What's Hideous, Weighs 15 Pounds and Can Support a London Bus? F1's New Halo

The comparison of a driver more likely to die out on public roads than on the track is so dishonest & skewed, smh.

 

No, you said safety is the most important thing. So justify motor racing, if that’s the case. Justify the needless risk of life and limb for a mere hobby or lifestyle choice. Do it. Explain to me and everyone else reading this thread why motor racing should be allowed to continue.

 

For the same reason any other sport is continued: It provides entertainment and thrill and part of that thrill is the potential risk that the athletes put themselves into. It just happens that in motorsports this risk can be potentialy deadly. I'm not saying death is in any way a desired outcome in motorsport, but the same goes for any other sport out there.In fact, motor racing isn't the only deadly sport out there. In whatever sport you look, you will find a death or two, even in the most seeminlgy harmless, like football, soccer and even marathons. But if we were to give up in the first struggle, life would be alot more boring and we wouldn't progress at all as a society. We learn and improve upon those mistakes and we make sure that they will never happen again, and the same goes for deadly accidents in motor racing. Even if we never manage to take out death from the equation, we will continue trying to make it as unlikely as possible.

 

That’s my point. Safety ISN’T above everything else, like the other bloke originally said. SOME safety is sacrificed for the sake of entertainment. The halo is simply the current arbitrary line in the sand that’s been drawn as the separation between ‘safe’ and ‘unsafe’. I wanted for him to see the cognitive dissonance he was exhibiting when he said ‘safety is #1’ whilst simultaneously supporting on-track competition. If we were truly 100% on safety, physical motor racing would’ve been abolished yesterday.
It’s also why I brought up both motorcycle racing and the fact a modern F1 car is siginificantly safer than any road car in existence. Deaths and injury are siginificantly more common per 100 people in commuter driving than in any form of motorsport. Hell, more kids die in karting every 5 years than F1 drivers have in the last 25. At some point we have to say “it’s safe enough”, because pursuing further compromises the spirit of the sport. Otherwise, why race in reality at all.

Danger is inherent in sport, and whether we like to admit it or not it’s part of the reason why spectators are attracted to it and what drives competitors to participate. People watch because they want to see heroes put themselves on the line to be the best, and people compete because they believe the risk is worth the glory. Just as it is with bullfighting, rock climbing, big game hunting, skydiving, stunt plane aerobatics, and everything else. If it weren’t, esports would’ve been pulling comparative spectator numbers to the real sports earlier this year when all sports were on lockdown. They didn’t, because most people don’t want to watch people play FIFA or Madden or Rfactor unless they have no other option.
What’s the old saying? “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”

 

Yes, because the halo is totally related to the quality of racing. I'm sure if we take it off today, we'd get a four way photo finish between Mercedes, Red Bull, RP and McLaren.

What a dumb take.

 

What I was implying was F1 is safe, when you compare it to literally every other form of motorsport. F1 is probably THE safest racing category.
I said 3 to illustrate just how little of an effect it would’ve had. It wasn’t an exact number. But alright, let’s see.
Mario Alborghetti 1955 maybe, he died of head and chest injuries after ploughing into a crowd at speed.
Alan Stacey 1960 maybe, he supposedly lost control because a bird hit him in the face at high speed and broke his neck.
Martin Brain 1970 maybe, can’t find enough information on what precisely killed him.
Piers Courage 1970 possibly, a tyre hit him in the head and killed him near-instantly. But considering his corpse was trapped in a burning car for a further several minutes, he most likely would’ve died anyway.
Helmuth Koenigg 1974, it would’ve saved him. But so would the barriers he hit if the track officials had done their job and forced The Glen to fix their broken barriers like the rules required them to do.
Mark Donohue 1975 probably, he died of a blood clot from his head hitting a fence post. But considering the state of car construction at that time, had his car been otherwise identical save for the addition of a halo he probably would’ve hit his head on said halo and died of the same thing. Whiplash is no joke.
Tom Pryce 1977, would’ve saved him. But so would the track properly training marshals to stop them running across an active racing surface without making sure it’s clear.
Patrick Depailler 1980, would’ve saved him.

So, that’s 3 definitives, 1 probable, 1 possible but would’ve most likely died of other injuries anyway, and 3 maybes. All of them from an era where car construction in general was a joke compared to today, all of them from at least 40 years ago, and all of them died more because of a lack of track safety rather than specifically car safety. Had they been driving a modern car even without a halo, their chances of survival would’ve increased 30fold. Had any of their incidents happened on a modern circuit, they most likely would’ve survived, even in the classic machines they were driving. Which is why there’s only been 3 people to die in classic F1 races in the last 30 years, despite literally hundreds of people driving cars from the 50s-70s in anger.

