I still wonder if he had the Halo device if Alonso could have gotten out or if it would have broken apart and pushed itself right into his visor.
What I found sorta incredible was how well the wheel tethers worked. I believe I heard one of the announcers mention that they now have 2 tethers on each wheel to keep them from becoming deadly projectiles during wrecks (like this). I could be way off but isn't this one of the main threats that 'halo' is meant to stop? How about a 'huzzah' for tethers!
For it to push against his visor, it would of broken the force of whatever hit it. For an object to do this, the force would otherwise be directed directly against the helmet with unbroken force. Physics.
Something not mentioned about the halo...could he have still crawled out of the car with it there? Looks like a tight fit, now imagine if that car had caught fire. Egress from a burning car would be as important to me as the random stopping of projectiles. Both are unlikely, for some reason I'd worry more about being trapped.
The thought of that crash send shiver down my spine I was so relieved when he was walking away from that mangled wreck. Check out pic 6 u can see the whites in his eyes amazing shots. The same big impact crash Robert Qubika in the Williams had in Canada 2007 all caught on film from memory he walked away with few bruises. Image Unavailable, Please Login
This article from Motorsport talks about much of the safety requirements of F1 cars. The halo we're likely to see next year would have an opening above the driver, so the odds of it getting in the way of an emergency exit would probably be small. Compared to the cars we all drive every day, or other race series, I don't see the halo as a negative. There's always going to be unusual circumstances, and there is nothing that is 100% safe. Tech analysis: The key safety advances that saved Alonso's life
Lets be fair here...Robert's impact was at much higher speeds than Alonso's. Alonso had a sideways impact at below 280kph, and started decreasing a lot in speed after that. Looks like the most significant reduction in speed came during his final roll in the gravel, where it grabs hold of him again before tilting over and rolling to rest upside down in the wall. IMO the rolling and tumbling made it look a lot more dramatic than it was in the end. Kubica on the other hand, hit a concrete wall head on at above 280. Initial impact was 78g, and then he tumbled for a while. 20 years ago, Alonso would have survived this same crash, too (look at Brundle...although slightly less speed considering it was the opening lap...he survived and actually took part in the race in the T car!). 20 years ago for Kubica's crash (now, so also in the mid 90s)...I have sincere doubts he would have been alive. As I was watching the Canadian GP I could not figure out how he survived, I was convinced he died.
Let's be fair - both of them had HUGE crashes at massive speed. They are both lucky to be alive. Well done F1 for bringing this level of survivability that we can only dream about in normal road cars.
+2 The survival cell is a wonderful thing. I dunno... We're not doing those kinds of speeds, but nevertheless the principles remain the same - Put the (belted in) occupants in a strong 'box' & sacrifice whatever's needed outside of that. We've come a long way. Outside of gross stupidity (see Dubai recently), which nobody can protect against, the vast majority of incidents that would have killed not many years back are now not just survivable, but the occupants walk away. Cheers, Ian
Interesting article; 46g impact and a broken CF seat.... FIA Investigate Alonso?s Broken Seat After Crash | GRAND PRIX 247 A few thoughts (beyond that yes, racing cars continue to be safer and safer) Kubica's accident was a straight-on hit to the wall; 75g peak deceleration....and he spun and rolled afterward. The tub itself broke, but it spared him other than a few bones (which were likely due to the pedals) Alonso'***** may have been "only" 46g, but anyone who has been over in an open wheel car will tell you it's bad; in his case, his forward velocity converted into some serious rotational velocity once the gravel caught it. Fortunate his arms stayed inside the tub...
The images again demonstrate why gravel traps should be banned and removed. Alonso's crash would have had much better energy dissipation if the wheel-less chassis had just been sliding across a high friction asphalt runoff area. All the gravel did was launch the tub into the air with rotational spin added.
Caught this just now as well (wasn't online yet when I was trying to find G figures for Alonso's crash). A broken seat is quite serious, considering they are specifically build to protect the back in case of a serious accident that the driver has to be extracted...seat will lift out with driver in it so as to minimize movement.
Apparently, he has injuries that won't permit him to race in Bahrain. All the best, Andrew. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Perhaps, but the letter says they're focusing on the chest. I would guess chest contusion from the seatbelt. All the best, Andrew.
I think with the Halo, it might have smashed into his helmet. It's even more dangerous in this kinda crash, IMO.
Andrew Benson takes on the Halo question, sounds like the jury is still out, but more testing is on the way to see how the Halo would help/hinder: Fernando Alonso's F1 crash: Would the halo have trapped him? - BBC Sport
Guys, the Halo will not ''smash into a helmet''. If they are to hit anything that'll force the halo into the helmet, the crash they're having is so violent and they'll hit something like Bianchi did. The big worry is quite simple, trapping whilst in the car, upside down and when on fire.
