45 replies to this topic

[Winegod]

Source: www.formula1.com

(QUOTE)Dr. Robert Hubbard and James Downing, inventors of the HANS safety device, were the recipients of the 35th annual Louis Schwitzer Award last Friday.(/QUOTE)

It goes on to say that DC and Barrichello have been testing this device, but are not inclined to wear it yet. In my opinion, this device is stellar. It can save lives, and it could have saved lives in the past. Senna died of massive head injuries sustained when his car hit the concrete walls at Imola at high speed. Perhaps he might have survived had he worn the HANS...

Anyway, I'm just interested in what the rest of you think.

[baddog]

Isnt this (or something much like it) compulsory from next year?

Shaun

[pa]

Let them talk to the guy who slammed into a wall at 100 mph at the Mosport TransAm race this weekend. The driver walked away, but the car was destroyed and the HANS device was busted up.

[Wes]

The HANS device would not have helped Senna; he died when a piece of front suspension broke off in the impact and pierced his helmet (his visor, I think) and skull. But to the topic; I'm all for the device as long as it doesn't impede a driver's ability to quickly exit the car. Speaking of which, did/will they implement that detachable seat design whereby they can remove the driver without removing him from his seat?

[tifoso]

This is an interesting poll in light of the controversy surrounding NASCAR after Earnhardt's tragic death. To my knowledge, they are the only sanctioning body of a major racing series not to mandate safety standards relating to the drivers' cockpit area. They do this to avoid liability issues. I don't think athletes are the best judge of these issues, however. When the NHL mandated helmets but grandfathered in some older players, many of those players continued to play without helmets. Earnhardt was still wearing an open-faced helmet. Drivers have too many other things to worry about and shouldn't be expected to be experts on safety issues...plus they're darn superstitious. You need cold, hard logic to look at all the incoming data about a new device to make a decision related to safety.

I think the FIA made the correct decision mandating the use of the HANS device for the 2002 season.

By the way, has anyone seen a driver wearing one this year? And if not, why not? What do the F1 drivers say about it?

[indysteve]

In view of the tragic events that have occurred in motorsports over the last year or two, it's hard for me to imagine why any driver would not want to wear it. It's certainly not going to prevent all injuries, but it does help with one major area that no other current safety equipment addresses: the movement of the head in relation to the body in a crash. Every driver should use it, in my opinion.

Since Dale Earnhardt died, I've seen a number of NASCAR drivers exit their cars quickly after a crash while wearing the HANS device. If they can get out through the window of a stock car, surely an F1 driver can exit an open cockpit while using it.

[BARnone]

I don't know what the HANS device might add to safety in F1. Senna died because a piece of the car pierced his helmet - no safety device could have saved him from that. The HANS device may have saved DE but take a look at the seats NASCAR uses. I read somewhere that DE's seat was from a Ford van. Perhaps if they had a monocoque or the like, he could have survived.

I also point to Villeneuve's crash in Australia - he walked away from a huge one with NO head injury. Also MS that weekend had a big one and walked away.

BARnone.

[Williams]

Should they wear it ? Yes. Should they be forced to wear it ? No.

[Ross Stonefeld]

which of you idiots voted *against* HANS?

[prettyface]

I didn't know it was mandatory for 2002, I'm certainly glad about it after reading an article (don't remember where) on modern motorsport deaths causes on the aftermath of Earnhardt's crash: Almost all of them were basilar fracture of the skull! It seems to be also one of Senna's injuries -poor Ayrton, it seems he didn't have any chance.

IIRC, Barrichello complained that the current HANS device is cumbersome on the shoulders and restricts lateral movement of the head, but the manufacturers of the HANS said it was nothing that can't be fixed. I think the helmet tethers are attached to the shoulder harness, not the back of the seat, so there shouldn't be a problem "getting the hell out of there" in a hurry.

Make them mandatory, I say! History has tought us that drivers are a bunch of hard-headed yahoos who don't know any better. Ithink it was Stirling Moss who said that he was a bit embarrased about his Polo helmet. Many drivers thought that helmets were for sissies!

