FIA considering closed cockpit F1 in the future?

[Rotary Junkie]

The difference is the fuel used in F1 cars is much stronger than traditional car fuels. What if this was to happen during a fuel leak?

Is it that the fuel is "stronger" in that it contains more energy per unit of measure or that it is actually weaker in that regard with a much better resistance to detonation?

 

[Cap'n Jack]

And if the car is upside down?

Even more powerful explosives to blow the car off the canopy.

 

[Owen.C93]

I don't think it will be necessary.

 

[Grand Prix]

My thoughts:

I like the first design. It shatters but it at least deflects the wheel from the cockpit. It also has an opening that the driver can get out of quickly. It reminds me a bit of the windshields used on 1960s F1 cars like the Lotus 49. Only far better.


I'm also finding it hilarious that people are saying "this isn't needed", "this is the death of open-cockpit racing", blah blah blah. Well guess what. People were probably saying the same thing decades ago when they introduced seatbelts. Or closed helmets. Or chicanes. All of which were introduced for protecting drivers (but, as always, the FIA always introduces the safety feature after someone dies, not before). It's already happened in F2. It almost happened to Massa. It happened to Senna years ago. So I'm quite surprised that they have taken this long to implement it, even. (the high windscreen, not the closed cockpit, I already know that the closed cockpit is a stupid idea for when the car rolls.)

 

[Ardius]

Its a very rare accident though, thats why nothing has really been done about it till now. Lets be fair, there have been significant advances in other areas which affect accidents like this though already:
-Vastly improved helmet designs
-High cockpit sides
-Tethered wheels (though they have limits)

Its also still not had much research done on it yet and pretty obviously its going to require a lot of money and a fair bit of re-designing to incorporate a high-windscreen to F1 cars.

Not only that but high-windscreens don't solve the problem of when the car rolls over. Its still going to be difficult to properly treat the driver in this position and for the driver to evacuate the car.

There is also much more than simply wheels to consider. What about sharp objects or objects with a fair bit more mass to them like a car? Remember the Coulthard and Wurz incident? I doubt a high windscreen would be much use at all, perhaps injuring the driver more when it shatters.

There is so much to consider here that is pretty logical that it hasn't been implemented earlier. I wouldn't be surprised if this research takes a good few more years, just because of the money if nothing else.

I think most people feel that if we are going to start making the cars closed-cockpits (effectively), then it may as well be LMP racing. I think people feel and accept this inherent risk of open-cockpits. Lets also not forget it doesn't just affect F1, but also Indycars, F2, GP2, GP3, F3, LMP1, LMP2, Formula Renault, Formula Ford etc. Now think about how many races occur every year in open wheel categories and how many fatal accidents there are. And then how many of those fatal accidents or injuries could have been avoided with cockpit shielding?

Not that some solutions shouldn't be looked at, but equally its not really surprising nothing much has been done about it.

 

[sumbrownkid]

My thoughts:

I like the first design. It shatters but it at least deflects the wheel from the cockpit. It also has an opening that the driver can get out of quickly. It reminds me a bit of the windshields used on 1960s F1 cars like the Lotus 49. Only far better.


I'm also finding it hilarious that people are saying "this isn't needed", "this is the death of open-cockpit racing", blah blah blah. Well guess what. People were probably saying the same thing decades ago when they introduced seatbelts. Or closed helmets. Or chicanes. All of which were introduced for protecting drivers (but, as always, the FIA always introduces the safety feature after someone dies, not before). It's already happened in F2. It almost happened to Massa. It happened to Senna years ago. So I'm quite surprised that they have taken this long to implement it, even. (the high windscreen, not the closed cockpit, I already know that the closed cockpit is a stupid idea for when the car rolls.)

It's a sad truth, but how can you expect the FIA mandate new safety features without seeing where the current safety features/rules have failed?

Safety is ironic in that it needs someone to get really hurt or die in order to learn where to improve.

 

[icelt]

Look I'm all for maximizing, within the limits of reason, risk mitigation but anybody who seriously thinks that any set of measures will magically make F1 racing, or really any form of racing, SAFE is deluding themselves. You're talking about a scant 640 kg vehicle with over 700 bhp of NA propulsion that can accelerate the vehicle to speeds in excess of 200 mph in somewhere around 10 seconds. The truly amazing thing about F1 is that there aren't MORE injuries and fatalities.

So in my mind there is nothing ironic about "safety" in F1, or just about any other motor sport. It is inherently a fantastically dangerous activity and the regulators, manufactures, track operators and drivers in combination do a remarkable job in minimizing the impact of incidents to life and limb.

