FOC's F1 Cockpit idea

I have been giving this quite a bit of thought and having just had the NHRA dragsters go down the fastest track in the world, near here at Sears Point, sorry "Infinion Raceway" here in San Francisco, I thought about their cockpit design and the needs of high speed versus imovable or "flying" object.

Here is an example:


So this got me thinking. Basically it is the same principle that every other motorsport vehicle uses and that is one of a roll cage to protect the driver. The unique difference with single seater, is the need for the driver to get in and out. Also as many have pointed out, a canopy not only changes the whole image of the sport but it will require some serous time and investment to get to a satisfactory level.

My proposal is therefore this.

Create as part of the Chassis a Roll bar that goes through the existing roll over hoop structure. There is then a similar one at the front of the cockpit ahead of the steering wheel in line with the mirrors. Two support "head protection" bars are then slid over each bar front and back and held in place with retaining bolts, fitted by mechanics on the grid. Marshalls and the driver can release the bolts via a manual quick release button or pin, to push/pull the bars off sideways after an accident.

This way, the driver retains an open cockpit for ventilation. Gets the much needed head protection for large objects like wheels or major components like springs,with the foreign object more likely to bounce off of, or at the very least have speed reduced significantly whereby new helmets, hopefully with frontal titanium plates for the forehead and chin guard, can deal with anything that makes it past the bars, if at all.

The dragsters have used this set-up for years, for cars regularly blasting down a track at 300 miles an hour and often as we have seen, many crashing at high speed. (let's not forget Rich Hammonds nightmare smash in the Jetcar).

So I think F1 has to seriously consider some form of Roll-bar protection that protects the head from glancing blows of foreign objects.

I am by no means a design guru or CAD CAM specialist, so forgive the rough design below, but it shows the principle in effect.

Just my own personal thoughts and what I thought could be the easiest and fastest implementation for greater head safety.



And the top view to give an idea of where the side bars mount. (Typo above in image should be "by Marshalls"



I would hope we see something like this in the not too distant future!

Edited by FlatOverCrest, 27 July 2009 - 21:59.

What if the bolts bend inside their threads because of an impact and they won't be so easy to remove? What if they get twisted from an impact or crash?

I understant what your trying to say but the way metal can bend when heavy force is applied is something that no one can forsee.

What if the bolts bend inside their threads because of an impact and they won't be so easy to remove? What if they get twisted from an impact or crash?

I understant what your trying to say but the way metal can bend when heavy force is applied is something that no one can forsee.

Vic there are a million reasons why we cant do things sometimes.....

Fortunately there are people who prefer to think how we "might" be able to do something.

Let's try and look at the problem with a glass half full perspective rather than the usual "let's see how we can say why this wont work".

Much smarter minds than I, would be able to find as safe and as strong a solution as possible for the retaining bolts. Is anything 100%..of course not....but I would rather (and have had) a safety cage over my head for many years.

Both Surtee's and Massa's accidents would not have been so bad, with a greater head cage for the drivers, period.

While I think the idea is well suited to stopping say a car going over the top and striking a drivers head (ala the DC/Wurz accident at Melbourne last year), it is still quite open and wouldn't stop what happened to Felipe from possibly occuring. It may even still be possible for a bouncing wheel to make sufficient contact with the drivers head to cause major harm.

The other thing with having bars around the drivers head is that it may even deflect an object the wrong way towards the drivers head, and resultin a more severe injury - rather than a glancing blow. Drag racers have huge and strong roll cages but the nature of the sport is different - they generally only have to look forward and not around them, and it is rare that they have to be worried about loose debris from other cars on the track in front of them.

How were the drags at Sonoma then?

Edited by krapmeister, 27 July 2009 - 22:44.

Dragsters...that do 350mph in the quarter mile are truly something else to see!....

Talk about lunatics!

Certainly not my favourite motorsport, but you have to respect them none-the less, it is pretty much, hit the button and hang on for dear life!...