[Ross Stonefeld]

*cough*


I think that article was on AtlasF1

[Zoe]

Originally posted by BARnone
I also point to Villeneuve's crash in Australia - he walked away from a huge one with NO head injury. Also MS that weekend had a big one and walked away.

Before Roland Ratzenberger and Ayrton Senna died, there were nasty accidents on F1 without fatalities (at least in the races) for more than 10 years. That only shows that you can't rely on statistics and past experiences. Just like the stock market.

Maybe Roland Ratzenberger would still be alive, maybe Karl Wendlinger wouldn't have been injured so badly that it basically ended his F1 career.

Zoe

[Joe Fan]

Personally myself, I would probably wear one but I don't really think that they should be made mandatory just yet. This device has been around for a decade now so I don't think it is the savior that many believe it is or its use would have been more commonplace by now. However, I believe it can help in some circumstances and I would want that protection. But to force everyone to wear one, I would like to see more demonstratable proof in a live environment that it is really that beneficiary. Some experts fervently disagree with the theory that the whipping forward motion in a crash is what causes basillar skull fractures. And the basillar skull fracture is what is killing many drivers.

When it comes to NASCAR stock cars, I can see why many of them were against wearing them from the get go. No representatives were on hand to work with them at making them comfortable for use in a stock car until after the Earnhardt crash. Also, have you ever tried to climb out of a Winston Cup stock car? I have and I will tell you that it is a bitch to climb out of those windows. Especially after they have made that opening smaller and smaller over the years, looking to improve aerodynamics with a lower roof line.

[prettyface]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
*cough*


I think that article was on AtlasF1

*belch*

It was an american newspaper website, with a bunch of diagrams and statistics. I'm sure the link was somewhere here in Atlas' RC.

[Vixen]

I think it should be mandatory, although as someone else has pointed out it probably wouldn't have saved Senna. Surely anything that can improve the drivers safety in the event of an accident is worthwhile enforcing

[TheDestroyer]

I don't think that F1 drivers should wear a HANS device.

Several reasons why they shouldn't:

1. F1 cars have lateral head/neck protection - NASCAR cars DON'T.
2. Any head/neck device will SEVERELY hamper their head movement which is something they CANNOT have. F1 drivers HAVE to move their head to see where they are going - it's a road course, not oval track!

[TheDestroyer]

Oh Ross, I was one of the idiots that voted against it.... It doesn't make sense for F1 drivers - F1 cars are inherently much more safe than NASCAR...

Read my previous post.

[Zoe]

Destroyer:

Even an F1 cockpit does not restrict the forward movement of the drivers head.

Zoe

[Duck]

Several weeks ago, Mauricio Gugglemin contacted the walls at T.M.S. during practice and recorded the HIGHEST G-load EVER in which a human survived. In Mo's own words, the ONLY thing that saved him was the HANS. I'm sure initial bitching, and moaning took place years ago regarding the introduction of nomex fire suits, full-face helmets, etc., and the same resistance to change probably now reflects the use of the HANS. However,it only takes but ONE instance where the HANS does its job, and protects, or SAVES a driver's life for the advantages to be obviously visible. Any driver who voluntariily REFUSES to utilize such a wonderfully simplistic, but thorough device relfects a degree of total irresponsibility.

[Ross Stonefeld]

A helmet and fireproof suit didnt prevent Schumacher from breaking his leg at Silverstone, should these be voluntary also?

[TheDestroyer]

Zoe, You are correct but how many crashes involve a purely head on accident? Please don't mention that phrase "all it takes is one incident"...

If the HANS device were useful in preventing injury in F1 rest assured the drivers would be screaming for them.

Duck, don't you think it's up to the drivers to determine what they find irresponsible? Afterall, it's their individual lives at stake. HANS devices are voluntary in NASCAR because a lot of drivers feel they restrict head movement too much. That being the case, NASCAR is an oval track race series - if drivers complain on oval tracks about the lack of head movement what do you think will happen to track safety on an F1 circuit when a driver can't turn their head to see where they are going or what's going on around them?

