The open debate on closed cockpits

[Nox]

"open wheeler should stay open wheeler"
Yes, I agree. I am saying open cockpit shouldn't stay open cockpit (and why should it stay open cockpit? Just because it's always been that way? That's just nostalgia, which should have no impact on what safety measures are taken.) How many incidents do we need with head injuries before action gets taken? Would you say the same thing had Massa died? Or what if Grosjean had hit Alonso's head in Spa 2012? We shouldn't be looking back - the point isn't how many people have been injured - it's about proactively reducing the risk of injury in future events.

People die in closed cockpit racing too, but I am not saying a closed cockpit makes everything safe (there's still deceleration injuries, etc). It's rare that someone dies in closed cockpit from something hitting their head, or their head hitting something, but I can think of examples where a closed cockpit may have saved a driver (

). It reduces the risk of these specific head injuries. I am not saying that closed cockpits will fix everything (motor sport is dangerous), and I know the pros and cons, but in my personal opinion it would improve safety regarding head injuries. Those are my thoughts, we can disagree, that's fine. Thanks for the chat.

 

[alless1184]

Actually its more rare that somebody dies in open wheelers becase of flying parts around.
None of the fatal accidents in f1 were caused by flying objects.
Most of F1 deaths were caused by forces on impacts.
Hans system was one of the safety meassures in F1 and other racing series that prevent the injurys happening 20+ year ago.
That is something we need to take into account. The canopy idea was idea becase of 2 things actually. One the death of the driver in F2 i think when the driver was hit by wheel and second by the accident from Massa. Thought the tires in F1 are by now allready really strong connected to the body and that similar accident will happen again like to Massa is far smaller than that driver will be injured by forces from impact.
Each accident has its own factors.

In video you posted-So if those GT cars would be open, they would be without doors wich would mean that no door would actually fly around on crash. You need to take into account all what happens in crash and just becase somebody has head injury its not necessary it was done by direct hit into his head.

 

[morsify]

One feasible idea might be to look at a roll bar, but I would not want to see a fully enclosed cockpit, it would be the end of the open cockpit era of racing.

Personally I would prefer to leave the cars as they are and improve the marshalling and track clearance - sorry to say it, but those marshals should surely have known that when Sutil crashed, it was highly likely to happen again at any moment in those conditions, same bend, same loss of grip. So that tractor should not have been there.

Suzuka is old enough by now to have been perfected - it should have sufficient cranes & wall openings after all its years of racing, to be able to remove a car more quickly & safely. If there are still places where this can not be achieved, then they should know this and bring out the safety car immediately.

But in the end, it doesn't matter what you do - there will still be a particular crash that can injure or kill, because that is the nature of the sport.

 

[Christian Casey]

Regardless of the main danger to the driver which is of course impact, closed cockpits are the next logical step in safety, it's obvious.

 

[bigboy1112]

So f1 just gets a sport for pussies?

 

[RichardHessels]

canopys wouldnt of saved senna that was because of the force of speed into barrier

No you're wrong...
The part of the front suspension that came off when he hit the barrier and went trough Senna's helmet was the cause of the fatal accident.
Giving him a major head trauma, also for the incident of Massa.
Where a part of suspension got fired to his helmet.

A half open cockpit where anything projected at high speed in the direction of the drivers head would make the projectile change direction could save lives & major injuries.

You would still have the open character of a formula car, only more save for the driver.
Would also be a substantial aerodynamic gain with it.

 

[RichardHessels]

Now for something lighter.. would not be suited for my previous post.
See what happens when a brick hit a poly-carbonate window.

 

[alless1184]

@Richard Hessels sharp object like suspension would still come trough the canopy. It would not save Senna in this case eather. And F1 cars were far different build back than. Heads were far more exposed to what we have now.
Canopy can save you from bigger objects like tires or maybe spring like in Massa races but not from sharp objects and in a case of Bianchi crash, the canopy would simply be cut away just like the airbox wich is far stronger for crashes than canopy would ever be.
The tests for the canopy and the rollbar was done exactly for bigger objects like tires only sofar and idea was only for that cause.

