Why is nobody discussing Bottas' Halo problems?

[strad]

Do you think todays cars are safe enough.

.
Yes by a wide margin.
Over safe in the opinion of many with direct experience.
The guy that started all this in the first place... Jackie Stewart, has said that todays cars are too safe.
Look at Jenson Button the video I posted. He was shocked that he could just walk away and saw it as an indication he could take even larger risks.

[Restomaniac]

I don't love it. Far from it.

I do however see why it's a necessity if we have the data showing it makes driving safer.

[NathanOlder]

But its safer to race under 100mph, its safer to race on big open circuits, its safer to do time trials,

If we always want safer, it wont take long to lose F1 as we know it. Some may not be bothered by that, I certainly am

[Zynerji]

I don't love it. Far from it.

I do however see why it's a necessity if we have the data showing it makes driving safer.

...So would making them keep the pit lane speed limiter on at all times.

Fighting for track position at 200 MPH is inherently dangerous. Crash test the cars, and have zero tolerance driving standards.

After that, Drive at Your Own Risk.

I think the vast majority of drivers see it this way as well.

[NathanOlder]

I don't love it. Far from it.

I do however see why it's a necessity if we have the data showing it makes driving safer.

...So would making them keep the pit lane speed limiter on at all times.

Fighting for track position at 200 MPH is inherently dangerous. Crash test the cars, and have zero tolerance driving standards.

After that, Drive at Your Own Risk.

I think the vast majority of drivers see it this way as well.

+1 thankyou Zynerji.

These guys are paid insane amounts of money. Some of that could be the fact they risk their lives when they step in the car.

Big money, big risk?
Little money, little risk?

[Manoah2u]

I agree with a lot of that BUT 1 thing I'm not sure on is Dan wheldon. The catch fencing is so strong to protect the fans. I still feel the halo wouldn't have stood a chance.

Yes, it would have protected the driver, because despite there being a serious amount of energy involved, the halo would have had it's part in deflecting the vehicle itself, in extreme terms; the halo would have helped the car bounce away from the structure, or at the very least, avoid / block the fencing to enter the cockpit (area). without the halo, it was an open area and the driver had zero chance. let's imagine it in 2 ways; a knight riding a horse in nothing but some underpants with a battering ram coming straight at him, or a knight wearing protective armor AND mounted to the saddle at the horse a metal cage. would the battering ram still hand out a hard blow? sure it will. would the knight suffer death as a consequence? hardly imaginable!

offcourse it's just an example, but that is more or less what the halo would have done. in this case, dan wheldon wasn't like a naked knight - he was wearing his armor. but to survive a blow from the battering ram (the fence catching), he needed to have that cage around him (halo).

Also people need to stop thinking the halo is some kind of force field. If for example Grosjeans car had hit Alonso's head, it probably would have killed him, if you added the halo to that, the halo if as strong as its meant to be, would have cut through the floor and side pod of the lotus, so plenty of broken sharp carbon fibre is now heading to alonso's head.

i don't think you're looking the right way at how the halo functions. the halo is going to be a structural part of the vehicle itself, which will in result not tear through the drivers like some claw or butcher knife, but it would rather mean that grosjean - upon hitting the halo around alonso's head - would alter the course / direction of the ferrari, and swing it more to the left if any. no, it's not adamantium, so it might even indeed get cracked, but even then it's not a piece of non-safety glass and still that means it absorbed a whole load of energy that otherwise Alonso's head would have taken. conclusion: halo works

Yes the halo would have saved Surtess and Wilson, but im not sure on Maria, Jules & Dan.

how is there any doubt on Maria de Villota? the halo's shape alone would have lifted up the trucks' cargo 'door'. instead, having nothing in front of her, the cargo door LITERALLY penetrated her helmet and only stopped because of the headrests, the helmet's construction itself and the bone of her skull. if it was a 1995 car, with a 1995 helmet, her head would have been literally cut in half perhaps all the way to the back. just let that sink in for a minute.

the diagonal shape of the halo would have saved her life in itself already, hell, the engine cover in itself mounted backwards in front of her might have even saved her.

jules remains a big question mark, hence why it's mentioned as MIGHT. but there is no doubt that it would surely had increased his chances as it would have absorbed some of the impact, whereas similar to maria de villota, jules actually DID hit his helmet - thus his head - to the truck itself. the halo would have taken THAT force, and as such, also took out atleast some energy from the crash. would it be sufficient for survival? huge question mark there. the decelleration itself might have been lethal enough. But, the shockwave that came through the helmet hitting the truck itself caused massive damage to his body (brains) additionally or cumulatively being simply too violent.
in either case - the halo would have taken that physical contact out of the equasion, and would have 'only left him' with the extremely rapid decelleration. hence why his chances for survival would be definately higher. high enough? that indeed is a big question mark.

