- 4,193
- UK
Indeed. It appears they've sat the driver about 3-4 inches too high in the seat. I suppose it gives a rough idea, but it's nowhere near a proper simulation (imo).
FIA considering closed cockpit F1 in the future?
- Thread starter Hun200kmh
- 664 comments
- 60,005 views
- 1,048
- Rockanje
- Mike-ZENKAI
- 2,121
- Chicago
- mustang622006
- 6,293
- Canada
I'm one who is in favor of leaving F1 as an open cockpit. If it must be closed off in some way, from a purely aesthetic point of view, I would vote for a full canopy.
However, I think a lot of the support for a full canopy is quite one dimensional, as a full canopy introduces a whole host of new problems:
- egress from a rolled car. Yes WEC does it, but WEC cars have doors. The canopy itself can remain in place and the driver can still get out. Wouldn't be the same in a F1 car with a full canopy.
- weight. Drivers already say the cars are too heavy. Next year, they wany to go to a wider tire, which will increase the weight even more. A full canopy would add a significant amount of weight to the car. The canopy itself needs to be thick enough and strong enough to withstand direct impact from a 28kg wheel while travelling at 300km/h. A paper thin piece of plexiglass will not due. On top of that, you need some sort of mechanism to lift the canopy up (as the driver is in an awkward sitting position and does not have great leverage), plus some sort of emergency back up system that could "blow" the canopy off in the case that the driver is injured and can't physically lift the canopy.
- air flow. An enclosed F1 cockpit would be a hell of a lot smaller than a WEC cockpit, so airflow might become an issue. At the very least, there would need to be some sort of emergency system in place just in case the cockpit starts to fill with smoke or toxic gasses (and with all the electronics in the side pods, it is a real possibility). There would also need to be a defogging system to keep the inside of the canopy clear. All that extra stuff adds weight.
- heat! This is a big one that I think a lot of people overlook. Like you said, can you imagine Sepang with a closed cockpit? Or Montreal in June/July? Stiffeling hot. KMags had his ass fried like a strip of bacon at Singapore 2014, to the point that his drinks bottle was burning the inside of his mouth - imagine those conditions under a closed canopy! People again use WEC and tin tops as examples, but seem to forget that most WEC cars have climate control in the cockpit. V8SC uses a dry ice system to keep the drivers cool. NASCAR has open windows. I can't see a closed cockpit F1 car existing without some sort of climate control in the cockpit. Again, that's more weight added onto an already heavy (relatively speaking) car.
But what about NHRA Top Fuel, they use closed cockpits!? BTrue, but they're only under the closed canopy for a max of 5 minutes at a time, not for 1.5-2 hours. Canopies are also optional in NHRA, not mandatory (just watch the finals of the last round from Pheonix - Force had a fully enclosed cockpit, while Graham Rayhal's wife, forget her name, had an open top cockpit). Also, Top Fuel drag cars weigh about 1 ton and push 10,000hp. F1 cars weigh about 3/4 of a ton, but barely push 1000hp.
In short, I don't think a closed cockpit is the be all end all solution that many think it is, as it introduces a whole host of new problems. If they wait until 2020 and design the whole car around the closed cockpit, including turning up the wick on the power units to 1100, 1200, or more HP to account for the increase in weight (but HP doesn't solve issues with braking distance or cornering speeds), ok maybe I could see that working - but I don't think that you can slap a full canopy on a 2017 car while still shaving 3-5 seconds off current lap times.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Name a situation where this has happened and the car has ended up losing the roll hoop (which sits far higher than the canopy).
No cars are built to the full weight - the purpose of weight saving by the designers is to give flexibility with the ballast. Besides, the weight limit is an arbitrary figure as you point out.
Weight issues aside (see above) this is a real possibility, particularly with the modern "sterile racetrack" philosophy. Carlos Sainz Jr's accident in Russia might be a good example - he was under the barriers for (relatively) a long time.
An activated F1 car needs to keep moving to stay alive, there's lots of air that's divertible to the cockpit in those circumstances. The problem comes if you want to park. The technology that's in place to protect the drivers from overheating inside their helmets (a big umbrella) will be adequate for keeping sun off the entire canopy, I think. It's also likely that the upper area of the canopy will be of semi-reflective material similar to that used on the bubble canopies of high-alt fighters.
- 1,048
- Rockanje
- Mike-ZENKAI
@twitcher, well said (typed). Agree on most points, but don't think weight will be a big issue.
It just ain't easy to just put a canopy on a F1 car. So if it must be done, don't rush it but give the designers/teams time
to design the whole car to it, like you said.
@TenEightyOne, I do not think air flow from driving will be enough to keep the drivers cool enough in the tropics with a full canopy. There should be at least a dry ice system or just an AC, which can be quite small and light.
Prefer to keep it open cockpit myself. What's next closed karts?