With regards the roll over bars, looking at where Massa was hit on the front top left of the helmet, I am pretty sure the bar would have deflected it away. It would be interesting to see if they run computer simulations of the incident to see if a crash bar could have protected his head a little more...

Edited by FlatOverCrest, 27 July 2009 - 22:44.

I like the fighter cockpit idea...





(yes I was bored and had Photoshop to play with)

I've not worked out the mounting and safety implications of it yet but I'll have a thinky.

Dragsters...that do 350mph in the quarter mile are truly something else to see!....

Talk about lunatics!

Certainly not my favourite motorsport, but you have to respect them none-the less, it is pretty much, hit the button and hang on for dear life!...

With regards the roll over bars, looking at where Massa was hit on the front top left of the helmet, I am pretty sure the bar would have deflected it away. It would be interesting to see if they run computer simulations of the incident to see if a crash bar could have protected his head a little more...

Perhaps the spring would have hit the bar and be deflected away, but it could just have easily been deflected through his visor - just as it may have never even hit his helmet or a protective bar.

I love the drags - I went to Pomona for the World Finals back in 2001. There's something so brutal about it - you don't just hear and see it, you feel it as well. And I love the variety as well.

But I agree that you have to be a little nuts to drive any of the nitro fuelled classes - especially the bike guys!

I like the fighter cockpit idea...





(yes I was bored and had Photoshop to play with)

I've not worked out the mounting and safety implications of it yet but I'll have a thinky.

The problem i see with the cockpit idea is that in order for the closed canopy to withstand all impacts it would need to be extremely thick, and combining this with a curved surface is sure to present the drivers with vision problems ie. distortion.

Use a cockpit surround like what is used unlimited hydroplane boat racing. It looks like a canopy of a F-16

Hi FOC

It's a nice go at adding cockpit protection but as mentioned it would not have prevented a full face impact straight on or from other angles

It also gets scary in cases of upside down situations, with fire, with or without functioning quick release bolts

But my main concern is this - motor racing is inherently dangerous. Most sensible people don't watch it for the chance that there will be crashes but we have to accept that humanity's affection for motorsport is that it's partly about having a sense of taming the machine, the environment and the competition to emerge victorious that is it's appeal. Hence lunatics drag racing and countless the Nordeschleife enthusiasts both professional and amateur.

After poor Ayrton, we got higher cockpit sides, stepped bottoms etc etc - but from the 70's to 1994 to present I can only recall two serious helmet compromising injuries - Price in SA and Ayrton

Sure, if drivers peered out through a periscope from an homologated hemisphere of steel it would be X percent safer

But what next?

Enclosed wheels?

Bumpers/Fenders front and rear?

Remote ccontrol?

As it says on the back of every ticket - Motor racing is a dangerous sport - let's try to make it safer but not with enclosed cockpits, surely?


Last point - might be an idea for the governing body to tighten scrutineering - I suspect that spring dropped off a loose damper - I could be wrong - but it is a part that is adjusted wuite often...

Might also have saved Schuey a broken leg...

Edited by Gilles12, 27 July 2009 - 23:04.

Use a cockpit surround like what is used unlimited hydroplane boat racing. It looks like a canopy of a F-16

Yes but in both instances (boat and plane) the cockpits are much larger than a proposed F1 cockpit/canopy would be.

Hi FOC
It's a nice go at adding cockpit protection but as mentioned it would not have prevented a full face impact straight on or from other angles
It also gets scary in cases of upside down situations, with fire, with or without functioning quick release bolts
But my main concern is this - motor racing is inherently dangerous. Most sensible people don't watch it for the chance that there will be crashes but we have to accept that humanity's affection for motorsport is that it's partly about having a sense of taming the machine, the environment and the competition to emerge victorious that is it's appeal. Hence lunatics drag racing and countless the Nordeschleife enthusiasts both professional and amateur.
As it says on the back of every ticket - Motor racing is a dangerous sport - let's try to make it safer but not with enclosed cockpits, surely?