Goal - minimize risk? Yes, possible to an extent. Safe? Impossible.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I too find it funny that people are crying about how it is the death of F1...F1 is F1 because it's open wheel racing with the highest degree of technical work in cars and safety. Not because it's open cockpit or not open cockpit, cause there are many cars that are one or the other. As for upside down...the car needs to be flipped over to begin with so just cause a closed canopy is there doesn't make much difference. Also you don't need explosives to pop it you can have an air driven system to pop it off there a number of other ways to do this from inside or out. Then again I guess this is a good reason why the fans wouldn't be asked to pick safety choices for the drivers.

 

[Grand Prix]

The primary reason people are worried about the closed cockpit is the case of a fire. I won't link it here because it is quite a sad video, but look up Roger Williamson's crash. The car rolled over upside down and erupted in a massive fireball. David Purely, upon seeing the accident pulled over to the side of the road and ran across the track to attempt to push over the car (a burning car). The Marshals were few and far between, and even when they arrived at the scene, they couldn't use a fire extinguisher well enough, so Purely grabbed it and did it himself. But it was too late, Williamson became silent.

Had there been more and better trained marshals, the death might have been prevented. If there was a closed cockpit it might make these scenarios far worse. But I suppose if a car rolls over and the driver can't get out of a burning car he's a dead man anyway...

 

[Akira AC]

Not sure about this,special with documented cases of F1 flipped over and high speed crashes against concrete,apart from that,if the polycarbon-thing breaks it will become a bunch of blades that will kill the pilot inside the canopy,I cant see this happening,not in the next 10 or 20 years.

 

[Grand Prix]

It's a very interesting case for sure. We already have carbon shards, but we're willing to deal with that because carbon fibre offers benefits in strength, weight and collisions. Does a polycarbonate windscreen or bubble offer enough pros that outweigh the cons? Maybe not so much.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

The primary reason people are worried about the closed cockpit is the case of a fire. I won't link it here because it is quite a sad video, but look up Roger Williamson's crash. The car rolled over upside down and erupted in a massive fireball. David Purely, upon seeing the accident pulled over to the side of the road and ran across the track to attempt to push over the car (a burning car). The Marshals were few and far between, and even when they arrived at the scene, they couldn't use a fire extinguisher well enough, so Purely grabbed it and did it himself. But it was too late, Williamson became silent.

Had there been more and better trained marshals, the death might have been prevented. If there was a closed cockpit it might make these scenarios far worse. But I suppose if a car rolls over and the driver can't get out of a burning car he's a dead man anyway...

Yeah I understand what you're saying here but like your last bit states...in current conditions they might easily die just the same. Also who's saying that there wouldn't be a inside and outside way to open the canopy? If a driver becomes knocked out from a hard hit or something else the safety crew will have to have someway of openning to tend to the drivers needs at the point.

Not sure about this,special with documented cases of F1 flipped over and high speed crashes against concrete,apart from that,if the polycarbon-thing breaks it will become a bunch of blades that will kill the pilot inside the canopy,I cant see this happening,not in the next 10 or 20 years.

Did you watch the video from the OP? Just curious cause that might help your doubts. No one is saying that these will be used at the German GP and no one is saying they should. But this would be a great safety item in the next couple years.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Well this has been given thumbs down supposedly so this convo can be ended I suppose. Too bad but that's how it goes.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/motorsport/2011/07/15/formula-one-chiefs-reject-fighter-jet-pods-for-driver-safety-115875-23271842/

 

[F1 fan]

Yeah I understand what you're saying here but like your last bit states...in current conditions they might easily die just the same. Also who's saying that there wouldn't be a inside and outside way to open the canopy? If a driver becomes knocked out from a hard hit or something else the safety crew will have to have someway of openning to tend to the drivers needs at the point.

I don't think anyone is claiming that there wouldn't be ways to open it from the outside and the inside. That would of course be mandatory. The problem is that in the case that the car was upside down, it would be impossible to remove the canopy.

Personally, I don't like the idea. There has been a massive increase in safety, which is obviously a great thing. However, first it will be closed cockpits, then the focus will shift to the obvious hazards of the open wheel. Before you know it, F1 will not be F1. It's bad enough that in the last 7 years, we have went from 220mph at tracks like Monza to 190-200mph. I think things are pretty safe as they are. Granted, there is still the chance of a freak accident, but part of the thrill is in the danger.

If it's still acceptable safety-wise for motorcycle racing to continue, then I think the risks in F1 are just fine. Motorcycle racing is far more dangerous, but no one complains about that. Please bear in mind that these words are being spoken by someone who still remembers Imola 94 vividly, and was shocked and is still upset by Shoya Tomizawa's death.

Edit:

Well this has been given thumbs down supposedly so this convo can be ended I suppose. Too bad but that's how it goes.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/motorsport/2011/07/15/formula-one-chiefs-reject-fighter-jet-pods-for-driver-safety-115875-23271842/

Good to hear that sense has prevailed.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

^ Glad you put so much work into that post, I mean really thank you but as I've just posted prior the idea of a canopy was rejected for one reason being in case of fires...so yeah. Since there is no further reason to debate or discuss it only on the realm of what if...I'm done here.

