Aeroscreen for Indycar for 2020

The sport was already safe enough. If you don't believe in that concept then  you fail to realize the end result of motorsport, which will mean all excitement removed as we have seen already imo. If you keep going the cars will eventually look like LMP cars and be racing on car parks with painted on curbs (basically what we have already).  It's nice to talk about drivers being 100% safe but you fail to consider the consequences for the sport to get to that point. Its boring, and nobody watches motorsport to be bored.

The excitement in racing for me comes from watching skilled drivers race each other in a bid to complete the race distance in the shortest possible time and cross the line first. Because that is what racing is. 

Danger is not and never has been a source of my interest. I may have respected that is is there, but it is far away from why I watch. 

I'm sure that's true of many. And I'm sure many others disagree like yourself. But don't talk about people not having the same opinion of you as though they are doing this whole 'being motorsport fan' thing wrong. 

The sport was already safe enough. If you don't believe in that concept then you fail to realize the end result of motorsport, which will mean all excitement removed as we have seen already imo. If you keep going the cars will eventually look like LMP cars and be racing on car parks with painted on curbs (basically what we have already). It's nice to talk about drivers being 100% safe but you fail to consider the consequences for the sport to get to that point. Its boring, and nobody watches motorsport to be bored.

The excitement in racing for me comes from watching skilled drivers race each other in a bid to complete the race distance in the shortest possible time and cross the line first. Because that is what racing is. 

 

Danger is not and never has been a source of my interest. I may have respected that is is there, but it is far away from why I watch. 

 

I'm sure that's true of many. And I'm sure many others disagree like yourself. But don't talk about people not having the same opinion of you as though they are doing this whole 'being motorsport fan' thing wrong. 

Part of skill is taking a car to the limit when consequences for a mistake are greater. That relates to curbs and barriers, walls, grass, gravel, so by removing those dangers, skill is reduced. I don't many people don't realize how much the danger attracts them.  There is a reason  why tight rope walkers don't perform 1 meter from the ground. Keep kidding yourself though.

Part of skill is taking a car to the limit when consequences for a mistake are greater. That relates to curbs and barriers, walls, grass, gravel, so by removing those dangers, skill is reduced. I don't many people don't realize how much the danger attracts them. There is a reason why tight rope walkers don't perform 1 meter from the ground. Keep kidding yourself though.

Part of skill is taking a car to the limit when consequences for a mistake are greater. That relates to curbs and barriers, walls, grass, gravel, so by removing those dangers, skill is reduced. I don't many people don't realize how much the danger attracts them.  There is a reason  why tight rope walkers don't perform 1 meter from the ground. Keep kidding yourself though.

We will have to agree to disagree on that then. With the continual advance in racing technology one has to accept a similar advance with safety measures. Failure to do so will lead to a situation where just because there haven't been any fatalities doesn't mean "it's safe enough.." and in reality the sport has just been lucky to postpone the inevitable.

And for the record, pure motorsport does not equal open top vehicles. LMP styled cars can and do produce good racing - its all about driver ability not whether or not you can see the drivers helmet in clear air.
 

Ok then where do we draw the line? An F1 car will be much safer in a completely closed cockpit and wheels, so I assume that is what you hope for and support?

 

 

As a trained marshall I'd much rather have acres of runoff than see cars wraping themselves around armco or similar. I get the whole notion of being penalised for exceeding track limits but due to vehicle speeds and the inherent fragility of the human body, there isn't really any safe way to achieve both goals - in reality the penalty could be technologically applied but "purists" wouldn't accept that either so the best and only acceptable compromise is to go for safety..

Well there actually was a way to achieve those goals, and they were gravel traps, unless the fragility of the human body suddenly increased? I'm glad you get the notion of being penalized for exceeded track conditions because sticking to the track is actually one of the most important aspects for motor racing....

Part of skill is taking a car to the limit when consequences for a mistake are greater. That relates to curbs and barriers, walls, grass, gravel, so by removing those dangers, skill is reduced. I don't many people don't realize how much the danger attracts them. There is a reason why tight rope walkers don't perform 1 meter from the ground. Keep kidding yourself though.