You guys really love this halo, I dont want to ever catch you guys out cycling without one

cycling is quite the different story to riding an f1 car.

but i talk from experience in going offroading in a bike through forest areas with hill climbs, decents, mudtrails etc, and i have rode it only once without protection as stupid as i was and i had an incident which caused me to have the steering bar to hit my chest and left me with broken ribs, a damaged diaphragm, and a perforated lung. and i was all alone. i gather that amongst one of the most stupid things i have done in my entire life and it could have cost me my life actually. i was really lucky to be able to make my way a bit further where somebody passed and who called emergency services. apart from that single incident, i always was, and afterwards always after, drove with adequate protection; knee cap protection, shin protection, a fall helmet, a chest plate and shoulder plates, all lightweight but safety approved. i had 2 or 3 collisions afterwards and thanks to one of those, slammed hard into a tree and walked away virtually unharmed bar some bruizes and some difficulty walking the next day through a day of 3 afterwards.

but in daily cycling, there are different circumstances. hence why your daily car commute does not require fia-legislated seats, belts, rollcages, etc.

[Manoah2u]

Do you think todays cars are safe enough.

.
Yes by a wide margin.
Over safe in the opinion of many with direct experience.
The guy that started all this in the first place... Jackie Stewart, has said that todays cars are too safe.
Look at Jenson Button the video I posted. He was shocked that he could just walk away and saw it as an indication he could take even larger risks.

not too safe.
safe enough to see Alonso in the Mclaren crash that he had and not be completely deader than dead but still walk away wounded.

[Manoah2u]

I don't love it. Far from it.

I do however see why it's a necessity if we have the data showing it makes driving safer.

...So would making them keep the pit lane speed limiter on at all times.

Fighting for track position at 200 MPH is inherently dangerous. Crash test the cars, and have zero tolerance driving standards.

After that, Drive at Your Own Risk.

I think the vast majority of drivers see it this way as well.

+1 thankyou Zynerji.

These guys are paid insane amounts of money. Some of that could be the fact they risk their lives when they step in the car.

Big money, big risk?
Little money, little risk?

that is the biggest strawman argument.

by that standard, it's dangerous enough to walk out of your own house or for that matter stay in your own house.
the moment you get out of bed, life is dangerous. hell sleeping is dangerous for that matter.

but that doesn't mean that there is no need for traffic lights, walkways, pedestrian crossings, bike lanes, etc.
"should not have left the safety of your house" sure bud.

let's do away with seatbelts for daily commuting too. Know what, scratch being it punishable by law not wearing one, no fines, nothing. own risk of mortality, don't wear a seatbelt, then bad luck to you when you die or get lifelong in a wheelchair. don't start crying or pleading when you can't do your job after that and get fired and have no income. not gonna get my money, your call. oh and family? don't let them weep or mourn or face hard work with the results of one family members 'stupidity'.

go ahead and look up WHY seatbelts are mandated, and how it came to be originally. there is a logic behind it, and it's not only emotional nor is it only financial. it's at the very least both of it. now take that in mind and look at improving racing safety / sport safety. same concept.

[jjn9128]

F1 can never be 100% safe. It's just impossible to create contingency for every possibility. Does that mean F1 shouldn't strive to minimize the risks? Absolutely not, that's when complacency creeps in. In 1994 F1 thought the dark days were in the past, no fatality at a race weekend for 8 years, then Imola happened - and at the next race Wendlinger was hospitalized for months.

