56 replies to this topic

[Lights]

Seeing how most drivers apparently couldn't really use their mirrors, I think it was also lucky we didn't have more contact between cars yesterday.

 

On TV we were for example looking at Hamilton overtaking Perez on lap 37, and it looks perfectly normal:

 

Except that in reality Perez didn't have a clue that Lewis was 3 meters behind him. He couldn't see behind him. At the start of the back straight he was told "Hamilton 1 behind, use energy".

 

The moment when his race engineer told him: "Hamilton has got DRS" Hamilton already appeared on the right of him:

 

It's also visible here how his right sided mirror is unusable. Perez was completely blinded. 

 

He also mentions this in a post race interview:

 

"My mirrors were full of fog so I wasn't able to see at all on my mirrors [..] they were informing me on Lewis's pace and then he just came by, I wasn't even expecting him to be there."

 

In his post-race interview with Brundle he also remarks how he couldn't see Max and Leclerc during their battles.

 

Grosjean also shared this picture post-race, which doesn't just look like fog, but also dirt in this case (all cars were pretty dirty).

 

Either way, non functioning mirrors is pretty scary IMO. I think the lack of functioning mirrors in these conditions was potentially more dangerous than the slippery asphalt, and could've resulted in high speed accidents.

 

Is there anything that can be done about this? Mirror wipers? Rear view cameras in the cockpit?

[SophieB]

It’s kind of beside the point but I said at the time of this overtake at home that it looked like Perez didn’t know he was there. His whole car kind of gave a startled jump, like when you unintentionally startle someone by asking them something while they’re deep in thought. 

[Burtros]

Formula one only gets away with having such bad mirrors because of the lack of close wheel to wheel racing and the fact that many passes are done with DRS where the driver in front knows they are a sitting duck when they get to that part of the track and can prepare a defence if possible.

[IrvTheSwerve]

How about tear offs that are taken off at the pit stops?

[Arundo]

[Augurk]

 

That doesn't really solve this issue does it?

They should probably use some kind of coating that helps the mirror keep clear of dirt and water. 

[Huffer]

Just to clarify, what's the larger issue here? That the mirrors are simply too small and you can't see much in them most of the time, or is it a problem in this specific case where they were simply fogged up?

 

The latter could easily be solved with tear-off strips or heated mirrors for the condition. I might even say that teams should be allowed to bleed air from the engine to help heat and clear any mud/oil that may accumulate. 

 

But the former has been a big issue for many years now. I don't think it's practical to make them bigger, so technology has to come to the rescue. I see somebody has already posted a picture of camera being used in a road car, which is exactly what I'd go for. You can make very small cameras with a decent FOV with processing that corrects for distortion caused by the lenses without much problem. It's a tried and tested solution. But I would also add something that many reversing camera have these days which is visual distance guide to help estimate the distance to the car behind. I'd also make it a standard part to avoid the teams doing anything tricky - have a single supplier for the camera and processing hardware, that can plug into a display of the teams choice. 

Edited by Huffer, 16 November 2020 - 10:52.

[Arundo]

That doesn't really solve this issue does it?

They should probably use some kind of coating that helps the mirror keep clear of dirt and water. 

 

Current cameras have this revolving screencleaning thing, why not use it on the Audi solution ? 

[P123]

Definite safety issue, although I don't remember any teams at the stops cleaning mirrors. 

[Peat]

Have you ever driven an estate car or van with a flat back? The back end is a dirt magnet due to the low-pressure area the shape creates. 

They are a bit stuck. You can have them at a distance from the driver that they can physically reach and wipe them, but then they wouldn't see alot past the rear wing/tyres. 
They could use a sportscar style rear-camera/radar system and have the screen attached to the halo... That would get filthy too, but at least they could reach it. 

It also struck me yesterday how hard the Merc would be to see in the mirrors anyway. They were camouflaged with the track surface. They should be forced to wear high-vis tabards. 

[ANF]

Latifi also said his mirrors were full or dirt, which made him literally blind when he got the blue flags, and ultimately it caused the contact with Grosjean.

[Kalmake]

New asphalt muck was a track problem. Cars were dirty all over.

 

Field of view is ok because it's regulated.

https://www.formula1...n_Grosjean.html

[Rodaknee]

At this level the drivers should know that if their mirrors are fogged up and covered in clag, so will all the others and they should make allowances.  That Grosjean didn't well...

 

Tear offs are pointless if they're changed at 8 laps in and there's 50 more to go!

Heating the mirrors will only glue to clag to the glass.

 

Some teams could have used their radios to keep the drivers better informed than appears the case.  I don't see the 'ban radios' supporters sticking their heads over the parapet on this.

