Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Closed Cockpit - Yes or No?


  • Please log in to reply
110 replies to this topic

Poll: Closed Cockpit (229 member(s) have cast votes)

Should the F1 cars have closed cockpits?

  1. Yes (52 votes [22.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.71%

  2. No (177 votes [77.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 77.29%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Barri

Barri
  • Member

  • 314 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 23 October 2014 - 16:05

maxresdefault.jpg



Advertisement

#2 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 23 October 2014 - 16:06

NO



#3 Giz

Giz
  • Member

  • 734 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 23 October 2014 - 16:07

Yes, but would there be wipers or would it mean no wet races?

#4 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 23 October 2014 - 16:33

Might as well merge F1 and LMP1 if we're not having open-wheel, open-cockpit rules. I do think anything that improves driver safety should be examined, and when you look back to car and cockpit design from 20 years ago it's incredible how much progress has already been made, but we're now reaching the limit of what can be done without enclosing the cockpit completely, and I do think it's legitimate to ask if that's a proportionate response to the instances of cockpit intrusion that we've had and the risks of which we are aware. I'd like to know, for example, whether closed cockpits would have helped Henry Surtees or Jules Bianchi or Filipe Massa in their accidents. I'd also like to know what the impact would have been on Nick Heidfeld's escape from his burning Lotus in 2011 if he couldn't just undo his belts and jump out.

 

I personally think there has to be a clear and compelling case for changing the fundamentals, and anything that can be done to improve safety without changing the character or the cars or the sport (like improving the protocols for recovering crashed or stranded cars, yellow flag rules etc) should be done first. Generally speaking we should do what we can to make the sport safer, and never stop trying to improve safety conditions for participants, but we needn't take that drive to maximise safety to its absolute extreme, because if we did we wouldn't go racing at all, and in my view there is still a place for allowing people to choose to take some degree of extra risk in order to preserve a much-loved element of the sport. Maybe open cockpits are a case in point?



#5 Barri

Barri
  • Member

  • 314 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 23 October 2014 - 17:01

Might as well merge F1 and LMP1 if we're not having open-wheel, open-cockpit rules. I do think anything that improves driver safety should be examined, and when you look back to car and cockpit design from 20 years ago it's incredible how much progress has already been made, but we're now reaching the limit of what can be done without enclosing the cockpit completely, and I do think it's legitimate to ask if that's a proportionate response to the instances of cockpit intrusion that we've had and the risks of which we are aware. I'd like to know, for example, whether closed cockpits would have helped Henry Surtees or Jules Bianchi or Filipe Massa in their accidents. I'd also like to know what the impact would have been on Nick Heidfeld's escape from his burning Lotus in 2011 if he couldn't just undo his belts and jump out.

 

I personally think there has to be a clear and compelling case for changing the fundamentals, and anything that can be done to improve safety without changing the character or the cars or the sport (like improving the protocols for recovering crashed or stranded cars, yellow flag rules etc) should be done first. Generally speaking we should do what we can to make the sport safer, and never stop trying to improve safety conditions for participants, but we needn't take that drive to maximise safety to its absolute extreme, because if we did we wouldn't go racing at all, and in my view there is still a place for allowing people to choose to take some degree of extra risk in order to preserve a much-loved element of the sport. Maybe open cockpits are a case in point?

 

You make a very good point and I agree with you on most of it. However, our head is one of the most crucial parts of our body and yet, despite all the safety improvements, it still is the most vulnerable area in a F1 car. If I'm taking the risk, as a driver, I would rather run the risk of breaking my legs than getting a bad head injury. A bigger effort should be made on protecting the driver's head. 


Edited by Barri, 23 October 2014 - 17:02.


#6 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 11,547 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 23 October 2014 - 17:17

Nope.

#7 nosecone

nosecone
  • Member

  • 1,938 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 23 October 2014 - 17:27

Yes, but would there be wipers or would it mean no wet races?

 

I've flown a glider in the rain and well it wasn't too bad (on Youtube there are many videos). We don't have wipers either...

 

BUT, of course, F1 is something different. I can imagine spray and heavy showers beeing a problem. :well:  On the other side F1 races get red-flagged when it's raining heavily.

 

I didn't vote. There is one big PRO which is the safety. But even canopies don't guarantee 100% safety. In the Bianchi accident a canopy was almost totally useless. On the CONTRA side is the tradition but also safety and aesthetic . What if the driver has to get out of the car quickly. And how is the driver cooled (i think they need to build some air duct into the canopy). Would Magnussen be boiled alive if there was a canopy?