Of course they should try to make it as safe as possible but not at all costs. Same as the tracks, now a days, most of them have so much tarmac around there is almost no time loss for a mistake. (IMHO)
(Well Baku is a new track that's not a car park, but it is just stupid. Only good for Mr.E's already well filled pockets.)
It just ain't easy to just put a canopy on a F1 car. So if it must be done, don't rush it but give the designers/teams time
to design the whole car to it, like you said.
@TenEightyOne, I do not think air flow from driving will be enough to keep the drivers cool enough in the tropics with a full canopy. There should be at least a dry ice system or just an AC, which can be quite small and light.
Prefer to keep it open cockpit myself. What's next closed karts?
Of course they should try to make it as safe as possible but not at all costs. Same as the tracks, now a days, most of them have so much tarmac around there is almost no time loss for a mistake. (IMHO)
(Well Baku is a new track that's not a car park, but it is just stupid. Only good for Mr.E's already well filled pockets.)
- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
That design is smart. I'd love to see that on F1 cars and Indycars. It protects against oncoming debris and still enables a hasty exit.
- 332
- Bristow, VA
- spacecowboy73
- spacecowboy73
That Red Bull design looks ok but I don't think it would have stopped what happened to Justin Wilson if I'm remembering it correctly. Didn't the nose cone come down almost directly on top of him?
- 21,262
- United States
Yes.
AJ
Premium
- 2,085
- UK [UTC+1]
- GTP_AJ
- GTP AJ
This is exactly the same as the Ferrari concept, but with added plexiglass, and two visual impairments instead of one...
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 44,184
- Blackburn
- Furinkazen_54
- 22,549
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
Nobody can't possibly say this is a worse idea than the FIA's. The FIA's protects against almost nothing. This at least protects against a Massa/Hinchlife incident (frontal debris). Both are hopeless at debris from above though.
- 22,549
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
That's not the point, refer to when I originally brought attention to the redbull solution and how it was supposedly more a canpoy than what Mercedes had. However in reality it's a better looking version of the Halo, perhaps an evolution of what the 70 and 80s f1 saw. However, I have no idea what you're talking about you seemed to misinterpret my comment as a negative notion for what RBR are doing or suggestion. When in reality it's a comment against their initial statements on what they were bringing to the table.
Also what is the FIA solution?
Last edited:
- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
I wasn't referring to you I was referring to general opinion that it's not about competition in this case as there is no real competition.
FIA solution was what ended up on the Ferrari. Ferrari doesn't like it though.
- 22,549
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
That wasn't the FIA solution that was Mercedes solution. The FIA solution would have been the canopy that got a tire fired at it a few years ago.
Also I'm confused you responded to my post and say it was a general response, but I haven't seen anyone bring up really how this could just be teams investing in what they know the FIA wants, but doing so to help get ahead on the competition end.
If I'm the team that the FIA goes with (really should be an independent) then I can manipulate the canopy best to fit the cars and efficiency because I invented it.
- 22,549
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
- 4,193
- UK
Yep, That's pretty dirty. If they do go ahead with the Redbull windscreen halo (I refuse to call it a canopy), It'll need a wiper, preferable not one that requires the driver to pit. Although we don't see as many oil leaks nowadays, it's still something that needs to be considered.Oil leak?
(Out of interest, Liquid, did they even have tear-off strips back then?).
- 28,545
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
I believe they did and Hill's pitstop visor-wiper man really earned his money that day.
And the point still stands; with any perspex windscreen comes added problems and scrutineering. In wet weather visibility will be impossible without wipers. A stone could chip the windscreen but would that result in a black and orange flag or not?
At least with the one Ferrari tested, even though it is horrible and impairing in its own way, you don't have the above issues.
- 332
- Bristow, VA
- spacecowboy73
- spacecowboy73
The reason I brought this up is because I am confused about the intent of these designs, and it seems maybe Vettel is too:
"But if it helps increase the safety and helps save lives, there would be at least two drivers who would still be around – Henry Surtees and Justin Wilson – if we had this type of system."
It seems to me these designs will help in similar incidents such as Massa's and Hinchcliffe's which is great but not the type such as Wilson experienced and maybe Surtees since I remember reading an article somewhere that said these devices are not that strong. Still probably better than nothing even in these incidents.
- 28,545
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
Surtees would still be alive and Massa would have avoided a lengthy hospital stay if the tyre/suspension didn't detach itself from the car of the driver in front. Things like that are what should be addressed in addition to any driver safety.
Cause of the accident, not just a cure for the aftereffects.
Cause of the accident, not just a cure for the aftereffects.
- 2,121
- Chicago
- mustang622006
I am not too sure about this one. Didn't the Ferrari drivers say the one they tried did not really bother their vision with the center support structure since they were mostly looking to the right or left at the apex to the corner they were entering? It seems these two supports would be right where the drivers needed to see the most. They also look to be much wider with the tubular structure of the supports rather than the one with the thinning center support we saw on track.
Similar threads