[Risil]

Damon Hill used to say they should ban mirrors altogether, on the basis that drivers only need them to block rivals, not let them through.

[Retrofly]

Rear facing wide FOV camera and mount a screen in the Halo, Sorted.

[Rinehart]

Damon Hill used to say they should ban mirrors altogether, on the basis that drivers only need them to block rivals, not let them through.

It's not just Damon, it's pretty much a 50/50 issue if you ask a bunch of drivers. The logic is that you can expect the car in front to stay on the line if they dont know whats behind them.

[oli4]

Rear facing wide FOV camera and mount a screen in the Halo, Sorted.

 

You would see less in sunlight

[Sterzo]

I do think overall rear facing cameras might be more effective than mirrors. Whether filth and spray would have thwarted those too in Turkey, who knows. An option to supplement the rear view would be sensors to give a warning of proximity to another car, rather like a road car's reversing sensors. There are various ways you could transfer that information to a driver, through visible or aubile signals.

[pdac]

Everything is "by wire" these days. Why do they not have rear-facing cameras and a display somewhere easy for the driver to look at. The cameras could be shielded from the worst and have self-cleaning mechanisms too.

[Dutchrudder]

Rear facing wide FOV camera and mount a screen in the Halo, Sorted.

Could a HUD in the helmet display a moving image?

Would be an interesting road-relevant safety application.

[Lights]

So while I initially created this topic after the muddy mirrors in Turkey, the same question still applies despite the clear mirrors in Bahrain: how much of a safety issue are a lack of functioning mirrors?

 

We can talk all day about barrier safety, marshal equipment and heroics, but the simple truth is that it's unlikely Grosjean would have crashed at all if he had known Kvyat was driving there.

At the restart, Stroll ended up on his roof because he "couldn't see" Kvyat either. But I'm pretty sure Kvyat wasn't racing in an invisibility cloak, because we all definitely saw him.

 

For a sport that's constantly crying about safety, why is this obvious weak point constantly ignored?

Instead of talking about solutions for it, it's just a perceived given that drivers can't always see each other. 

 

Not only is it dangerous, but it's also hurting the quality of racing, as drivers are being criticized for engaging in a battle because they do so 'in someone's blind spot'.

What's the point of racing in cutting edge innovation machines of beauty if drivers can't see each other? It's inexcusable that F1 doesn't appear to be even trying to find a better solution.

[OvDrone]

I agree. I remember a recent interview that Rachel Brooks had with K-Mag going through his various F1 career 'highlights' and they talked about this incident from 2018.

 

 

In the interview, Kevin honestly said that he had absolutely no clue that Pierre was there, couldn't see him at all. Very disconcerting.

 

I think something similar happened to Romain yesterday. It certainly needs a hard, thorough look, which I unfortunately think won't happen given the current lackluster FIA responses.

[Scotracer]

Let's get ambitious - visor HUD with peripheral view using cameras on the exterior of the body. 

[Kalmake]

In the interview, Kevin honestly said that he had absolutely no clue that Pierre was there, couldn't see him at all. Very disconcerting.

 

I think something similar happened to Romain yesterday. It certainly needs a hard, thorough look, which I unfortunately think won't happen given the current lackluster FIA responses.

How do you know he said it honestly? If Pierre really wasn't visible that mirror wasn't legal.

 

What happened to Romain was that when he started his move Kvyat was about 2 car widths to his side and 1 behind. That's not visible in the mirror.

[Lights]

Let's get ambitious - visor HUD with peripheral view using cameras on the exterior of the body. 

 

Yeah something like that. Or in the halo. I don't know what's less intrusive.

 

Maybe even something as simple as warning lights in the halo on the side of where a car is can help prevent crashes like Grosjean's.

[cpbell]

Yeah something like that. Or in the halo. I don't know what's less intrusive.

 

Maybe even something as simple as warning lights in the halo on the side of where a car is can help prevent crashes like Grosjean's.

Surely a parking sensor-esque sound in the driver's ear plugs when another car has an overlap would be a simpler solution?

[Clatter]

If any of these electronic gadgets being suggested fail during the race, should the driver retire the car?

[cpbell]

If any of these electronic gadgets being suggested fail during the race, should the driver retire the car?

Wouldn't have thought so, provided that he makes allowances.

[Clatter]

Wouldn't have thought so, provided that he makes allowances.

 

Then they should be capable of making those allowances the rest of the time then.

[cpbell]

Then they should be capable of making those allowances the rest of the time then.

Point taken, but it's like driving on the road with a space-saver tyre after a puncture - just because you can drive slowly in that configuration doesn't mean that doing so normally would be reasonable.

[ANF]

What happened to Romain was that when he started his move Kvyat was about 2 car widths to his side and 1 behind. That's not visible in the mirror.