 

[ouvert]

@Richard Hessels sharp object like suspension would still come trough the canopy. It would not save Senna in this case eather. And F1 cars were far different build back than. Heads were far more exposed to what we have now.
Canopy can save you from bigger objects like tires or maybe spring like in Massa races but not from sharp objects and in a case of Bianchi crash, the canopy would simply be cut away just like the airbox wich is far stronger for crashes than canopy would ever be.
The tests for the canopy and the rollbar was done exactly for bigger objects like tires only sofar and idea was only for that cause.

not necessarily, depends on ange of impact .. it seems that canopy in F1 case would be build with pretty low ange so it highers your chances significantly ...

and I woulds say, let drivers decide ... to see if they are concern about current state or they take it as a risk comming with that job ...

 

[kelaroost]

Safety in a sport that should be dangerous seems backward thinking to me because its removes the respect given to the driver who wins because his risking nothing.
Drivers know the risks and choose to be there so removing them risks also removes any respect and admiration given by the fans because there risking nothing.
May aswell start using drones to race and keep the driver safe inside a concrete bunker so no harm can come to him....

 

[Dan Allen]

Safety in a sport that should be dangerous seems backward thinking to me because its removes the respect given to the driver who wins because his risking nothing.
Drivers know the risks and choose to be there so removing them risks also removes any respect and admiration given by the fans because there risking nothing.
May aswell start using drones to race and keep the driver safe inside a concrete bunker so no harm can come to him....

If I could rate that funny, I would. So I'll just say it... Funny. 'Tis true though

 

[1Karl1]

Cars in front of them spewing oil or whatever other fluids would prove more dangerous blacking out a drivers view . Maybe some kind of roll-cage integration .

 

[Dmitry Zaharov]

I like this concept

 

[Aidan Keranen]

In the light of recent events, it makes sense that closed cockpit is something to look at.

But I feel that more time should be devoted to prevention, if different techniques were used in Japan (whether it was right/wrong), Jules would not have gone off and this debate wouldn't be here.
A closed cockpit will stop projectiles yes, so long as the screen holds. But if the collision is more about stopping forces and whiplash sort of thing, it makes little difference being in a cockpit or not.
So while it is a tragedy, we should make sure that it doesn't happen again, and I think that having a clear form of yellow flag protocol would be better in the long run

 

[Philip Heck]

I like this concept

Oh, that looks cool!

 

[Dan Allen]

I like this concept

It looks cool, but I bet it creates a drag behind the drivers head... Imagine the driver wasn't in there, it's just a big ol' cavity which sucks up air and doesn't move it elsewhere. Even though there will always be a driver, air can still flow around the back of the helmet.

 

[Philip Heck]

It looks cool, but I bet it creates a drag behind the drivers head... Imagine the driver wasn't in there, it's just a big ol' cavity which sucks up air and doesn't move it elsewhere. Even though there will always be a driver, air can still flow around the back of the helmet.

Nah, there should be a "swirl" of air that acts like a canopy for the air after it. Atleast that's how it works with convertibles and pick-up trucks

 

[kelaroost]

Oh, that looks cool!

the driver would be sucked out of his seat and thrown forward then thrown backwards then forwards then backwards.
Bad design like suicide doors on a London taxi.

who ever made that drawing needs a spanking.

 

[Dmitry Zaharov]

It looks cool, but I bet it creates a drag behind the drivers head... Imagine the driver wasn't in there, it's just a big ol' cavity which sucks up air and doesn't move it elsewhere. Even though there will always be a driver, air can still flow around the back of the helmet.

I don't think this is a major problem, they could create vents on the backside or something like that. Still one of the most elegant solutions i've seen so far.

the driver would be sucked out of his seat and thrown forward then thrown backwards then forwards then backwards.

Nope, driver is always strapped hard to his seat by racing safety belts.

 

[ouvert]

I don't think this is a major problem, they could create vents on the backside or something like that. Still one of the most elegant solutions i've seen so far.

wouldn`t it be easier to designe it that air flow from front shield will go over backshield ? not a big deal for car designers on F1 level ...