Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Aeroscreen for Indycar for 2020


  • Please log in to reply
133 replies to this topic

#1 owenmahamilton

owenmahamilton
  • Member

  • 37 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:23

https://www.motorspo...screen/4395079/

 

Seems rather ironic that a company owned by an F1 team is developing something far superior (in my opinion) to the halo for a different racing series.



Advertisement

#2 Joseki

Joseki
  • Member

  • 3,136 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:28

It doesn't look as alien as the halo.

#3 Burai

Burai
  • Member

  • 1,430 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:31

Looking at those pictures... Isn't it just a plexiglass-covered Halo?



#4 maximilian

maximilian
  • Member

  • 4,109 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:33

Should have titled it "Red Bull to IndyCar" for clickbait  :wave:

 

Interesting, because word first was that a "halo" type device would not work on ovals for visibility issues, yet here it is...? Would like to see this in the road course config car, which would look a bit more balanced, methinks.  Doesn't look bad at all, though.


Edited by maximilian, 24 May 2019 - 14:33.


#5 phrank

phrank
  • Member

  • 1,094 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:34

Thought the halo would not work on ovals?

#6 Laster

Laster
  • Member

  • 1,807 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:34

Looks far better than the halo, I’m glad Red Bull kept developing it, I’d like to see it replace the halo some day.

#7 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 852 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:36

Seems like "the halo" as F1 implemented didn't work for ovals, but a tweaked version did, in the simulator, and they went forward from there.  Seems like a much better solution, aesthetically and safety-wise.



#8 hodgy21

hodgy21
  • Member

  • 755 posts
  • Joined: February 14

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:37

Looking at those pictures... Isn't it just a plexiglass-covered Halo?

 

Yes.



#9 TheGoldenStoffel

TheGoldenStoffel
  • Member

  • 357 posts
  • Joined: November 18

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:38

This is what I always thought F1 should've done, combine a Halo with a screen. Not only isn't it nowhere near as offensive looking as the Halo it also offers more protection.

 

What I don't really understand though is that Indycar said it couldn't use a Halo because of the banking on ovals and the Halo blocking the view, you would still have that problem with this new solution.



#10 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 852 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:46

This is what I always thought F1 should've done, combine a Halo with a screen. Not only isn't it nowhere near as offensive looking as the Halo it also offers more protection.

 

What I don't really understand though is that Indycar said it couldn't use a Halo because of the banking on ovals and the Halo blocking the view, you would still have that problem with this new solution.

The comments from the drivers are they when they tested this version in the simulator, they could see.  So, the previous concern was not longer valid with this solution.

 

Marshall Pruett has an article with a lot more detail:

 

https://racer.com/20...ars-aeroscreen/


Edited by juicy sushi, 24 May 2019 - 14:48.


#11 DrArrow

DrArrow
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:53

The comments from the drivers are they when they tested this version in the simulator, they could see.  So, the previous concern was not longer valid with this solution.

 

Marshall Pruett has an article with a lot more detail:

 

https://racer.com/20...ars-aeroscreen/

 

He basically confirms that it is the fugly HALO with an oversized windshield around it.  In my opinion it looks much worse than F1s HALO. 



#12 Fulcrum

Fulcrum
  • Member

  • 237 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:53

It's a halo with a windshield. That's ugly, but it is the perfect solution.



#13 ANF

ANF
  • Member

  • 8,951 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:55

It basically looks like the Halo with a screen? But we were being told that the Halo wouldn't work on ovals. But ah, I see, this one has a "horseshoe-shaped top frame ... designed to be out of the drivers' sightline even when looking around turns on a banked oval." But we were being told that the Indycar windscreen was superior because it didn't need a stupid/ugly frame? But maybe that was before they ran some more crash tests on it...

Anyway, this one has a screen. And a frame. Looks good to me!

And I assume that the screen can be removed so the safety team can do this?


Edited by ANF, 24 May 2019 - 14:56.


#14 phrank

phrank
  • Member

  • 1,094 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 24 May 2019 - 14:59

It's a halo with a windshield. That's ugly, but it is the perfect solution.