I might be wrong but... he wasn't really looking in the mirror either, was he?

[Clatter]

Point taken, but it's like driving on the road with a space-saver tyre after a puncture - just because you can drive slowly in that configuration doesn't mean that doing so normally would be reasonable.

 

Not sure that's a valid comparison. I just think people are complicating things with all these device suggestions, when I think the issue is more down to driving standards.

[PayasYouRace]

So while I initially created this topic after the muddy mirrors in Turkey, the same question still applies despite the clear mirrors in Bahrain: how much of a safety issue are a lack of functioning mirrors?

 

We can talk all day about barrier safety, marshal equipment and heroics, but the simple truth is that it's unlikely Grosjean would have crashed at all if he had known Kvyat was driving there.

At the restart, Stroll ended up on his roof because he "couldn't see" Kvyat either. But I'm pretty sure Kvyat wasn't racing in an invisibility cloak, because we all definitely saw him.

 

 

I don't think this has to do with "functioning" mirrors. Romain clearly wasn't looking in his mirrors anyway. He just swerved without looking. Meanwhile, Stroll ended up on his roof because Kvyat isn't nicknamed The Torpedo for nothing.

 

The thing is, we know how good the mirrors actually are on F1 cars because we can see them in helmet cam videos.

 

 

To call those mirrors "functioning" would be an understatement. They're actually surprisingly good.

[Kalmake]

I might be wrong but... he wasn't really looking in the mirror either, was he?

I haven't seen footage of his eyes so I don't know where he wasn't looking.

[Kalmake]

If any of these electronic gadgets being suggested fail during the race, should the driver retire the car?

They are allowed to continue now if the mirrors fail during the race.

[Jovanotti]

We can talk all day about barrier safety, marshal equipment and heroics, but the simple truth is that it's unlikely Grosjean would have crashed at all if he had known Kvyat was driving there.
At the restart, Stroll ended up on his roof because he "couldn't see" Kvyat either. But I'm pretty sure Kvyat wasn't racing in an invisibility cloak, because we all definitely saw him.

Yet it's always the same few drivers who are involved in these types of accidents, no need to look any further.

Though it's true if something can be done to improve peripheral view, I'm all for it.

[absinthedude]

There have been complaints from some quarters about the mirrors on F1 cars since at least 1980. I recall a driver with  rear puncture at the British GP, possibly Laffite...and James Hunt saying that the mirrors "these days" are so small you might not see a damaged tyre.....then Jackie Stewart pointed out he'd just tested the 1980 Tyrrell and he most certainly could see the rear wheels in the mirror!

Edited by absinthedude, 30 November 2020 - 19:29.

[ANF]

I haven't seen footage of his eyes so I don't know where he wasn't looking.

Me neither, but you can usually see the head rotate a bit in the onboard video when they check in the mirrors.

[Dmitriy_Guller]

A lot of drivers appear to have seen the Grosjean accident in their mirrors yesterday, so the mirrors must be functional to some extent.

[Clatter]

Me neither, but you can usually see the head rotate a bit in the onboard video when they check in the mirrors.

 

He appeared to be at quite an acute angle heading back across the the track, so even if he has looked in the mirrors I wouldn't be surprised if Kvyat wasn't visible.

Edited by Clatter, 30 November 2020 - 20:09.

[Clatter]

They are allowed to continue now if the mirrors fail during the race.

 

People are talking about different electronic sensors, if the drivers come to rely on them and they fail without them knowing, then you have an even more dangerous situation arising. If a mirror falls off the driver can't fail to miss that.

[redreni]

So while I initially created this topic after the muddy mirrors in Turkey, the same question still applies despite the clear mirrors in Bahrain: how much of a safety issue are a lack of functioning mirrors?

 

We can talk all day about barrier safety, marshal equipment and heroics, but the simple truth is that it's unlikely Grosjean would have crashed at all if he had known Kvyat was driving there.

At the restart, Stroll ended up on his roof because he "couldn't see" Kvyat either. But I'm pretty sure Kvyat wasn't racing in an invisibility cloak, because we all definitely saw him.

 

For a sport that's constantly crying about safety, why is this obvious weak point constantly ignored?

Instead of talking about solutions for it, it's just a perceived given that drivers can't always see each other. 

 

Not only is it dangerous, but it's also hurting the quality of racing, as drivers are being criticized for engaging in a battle because they do so 'in someone's blind spot'.

What's the point of racing in cutting edge innovation machines of beauty if drivers can't see each other? It's inexcusable that F1 doesn't appear to be even trying to find a better solution.