Ok then where do we draw the line? An F1 car will be much safer in a completely closed cockpit and wheels, so I assume that is what you hope for and support?


Well there actually was a way to achieve those goals, and they were gravel traps, unless the fragility of the human body suddenly increased? I'm glad you get the notion of being penalized for exceeded track conditions because sticking to the track is actually one of the most important aspects for motor racing....

I get the whole notion of being penalised for exceeding track limits but due to vehicle speeds and the inherent fragility of the human body, there isn't really any safe way to achieve both goals - in reality the penalty could be technologically applied but "purists" wouldn't accept that either so the best and only acceptable compromise is to go for safety.

There is. F1 just doesn't care about track limits. You can easily create a framework where you penalize off-track excursions based on circumstances. You can be harsh when people do it in obvious places where it allows them to carry more speed through a section, you can be harsh when people do it to correct a mistake (i.e. when the tarmac saves them from a DNF), but you can also be lenient when the track is left to avoid a collision. The WEC does two of those three right, and the resulting adherence to track limits is predictably much better than in F1.

Except this thread is about head protection, which is only relevant once a barrier has been hit. Would you find racing more exciting if you took away the HANS device?

The same principles apply to all areas of motorsport safety, when is the sport safe enough? If its never then everything must go in the name of safety.

Skill is not related to sense of self preservation. It could be argued that by being safer more skillful but less danger averse competitors will arise. There's a point where doing something knowing full well that its dangerous is actually stupidity.

I guess you're of the mindset that Jackie Stewart and all the other drivers that have pushed hard for increased safety were wrong too..

Of course its related, for the same reason most people could walk across a tight rope 1 meter from the ground but barely any 100m. Drivers even said parabolica was much easier when they put tarmac around it. Less precision is needed and mental skill.

I guess you've never seen a car dig a wheel into the gravel and then flip over trapping the driver.. Or never seen how above certain speeds the cars skip across the gravel straight into the tyre barrier.. Race cars work best on flat tarmac, and equally have the best chance of avoiding further damage on that same surface where the tyres can grip and there is less probability of pitching the car off the horizontal plane.

If all you are interested in is penalty enforcement for exceeding track limits that's a regulatory matter not a safety matter.

Yes i have seen it before and its been happening since the dawn of motorsport about 100 years ago and it kept happening until the safety nuts ran out of other aspects of the sport to ruin and turned the tracks into boring car parks with flat curbs. One of the big reasons for the sport being ruined unless you think cutting corners is a skill?

Edited by Laminar, 26 May 2019 - 09:21.

Yes i have seen it before and its been happening since the dawn of motorsport about 100 years ago and it kept happening until the safety nuts ran out of other aspects of the sport to ruin and turned the tracks into boring car parks with flat curbs. One of the big reasons for the sport being ruined unless you think cutting corners is a skill?

The same principles apply to all areas of motorsport safety, when is the sport safe enough? If its never then everything must go in the name of safety.


Of course its related, for the same reason most people could walk across a tight rope 1 meter from the ground but barely any 100m. Drivers even said parabolica was much easier when they put tarmac around it. Less precision is needed and mental skill.

The thing is I do agree that taking away the penalty of getting it wrong is a detriment to the sport.

But for me the penalty of getting it wrong should not be death or serious injury. That's it - bottom line - non-negotiable. 

I got laughed at the last time I said something this but think about the just passed Indy 500 qualifying. There was excitement in the Juncos crash situation. But I do not think that was because Kyle Kaiser was at risk of death (no one wanted him to die or even his life to be at risk - or I would hope at least). There was that risk there, sure, but that certainly wasn't what I was thinking about. I was thinking that they wrote off the chassis. That they had to build up a new one, get it up to speed and qualify in a very short time frame and on a small budget. That they had one shot to qualify in which wiping out the car again would mean missing the Indy 500. I was thinking that a small team's existence and a driver's career could hinge on making that field or not. Everything was on the line for the team. And it was exciting. 

We do need consequences for mistakes to have risk vs reward excitement. We do not need it to be the threat of death. 

Edited by Ben1445, 26 May 2019 - 09:38.