 

F1 will never be 100% safe (sadly). Canopies would add some safety so i wouldn't refuse them just because of tradition :well: difficult question


Edited by nosecone, 23 October 2014 - 17:29.


#8 Imateria

Imateria
  • Member

  • 2,424 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 23 October 2014 - 17:34

No. I'd much rather see a larger wind shield type deflector used. I know the FIA ruled them out when tested a couple of years ago because the shield shattered (but did deflect the tyre) but as far as I know they were only testing polycarbonate, did they try one made from something else 'cause haven't of it being tried?



#9 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 2,876 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 23 October 2014 - 17:36

Can't say. Closed cockpit will create new problems. Heat, visibility, getting out quick when necessary (fire, crash). What if there is a fire and the mechanism to open it is broken? What about reflections? Weight? It will solve some problem and create new ones. In damp weather there will be fog, in the heat it will be hot...



#10 Turboflame

Turboflame
  • Member

  • 568 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 23 October 2014 - 17:38

Yes, but i think it would be cooler in combination with closed or protected wheels (which would give an extra safety feature as well).



#11 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 17,232 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 23 October 2014 - 18:05

No.



#12 Tourgott

Tourgott
  • Member

  • 1,149 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 23 October 2014 - 18:05

Never!



#13 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 23 October 2014 - 18:38

If they decide to use closed cockpits they need to take that opportunity to redesign the whole layout of the cars.

The overly simplistic idea of just slapping a bit of polycarbonate over the drivers head isn't going far enough.

The FIA should be constantly spending more money researching the future of all open wheeled racing and not just patching over issues after a particularly bad accident happens.

#14 Anja

Anja
  • Member

  • 10,257 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 23 October 2014 - 18:45

To be honest, I wouldn't mind if it would be done the right way. Open wheels define the concept more than open cockpit in my opinion.



#15 Radoye

Radoye
  • Member

  • 3,364 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 23 October 2014 - 18:51

If they decide to use closed cockpits they need to take that opportunity to redesign the whole layout of the cars.

The overly simplistic idea of just slapping a bit of polycarbonate over the drivers head isn't going far enough.

The FIA should be constantly spending more money researching the future of all open wheeled racing and not just patching over issues after a particularly bad accident happens.

 

Agreed.

 

I still have doubts about fighter-jet style canopies in situations where the car turns upside down. With the current rollbar setup there is just enough space for the driver to wiggle its way out - but with the canopy in the way as well would this still be the case?



#16 Turboflame

Turboflame
  • Member

  • 568 posts
  • Joined: October 14

Posted 23 October 2014 - 19:23

It's called evolution. The Grand Prix cars evolve. Did they always were singleseaters? No, the first weren't. Did they always have open wheels? No, Mercedes for instance had covered wheel designs for the high speed tracks in the 30s and 50s. So what would be wrong with closed cockpits? They should match the closed cockpits with the rest of the design though. Only introduce closed cockpits without looking at the rest of the design could potentially produce aestheticaly less pleasing results. But the aesthetics as such should not be a primary reason not to introduce them, as safety is the most important argument.



#17 HoldenRT

HoldenRT
  • Member

  • 6,773 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 23 October 2014 - 19:50

Not ideal.  Especially if it's a knee jerk reaction to a freak circumstance.



#18 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 2,876 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 23 October 2014 - 21:28

Need a "I am undecided" option in the poll



#19 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 44,619 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 October 2014 - 23:56

I've flown a glider in the rain and well it wasn't too bad (on Youtube there are many videos). We don't have wipers either...

 

BUT, of course, F1 is something different. I can imagine spray and heavy showers beeing a problem. :well:  On the other side F1 races get red-flagged when it's raining heavily.

 

I didn't vote. There is one big PRO which is the safety. But even canopies don't guarantee 100% safety. In the Bianchi accident a canopy was almost totally useless. On the CONTRA side is the tradition but also safety and aesthetic . What if the driver has to get out of the car quickly. And how is the driver cooled (i think they need to build some air duct into the canopy). Would Magnussen be boiled alive if there was a canopy?

 

F1 will never be 100% safe (sadly). Canopies would add some safety so i wouldn't refuse them just because of tradition :well: difficult question

I've flown gliders and planes in the wet as well, but one big difference is that there is no oil, rubber and other materials in the mix when your up in the sky.



Advertisement

#20 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 43,951 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 24 October 2014 - 02:53

First thought was.. Messerschmitt..?

 

No thanks.