Well having competed since 95, I take on board all modifications that add an extra protection while trying to retain some of the original look, form, methodology for the sport etc. A full cage saved my butt once where we hit with enough force that my co-drivers seat broke in two from the impact.

The question as to whether it would work or not simply comes down to design, thickness of tube, etc etc. The thicker the tube, the less view the driver has, etc.

I am wel laware of the dangers of competition and while I hate wearing my HANS device, it may very well save my ass one day! Therefore to do nothing, following this incident and that of Surtee's would be irresponsible. We compete knowing there is a risk, but we also do so, knowing we are working at improving safety all the time. While we all love motorsport, none of us wishes to die as a result.

Following Sennas and lets not forget Ratzenburger's injuries, the sidehead protection was a very sensible safety measure. If one persons life would be saved with having greater roll bar protection, then I personally think it should be considered.

If you look at the damage caused to Latvala's car during Rally Portugal this year, it could be argued that a Rally car is even stronger than an F1 car now, when it comes to driver protection. Whether the roll over bars are the way to go or not is for the design engineers to figure out, I disagree that we should do nothing, just because the ticket says its dangerous.

There will be a solution to this problem and protecting the head of a single seat driver must be looked into further. Reducing the threat a little further, is better than doing nothing at all, as the next guy may not be so fortunate.

don't compare roll cages in rally cars that are contained within the monocoque structure and a roll bar that sits on top of an f1 monocoque, loads are different, stresses are different and tolerances are way way smaller.

In a rally car, to put it as plainly as possible, you are reinforcing an existing structure. In an F1 car you want to build a new structure, able to withstand basically the same loads as the rollover hoop/engine air intake.

The problem with F1 cars is that because of aero they will suck objects in (much like Massa's car did to the spring). Beyond that the trajectory is impossible to predict. In Massa's case the spring hit just in front of his cockpit on the left side (should have been deflected there), then went on to hit the lip of the protective foam around massa's head then changed direction again and hit felipe. There's just no way to effectively protect yourself from a thing like that cause simply next time it may not bounce over to foam it may bounce near the center of the cockpit and straight into the driver's face

I get a feeling of deja vu. I suggested the roll cage a few days ago and its like I had murdered someones first born - it felt as if almost nobody was prepared to even consider doing anything, for the most illogical of reasons. Still, after a bit of consideration, I hope people will start to warm to the idea of roll bars - its the best compromise to still maintain open top racing, but prevent a car / wheel / wing / kerb (if upside down) causing a driver serious harm.

If you want to play with photoshop some more, I think that instead of straight side bars they need to loop upwards more, so they give more clearance. Also a cross strut, somewhere around the position of the forearms - far enough forwards so that there is still a good sized exit gap between the front and back lateral roll bars.

Re the full cockpit - the basic problems are that its not strong enough (or if it is, its too thick to see through / too hard to remove / may break and make worse problems), and that it will quickly get so dirty drivers cannot see where they are going - not a problem for jet fighters, which fly through clean air, and have navigation aids to fly blind if need be.

Re the concerns about smaller objects getting through it - the smaller objects have to be handled by the helmet. There aren't that many small heavy objects that can beat a spring for being a worst case, and the helmet almost did enough.

Edited by jez6363, 27 July 2009 - 23:40.

Does anyone have any hard statistics as to how many drivers have been hit on the helmet and/or been injured/killed in the last 20 years or so?

Just wondering, as I'm sure the FIA would have such numbers.

I find it interesting that there is much debate now about improving safety because of 2 such 'freak' incidents resulting in death/injury to drivers who undertake motorracing knowingly and willingly, and have accepted the risks involved.

We all do things everyday that are inherently risky - and probably much more risky than driving an F1 car - yet we accept this as ok.

Shame we don't put as much thought into road car protection/safety after an accident as much as we do for an incident in F1...