I can see that danger/risk aversion and skill are the same in your mind, so we can safely stop this debate because we absolutely disagree on that front. Skill can be appreciated without danger, it doesn't make it any less skillful or exciting. But I can see how for some it might appear less exciting.

 

Button joined those expressing doubt over the changes to the corner, despite saying he felt he could now take the corner more quickly.

“The revised run-off at Parabolica is still slower, if you go off-track, but now you don’t get penalised,” he said.

“I’m definitely carrying more speed into that corner than I did last year – because you’re less wary of the gravel exit, which is no longer there. 

It looks like the drivers also disagree with you.

Edited by Laminar, 26 May 2019 - 09:37.

It is OK to make gladiators fight with plastic swords, but please do not call them gladiators anymore.

The excitement in racing for me comes from watching skilled drivers race each other in a bid to complete the race distance in the shortest possible time and cross the line first. Because that is what racing is. 

 

Danger is not and never has been a source of my interest. I may have respected that is is there, but it is far away from why I watch. 

 

I'm sure that's true of many. And I'm sure many others disagree like yourself. But don't talk about people not having the same opinion of you as though they are doing this whole 'being motorsport fan' thing wrong. 

That is absolutely OK and there are many closed cockpit series as options for this. In my opinion a safety level has been reached, where they are making the sport (Indycar) potentially safer by transforming it into another sport (LMP1, IMSA, WEC, etc.) where the racing will indeed be safer, but without the connection with the driver and with different DNA. With this nearly fully enclosed cockpit we will definitely loose those fantastic visor-cams or over the shoulder looks, where as a spectator I felt inherently connected and drawn in into the pure form of racing in minimalistic super light cars and a special form of risk/danger/adrenaline. I do not watch racing for crashes and do not want anyone to get hurt or die, quite the opposite, but I admired the courage, abilities and resolve of the drivers taking risks, which are acceptable today by using sensible technologies. I started go-kart racing, not because of LMPs, WEC or another closed cockpit series, but I started it because of F1 and Indycar - I wanted at least to remotely feel what these drivers do. I would be quite OK with the plexiglass like was shown on the older cars or even the last year's aeroscreen tested by Dixon. However, the presented concept is bulky creating a full framed cockpit, basically transforming the current chassis into something completely different in my opinion. In this regard I even view the F1 dreaded Halo as a better solution, but I hate it and do not watch F1 anymore after 30 years of watching, it is just not the same for me and it went too far, but that is probably life. I feel already old to state that I am sure it is also the spirit of today, make everything safe, fool proof, sterile taking something from us that makes us really feel alive. With this mindset we will once see only remotely controlled cars or virtual racing, which will be absolutely safe, but artificial.

At this point no sane person in charge of a racing series is going to actively reduce the safety of that which they govern. So seeing as this improving safety journey has become an unstoppable force, I am beginning to think the only thing left to do is vote with your feet. 

If the direction of motorsport pleases you, stay.

If you do not mind what is happening, stay.

If you like it how it is but further advances go too far, stay for a little bit.

If it's too far gone for you already, it's time to move on.

Does that count on my Motor Racing head protection bingo card?

At this point no sane person in charge of a racing series is going to actively reduce the safety of that which they govern. So seeing as this improving safety journey has become an unstoppable force, I am beginning to think the only thing left to do is vote with your feet. 
 
If the direction of motorsport pleases you, stay.
If you do not mind what is happening, stay.
If you like it how it is but further advances go too far, stay for a little bit.
If it's too far gone for you already, it's time to move on.

The same principles apply to all areas of motorsport safety, when is the sport safe enough? If its never then everything must go in the name of safety.


Of course its related, for the same reason most people could walk across a tight rope 1 meter from the ground but barely any 100m. Drivers even said parabolica was much easier when they put tarmac around it. Less precision is needed and mental skill.

Basically an Aeroscreen ...

It's not though. It's basically the halo with some plexiglass wrapped around it.

Was referring to the aesthetic look of the windscreens of IndyCars past 

Was referring to the aesthetic look of the windscreens of IndyCars past

Ok. I'm just confused as to why so many think this is better, when the driver is even furthur hidden away.

Well I'm confused as to how people prefer the halo! Guess it's just a matter of taste...