For what?

#15 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Member

  • 7,831 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:00

Pretty soon the only place you'll find a good-looking open wheeler will be on YouTube.

#16 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 852 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:00

He basically confirms that it is the fugly HALO with an oversized windshield around it.  In my opinion it looks much worse than F1s HALO. 

And I feel the opposite.



#17 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 852 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:01

For what?

 

Debris coming at the driver.  The halo on its own can't prevent smaller debris from striker a driver.  The windscreen does a much better job of that.



#18 Burai

Burai
  • Member

  • 1,430 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:06

The comments from the drivers are they when they tested this version in the simulator, they could see.  So, the previous concern was not longer valid with this solution.

 

Marshall Pruett has an article with a lot more detail:

 

https://racer.com/20...ars-aeroscreen/

 

 

Wait...

 

“One of the options was to, and this was Dallara’s suggestion, just to go to the regular FIA Halo,” Belli continued. “So we tested the Halo for visuals on the Dallara simulator, because there was concern that on the high banked speedways, the Halo would obscure the vision. So we ran with Scott Dixon and on the Dallara simulator with a standard FIA Halo, and to our surprise, it didn’t obscure any visions in any way. But when we came to do the stress test on the tub, this current tub couldn’t sustain the loads of the FIA Halo in the back corner of the cockpit opening, which made us revisit some of our other thoughts.”

Affixed to every custom F1 chassis atop the cockpit’s sidewalls, the Halo proved unsuitable for mounting in the same manner on the DW12, which was never designed to accept crushing vertical loads in those locations.

 

That says that Dixon could see perfectly with the FIA Halo. The only issue they had was that they couldn't fit it to the current chassis which isn't what they were saying at the time. They said that Halo had visibility issues.

 

There is literally no difference between this and the FIA Halo except for mounting points and wrapping it in perspex.



#19 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 852 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:26

Wait...

 

 

 

 

That says that Dixon could see perfectly with the FIA Halo. The only issue they had was that they couldn't fit it to the current chassis which isn't what they were saying at the time. They said that Halo had visibility issues.

 

There is literally no difference between this and the FIA Halo except for mounting points and wrapping it in perspex.

Not a lot of difference, no.  At the time, they said there was a visibility issue, and then explored their own windscreen solution.  That didn't work out as they'd wished, so they came back to this.  They did say at the time that there were visibility issues.  It would be interesting to hear how that changed, or why.  

 

Still, this is where things are now.



Advertisement

#20 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 11,850 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:34

Looks much better than the Halo. Hopefully it is as strong.



#21 ANF

ANF
  • Member

  • 8,951 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:34

Another couple of interesting quotes from the Racer article:
 

Designed to withstand a blow of 150 kilonewtons – nearly 34,000 pounds – Belli and RBAT will pivot from the Indy 500 press conference and begin work on testing Aeroscreen 2.0 in the lab and on the racetrack in the coming months.

“We’ve been really pleased,” [Belli] said. “All the calculations done by Dallara and Red Bull show that the tub with this type of mounting can take the 150 kilonewtons, and we’ve just gone from there.”

...

“We have to obviously decide who’s going to manufacture the windscreen, and we have to start deciding who’s going to manufacture the top frame and the bottom frame. Then we have to take the prototype frames and put them into a fixture and do the load test on the first frames that we make. We’re going to make three to five frames to start.”



#22 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,448 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:35

For what?

 

The United States' lack of high profile cabriolet racing series.



#23 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,448 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:41

"Indycar will do it much better."

 

"Indycar takes more time to get it right."

 

It's still just an awful Halo, to which some enthusiast pasted a bunch of plexiglass left over from his kitchen garden DIY greenhouse.

 

Just race LMP1 cars.

 

NjCarqz.jpg?1

 

:cool: 



#24 BuddyHolly

BuddyHolly
  • Member

  • 2,728 posts
  • Joined: December 15

Posted 24 May 2019 - 15:48

..and open wheeled racing takes another step backwards.  :down:



#25 Ickx

Ickx
  • Member

  • 817 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:05

I prefer the halo. I actually think it is a good solution. Keep the drivers outside but with a crash structure. 