[Joe Fan]

I am beginning to think that drivers are not being killed from violent forward whipping movements, but by their neck being thrust at odd angles. I read on thatsracin.com a few weeks ago, that a 17 year old girl was recently killed from a crash in one of those fantasy stock car programs. Police said that she pancaked the wall at a speed of estimated at 40-50mph! They aren't sure that the car was up to NASCAR Winston Cup specs but it goes to show you that you do not need massive Gs to be killed in a crash. A month or so after Earnhardt's crash, another driver was killed at short track up in Wisconsin and it was estimated that he only hit the wall at 80mph. So, once again, where are all the massive Gs?

This is why I have doubts to the effectiveness of the HANS device because the HANS device, while it restricts forward movement, allows for side to side movement of the head. Is the head movement restricted enough side to side to prevent basilar skull fractures when drivers are getting killed in 50-80moh crashes? Even the doctor who reviewed Earnhardt's autopsy report and photos said that inertial forces alone can small hairlike fractures to basilar skull, even if the head wasn't thrust way forward. He also said that violent right-sided impacts are the worse because he believes that it is worse to be thrown forward at angle, than just thrown forward. So I think limiting side to side movement of the head is more important. Also, what is the likely outcome of the side of your head hitting your shoulder with great force? Wouldn't this snap your neck? Wouldn't a helmet restrict the side movement of the head in this situation and transfer more force to the neck?

In summary, I think more research needs to be conducted all the way around but as far as inside the cockpit of the car, I think emphasis needs to be placed on restricting side to side movement of the head. I think we are better suited for forward thrusting movements because this is more natural from a kinesiology standpoint because we bend over frequently. But our bodies are not designed or used to quick and sudden thrusts to the side or forward at an odd angle.

[Manson]

Originally posted by TheDestroyer
I don't think that F1 drivers should wear a HANS device.

Several reasons why they shouldn't:

1. F1 cars have lateral head/neck protection - NASCAR cars DON'T.
2. Any head/neck device will SEVERELY hamper their head movement which is something they CANNOT have. F1 drivers HAVE to move their head to see where they are going - it's a road course, not oval track!

I have one and wear it. I don't even notice it on the race track. I can see well enough side to side. Yes I race on ovals but the limited vision factor is a non-issue in my informed opinion.

F1 cars do not have any frontal protection, unless your refering to the steering wheel. That is the impact the device was most intended for. As Pa says, ask Kenny Wilden and Jeff Gordon what they think.

If my small budget racing effort can afford the best of the best for safety equipment, why can't the best of the best racers do the same? Let's lose this macho attitude and start saving lives.

[Duck]

Destroyer, the HANS is designed for protection in the event of sudden deceleration. If you look at the start of the Austrian Grand Prix, it was only through Divine Intervention that with FOUR CARS stalled on the grid, NO VIOLENT CRASHES RESULTED from rear impacts (talk about sudden deceleration !!).
My father is Chief of Neuro Surgery at a large metropolitan hospital, and the horror stories he deals with almost on a daily basis reflecting "Accute Deceleration Trauma" are heartbreaking. The awful sequence of neurological events which take place during sudden deceleration will literally turn your stomach. Don't forget, if a vehicle is traveling at 130 m.p.h., THE HUMAN BRAIN IS ALSO TRAVELING AT 130 m.p.h.. Sudden deceleration will catapult that brain horribly into the skull - in a BEST CASE SCENARIO, the brain will be badly bruised. In a WORSE CASE SCENARIO, the brain basically morphs into a gob of goo. Sudden deceration will ALSO launch the spinal cord like a whip - in many cases breaking the cord like a dry tree twig. Obviously, the results of "Accute Deceleration Trauma" are devastating - and that's assuming the victim survives.
As you probably know, the HANS is designed to retain the integrity of the skull, and spinal column in the event of sudden deceleration by preventing the head from launching forward. If you can provide ANY DEGREE OF DATA which definitively states that no possible threat of sudden deceleration trauma in an accident scenario exists in F1 I'll be amazed. Hell, just the starts alone in a Grand Prix are enough to warrant the utilization of the HANS.
And Destroyer, just where do you obtain the data which indicates wearing a HANS will impede, or PREVENT a driver from turning his/her head? And yes, I guess if a driver is stupid enough to NOT want to utilize a device which could very possibly save his or her life, so be it. The same options are also up to you in your street/road car. If you feel wearing a seat belt impedes your flexibility, for Goodness Sakes, don't buckle-up. If you feel the sudden deployment of your vehicle's air bag would be more damaging in an accident sceanario, by all means disengage the mother. If you don't feel as though side air bags would assist or aid your chances for survival in a side impact, don't buy a vehicle which includes that feature. After all, it's a free country.