I like the fighter cockpit idea...





(yes I was bored and had Photoshop to play with)

I've not worked out the mounting and safety implications of it yet but I'll have a thinky.

I don't think it would work...

There is no way the fighter type canopy would work.
As the way it works when struck is to deform massively and in an F1 car you just don't have the space for the canopy to deflect enough before it hits the driver. There are also many reasons why a canopy would increase risks.
As for role cages you have to allow for the decrease in what the driver can see. Would all the added bars end up with drivers only able to see straight ahead? As well as all the problems with getting drivers out in an emergency or what happens if the roll cage collapses etc etc etc.

I cannot see the teams the drivers or even the safety working group agreeing to enclose drivers in even more due to the fact that accidents happen and if someone is in a life threatening situation every second counts when you need to get that driver out and start medical treatment.

In the end I think most are looking at the problem from the wrong perspective.

Please remember we are talking about bits coming off cars and hitting a person which is in itself very rare thankfully. I am not aware of any driver being hit by anything which was not part of a racing car when such rare accidents have happened.

Instead of how can we stop things hitting the drivers head I would think that the FIA and FOTA would rather look at how to reduce the chance of something like happened with the brawn from happening again perhaps it is as simple as ensuring that no part is reliant on just a single nut and bolt to retain it or if it can only be used with a single nut and bolt that it has to have some form of tether to ensure it cannot part company from the car.
Of course this is only going to be of use in normal conditions and with the speed and forces that drivers and cars go at there is no way that you could ensure no part came away from the car in an accident. Also certain parts like front wings are safer leaving the car rather than being tethered and ending up under the front of the car.
But I would think addressing the cause not the symptom would be what the FIA and FOTA will want.

Edited by Demo., 28 July 2009 - 01:50.

don't compare roll cages in rally cars that are contained within the monocoque structure and a roll bar that sits on top of an f1 monocoque, loads are different, stresses are different and tolerances are way way smaller. In a rally car, to put it as plainly as possible, you are reinforcing an existing structure. In an F1 car you want to build a new structure, able to withstand basically the same loads as the rollover hoop/engine air intake.

The problem with F1 cars is that because of aero they will suck objects in (much like Massa's car did to the spring). Beyond that the trajectory is impossible to predict. In Massa's case the spring hit just in front of his cockpit on the left side (should have been deflected there), then went on to hit the lip of the protective foam around massa's head then changed direction again and hit felipe. There's just no way to effectively protect yourself from a thing like that cause simply next time it may not bounce over to foam it may bounce near the center of the cockpit and straight into the driver's face

Engel with the greatest of respect I dont need a lesson on Rally car roll cages. As I said before, one saved my backside from a side impact of 80mph to a dead stop in 1 second.

Nor did I propose the the roll bar "sit on top" of the monocoque. I said very clearly that the retaining bars would need to be part of the chassis, i.e. monocoque.

The very fact as you rightly pointed out that the spring was sucked in, onto the front left corner of the cockpit and then travelled onward up to the head restraint, is the exact line a roll bar would follow and thus the spring would have bounced off to the left. The question would be whether a pair of blended "Horns" on the front corners of the cockpit would help any better. The oe thing they would not help with is another car or a wheel arriving over the drivers head, but they would be a relatively easy item to adapt to current cars to add a little bit more protection to the driver.

There will be a solution created and I suspect Horns rather than a full roll bar will be likely, but I have no doubt we will see something created, that can then be used in all single seater motorsport categories.

Edited by FlatOverCrest, 28 July 2009 - 01:56.

Engel with the greatest of respect I dont need a lesson on Rally car roll cages. As I said before, one saved my backside from a side impact of 80mph to a dead stop in 1 second.

Nor did I propose the the roll bar "sit on top" of the monocoque. I said very clearly that the retaining bars would need to be part of the chassis, i.e. monocoque.

