Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Aeroscreen for Indycar for 2020


  • Please log in to reply
394 replies to this topic

#101 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,526 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 26 May 2019 - 08:29

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. 



Advertisement

#102 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 14,951 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 26 May 2019 - 08:44

I was revolted with the halo but now I'm okay with this. Maybe it's because being upset doesn't change a thing. And it might also be because I someow have greater faith and goodwill in Indy.

Oval racing does lend itself to more violent and spectacular crashes. So I also believe its safety needs are greater.

#103 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,603 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:04

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.


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.

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..

#104 Laminar

Laminar
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:06

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. :wave:



#105 Mat13

Mat13
  • Member

  • 1,773 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:09

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. :wave:


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?

#106 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,198 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:10

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. :wave:


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.

#107 Laminar

Laminar
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:10

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....



#108 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,603 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:11

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. :wave:


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..

#109 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,603 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:16

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 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.

#110 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:16

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.



#111 Laminar

Laminar
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:18

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.



#112 Laminar

Laminar
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:20

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.


#113 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,603 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:24

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?


<sarcasm>
Yes because we should never adapt and improve or change anything since its first inception, no matter how dangerous or risky it might be..
</sarcasm>

#114 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,603 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:28

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.


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.

#115 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,526 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:35

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.


#116 Laminar

Laminar
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:37

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. :wave:


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


#117 Victor

Victor
  • Member

  • 629 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:40

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



#118 DrArrow

DrArrow
  • Member

  • 48 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 26 May 2019 - 09:44

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.



#119 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,526 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 26 May 2019 - 10:00

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.



Advertisement

#120 coppilcus

coppilcus
  • Member

  • 1,535 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 26 May 2019 - 10:41

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


Yes...

It’s just a piece of cardboard, but has an open cockpit racing car: Dangerous!

#121 coppilcus

coppilcus
  • Member

  • 1,535 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 26 May 2019 - 10:54

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.


Advancing through turtle steps in the search of safety is exactly the prove that everyone involved in the sport, including fans, take into account the intangible values of open cockpit/wheel racing, such as the unobstructed view of the drivers and, yes, danger...

It’s a little bit hypocritical really. If everyone values so much the safety of the drivers why not banning open cockpit racing all together?

#122 Mat13

Mat13
  • Member

  • 1,773 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 26 May 2019 - 11:03

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 difference is that turning tracks into car parks influences the risks taken, thanks to there being no deterrent to taking them, I.e. a wall. Head protection only takes effect once the risk has been taken and things have gone wrong. Fully with you on grass, tarmac etc. F1 is still a choice- there will always be risks involved and everyone knows that, but if the risks of serious injury in a crash can be reduced, then we should all be behind it.

#123 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,841 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 26 May 2019 - 11:40

Basically an Aeroscreen ...
http%3A%2F%2Fd2i8ejbvsgsqtt.cloudfront.n

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

#124 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,526 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 26 May 2019 - 11:41

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 



#125 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,841 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 26 May 2019 - 11:45

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.

#126 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,526 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 26 May 2019 - 11:51

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...



#127 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Member

  • 7,853 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 26 May 2019 - 16:09

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

That's the point. This is where they're heading.

We're looking at an aeroscreen for 2020, then we'll be looking at fenders and covered wheels for 2024, and that's exactly how it will go. Everything that makes Indycar unique also makes it dangerous, and we are all happy to agree to that, until someone gets a one-in-a-million shot on the head and dies.

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


#128 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 10,418 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 May 2019 - 17:18

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



#129 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,198 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 26 May 2019 - 17:20

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.



#130 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,841 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 26 May 2019 - 18:24

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

As this is basically a halo there isn't much too like about either of them.

#131 Mauseri

Mauseri
  • Member

  • 7,590 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 26 May 2019 - 19:24

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.


#132 DrArrow

DrArrow
  • Member

  • 48 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 26 May 2019 - 20:15

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...



#133 Anja

Anja
  • Member

  • 4,277 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 26 May 2019 - 20:19

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  :p



#134 DrArrow

DrArrow
  • Member

  • 48 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 26 May 2019 - 20:45

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

 

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.



#135 prommer

prommer
  • Member

  • 2,422 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 03 July 2019 - 05:14

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

 



#136 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,198 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 July 2019 - 07:23

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.



#137 Peat

Peat
  • Member

  • 4,485 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 03 July 2019 - 08:21

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. 



#138 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,309 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 03 July 2019 - 08:22

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.


Ayrton Senna, Roland Ratzenberger, Jules Bianchi, Justin Wilson and Dan Wheldon to name five would have agreed with that 👍🏻

#139 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 22,399 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 03 July 2019 - 08:30

I’m lost at how people think this is uglier than the halo.

Advertisement

#140 ANF

ANF
  • Member

  • 10,216 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 03 July 2019 - 09:01

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.

Let's hope it's not as close to the driver as their F1 aeroscreen... https://racer.com/20...d-in-fia-tests/

...which was a totally different concept, I know.

#141 Imperial

Imperial
  • Member

  • 4,049 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 03 July 2019 - 09:09

The halo in F1 is disgusting.

This looks nicer as it almost isn't there.

It wouldn't have saved Dan Wheldon.

It would have spared Justin Wilson though, so I'm fine with it.

And safety is a relevant thing. F1 safety is one matter, but our boys are doing 240mph+ on ovals with a cheese grater to stop them. This device won't change much, if anything, when hitting the cheese grater, so the discussion about safety is really a moot point.

#142 paulb

paulb
  • Member

  • 6,865 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 03 July 2019 - 16:03

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.


#143 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,526 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 03 July 2019 - 18:12

Found this in Twitterland

 

D-Q3xptWsAAA_7f.jpg



#144 Radoye

Radoye
  • Member

  • 2,917 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 03 July 2019 - 20:10

Found this in Twitterland

 

 

 

You can find official renders here:

 

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



#145 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 3,526 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 03 July 2019 - 20:26

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. 



#146 Beri

Beri
  • Member

  • 1,568 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 03 July 2019 - 22:07

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


And it doesn't look too shabby me thinks.

#147 r4mses

r4mses
  • Member

  • 1,322 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 03 July 2019 - 22:40

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



#148 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 04 July 2019 - 06:11

My only issue with all this is that no one wants to go all the way. If head protection like this is a must, just go all in!

Halo = 1/3 the way.
Aeroscreen = 2/3 the way. Essentially Halo + screen filling the gaps.

So why not go full closed at this point?

If the aero screen structure continued to taper around the back past the Roll hoop, and if there was an easy to remove vanity panel over the hole on top, then it would look much better. Instead, everyone wants to keep the claim of being open cockpit simply because birds can still see the drivers helmet. Just make the cabin a skinny LeMans style prototype and be done with it.

#149 lustigson

lustigson
  • Member

  • 5,472 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 04 July 2019 - 07:18

Found this in Twitterland

 

D-Q3xptWsAAA_7f.jpg

 

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.



#150 Peat

Peat
  • Member

  • 4,485 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 04 July 2019 - 07:55

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.