Jp



#21 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Member

  • 7,911 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 24 October 2014 - 04:21

Nick-Heidfeld-2_2599202.jpg

 

Nein,



#22 CoolBreeze

CoolBreeze
  • Member

  • 2,440 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 24 October 2014 - 04:24

Definitely no. 



#23 Sardukar

Sardukar
  • Member

  • 692 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 24 October 2014 - 04:41

a million times no



#24 emmanuelrubi

emmanuelrubi
  • Member

  • 1,058 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 24 October 2014 - 04:47

Do we really need another post about closed vs open cockpits ?



#25 SmallHorsey

SmallHorsey
  • Member

  • 951 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 24 October 2014 - 06:57

Oooh, fire. That picture shows exactly why I cut the roof off my car, in case I get trapped in a fire.



#26 ollebompa

ollebompa
  • Member

  • 791 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 24 October 2014 - 07:08

No. i can't see the benefits outweighing the negatives, especially if it become a rushed decision.



#27 SmallHorsey

SmallHorsey
  • Member

  • 951 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 24 October 2014 - 07:18

I might go and knock the windshield out, too. Can't have enough fire protection... 



#28 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 24 October 2014 - 07:24

I might go and knock the windshield out, too. Can't have enough fire protection... 

You don't think it's a risk?



#29 SmallHorsey

SmallHorsey
  • Member

  • 951 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 24 October 2014 - 07:40

You don't think it's a risk?

Both are potentially risks. But are they an equal risk? I have no doubt that F1 cars can be designed to be safer - and offer the driver much greater head protection - while not greatly increasing their chance of being injured in a fire. Some people are just opposing this on emotional grounds. 

 

Do you think motorbikes are safer than cars? Much less chance of being caught in a fire on a motorbike, right? Do you wear a seatbelt? What if the belt was damaged in a crash and you were caught in a fire? You don't think it's a risk?



#30 travbrad

travbrad
  • Member

  • 1,058 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 24 October 2014 - 07:42

Oooh, fire. That picture shows exactly why I cut the roof off my car, in case I get trapped in a fire.

 

The reason they don't just tear the roofs off all road cars is because road cars don't have high cockpit sides, carbon fiber monocoques, and roll hoops.  Most people don't wear crash helmets and HANS device when driving their road car either.  It WOULD be safer to have no roof in the event of a fire, but that safety gain is outweighed by the much greater risk of collision injuries due to those other things I mentioned.

 

 

http://www.nfpa.org/...sumers/vehicles

  • Collisions and overturns were factors in only 4% of highway vehicle fires, but these incidents accounted for three of every five (60%) automobile fire deaths.

F1 cars have a lot of collisions.

 

It seems to me both open and enclosed cockpits have safety risks and benefits, so either way F1 will never be completely safe.  Which one would be safer overall?  I doubt anyone really knows for sure.


Edited by travbrad, 24 October 2014 - 07:48.


#31 byrkus

byrkus
  • Member

  • 1,011 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 24 October 2014 - 07:52



maxresdefault.jpg

 

2009-Peugeot-908-HDi-FAP-Le-Mans-Winner-

 

That Peugeot would look faboulous with open wheels. :wave:



#32 SmallHorsey

SmallHorsey
  • Member

  • 951 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:16

The reason they don't just tear the roofs off all road cars is because road cars don't have high cockpit sides, carbon fiber monocoques, and roll hoops.  Most people don't wear crash helmets and HANS device when driving their road car either.  It WOULD be safer to have no roof in the event of a fire, but that safety gain is outweighed by the much greater risk of collision injuries due to those other things I mentioned.

 

 

http://www.nfpa.org/...sumers/vehicles

  • Collisions and overturns were factors in only 4% of highway vehicle fires, but these incidents accounted for three of every five (60%) automobile fire deaths.

F1 cars have a lot of collisions.

 

It seems to me both open and enclosed cockpits have safety risks and benefits, so either way F1 will never be completely safe.  Which one would be safer overall?  I doubt anyone really knows for sure.

We don't know for sure which one would be safer overall because the discussion has barely begun, and plenty of people have already made up their mind and have labelled the discussion ridiculous. The truth is that they don't want to know the truth. They just don't like change. 



#33 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:24

Both are potentially risks. But are they an equal risk? I have no doubt that F1 cars can be designed to be safer - and offer the driver much greater head protection - while not greatly increasing their chance of being injured in a fire. Some people are just opposing this on emotional grounds. 

 

Do you think motorbikes are safer than cars? Much less chance of being caught in a fire on a motorbike, right? Do you wear a seatbelt? What if the belt was damaged in a crash and you were caught in a fire? You don't think it's a risk?

