TBK-Light.com
https://tbk-light.com/phpBB3/

2016 F1 pre-season testing
https://tbk-light.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=9590		 Page 5 of 7
Author:  Justin Time [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Ian-S wrote:
Ah ha, it does seem they are working on the principle of something that should never happen because wheel tethers should stop wheels going flying, the only thing it might help with is a solid front wing, but when was the last time that an F1 driver was struck on the head by an errant wing? as others have said it has little chance of stopping something small. If the weight of the wing is a problem, surely it would be easier to make the wings lighter, with less parts?

It's going to be fun seeing all the drivers on the grids carrying their little step ladders up to their cars so they can climb in.

I guess this is the world we live in, it's no longer socially acceptable to watch people take risks, ah well, I suppose at least they are doing something, but it's killing the spirit of racing, as I once heard a famous Brit's father say to his son who was complaining about safety at Oulton, "if it was fucking easy and safe son, I'd be doing it".

Amen to that. The heaviest thing on a wing is the ballast that is stored at the center tip of the frontwing, and it would be terribly easy to forbid that. The wings itself weigh pretty much next to nothing.
Author:  Ian-S [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
I thought that was an urban myth about the ballast, we used to put it under the seat/on the floor back in the day, but I seem to remember it being mentioned that it was a contributing factor in Wilson's death. I know we stick lead in the nose of plane's to get the COG right, but it seem absolutely insane to allow the teams to put it in the car's nose, and then they go and design this ugly thing to try and protect the driver when the easier solution is just say there's a max weight for the front wing and no lead in it, cos that thing is not going to save a driver if he submarines under another car (or tractor) at speed.

Obviously the FIA is emulating the stupid way our Country is run.
Author:  webbsy [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Scotty wrote:
I've very happy someone is taking some initiative in a sport where testing time and effort is at massive premium.

Don't care if its ugly. If it saves lives, I'm for it.

I'd rather see ugly cars than a chance of a driver getting struck by something, even if that chance is 0.000005%.


Ok well seeing as this is an F1 driven concept, lets look at who this kind of development might have saved in F1 from either injury or death.

Bianchi...no (even FIA said wouldn't have)
Coulthard...no (his close call with Wurz. strongly believe that would have actually rolled him over with the force and angle of Wurz hitting that thing)
Massa...no (spring would have missed based upon where it hit him)
Diniz...? (roll hoop was snapped off to the base)
Ratzenburger...no (raised cockpit sides would have)
Wendlinger...no (as above)
Senna...no (as above)
Lamy...no (other non head injuries)
Barichello...no (as above)
Zanardi...no (same as Lamy)
Warwick...probable (this might have prevented his car digging in)
Streiff...no (was a back injury that did him)
Pique...yes (Adelaide 1989 smash)
Donnelly...no (car totally disintegrated)
Pironi...no (feet smashed in)
Paletti...? (died of asphyxiation but don't believe suffered head injuries per say, but knocked unconscious so might have prevented)
Peterson...no (feet smashed in and complications)
Donohue...? (judging from pictures of his car it might have helped but not really sure)
Helmuth Koinigg...possibly (could have deflected the guard rail over the car)
Cervet...possibly (as above)

Yes I know it is a pointless exercise to compare car designs/builds/strenghts etc as above, but the point is that this very specific type of prevention that the FIA is trying to protect against is practically non existent in F1 when measured against the thousands upon thousands of hours that F1 cars have been racing around. Where do you draw the line on safety and then completely destroy the fabric of the sport by placing it in a half in half out category? It's either open wheel racing or closed cockpit, because I can see this half measure ending up back firing and in fact being more dangerous than either open or closed cockpit.
The drivers are already deeply submerged into their cars, we are not talking about late 80's low cockpit sides here.
Author:  Justin Time [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Ian-S wrote:
I thought that was an urban myth about the ballast, we used to put it under the seat/on the floor back in the day, but I seem to remember it being mentioned that it was a contributing factor in Wilson's death. I know we stick lead in the nose of plane's to get the COG right, but it seem absolutely insane to allow the teams to put it in the car's nose, and then they go and design this ugly thing to try and protect the driver when the easier solution is just say there's a max weight for the front wing and no lead in it, cos that thing is not going to save a driver if he submarines under another car (or tractor) at speed.

Obviously the FIA is emulating the stupid way our Country is run.