The very fact as you rightly pointed out that the spring was sucked in, onto the front left corner of the cockpit and then travelled onward up to the head restraint, is the exact line a roll bar would follow and thus the spring would have bounced off to the left. The question would be whether a pair of blended "Horns" on the front corners of the cockpit would help any better. The oe thing they would not help with is another car or a wheel arriving over the drivers head, but they would be a relatively easy item to adapt to current cars to add a little bit more protection to the driver.

There will be a solution created and I suspect Horns rather than a full roll bar will be likely, but I have no doubt we will see something created, that can then be used in all single seater motorsport categories.

Oh ok so you want to produce a roll bar that would cover the exact trajectory of the massa spring? You think everything small flying projectile will follow that same trajectory do you?
A roll bar will not ensure sufficient protection from small flying projectiles so its a waste of time. What you are left with is creating one to protect drivers from large flying objects. Now before you do that you should go over the history of the sport and look at how many drivers have been hit by large projectiles. I can tell you now its barely any, so why should such drastic measures be introduced now?

Why could previous generations of drivers drive with open cockpits but todays drivers cant, despite the cars being much safer? There is only one reason. Cowardice.
If we allow stupid knee jerk reactions like this, F1 cars will eventually look like le mans cars.

i think they must be getting good strength from curved glass/perspex/polycarbonate or whatever is used by the military, and unlimited hydroplanes... the eurofighter and f22 both dont have the previous norm of a flat center plate of glass (normaly bulletproof) for the dead ahead area. and unlimited hydroplanes are the same, and the speeds they do hitting water is like hitting concreate. and fighters have to cope with people shooting at them and hitting birds and other stuff at very high speeds...

if your going to put a cockpit canopy on, then go from roughly the midpoint of the fin thats on top of the nose, raise the rollbar height abit (and the airbox). the canopy needs to intergrate with the saftey cell aswell.

if you want to go with bars then go with something like the drag race ones. "removable" ones are a concern, they could come off if someone forgets to fix them, and theres a good chance they will get jammed in a crash..

rallycars vs a formula car, the rallycar is a cage with a plastic shrink wrap around it, and the formula car is a good old thick bathtub

At the risk of being crass, part of the reason these guys get paid as much as they do is because of the non-zero risk of injury or death. It's like hazard pay.

That said, of the two recent incidents, the Massa one was an utter one-in-million fluke. The only way to design around small objects (birds, debris, whatever) striking the head is to enclose the cockpit. We have cars with enclosed cockpits already, so if that's what the people really want, we can do it tomorrow. Just ban open wheel, open cockpit cars. Any kind of half-assed partially enclosed cockpit solution is stupid and pointless.

The Surtees incident was more of a concern. Not so much because of his incredible misfortune at being in the path of the wheel, but because the wheel was bouncing down the track in the first place. That crash should not have detached a properly tethered wheel. Flying wheels are an especially serious concern because they could end up in the stands, and that simply can't happen.

If we need to do anything, we need to mandate steel wishbones, or mandate tethers down all five links, or whatever it takes to keep the large bouncy **** attached to the car.

Oh ok so you want to produce a roll bar that would cover the exact trajectory of the massa spring? You think everything small flying projectile will follow that same trajectory do you?
A roll bar will not ensure sufficient protection from small flying projectiles so its a waste of time. What you are left with is creating one to protect drivers from large flying objects. Now before you do that you should go over the history of the sport and look at how many drivers have been hit by large projectiles. I can tell you now its barely any, so why should such drastic measures be introduced now?
Why could previous generations of drivers drive with open cockpits but todays drivers cant, despite the cars being much safer? There is only one reason. Cowardice.
If we allow stupid knee jerk reactions like this, F1 cars will eventually look like le mans cars.

Thanks for the dribble.

If you bothered your backside to look at the mock-up..it just "happens" to be in the prime line of aero dynamic pull around the cockpit. It also "happens" to be the position that could very well have deflected the spring concerned. Unlike you, I have had foreign objects thrown at my car in competition, namely rocks flying at my windscreen when stuck behind another car so spare me the sarcasm.

