IndyCar Series

[Andres125sx]

I wonder if we all are reading same article. Where did they say aeroscreen was discarded?

I´ver read it does need more tweaking, nothing about the fail anyone may conclude from the above comments

[Andres125sx]

Did anyone expect the plastic screen to stop a big lump like a wheel/tyre combo at high speed? Really?

The use of the word plastic denotes subjectivity against canopies. Fighter canopies are made of plastic too, even for supersonis speeds, are they all crazy?

[Just_a_fan]

The clue is that the fighter canopy is a canopy and not a screen. A canopy is inherently more robust because it doesn't have a huge hole cut in the top of it. We've been through this already.

[Jolle]

apart for the discussion of a canopy is as good as a halo, it's almost impossible cost wise. Even with production of thousands for fighter jets, they cost around 150.000 dollars a piece and are less durable then a titanium/steel roll cage style halo device (scratching for instance). This would at least double the costs of an IndyCar.

[Pat Pending]

https://www.indycar.com/News/2019/02/02 ... ection-AFP

Looks like the aero screen didn't make it trough the crash testing (the word is that it did stop small debris but wasn't successful at wheels and big car parts/etc etc)

They have gone for a rather different solution - https://www.gpfans.com/en/articles/4250 ... -for-2019/

[Just_a_fan]

apart for the discussion of a canopy is as good as a halo, it's almost impossible cost wise. Even with production of thousands for fighter jets, they cost around 150.000 dollars a piece and are less durable then a titanium/steel roll cage style halo device (scratching for instance). This would at least double the costs of an IndyCar.

Scratching is a good point. A scratched canopy on an Indy car (or F1 car), under lights or during the evening when the sun is low, could make it difficult/impossible to see where you're going. I could see the teams wanting to change them regularly which would be millions of dollars a year just on throw away canopies. Even the spendthrifts in F1 would blanch at that.

[Just_a_fan]

They have gone for a rather different solution - https://www.gpfans.com/en/articles/4250 ... -for-2019/

Yes, they've gone for a third of the halo (the front leg only).

[Jolle]

apart for the discussion of a canopy is as good as a halo, it's almost impossible cost wise. Even with production of thousands for fighter jets, they cost around 150.000 dollars a piece and are less durable then a titanium/steel roll cage style halo device (scratching for instance). This would at least double the costs of an IndyCar.

Scratching is a good point. A scratched canopy on an Indy car (or F1 car), under lights or during the evening when the sun is low, could make it difficult/impossible to see where you're going. I could see the teams wanting to change them regularly which would be millions of dollars a year just on throw away canopies. Even the spendthrifts in F1 would blanch at that.

Plus extra safety measures in the car (air, smoke prevention, cooling), problems with rain (as any biker knows, when it rains you can't look trough your screen, you look over it), dirt (doable with tear offs but still nog ideal) etc etc etc...

cost and weights would skyrocket while safety benefits over the halo aren't proven.

[Big Tea]

apart for the discussion of a canopy is as good as a halo, it's almost impossible cost wise. Even with production of thousands for fighter jets, they cost around 150.000 dollars a piece and are less durable then a titanium/steel roll cage style halo device (scratching for instance). This would at least double the costs of an IndyCar.

Scratching is a good point. A scratched canopy on an Indy car (or F1 car), under lights or during the evening when the sun is low, could make it difficult/impossible to see where you're going. I could see the teams wanting to change them regularly which would be millions of dollars a year just on throw away canopies. Even the spendthrifts in F1 would blanch at that.

They could possibly use the equivalent of 'tare off's' as on visors?
If applied with hot air in 'factory conditions' the film would form to the shape of the canopy and not distort as there would be no airgap.

[Jolle]

apart for the discussion of a canopy is as good as a halo, it's almost impossible cost wise. Even with production of thousands for fighter jets, they cost around 150.000 dollars a piece and are less durable then a titanium/steel roll cage style halo device (scratching for instance). This would at least double the costs of an IndyCar.

Scratching is a good point. A scratched canopy on an Indy car (or F1 car), under lights or during the evening when the sun is low, could make it difficult/impossible to see where you're going. I could see the teams wanting to change them regularly which would be millions of dollars a year just on throw away canopies. Even the spendthrifts in F1 would blanch at that.

They could possibly use the equivalent of 'tare off's' as on visors?
If applied with hot air in 'factory conditions' the film would form to the shape of the canopy and not distort as there would be no airgap.

for dirt and grime a tear off is a good solution, they do this in LMP1 as well but rain is a big problem. Fighter jets don't have this, because they don't need to look out of the canopy that much when they are at altitudes where it rains plus the speeds are that much higher. On a motorbike rain on your visor isn't a problem because of how close the visor is to your eyes but on your windshield it's impossible to drive safe when looking trough it.

[Andres125sx]

The clue is that the fighter canopy is a canopy and not a screen. A canopy is inherently more robust because it doesn't have a huge hole cut in the top of it. We've been through this already.

What´s the reason to not implement a solid arc made of steel or carbon fiber at the top so the screen goes into a closed frame? Imagine current halo without the front leg, and a screen going from the top arc of the halo down to the cockpit

[strad]

I hesitate to get involved in this discussion but you could buff most scratches out.

[Big Tea]

Any one know what the truth is with ALON? The so-called 'Transparent Aluminum'?

There are many different opinions of if it is the real deal or so specialist we can forget it.

[Jolle]

I hesitate to get involved in this discussion but you could buff most scratches out.

That is very difficult with those bullet proof style polycarbonate’s. Also, even a good polish will cause micro scratches which make plastics look like frosted glass with low standing sun. That’s why cars still use glass.

[subcritical71]

Any one know what the truth is with ALON? The so-called 'Transparent Aluminum'?

There are many different opinions of if it is the real deal or so specialist we can forget it.

I think its still reserved for smaller scale projects...

http://www.surmet.com/technology/alon-o ... /index.php