Come back when they add a roof, a passenger seat, headlights and fully covered wheels. Things that sports cars have.

Edited by Andrew Hope, 26 May 2019 - 16:11.

The excitement in racing for me comes from watching skilled drivers race each other in a bid to complete the race distance in the shortest possible time and cross the line first. Because that is what racing is. 

 

Danger is not and never has been a source of my interest. I may have respected that is is there, but it is far away from why I watch. 

 

I'm sure that's true of many. And I'm sure many others disagree like yourself. But don't talk about people not having the same opinion of you as though they are doing this whole 'being motorsport fan' thing wrong. 

There is a difference between being turned on by the danger as such and seeing that some danger (and if it's only to be out of the race in a gravel trap) has an impact on how drivers approach racing

It is OK to make gladiators fight with plastic swords, but please do not call them gladiators anymore.

Sure, but as long as racing drivers drive racing cars, we can still call them racing drivers.

Well I'm confused as to how people prefer the halo! Guess it's just a matter of taste...

Well I'm confused as to how people prefer the halo! Guess it's just a matter of taste...

plexi glass = 'ugly'

halo = 'very ugly'

halo + plexi glass = not 'ugly' or 'very ugly', but 'very very ugly'

Ugliest part is the then useless center stud. Plexi glass with good upper frame shape might be only 'ugly'. Or if the center stud is a must have from structural point, design it glued to the plexi glass.

Edited by Mauseri, 26 May 2019 - 19:27.

Well, even today's fantastic 500 has shown how important the open cockpit is - I'll never forget Rossi waving his hand on Servia at 220 Mph, it will never be the same again with the proposed enclosed cockpits...

Well, even today's fantastic 500 has shown how important the open cockpit is - I'll never forget Rossi waving his hand on Servia at 220 Mph, it will never be the same again with the proposed enclosed cockpits...

Don't forget Rahal waving at Bourdais while still crashing out 

Don't forget Rahal waving at Bourdais while still crashing out 

Yes, this was also epic. Even the commentators mentioned how brave Alex Rossi was when driving near that wall in an open cockpit and it indeed was something that I will always deeply admire and remember. It was probably a fantastic way to end an era on a quest for total safety, if the closed cockpits come next year.

Cross posted from the 2020 (very) silly season thread. Dixon runs the simulator with the halo/aeroscreen and says s'alright...

Dixon runs the halo/aeroscreen on the simulator; reports no visibility problems.

 

Report includes video that makes the visibility look remarkably bad, but to be fair the video doesn't appear to be from the point of view of the driver, but just from just above the driver's head.

 

Reminds me of all the poorly positioned views we had showing us how the F1 drivers wouldn't be able to see anything with the halo.

To my eye, I think the Indycar one has the main hoop slightly further back and closer to the driver, thus increasing the vertical FOV over the Halo. 

That’s fine but head protection solutions like these have nothing to do with driver skill or the consequences of a mistake. Its got nothing to do with curbs, barriers, walls, grass or gravel. It’s about getting hit in the head by debris, and no amount of skill can prevent that.

To my eye, I think the Indycar one has the main hoop slightly further back and closer to the driver, thus increasing the vertical FOV over the Halo.

In my expertly uninformed and pessimistic opinion, I think this is something the drivers have to say they like whether they actually do or not.

It is still a visual abomination to me and a step away from open cockpit racing. I don't want Indycars to look like FIA open wheelers.

Edited by paulb, 03 July 2019 - 18:41.

Found this in Twitterland

Found this in Twitterland

 

 

You can find official renders here:

https://www.indycar....ll-announcement

You can find official renders here:

 

https://www.indycar....ll-announcement

You can, though the novelty of that one was visualising it with a current, familiar livery. 

You can, though the novelty of that one was visualising it with a current, familiar livery.

looks like a toy designed by a six year old who loves racing cars and jets.

Found this in Twitterland

 

Looks decent. Although I'd opt for a darker halo part because it makes it blend into the screen somewhat. With the yellow it really stands out.

So why not go full closed at this point?
 

Because it's an open cockpit chassis. You cant just go cutting door holes in it.  I would expect the next Dallara IndyCar tub to be fully closed.