[Manson]

Originally posted by Joe Fan
I think we are better suited for forwards thrusting movements because this is more natural from a kinesiology standpoint because we bend over frequently. But our bodies are not designed or used to quick and sudden thrusts to the side or forward at an odd angle.

You are strapped in so tight that this bend over motion you talk about does not exist. Only your head and neck stretch (the belts somewhat as well). This is what is causing the basal skull fractures. Without the HANS, the drivers head can impact the steering wheel, that's a long stretch. The neck can stretch up to 1 ft! in a severe impact.

[Ross Stonefeld]

HANS restricts side movement too. It wont make anything worse, so why not use it

[Joe Fan]

Manson, did you see the TV program a year or so ago with the GM safety expert that was about improving safety of IRL cars in crashes? They showed test dummies and their head did get thrust forward even with belts. In a severe frontal impact, belts stretch, stress is placed on the seat, etc. to the point that it allows for the head to be thrust forward. But I don't think this is the problem. Earnhardt had a crack down the top of his skull which is thought to be from contact with the steering wheel but the doctor said that this is not what killed Earnhardt. He thinks the forward thrusting motion is what caused the basilar skull fracture but I think it was more the angle that he was thrust.

Ross, the HANS does restrict side to side movement, but in stock cars, drivers want to retain their peripheral vision. Therefore most desire very loose settings when it comes to side to side movement so that they can turn their head and not feel uncomfortable. This is where the studies need to concentrate, how much movement can be allowed and still prevent basilar skull fractures from the head being whipped to the side or forward slightly at an angle. Ultimately, it may come down to virtually no movement should be allowed which will then mean different seats and better mirrors in stock cars. In open wheel cars it will require a design change which undoubtably will prevent us fans from seeing much of the driver's helmet from a side view of the car. It seems to me that IRL cars are closer to this design that F1 or CART cars currently.

[Comma]

Yes they should wear the HANS device. It won't help in every accident obviously, but it could help in some accidents and even save someone's life, or at least minimises injury. I don't see a negative side to it in comparison to already implemented ideas - it can only help the drivers.

[Manson]

Originally posted by Joe Fan
Manson, did you see the TV program a year or so ago with the GM safety expert that was about improving safety of IRL cars in crashes? They showed test dummies and their head did get thrust forward even with belts. In a severe frontal impact, belts stretch, stress is placed on the seat, etc. to the point that it allows for the head to be thrust forward. But I don't think this is the problem. Earnhardt had a crack down the top of his skull which is thought to be from contact with the steering wheel but the doctor said that this is not what killed Earnhardt. He thinks the forward thrusting motion is what caused the basilar skull fracture but I think it was more the angle that he was thrust.

Ross, the HANS does restrict side to side movement, but in stock cars, drivers want to retain their peripheral vision. Therefore most desire very loose settings when it comes to side to side movement so that they can turn their head and not feel uncomfortable. This is where the studies need to concentrate, how much movement can be allowed and still prevent basilar skull fractures from the head being whipped to the side or forward slightly at an angle. Ultimately, it may come down to virtually no movement should be allowed which will then mean different seats and better mirrors in stock cars. In open wheel cars it will require a design change which undoubtably will prevent us fans from seeing much of the driver's helmet from a side view of the car. It seems to me that IRL cars are closer to this design that F1 or CART cars currently.

