept the heads from moving too freely. And Wendlinger's crash was a good example of that.

The halo doesn't make sense as it clearly isn't strong enough to prevent crashes as Bianchi's and getting hit by wheels is rarer than a football jock at a Star Trek convention.

There are probably more smaller bits of debris that the halo wouldn't stop then large parts that it would.

What about this then? http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-co ... gn-672256/

That picture makes it look like the pillar of the halo isn't even 1 piece but a pillar clicked on to the car. Now I'm even less convinced this is a good solution.

That mechanism was there when Mercedes originally unveiled the halo concept back in late 2015

_________________
BTCC Pick Em's Champion 2010
Formula Fun Cup Champion 2013
http://www.the-fastlane.co.uk

So that thing is hinge and latch operated? What could possibly ever go wrong with those.

Please don't do this. What you just did is like telling someone who complains about tarmac outside of La Source's hairpin exit, that they would like gravel re-introduced at Eau Rouge. It's a mean - though often used - strategy to invalidate an opinion by pushing it out of its limits until it becomes ridiculous. Analogies only work in strictly controlled application boundaries and we've blown out of those here.

Many people have brought out Indycar and how the car looks more and more like a sportscar, I see some discussion here about the differentiation about open-wheel and open-cockpit racing, etc... So I would like to ask: why do we have single-seaters in the first place? Why open-wheel? It's a genuine question.

Is it worth fighting for these kind of series to survive, given that they only look like they do because of historical reasons (first automobiles of late 19th century, roadster design...), and given that no major series seems to be willing to accept the associated risks: wheel-tangling, cars and wheels flying off, head impacts, restricted cockpit space?

The question should be seriously asked and if necessary, the philosophy of single-seater racing be revised deeply. Just, instead of doing it step by step like Indycar is doing (and now F1), just straight out put a commission onto this and cover all those issues, if the result is that single-seaters should not race anymore, I will accept that more than the shit-looking shit that Indycar and F1 are slowly pulling off year after year.

This is coming from a single-seater guy. I hate closed racing cars.