F1 cars catch fire fairly regularly.

 

Engineering fasteners for the canopies that would be strong enough to resist the impact of Bianchi's crash and be guaranteed to release quickly from both inside and outside would be very tricky. Collisions have a tendency to distort chassis, canopies and fasteners. Making something that would be guaranteed to work in all situations would be impossible.

 

There is a considerable risk here of making things more dangerous for the driver and then you have the visibility problems that would most likely increase the chance of collisions in the first place.

 

If I was a driver I would be very concerned about the idea of canopies.


Edited by Lazy, 24 October 2014 - 08:25.


#34 Knot

Knot
  • Member

  • 666 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:25

F1 cars catch fire fairly regularly.

 

Engineering fasteners for the canopies that would be strong enough to resist the impact of Bianchi's crash and be guaranteed to release quickly from both inside and outside would be very tricky. Collisions have a tendency to distort chassis, canopies and fasteners. Making something that would be guaranteed to work in all situations would be impossible.

 

There is a considerable risk here of making things more dangerous for the driver and then you have the visibility problems that would most likely increase the chance of collisions in the first place.

 

If I was a driver I would be very concerned about the idea of canopies.

 

 No other types of racing cars catch fire?



#35 SmallHorsey

SmallHorsey
  • Member

  • 951 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:26

I think people should go and look at this clip which was posted by Gorma in the other thread about cockpits. It's just a thoughtful discussion about the possibilities of closed cockpits on an F1 car.

 

 

Plenty of the points raised by people questioning a closed cockpit are touched on. And are we still allowed to call it a cockpit? I thought it was now a flight deck...  ;)



#36 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:32

 No other types of racing cars catch fire?

Where did I say that?



#37 Jerem

Jerem
  • Member

  • 2,164 posts
  • Joined: September 13

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:41

I think it would look sexy.

So if it actually improves safety (there are pros and cons regarding that) then fine.



#38 Spillage

Spillage
  • Member

  • 10,251 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:49

I'm all for it if it can improve safety, but I'm not sure it can. Racing in the rain is a real concern unless we have wipers and any canopy has to be big enough to avoid the driver hitting his head on the side. Less concerned with fire since it's really the same for LMP cars, although it could be extremely dangerous in the event of a car upside down. But in the past few years we've had two serious injuries (Massa, Bianchi) because of drivers being struck on the head and several near misses (Karthikeyan, Alonso, Wurz) so if we were to hedge our bets I'd say open cockpits are a greater risk than fire.

#39 AJFIN

AJFIN
  • Member

  • 237 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:50

F1 should have open cockpit and open wheels. Otherwise it's not F1 for me.



Advertisement

#40 David1976

David1976
  • Member

  • 1,638 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:59

The closed cockpit, or even the part closed cockpit ideas, look absolutely awful.

 

The danger in open wheeled formula cars cannot be eradicated.  This is all a massive overreaction to the Bianchi accident which could have been prevented better by modifications to the recovery vehicles or yellow flags as opposed to anything else.



#41 Shambolic

Shambolic
  • Member

  • 1,269 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 October 2014 - 08:59

I've said it before and I'll say it again - It seems the sport, and many of its fans, want "Formula Amish", not the self acclaimed pinnacle of racing cars they chant to defend themselves.

 

F1 cars "fundamental" design elements - Open wheels, open cockpit, rear engine, two wheel drive - Stem from times when the common thinking was these approaches was the best for performance. When wheels were little more than bicycle tyre beshod skinny spindly things, then there was probably little advantage to covering them - The extra bodywork may well have added more drag than it removed. Aero downforce was still a thing of the distant future, so there was no real gain in adding bodywork if it couldn't remove drag.

 

Open cockpits resulted in a lower centre of gravity, and at the time sports cars on and off track were generally open topped. But perhaps they were never developed past their crude infancy because that was the era in which a car was a large, fragile fuel can on wheels. This talk of fire in today's F1 is bordering on risible, especially when one well known incident is trotted out repeatedly. Cars can (and do) have on-board extinguishers. Tracks have a plethora of marshals, with extinguishers. Ignoring the fact a car could and should be designed so an engine area/ battery area/ fuel fire should never enter the cockpit, there's vastly more fire safety measures now than in the past, and in fact the most dangerous fire of recent times was in a garage not on the track.