I missed that show but I read about the crash that killed Gonzalo Rodriguez. They estimated his impact at about 70-80 mph with the tires and he was dead on impact. The HANS would have saved him without a question of a doubt. When I read this, I ordered my HANS.

As far as side to side movement, I'm telling you this is blown out off proportion. I can still see my rear tires through my peripheral vision with the limited movement. That's enough to check a blind spot. These guys have mirrors too!, which I don't.

[Joe Fan]

Manson, I have the Rodriguez crash on tape and I do not think he was killed by the initial impact. I strongly believe that he was killed when his car flipped over, dropped down a hill quite a few feet and landed upside down. When he hit, his car dug down into the ground. So, there is little doubt in my mind that he was killed because he was pile-drived into the ground. The report that he was killed by the frontal impact was just CART trying to evade the lack of safety of the open cockpit. The flipping motion over the wall should have dispersed energy away from the driver which is a good thing but not when it flips over and drops down a hill. If he directly impacted the wall and then was shot backwards, I might have believed that he was killed by the initial impact because he would have absorbed all of the energy of the crash.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Rodriguez had a Basalar fracture

[Manson]

Originally posted by Joe Fan
Manson, I have the Rodriguez crash on tape and I do not think he was killed by the initial impact. I strongly believe that he was killed when his car flipped over, dropped down a hill quite a few feet and landed upside down. When he hit, his car dug down into the ground. So, there is little doubt in my mind that he was killed because he was pile-drived into the ground. The report that he was killed by the frontal impact was just CART trying to evade the lack of safety of the open cockpit. The flipping motion over the wall should have dispersed energy away from the driver which is a good thing but not when it flips over and drops down a hill. If he directly impacted the wall and then was shot backwards, I might have believed that he was killed by the initial impact because he would have absorbed all of the energy of the crash.

The report I read stated that Gonzalo had "bled out" before the car hit the ground on the other side of the billboard. In other words, his neck was broken so badly that it cut the arteries and most of his blood was on the tires and the billboard. This has been reported many times.

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Rodriguez had a Basalar fracture

Yes, which can be caused by the force of when your head gets rammed into an object. The doctor who reviewed Earnhardt's autopsy report/photos stated this could have been the reason for Earnhardt's basilar skull fracture but he said that he did not think so because his specific fractures weren't consistent with this type of basilar skull fracture.

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by Manson


The report I read stated that Gonzalo had "bled out" before the car hit the ground on the other side of the billboard. In other words, his neck was broken so badly that it cut the arteries and most of his blood was on the tires and the billboard. This has been reported many times.

Well, this is the first that I heard of this and I followed that crash closely in the news. I am not trying to say that you are lying but I have never read about blood being on the billboard. The only thing that I read that was close to what you are saying was that some track official (who was close to the crash) said that he knew right upon the crash that he was killed on the initial impact. He didn't say why, so I thought that was a stupid comment at that time. If this is a fact, then CART cars are not as safe in frontal impacts as I previously believed.

[prettyface]

Originally posted by Manson


The report I read stated that Gonzalo had "bled out" before the car hit the ground on the other side of the billboard. In other words, his neck was broken so badly that it cut the arteries and most of his blood was on the tires and the billboard. This has been reported many times.

That's what I read too. Basilar skull fractures are ugly, basically, a loose head with the added weight of the helmet; like being hanged
from a noose forward. Victims were reported to bleed out the ears, mouth and nose. I'd rather not hear about it happening ever again.

[TheDestroyer]

Duck, I have more than a basic education in physics so I know all about deceleration forces, etc. I'd like to see more studies done with regards to HANS devices and F1 cars.

Et al. My statements about head movement restrictions are basically reiterations of some NASCAR drivers who chose not to wear them.