 

Well, I actually prefer the cars from the early 90:es where you could see the driver properly but for so many reasons that is not really something to dream about having. 



#26 DrArrow

DrArrow
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:12

I liked the previous aeroscreen which was tested by Dixon last year. This is just even worse than F1's halo, for me it is completely changing the nature of the racing, I might as well watch NASCAR or LMP1 if I wanted enclosed racing. I've left F1 and I'll leave indycar as well in the next year. I am sure I take more risks as an amateur go-KART racer, skier or just driving to work than F1 racers of today.



#27 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 3,862 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:14

It looks futuristic.

 

D7Vmdq2W4AA2oZ3.jpg


Edited by Vielleicht, 24 May 2019 - 16:14.


#28 RA2

RA2
  • Member

  • 1,132 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:21

I remember being called a troll for this halo vs oval argument 



#29 Muppetmad

Muppetmad
  • Member

  • 5,687 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:24

This looks better integrated than the halo to me. I'm intrigued to see how it will look in practice.



#30 prommer

prommer
  • Member

  • 2,250 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:28

What happens if the car is upside down?  Can the driver extricate himself or is he stuck inside an upturned fishbowl?



#31 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 3,862 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:34

D7VuzpgXsAAPWV4.jpg



#32 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 852 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:39

What happens if the car is upside down?  Can the driver extricate himself or is he stuck inside an upturned fishbowl?

Can a driver extricate themself now?



#33 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 3,862 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:39

What I am surprised about is how good it does look considering it's a retrofit to a near 10-year old chassis.

 

Imagine how it could look when a new chassis is designed around the concept.



#34 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 8,519 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:42

Reminds me of a Vanwall...



#35 Peat

Peat
  • Member

  • 4,112 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 16:46

Hasn't every opinion on the Halo/Aeroscreen been expressed already?

Enough with the hand wringing, we knew this was coming, just deal with it. It'll be fine.



#36 OO7

OO7
  • Member

  • 18,793 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:00

I've actually been working on a design (purely graphical) that's almost identical to the Indycar solution, but for F1.  The HALO represents what is the bare minimum in terms of the design (3 pillars) for structural load requirements and adding a screen to it was a no-brainer.  This combination will certainly improve driver head protection.  The other option is to stick with the current HALO design (no screen), but have the central support angled further and thicker (front to back), this redesign would be for aesthetics.



#37 OO7

OO7
  • Member

  • 18,793 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:09

"Indycar will do it much better."

 

"Indycar takes more time to get it right."

 

It's still just an awful Halo, to which some enthusiast pasted a bunch of plexiglass left over from his kitchen garden DIY greenhouse.

 

Just race LMP1 cars.

 

NjCarqz.jpg?1

 

:cool:

 

Current LMP1 cars look ugly though! :lol:   Give me something from the Group C era, such as the Sauber Mercedes C11.

2130668873_c77ebf001e_b.jpg

8248567105_21767754e9_o.jpg



#38 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,928 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:22

Current LMP1 cars look ugly though! :lol:   Give me something from the Group C era, such as the Sauber Mercedes C11.

 

In the 80s, were there folks saying 'these Group C cars are ugly, give me something from the 50s - they were much nicer'? 


Edited by Ben1445, 24 May 2019 - 17:22.


#39 OO7

OO7
  • Member

  • 18,793 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:24

In the 80s, were there folks saying 'these Group C cars are ugly, give me something from the 50s - they were much nicer'? 

I'm sure there were.



Advertisement

#40 danmills

danmills
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:25

I'm lost for words at the number of people that think it looks better than the already ghastly halo. I mean, realllllly?

 

If you put turd sprinkles on a turd it's still a turd. 


Edited by danmills, 24 May 2019 - 17:26.


#41 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,928 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:26

I'm lost for words at the number of people that think it looks better than the already ghastly halo. I mean, realllllly?

 

Yeah. Looks like a fighter-jet. 