 

Nailing down "F1 has always been (erroneously) and therefore always must be x, y or z anachronistic aesthetic" really means F1 must be some bizarre blend of the archaic and the modern, making it nothing more than an obscenely expensive, ever more sidelined, freak show. If enclosed cockpits improve safety then why not have them? They could also lead to more efficient aero, which may or may not lead to better overall racing. If closed wheels (personally I'd like to see something similar to Indcar bodywork around the wheels) means less wheels flying around in case of failures or crashes, whilst also cleaning up the aero so the cars can run more efficiently, then is it so abhorrent if we can't see quite as much grey sticky stuff flashing round and round in a blur?

 

F1 has, to me at least, always been about extracting the most performance from a given rule formula. The rules can and do change, aside from the instinctive emotional reactions is there really any difference between allowing closed cockpits, and banning blown diffusers? Think before answering, because whilst one makes a large visual change, both mak a significant technological change. And one of them possibly makes a massive positive safety change..



#42 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:03

In the light of Bianchi's accident, I think aesthetic concerns are spectacularly selfish.



#43 Sennasational

Sennasational
  • Member

  • 453 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:18

It seems like everyone is missing the most obvious solution here. Lets face it; cars are dangerous. All those hot bits and fast spinny parts? No thanks. Don't even get me started on exposing limbs and body parts to the elements and very random debris. If it can go wrong, it will. I'm still surprised no one has brought up the obvious meteor risk which the FIA keep ignoring despite my many letters. So I present to you, Formula S. The 'S' is for safe, or possibly sanctimonious.

 

hamster-balls.jpg



#44 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:19

I've still no idea what point people who bring up the Nick Heidfeld fire are trying to prove.

Those Lotus fires were caused by the front facing exhausts.

If you're all suddenly so affraid about drivers burning to death then why was there no huge fan led campaign to ban that idea at the time?

The "driver might get trapped upside down" argument is just silly as well. When was the last time anyone in LMP1 crashed and then somehow got more injuries by being upside down in a closed cockpit for a bit.

#45 Nitropower

Nitropower
  • Member

  • 1,351 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:29

Is it an effective measure? would it have prevented Bianchi from his injuries? can it bear the weight of a formula one car falling onto another one (kind of what happened to Alonso in Spa 2012 when Grosjean caused an accident at the start of the race?

 

If the answer is yes, then YES, use closed cockpits. It doesn't detract anything from the show if there onboard cams or the cover is transparent. We dont' really need to see their helmets or heads to enjoy racing as much as fans of NASCAR or other series don't need it.



#46 SmallHorsey

SmallHorsey
  • Member

  • 951 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:33

Because the people who oppose change are being exposed as exactly that, simply people who oppose change. 



#47 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:39

To those talking about other categories having closed cockpits, LMP cars have doors on either side. The problem with this F1 concept as it stands is that ingress and egress would be difficult in certain emergency scenarios due to the 'fighter' style cockpit, which would require the car to be upright to afford access for marshalls etc, a problem that is not an issue in other closed cockpit categories.

So, unless there is a fundamental ground-up rethink of F1 chassis design and construction, which would effectively see the demise of the category as it stands from both technical and visual standpoints and yes, the visual aspect does matter and will play a part, ask anyone in marketing.

At that point, you have something more akin to LMP cars and you are then in competition with an existing, established category, whilst losing one of F1's few USP's. I guarantee any changes will be dictated by business led decisions as much as any safety concern, given that the actual risk you are seeking to minimise is, whether you like it or not, proportionally small.

Edited by superden, 24 October 2014 - 10:20.


#48 MikeV1987

MikeV1987
  • Member

  • 6,371 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:40

no, leave closed cockpit to lmp. The drivers have been in open cockpit machines throughout their lives, they know the risk. No need to nanny things up.


Edited by MikeV1987, 24 October 2014 - 10:15.


#49 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 24 October 2014 - 09:59

Because the people who oppose change are being exposed as exactly that, simply people who oppose change. 

I don't think there's any call for your self righteousness. There are legitimate concerns as to whether canopies would increase safety overall.

 

The FIA has looked at canopies before and there are significant issues. 

 

Scarbs covers some of the issues but certainly not all. He suggest hydraulic operation of the canopy for instance but doesn't say what would happen in case of hydraulic failure.

 

This is a much more complex issue than just would it have saved Bianchi, which is doubtful in itself.



#50 Kraken

Kraken
  • Member

  • 980 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 24 October 2014 - 10:11

Because the people who oppose change are being exposed as exactly that, simply people who oppose change. 

Get over yourself. There are many valid reasons for Yes or No. Just because you're in one camp doesn't mean that everyone who holds the opposing view is wrong.