I'm all for driver safety BUT let's not jump to conclusions about HANS devices when no one knows if they will be effective AND safe in F1. Since Earnhardt died (RIP Dale) the media and everyone else is on this HANS device kick.

Safety theory doesn't always translate to practical safety OR even safety in different uses.

[arcwulf7]

The concussion vs. basalar skull argument against HANS has largely been disproved by the experience with the device so far. Yes, at these speeds a concussion will occur, and that can be deadly with enough force. But so far the deaths (or quad paralysis) we've seen from basalar skull injuries seem a far more certain fate, than a concussion injury. Keep in mind, there is some 'play' with the device, which attempts to distribute load down the body. All the force is not directed into skull and soft brain tissue. It's possible that with the side protection in F1 cars a modified version of HANS would be optimum, one that allows head movement to the sides but restricts movement back and forth, levered at the base of the skull.

[Ross Stonefeld]

I still dont understand why anyone has any objections to it. Helmets limit your vision, so do high cockpits.

HANS Helps, use it. Its not trendy, its been around for a decade, it only hit mainstream press because of the NASCAR deaths.

[Duck]

I'm quite keen on wondering how Professor Watkins (a neurosurgeon himself) feels about the HANS. I'm sure he's examined the relevant research data, and possesses opinions on the subject. I'm confidant if he advocates the use of the HANS (refined for F1 cockpits - and new variations of the HANS are appearing with frequent regularity), the drivers will certainly respect his endorsement of the device.

[TheDestroyer]

Duck, so long as they test the device for F1 before implementing it then I'm all for it.

F1 has seen too many "changes" made over the last couple of years in the name of safety and not all were smart.

[Duck]

Destroyer, I have no problem with researching data in the proper respect, or testing the viability of the HANS regarding F1 utilization. As I mentioned in my previous post, I believe variations of the HANS are being designed, and implimented on almost a constant basis. I think we'll probably see a specific HANS designed for almost all genres of the sport - NASCAR, CART/IRL, F1, Touring Cars, NHRA, and even (hopefully) WRC.
Again, does anyone have any information on Syd Watkins feelings,or opinions regarding this subject? I'm curious.

[PDA]

The HANS device has been in use for several seasons so far, si there is a large database of data. In addition, MB have spent over two years doing experimental work on the device for the FIA, creating even more data. As far as single seaters are concerned, it has been used in CART for a few seasons now (now compulsory) and data totally relevant to single seater cars gathered.

I am reminded of the time when Dan Gurney introduced full face helmets to F1, and many (if not most) said that they didn;t want them becasue they restricted vision. Similar arguments were used in the late fifties/early sixties that seat belts restricted movement, and prevented to driver being thrown clear of a wrecking car! Jochen Rindt refused to use the crotch straps of his harness becasue he found them uncomfortable. That may have contributed to his death.

All drivers have a pretty high expectation of their own immortality and are not always the best to judge the efficacy of new safety equipement.

BTW, it is now unusual to see a NASCAR WC driver NOT using HANS. They have learned very quickly that the restricted vision was an illusion.

[Manson]

Originally posted by PDA
They have learned very quickly that the restricted vision was an illusion.

Quite correct. Like I have said, I wear one now and think it's great, restricted vision is indeed a non-issue. The rest of the drivers in my series look at it with skeptisism. I'm not sure whether it's a macho thing or it "doesn't look cool". I like the look of it, find it comfortable and know I've done all I can to prevent injury.

I like the rest of your quote. Pretty soon, everyone will have one and we'll look back and shake our heads why it took so long to mandate.

[TheDestroyer]

PDA, one problem with the "large database of data"... It's all primarily NASCAR related data.

Don't get me wrong. If the HANS device proves safe for F1 use then they should use it, but just because it works in NASCAR doesn't mean it will work in F1.

F1 specific testing is needed.

[Joe Fan]

PDA, you state that the HANS device is compulsory in CART but I read that it is only mandated on oval tracks.

[Manson]

Ross, I have proof that Mike Helton voted no 10 times under different identities!