What I meant was the halo fundamentally damages the spirit of the sport, because it’s a giant leap in the direction of closed cockpits. F1’s basic DNA is open-cockpit open-wheel racing cars. If closed cockpits come, enclosed wheels won’t be far behind. And at that point, there’ll be no difference between F1 and sports prototypes/LMP machines.

All the drivers going to simulators wouldn’t affect the quality racing, so why don’t we just do that? Or make all the cars RC and have the drivers control them remotely?

What a dumb take.

 

What's the importance of staying open cockpit? If there are major safety benefits with going closed, history isn't the greatest counterpoint.

 

It took a while to get used to it, but my first impression was:

 

I'm used to how it looks now, but it must be a nightmare for the drivers' visibility cause it blocks their line of sight.

 

It doesn't. Last year at Silverstone, I had a chat with a driver in the Formula Renault Eurocup (who is now in F3) when his car broke down and asked him what it was like driving with the Halo. He said he hated how it looks on the car, but when you're driving you never notice it. He said that once in the car, the only time you see the Halo and realise it's there is when you get out, and was thankful for the extra head protection. Directly in the centre is never a place a driver looks, and even if it is, the driver just needs to move their head slightly to the left or the right and it's out the way. It is worse in games because you don't have the luxury of being able to move your head while looking along, but even still, I've never found it an issue while playing F1 2019.

 

I'd add Jules Bianchi and Maria de Villota to the very probable saves list. Bianchi hit the tractor at 78 mph, such a speed is absolutely nothing in a head-on impact when wearing the HANS and the car taking the actual hit, unfortunately the first thing to impact was his head. Also de Villota hit the loading ramp at a relatively low speed, the Halo would have done the job easily.

Perhaps even Senna would be alive. He had three main injuries - one from the wheel hitting his head, one from a part of the suspension attached to the said wheel penetrating his helmet, and one from another part attached to the wheel penetrating his visor. With the Halo keeping the entire wheel away from his head the other two injuries might well not have happened.

 

I have to imagine Bianchi's skull being smashed by the halo when it sheared off the car instead of the tractor itself wouldn't have been that much of an improvement.

 

The safety improvement they made that would have saved Bianchi was the VSC. Bianchi's accident, like Hubert's, was one of those freak accidents where it's almost impossible to produce something that can make it survivable. However, the drivers still wanted some form of head protection that would prevent deaths like Justin Wilson or Henry Surtees in response, so the Halo has at least solved that issue. It's had quite a strong testing in practice, and has passed on most counts.

Tadasuke Makino, Charles Leclerc, Juan Manuel Correa, Sean Gelael, Alex Peroni, Will Power and Rinus VeeKay at least have all had some scary accidents where the Halo has kept a wheel, big bit of debris or and entire other car away from their heads. You just need to watch a video like this to see that millimetres away from serious head injury is a bit crazy to think of now that we have the Halo.

 

What’s the importance of racing at all? If there are major safety benefits to going simulator-only, history isn’t the greatest counterpoint.

Closed cockpit isn’t safer anyway.

 

Good point, but then we would be in a completely different business. I don't imagine the majority of fans would follow.

I don't see the issue with the theoretical deviation from the open cockpit formula. I'm sure some people would, but people adapt or stop watching. F1 regulations can evolve. That's what separates F1 from sportscars prototypes/LMP. It's a different racing series, racing to a different set of regulations. How much closer did we get to LMPs with the addition of the halo?

Then there won't be any issues for you in the future.

 

“Majority of fans won’t follow” so you agree there’s a limit to how hard we should pursue safety? So why is it the halo is where you draw the line? A device that wouldn’t’ve made an appreciable difference in a single F1 crash since the 70s, because the issues the halo is designed to solve (primarily errant wheels) has been essentially solved? The only time wheels go flying is when a lug nut isn’t secured. But in those sorts of incidents, the wheel travels in the same direction as traffic and is essentially harmless to other drivers. Which is why there’s not be a single incidence I’m aware of of a driver being hit by a wheel that came off because of an unsecured nut.

 

When dealing with things that might involve people being decapitated on live television, I'd say it's decidedly better to have and not need, than to need and not have.

 

What makes you think drivers being decapitated is such a problem? The last driver to die of such an accident was Tom Pryce in 1977, when he hit a marshal who ran across an active track carrying a fire extinguisher, which hit Pryce’s head and crushed it. Track safety and marshal training has progressed far enough to where such an incident is no longer realistically possible. It’s not the 1970s anymore, drivers aren’t dropping off like flies every season.