I really don't think the issue in Bahrain was a lack of visibility, it was a lack of good sense. You just don't move abruptly from the extreme left to the extreme right of a straight on the first lap. If you do, the risk of contact is enormous. Grosjean's career has been marred by far too many crashes, especially at the start of races. He has been to blame for nearly all of them. He is one of those drivers whose retirement from F1 will, in and of itself, make a positive contribution to driver safety.

 

On the wider point, as mentioned above there was a school of thought among old-school drivers that we'd be better off without mirrors. The way drivers react to what they can see around them isn't always designed to make sure there's no contact - it is often designed to block or intimidate or generally make life difficult for another driver. The "no mirrors" theory hinged, however, on a driver being able to see what is next to him. That way, legitimate overtaking moves would be much easier because the driver ahead wouldn't cover the inside (because he wouldn't see you coming), but equally, the driver behind would know it was his responsibility to get far enough up the inside, before the turn-in point, to enable the other driver to see him and not turn in. You wouldn't try the "divebomb" overtake because it would be certain to end in tears.

 

Head and neck safety advances mean it is much, much more difficult for F1 drivers to see what is next to them than it used to be, largely because you can't turn your head much. I don't know why teams don't put side-facing cameras on the driver's helmet and display the images on screens inside the helmet in the periphery of the driver's field of vision. As far as I know there's no rule preventing that?

[IrvTheSwerve]

Proximity sensors would be good (see link). You could display it on the steering wheel.

https://steamuserima...FD7A4E81D505E7/

[Reinmuster]

Proximity sensors would be good (see link). You could display it on the steering wheel.

https://steamuserima...FD7A4E81D505E7/

 

Or it could display at driver's HUD helmet.

[djparky]

Mirrors on F1 cars have not been much use for a long time, not least of which is the vibration in the cars.

The accident happened because Grosjean chopped across Kyvat and even after the crash at the restart they were doing the same thing- and Stroll ended on his air box

[JeePee]

Proximity sensors would have a fun time around Monaco.

[Beri]

So while I initially created this topic after the muddy mirrors in Turkey, the same question still applies despite the clear mirrors in Bahrain: how much of a safety issue are a lack of functioning mirrors?

We can talk all day about barrier safety, marshal equipment and heroics, but the simple truth is that it's unlikely Grosjean would have crashed at all if he had known Kvyat was driving there.
At the restart, Stroll ended up on his roof because he "couldn't see" Kvyat either. But I'm pretty sure Kvyat wasn't racing in an invisibility cloak, because we all definitely saw him.

For a sport that's constantly crying about safety, why is this obvious weak point constantly ignored?
Instead of talking about solutions for it, it's just a perceived given that drivers can't always see each other.

Not only is it dangerous, but it's also hurting the quality of racing, as drivers are being criticized for engaging in a battle because they do so 'in someone's blind spot'.
What's the point of racing in cutting edge innovation machines of beauty if drivers can't see each other? It's inexcusable that F1 doesn't appear to be even trying to find a better solution.

I think there is no issue only an excuse. Because every driver saw the burst of flames after the Grosjean crash in their mirrors. Everyone asked, before they got in the pits, if Grosjean was okay. How would they have known without functioning rear view mirrors and not having driven past the accident site? I think the mirrors are used as an excuse to bad driving one too many times before.

[Lights]

That's a lot of fallacies you're making there.

 

every driver saw the burst of flames after the Grosjean crash in their mirrors.

The mirrors make drivers see directly behind them, but not what's half next to them.

That drivers can spot a huge ball of fire in pretty much a straight line ~100 meters behind them, does not necessarily mean they can through their mirrors see a driver a bit behind 2 meters next to them.

 

Everyone asked, before they got in the pits, if Grosjean was okay. How would they have known without functioning rear view mirrors and not having driven past the accident site?

Most drivers up front did not know what happened, but when there's an immediate red flag, this naturally sparks the conversation.

In most cases the teams told the driver about the crash and that the driver involved was Grosjean.

Additionally all drivers could see the fire while driving through T9, and upon seeing that a lot of drivers asked their team about it.

 

I think the mirrors are used as an excuse to bad driving one too many times before.

That doesn't mean it can always be ignored. The blind spot is not a myth. 

Edited by Lights, 01 December 2020 - 22:48.

[pdac]

Maybe the simple solution is (as is always the case) if the stewards don't accept the "I didn't see him" excuse - i.e. if you cannot see, then you have to just assume that someone might be there. Alternatively, the other way around (the guy coming from behind has to assume that the guy in front cannot see him and needs to take that into account). Essentially, the onus is on one or other to take care and if there is an incident, then it cannot be a racing incident, but has to be someone's fault.

[PayasYouRace]

Just edited the thread title to something less clickbaity. We have good video evidence that the mirrors are indeed functional.

 

Also had to clean up some unwarranted personal insults. Don't do it guys.