So, with your next great sentence with regards the number of head-strikes in motorsport, HOW many exactly have their been? In order for you to claim "barely any" do you want to regail us all with your great statistical collection that enables you to make such a statement.

I suspect not.

Therefore those of us who HAVE actually been involved in the sport and researched it and followed it for decades, know that in fact MANY drivers have been hit on the head in motorsport in single seaters. Fortunately most have passed without srious injury.

Why dont you try and compare the sheer number of drivers killed in past generations through lack of safety equipment and modern times. Your next claim of "cowardice" really sets your knowledge level for all to see. Maybe your one of these guys that goes to trackdays in his roadcar and runs against the stopwatch....? Saying..."hah,,,roll cage.... who needs roll cages...roll cages are for poofs"....

I instructed an idiot like this once at Oulton Park, having advised him of the great need for safety cage and equipment in order to go against the clock, he turned round and said...'yeah yeah...'

4 laps later on the trackday and he had buried in Subaru Impreza into the wall off the first turn, broke his left arm and left leg and had a severe concussion.

So, before you dismiss people with some experience, may I suggest you listen more and speak less, you may learn something.

I don't get it. It wouldn't have saved Massa or Surtees.

Thanks for the dribble.

If you bothered your backside to look at the mock-up..it just "happens" to be in the prime line of aero dynamic pull around the cockpit. It also "happens" to be the position that could very well have deflected the spring concerned. Unlike you, I have had foreign objects thrown at my car in competition, namely rocks flying at my windscreen when stuck behind another car so spare me the sarcasm.

You still seem to think all flying objects follow the same line of trajectory. Thats absurd. Depending on the direction they are flying and speed or deflection they could hit a driver anywhere in the head and your roll bars dont offer such protection so they would be pointless.

So, with your next great sentence with regards the number of head-strikes in motorsport, HOW many exactly have their been? In order for you to claim "barely any" do you want to regail us all with your great statistical collection that enables you to make such a statement.

I suspect not.

Therefore those of us who HAVE actually been involved in the sport and researched it and followed it for decades, know that in fact MANY drivers have been hit on the head in motorsport in single seaters. Fortunately most have passed without srious injury.

Why dont you tell us how many then? I dont recall any drivers in the last 20 years being hit in the head in formula 1 with any large flying objects, which is why I dont see a problem.

Flying wheels are an especially serious concern because they could end up in the stands, and that simply can't happen.

That is why there are fences around the spectators.

How horrible the latest incidents with Massa and Surtees have been, I wouldn't want F1 to end up having closed cockpits.

If they go for the fighterplane cockpit that all that airbox concept becames useless, they will have to redesign airbox and place it on the sides like two smaller airboxes or something

If they go for the fighterplane cockpit that all that airbox concept becames useless, they will have to redesign airbox and place it on the sides like two smaller airboxes or something

why?

Improvise this little bit

I don't think it would work...

If anything the fact it stopped the wheel getting through the windshield supports the idea of a windshield? Afterall its much better to be concious in a car you cannot see out of than being knocked out cold at high speed like massa.

Whats really important is to stop objects hitting the drivers helmet at high speeds. Even if its a destructible structure that reduces impact by 50% it could be enough to save lives. Maybe Massa would only have a bruised forehead instead of skull fractures and damaged eyes.

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 28 July 2009 - 08:29.

You still seem to think all flying objects follow the same line of trajectory. Thats absurd. Depending on the direction they are flying and speed or deflection they could hit a driver anywhere in the head and your roll bars dont offer such protection so they would be pointless.



Why dont you tell us how many then? I dont recall any drivers in the last 20 years being hit in the head in formula 1 with any large flying objects, which is why I dont see a problem.

It's the FIA's task to think about safety in all classes they run, an example then is quick to find. besides a lot of incidents have happened in formula 1, they just were near miss, or ajust a light touch.