 

The halo looks like a flip flop. 



#42 Ellios

Ellios
  • Member

  • 2,111 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:30

What happens if the car is upside down?  Can the driver extricate himself or is he stuck inside an upturned fishbowl?

 

I believe the term is 'hanging like a cow'

 

skysports-f1-nico-hulkenberg-4499234.jpg



#43 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 3,862 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:38

In the 80s, were there folks saying 'these Group C cars are ugly, give me something from the 50s - they were much nicer'? 

I think there are still peole who say this...



#44 paulb

paulb
  • Member

  • 6,300 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:46

blargh. please, no.



#45 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 3,086 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 24 May 2019 - 17:56

Wait...

 

 

 

 

That says that Dixon could see perfectly with the FIA Halo. The only issue they had was that they couldn't fit it to the current chassis which isn't what they were saying at the time. They said that Halo had visibility issues.

 

There is literally no difference between this and the FIA Halo except for mounting points and wrapping it in perspex.

Yeah, they lied. Visibility excuse never made sense to anyone who can understand basic geometry. They just don't like how the halo looks.



#46 ArrowsLivery

ArrowsLivery
  • Member

  • 2,929 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 24 May 2019 - 18:24

Sigh, 2019 will be my last year of watching Indy...

#47 thegamer23

thegamer23
  • Member

  • 7,535 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 24 May 2019 - 18:27

Not a fan of it.
It's an halo covered with a screen.

Wich is even worse as you won't even see a glimpise of the driver helmet anymore. (Beacause of the reflections)

Edited by thegamer23, 24 May 2019 - 18:27.


#48 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • RC Forum Host

  • 6,724 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 24 May 2019 - 18:39

Happy to see that they're attempting to be transparent about the whole process, but the misinformation about the halo obscuring the view on ovals definitely leaves an IRL-style bad taste. Would it kill a single one of these damn racing series to be honest with the fans about something? We know it looks like arse. They know it looks like arse. If they admitted that and said they'd weighed the risks and benefits and thought it was worth sacrificing, we'd respect them so much more than we do when they patronize us ("I don't care what the fans think.") deflect ("But what about the driver safety!?") or hide behind nonsense ("Oh, well it might not work from certain viewing angles.") What the hell? :down:

If they didn't want the halo because of aesthetic reasons before the failed load test gave them an excuse, then they should've at least told us they were continuing a search for a solution that balanced the traditional aesthetics of open-wheelers and what the drivers believed to be an acceptable level of risk. We know people change their minds about things over time and I'm damn sure none of us sitting on our couches would ever dream of driving over 240 mi/h with 23 other lunatics all slicing past us to get to a flag first, so it's not like our ideas on what constitutes an acceptable level of risk matter anyway. They might've gotten laughed at or even killed on social media for being hell-bent on murdering people because they didn't do anything, but it's not like they've never made a decision that resulted in that happening. :rolleyes:

I will say the thing is much more palatable than the halo aesthetically, providing the upper part of the frame isn't as bloated as it is in the rendering. Definitely see the parallels to a fighter jet, which is good, because they look like fighter jets in close quarters. Still concerned about the possible hazards in terms of escaping from a wreck that's burst into flames, but I suppose I can't remember the last time that happened before a safety crew arrived on the scene in any form of racing so maybe that's what they're counting on.

#49 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,448 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 24 May 2019 - 19:07

Current LMP1 cars look ugly though! :lol:

 

Nah, these are awesome cars. There's a few quirks about them, like the silly fin - but on the whole they're great.

 

Other cars are and were also great, some mostly in their time, a few are all-time classics.



#50 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,928 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 24 May 2019 - 19:12

Back before seatbelts it was said that there was more risk in being strapped into the car and it catching fire then there was being thrown from the vehicle completely (might survive and even if not at least you don’t burn to death). And it has to be said it wasn’t an entirely unreasonable judgement.

Today the idea that it’s better to take your chances on the thing not catching fire (low risk of that these days) than on hitting your head on some flying debris (still a pretty high risk) is also not entirely an unreasonable judgement.