So then why race at all, by the logic. Any crash could be fatal, as we saw with Hubert. Small bits of metal and CF can still go straight through the giant gaps in the halo and lead to the same thing that killed Senna (pierced helmet). Why not just have all the drivers on simulator rigs, or controlling the cars via RC? I’ve asked this at least once before and never got an answer. Why not? Why won’t you make the case for continuing actual on-track racing, if safety is paramount. If drivers shouldn’t have agency over their life choices.

 

I wonder why? Could it be because of an increased focus on safety?

The Halo can't entirely be credited for making F1 safer, nor can improvements in barrier technology or marshall procedure. These are ALL parts of a larger focus that's led F1 to become a far less deadly sport than it was long into its existence.

The great crying shame is that because of being scared to affect racing, it has again and again taken the deaths of talented race drivers to wake the sport up to make changes to safety. Senna did not need to die - everyone knew how unsafe F1 was that year.

I cannot at all support the idea that the focus should be taken off safety. It's the job of the teams and drivers to provide good racing within the regulations. It's the job of the FIA and F1 to make sure those regulations account for safety. Nobody wants to watch a driver die.

No-one is saying let's all just do sim racing, don't try to reduce our argument to that because it's not our point. My point is that arguing against any safety is erring dangerously close to saying F1 can't be a good sport if nobody's life is at risk, which is morbid nonsense.

F1 has always been about technology and innovation. What's so underwhelming about the kind of innovation that allows drivers to survive crashes at over 100mph? I find it quite amazing how safe we have managed to make the fastest racing series in the world.

 

The effects.

In 2015 and 2013 drivers died from the effects massive head trauma caused by crashing F1 cars. How recent is "realistic?". In 2009 Massa's skull was smashed by a spring that bounced up into his visor. Is that too long ago to count?

Hubert's crash was part of a chain of events (like so many), I'd say that a car with destroyed safety structures bouncing back onto the track for a second accident represented a rare, even "freak" occurence. You never know exactly when/how a crash will happen but you can mitigate against the greatest (and known) likelihoods.

Yep, halo won't help with things that go through. Should I get rid of the fire extinguishers in my garage just because there's also a risk that I could die in an electrocution accident?

Because drone racing is a different sport. Why not wear swimming trunks and do four lengths of the pool? Weird question.

 

@Frank McGank. Please just stop carrying on this argument you've lost a million times already. This debate was reasonable in 2016 and 2017 when the Halo was still new, but it's now 2020, motorsport has accepted the Halo and it has completely proven itself unequivocably. In probably 95% of accidents where the Halo gets involved, it will be enormously beneficial for driver safety. You've managed to rant about unrelated things and still only care about the looks of cars rather than the lives of elite sportsmen. The only times the Halo will ever be worse for survivability is if something deflects off the top and down into the driver or they get trapped in the car. But as we saw with Hulkenberg at Abu Dhabi, that is a non issue because - as you said - Marshals are well trained to be there ASAP.

I don't need to repeat what has been said in this thread a million times about why the Halo exists and why it works, it's clear you don't even bother to read it.

We did. It was called Lockdown. It was a lot of fun but nobody took is seriously and it highlighted that sim racing is still a few years of development away from being a true competitor to real motorsport. The experiment has been done.

May I direct you to https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/please-read-general-motorsports-forum-rules.349092/

If you in your sick mind with archaic views want to see people being killed doing motor racing, go and watch Motorbike road racing such as the Isle of Man TT and don't come back. You just need to look at the "likes" being put on posts in the thread. None of them are directed at you, and all of them are on posts of people debunking your comments. That should be a clue that perhaps you are in the wrong.

 

From 3 days ago:



Sure, he didn't actually get hit by his own wheel - but it was oh-so-close.

 

Halo obscures vision!...? Orite....

 

His hands obstruct his vision much more than anything else...

 

Most apexes seem to completely obscured by the wing mirrors and front wheels!

I do like this camera view though.

 

I didn't see the race so I don't know much about this incident, seemed to be a very dramatic brake fire? Anyway, the driver credits the aeroscreen with protecting him from the flames/gasses.

 

Roman Grosjean's accident in the Formula 1 Gulf Air Bahrain Grand Prix 2020 has to be one of the most dramatic motorsport crashes in many years, certainly in Formula 1. There is no doubt that Grosjean's life was safed by a variety of factors without any of which Grosjean could not have survived, and one of those is the Halo. In the past we've seen F1 drivers decapitated in accidents and we've seen them crushed by forces above the car - without the Halo one of those two would certainly have happened to Grosjean.

For me any doubts about it Halo are gone.

 

(someone in) This thread, a few weeks ago: We don't really have any outright examples of the halo being good

Romain Grosjean: Hold my beer