Edited by Ruud de la Rosa, 28 July 2009 - 08:29.

The problem i see with the cockpit idea is that in order for the closed canopy to withstand all impacts it would need to be extremely thick, and combining this with a curved surface is sure to present the drivers with vision problems ie. distortion.

Curved surfaces have been used in aircraft for years with no distortion so that shouldn't be an issue.

One thing that would worry me about a closed cockpit is the heat. It gets hot enough for the driver as it is, with a canopy on the problem would be much worse.

Any roll bar that would have stopped that spring, would also have rendered visibility unacceptable.

Curved surfaces have been used in aircraft for years with no distortion so that shouldn't be an issue.

One thing that would worry me about a closed cockpit is the heat. It gets hot enough for the driver as it is, with a canopy on the problem would be much worse.

Mandatory AC

why?

well because my little friend the airbox is where it is because the air flow is already jammed. with capsle you would have nice air flow that you wouldn want to disturb with boxy thing such is airbox

Mandatory AC

Love to see where they will fit that.

To deal with the ever present problem of fire, a driver in normally seated position with seat belts on, has to show that they can get out of the car within 5 seconds.
Whatever you suggest in regards to cockpit shields, DONT mess with this rule.

What would F1 and Indy cars look like if we'd modified them to prevent what happened to Alex Zanardi?

This type of thread is well-intentioned but naive. Open wheel / open cockpit racing cars are inherently dangerous. I'm not advocating doing nothing to make them as safe as possible (crash structures, etc) but to fundamentally change the concept of the vehicles is a step too far in my opinion.

BTW - fully enclosed cars don't guarentee no head injuries:

Ben

Edited by Ben, 28 July 2009 - 11:16.

What would F1 and Indy cars look like if we'd modified them to prevent what happened to Alex Zanardi?

This type of thread is well-intentioned but naive. Open wheel / open cockpit racing cars are inherently dangerous. I'm not advocating doing nothing to make them as safe as possible (crash structures, etc) but to fundamentally change the concept of the vehicles is a step too far in my opinion.

BTW - fully enclosed cars don't guarentee no head injuries:

Ben

Geezuz - i think that is the worst accident I've ever seen. I'm assuming that it was fatal - terrible...

god. Why don't we just ban F1 because it is so dangerous and be done with it. Then perhaps you would be happy.

Geezuz - i think that is the worst accident I've ever seen. I'm assuming that it was fatal - terrible...

Yes it was fatal.

Like I said that type of incident is essentially unsurvivable in anything that looks like a conventional race car - that's life.

Ben

Cockpits with Ejector seats are the only possible way I can see F1 going forwards.


Not activated by the driver mind, if any object comes withing 100 feet of the car the system automatically activates. No more crashes.... or overtaking... or starting on the grid... or...er... well F1.

Here's the bottom line: if Felipe's car had an F-16 canopy he wouldn't be in the hospital today.

Yes it was fatal.

Like I said that type of incident is essentially unsurvivable in anything that looks like a conventional race car - that's life.

Ben

even the COT ?

Here's the bottom line: if Felipe's car had an F-16 canopy he wouldn't be in the hospital today.

Maybe, but there'd be another accident of a different nature a few months or years down the line that caused some physical injury.

The only way to avoid all possible injury would be to ban motorsport. To make a car completely 100% safe for the driver under any and all eventualities is just physically impossible imo

Here's a heads up to all the great armchair daredevils amoungst you that think that that as competitors we should just suck it up.

Having been stood at the side of the road in Margam Park ready to interview Mike "beef" Park when he was sitting next to Markko Martin on Rally GB, only to hear across he radio that they have gone off and it's bad, you have no idea the gut wrenching feeling you get, when you know a fellow competitor has been badly hurt. Beef lost his life in that accident and we all lost a great friend and a great character.