Edit: Thanks for the edit

 

[Earth]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99155

 

[Furinkazen]

Visilibity issues no?

 

[Dennisch]

An awesome canopy they refuse, and then they come up with this?

 

[vfrmaverick]

i think its a bad idea, freak accidents dont need immediate change of everything. Plus if stuck upsidedown these closed/semiclosed cockpit cars would be impossible to excape from until they are straightened out. Which reminds me of some pics i saw once of a murcielago that crashed and flipped at high speeds then burst in flames while resting upsidedown. I dont know if anyone here recalls how lambo doors open but lets just say the 2 people inside figured why its the only car to have them. Yes both were burned to a crisp

 

[nitrorocks]

That is the saddest thing I've ever seen. Visibility issues? I think so. And what id debris comes from the side? There;s always going to be an unprotected side. The drivers know the risks. The FIA Shouldn't get desperate like this.

 

[tribolik]

i think its a bad idea, freak accidents dont need immediate change of everything. Plus if stuck upsidedown these closed/semiclosed cockpit cars would be impossible to excape from until they are straightened out. Which reminds me of some pics i saw once of a murcielago that crashed and flipped at high speeds then burst in flames while resting upsidedown. I dont know if anyone here recalls how lambo doors open but lets just say the 2 people inside figured why its the only car to have them. Yes both were burned to a crisp

They will probably free themselfs after the impact like seatbelts...
I think that if they havent use it yet its because its being improoved, Im all pro driver safety...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The FIA Shouldn't get desperate like this.

I don't thin they have any intention of actually implementing it. Right now, it's probably more important the the FIA be seen experimented with various safety ideas. Whether or not they actually find their way onto the car is beside the point.

 

[corporatesteve]

then there is always the issue of the canopy being accidentally removed ( since they need to make it easy enough to release, it could be forced open during a live race)

 

[dj_hazardous]

Looks stupid to me, think the FIA are wasting too much of their money on crap like this.

 

[vfrmaverick]

They will probably free themselfs after the impact like seatbelts...
I think that if they havent use it yet its because its being improoved, Im all pro driver safety...

You didnt read what i said. When an open wheel car is upsidedown they have by the rules some dimensions added in to let the driver crawl out. If its closed cockpit unless they decide to add doors to the cars (which would compromise the cockpit structures strength) the canopy will not open. if the car is on fire and the canopy doesnt open it will be lethal 99% of the times.

Honestly, revise the helmets (which was done promptly after massa) would be the best thing to do.

 

[Earth]

Honestly, revise the helmets (which was done promptly after massa) would be the best thing to do.

A better helmet would not have saved Dan Wheldon who went head first into the catchfencing.

A canopy or extra rolloverbar of some sort would have possibly saved Surtees, Wheldon, and others.

Now I've seen tiny windshields on Indycars deflect tires. It was at one of the high speed ovals, I think Michigan where the speeds are constantly over 220mph, a car ran into a loose tire that was bouncing along the track. The driver was fortunate enough that it hit his small windscreen which deflected it. The tire was bouncing at a favorable angle which no doubt helped, but the forward rollover bar is excessive IMO. With today's technology they need to develop some sort of clear canopy that has escape openings. It doesn't necessarily need to be strong enough to take a direct blow, but it should be strong enough to take a glancing blow.

All debri won't be flying at high speeds anyway. Lower speed start crashes can send debri bouncing or airborne. The 1998 Spa start crash is a good example of lower speed debri that is still incredibly dangerous

 

[tribolik]

You didnt read what i said. When an open wheel car is upsidedown they have by the rules some dimensions added in to let the driver crawl out.

The canopy will probaly fly off the car before or they can make so that there is another part that doesnt allow it to touch the ground and the thing can slide foward after, making in ever safer than what it is now when it comes to roll overs... one thing Im sure if they implement it, it is because they know what they are doing... its not like they have plummers designing the thing

 

[Furinkazen]

I've got a possible solution, kinda half a canopy.

Look at the modern Ferrari F1 car, and indeed nearly all the grid with the ugly front of the cars.. there's already a bump on the car due to the tech regs, so why not mandate the nose being pushed back, and increase that bump's so you end up with kinda a upwards canopy or shield,

Raise the "bump" so to speak, push it back you can form a cocoon that will keep the driver safe. Think of it as a higher version of the classic 70's design being applied, mainly to the front of the car.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Why they can't just go back to perfectly functional wind shields like that rather than mess about with stupid ideas that do not do anything other than add further problems for the driver I don't know.

 

[Earth]

I've got a possible solution, kinda half a canopy.

Good idea. Even something like this from the 1994 Penske PC23 would be a great improvement.

Would this have prevented Massa's accident?