One of the biggest things which has stuck with me from the Senna movie was footage from after Martin Donnelly's crash in Jerez, where two 'fans' are hamming it up for the camera while Donnelly is laying motionless in the track having been thrown from the car, and with severe lower leg injuries. That sort of thing makes me sick to my stomach. Likewise when people post videos/stills from fatal accidents in forums to make a point, especially when their logic is severely flawed. I don't want to see these things, and there's sometimes this pervasive and desensitized attitude towards death that creeps into these discussions about safety.

I dunno. Maybe I'm just a wimp.

[Manoah2u]

No you're not a wimp.

I have seen death in many ways, and i regret seeing every single of them. Hell, i've faced my own mortality in the depths of my eyes, and the coldness of it still gives me the creeps.
me too has a problem with people delibaretly filming the death of other human beings, a moment that should not be recorded ever but left to the privacy of the poor soul it is encountering.
there is a huge amount of sadness and emptyness in actually seeing somebody dead. I remember that of Senna like yesterday and i can visualize it as we speak, and i am far from comfortable with that.

I am glad though that the video of Bianchi never was broadcast live during the races. It is available, and i have seen it and added it to my regret list. I think that was actually the last time i've ever watched a death occur in media formats, even if he wasn't actually dead at that moment.

But the last thing we need is another death in the sport, and even less is to see it. what we need is moments like that of Alonso, where he simply walks out and away from the car. Something i wanted to see from Senna in 1994, but never happening. Something that i wanted to see from Ratzenberger in 1994, but never happened. Something i wanted to see from Bianchi, but never happened.

[NathanOlder]

@Manoah2u , a few points.

1. The Grosjean Alonso accident, I wasnt talking about the halp breaking up, I was talking about the Halo biting in to the Lotus, the Lotus would break and then potentially harm. SO The Halo can no way be guaranteed to stop any injuries.

2. Maria's accident, yes the Halo may have flicked up the lift on the lorry, but then you have the back of the lorry itself, also at head height for a driver, so again, you cant guarantee she walks away unscratched.

3. Wheldon's accident, The way i saw that crash was he went in to the catch fence, the chain fence absorbed the car as its not super tight, so the actual posts for the fence then pretty much hit Wheldon's helmet full on, so you cant say the halo would have deflected the car away, it would have mangled the halo for sure, the fence almost acted like a cheese grater.

4. The cycling comment was a joke.

5. The knight and horse comment is a bit silly as The battering ram would still hand out an instant stop and expost the Knight to G-Forces plenty high enough to kill him, crumple zones save lives, not solid steel.

[NathanOlder]

But the last thing we need is another death in the sport, and even less is to see it. what we need is moments like that of Alonso, where he simply walks out and away from the car. Something i wanted to see from Senna in 1994, but never happening. Something that i wanted to see from Ratzenberger in 1994, but never happened. Something i wanted to see from Bianchi, but never happened.

Why dont we just make the run off's huge, so there is nothing to hit, would have saved Roland, Ayrton and Jules.

[Restomaniac]

I don't love it. Far from it.

I do however see why it's a necessity if we have the data showing it makes driving safer.

...So would making them keep the pit lane speed limiter on at all times.

Fighting for track position at 200 MPH is inherently dangerous. Crash test the cars, and have zero tolerance driving standards.

After that, Drive at Your Own Risk.

I think the vast majority of drivers see it this way as well.

+1 thankyou Zynerji.

These guys are paid insane amounts of money. Some of that could be the fact they risk their lives when they step in the car.

Big money, big risk?
Little money, little risk?

So we shouldn't reduce the chance of a death because they are paid well? Good god.

Also just for clarification there are sportsmen in the NFL, Association Football, WTC, NBA and PGA who earn more than the top driver earns and last time I checked they don't run anywhere near the risk an F1 driver runs every race.

You are sounding more and more like Dolf Lundgren in Rocky III every time you post on this subject. You maybe happy for drivers to run the risk of dying but I and others would rather we took as many precautions as we can.

[Zynerji]

They accept the risks, or they go drive something else.

No one is slave labor in F1, they are all welcome to retire if the risk outweighs the rewards in their mind.

[Restomaniac]

They accept the risks, or they go drive something else.

No one is slave labor in F1, they are all welcome to retire if the risk outweighs the rewards in their mind.

Thankfully the FIA are not as bloodthirsty as you.

If it's not bloodthirsty it certainly isn't someone who gives a sh.. if a driver dies.