Hahaha :mrgreen: yeah, every team has a little compartment for ballast in the middle of the neutral area of the frontwing, right at the tip. You can even see the cutouts from the top where they open it.

There are just so many ways to improve safety without such a hideous clusterfuck or stupid car parks everywhere

Image
Author:  Fish88 [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
What is wrong with 'fighter jet' kinda canopy's? They look aesthetically much prettier than this option. The Mclaren concept looked actually quite cool on that part.

Image
Author:  Ian-S [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Yeah it's stupid, about as stupid as the person the other week I saw try and catch a quad to stop it hitting a child, instead of pushing the child out the way and letting the quad crash into the ground.

Luckily the doctors stitched his fingers back on.
Author:  Fabs [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
F1 :lol:

How many times have I posted this the last 5 years, ugh.

Rosberg seems to think it's a good improvement though.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/nico_rosberg/status/705369326648496128[/tweet]
Author:  Mika Kimi [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 2:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Image
Author:  micha [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 2:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Fabs wrote:
F1 :lol:

How many times have I posted this the last 5 years, ugh.

Rosberg seems to think it's a good improvement though.



but Rosberg is a sissy, we all agreed on that. He'd be ok with the cars packed in Styrofoam if it protected him from breaking a nail after his pedicure.
Author:  siggy [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 2:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Don't forget that most older drivers called for protection, even Hamilton, Alonso and Button.....

And it seems Grosjean is the prime candidate to replace Maldonado. Brainfades are coming back!
Author:  JJ [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Crashjean has found his form. The only thing we need is hasgrosjeancrashedtoday.com
Author:  LucasWheldon [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
will they fill the front gaps of those halos with windshields to improve aerodynamics?
Author:  Diageo [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Image

Image

OMG...That Halo-thing is disgusting :yuk:
Author:  Fabs [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 6:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
This thing with Mercedes hardly running the softer tyre reminds me of the dominant Ferrari days.

No one knew their pace because they hardly did qualy runs on softer tyres, then come Melbourne they raped the field :(
Author:  Mattzel89 [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
This seems like a half arsed attempt. I don't like the looks of that at all.

I would much rather see a canopy design like this http://andriesvanoverbeeke.com/399419/6 ... ed-cockpit
Author:  Fabs [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
That looks so cool :icame:
Author:  webbsy [ Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Mattzel89 wrote:
This seems like a half arsed attempt. I don't like the looks of that at all.

I would much rather see a canopy design like this http://andriesvanoverbeeke.com/399419/6 ... ed-cockpit


That's just a different looking sports car.
Author:  StefMeister [ Fri Mar 04, 2016 3:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
Test 2, Day 3:

SSN Reports:
[dailymotion]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3vohxf_barcelona-test-2-day-3-ssn-reports_sport[/dailymotion]

Paddock Uncut:
[dailymotion]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3vorvy_barcelona-test-2-day-3-paddock-uncut_sport[/dailymotion]

Ted's notebook:
[dailymotion]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3vohxg_barcelona-test-2-day-3-ted-s-notebook_sport[/dailymotion]
Author:  Philthy82 [ Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
I know this isn't how things are generally done here, but let's think about things logically and try a few safe assumptions:
  • They wouldn't introduce cockpit protection that wasn't a core part of the chassis - suggestions that this is a "clip on" and wouldn't distribute an impact to the wider chassis are ridiculous. If this is the case then this would absolutely have a benificial impact on a Bianchi-style crash. Whether it would be enough to prevent a fatal injury no one can say.
  • Webbsy's list of crashes that wouldn't have benefited from a 'halo' is just as ridiculous. Not to mention the majority of that list are crashes that have nothing to do with cockpit protection. For the relevant ones it's impossible to say whether this structure would have improved injury unless you can produce exact measures of the height an impact was at vs the height of various parts of the halo, load of the impact vs load this structure will be able to withstand. Otherwise all you can say is that having any protective structure in front of a driver's head can only improve their chances in many of these scenarios.
  • The problem with all the whiz-bang Fzero-style canopy mockups is the drivers will never accept them for dozens of scenarios where they would increase the danger to the driver - fires, flips, fumes in the cockpit. The halo design isn't without its own safety questions, but it objectively has less issues than a canopy (if you don't count aesthetics).
Author:  siggy [ Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 2016 F1 pre-season testing
I'm overwhelmed by the lack of logic reasoning.
Page 5 of 7 All times are UTC+01:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/