The 307 he was in, collided with a tree at 100mph, on his door section at the door hinge. The hit was so violent the cage buckled and unfortunately the imapct was fatal.

After that time, greater research was put into cage design and the current WRC spec cage is a truly amazing piece of kit. I am more than happy to be tearing along at 140mph with trees clipping my wing mirrors, but becuase I have been involved in motorsport all these years, do I choose to "flip off" the danger elements....of course not.

So to all who sit and say nothing should be done, let me enlighten you.... The ones who actually will be the first to ask what measure might be taken to to help "improve" safety further, will be the drivers. All of us that actually compete, know the risks, we love the sport, but none of us "WANTS" to die or be in a potentially fatal situation, therefore we are always developing safety.

If by developing safety further, you think it takes away for example at; Barrelling down a road 100mph plus toward a house at a 90 right and still being on the gas 80 yards out....just because we have more safety now than we did 30 years ago...then your a fool.

In motorsport, it does not matter whether your in the safest car in the world, when the competition is on, the adrenalin pumps and you push as hard and fast as you can.

The idiots who say nothing should be done following these two incidents, are the type of morons that would still have F1 cars with no head-supports because "Jacky Stewart never had to drive with a head support". What they dont realise is Jacky Stewart never pulled 4G going round a corner!

So the point of this thread is not pointless... it is looking at a "potential" solution to reduce the chance of a head strike.

If you feel so strongly against that, why dont you go talk to the Surtees family and tell them to suck it up as "Henry knew what the risks where". That may be the case, but the aplication of head protection should apply even more to our up and coming youngsters, to give them the time to learn their craft and to protect them from a pretty common event in single seaters, which is either a wheel from another car hitting the head, be it attached to the car or not, or even another car being launched over another car.

Consideration SHOULD be given to what can be done and I agree that the "spirit" of an open cockpit single seater is what we all want. I am just prepared to consider all options, rather than be one of the great Armchair critics who say "you get paid enough money, you should accept the risks".

We do accept the risks, but we also look to improve safety where we can as at the end of the day, it means we lose less friends and colleagues as a result. That may not mean anything to some of you, but those of us that have known someone who has been killed in the sport respectfully disagree with your idiotic sentiment.

Here's the bottom line: if Felipe's car had an F-16 canopy he wouldn't be in the hospital today.

And I guarantee you that if cockpit canopies were introduced, at some point in the future someone would become trapped in a burning car as a result of canopies and people like you would be deploring the madness of enclosing the driver so closely.

Ben

Consideration SHOULD be given to what can be done and I agree that the "spirit" of an open cockpit single seater is what we all want. I am just prepared to consider all options, rather than be one of the great Armchair critics who say "you get paid enough money, you should accept the risks".

We do accept the risks, but we also look to improve safety where we can as at the end of the day, it means we lose less friends and colleagues as a result. That may not mean anything to some of you, but those of us that have known someone who has been killed in the sport respectfully disagree with your idiotic sentiment.

Very nicely said - I'm afraid I cannot speak as a driver, but I have found it hard to deal with the number of callous sounding posts around this subject. For sure its dangerous, the drivers know that, but I hope that if people do have the sort of 'motorsport is dangerous, live with it' view, they will not feel it necessary to continue to share it publicly, becuase it is likely to be pretty upsetting, for example if someone such as Surtees family member was reading it. And I know that mostly its probably said with good intent, but it really doesn't add anything to the discussion at the moment.

And I guarantee you that if cockpit canopies were introduced, at some point in the future someone would become trapped in a burning car as a result of canopies and people like you would be deploring the madness of enclosing the driver so closely.
Ben

Er.....not to put out your fire so to speak.....but the Aston does not exactly have a HUGE cockpit...and yes, sportscar drivers have to get out of their cars in 5 seconds too!

Maybe, but there'd be another accident of a different nature a few months or years down the line that caused some physical injury.

Which has nothing to do with the increase in cockpit safety from a canopy.