FIA tests fighter-jet canopy for Formula 1

Hello Mr I have learnt a new word so I will wear it out.

Nobody is forcing you to watch F1, so do yourself a favour and don't watch it.. it's that simple .... saves your head exploding as well, a win win

 

****POSSIBLE HUNGARY GP SPOILER BELOW********






















**********************************************************




Think Heidfeld wished he was in an enclosed cockpit???

 

Excellent point!

 

Andreas, please don't feed the troll.

 

When were Cosworth engines forced on all teams???

 

Please see previous post.......

 

What if a car rolls and the canopy won't open, but the car is also on fire (a la Heidfelt). When flipping a car over they always have to be very careful in case a vertebrae slips and paralyses the driver. Or worse, if they can't get to the car because of the fire and stuff, driver suffocates (even quicker because of the stupid canopy).

I'm still against the canopy and probably always will. It may be saver in some ways, but it's only VERY rare instances that anything like a Massa or Surtees accident would have happened.

A boxer knows that every blow to the head could go *VERY* wrong. A racing driver KNOWS the sport is dangerous and can potentially kill you. Why do we do it? It's fun. Your mind LOVES danger.

 

The canopy probably would prevent a Massa or Surtees like accident, but the risk of trapping the driver is real:

In an accident, the hold down mechanism for the canopy could get deformed and therefore not release the canopy when needed. The comparison with a fighter jet is false: A fighter jet normally doesn't endure the kind of mechanical deformations a F1 car undergoes when things go wrong, therefore a fighter pilot can normally eject. Not the case for F1 cars.

And before somebody brings up a comparison with trapped drivers in endurance racing cars: I'd think that the canopy of a F1 would have to be a lot stronger than the windshield in a Le Mans car, which a driver could probably kick out with his feet if necessary. If it wasn't stronger, it wouldn't hold up against a flying tire. And: A F1 driver would only have his bare fists to break it, which seems unlikely.

I'm 100% against the canopy from a purist/idealistic point as it has no business in F1. But even from a more practical/technical perspective I think this creates as much risk as it is trying to mitigate.

 

That's a solid argument.

 

I'm not saying F1 cars should get a canopy cause they don't, but this looks really good:
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/bilder/f1-concept-fx-i1-ist-das-die-zukunft-der-formel-1-4100111.html

Natan Tazelaar

 

It looks good. But it isn't F1 anymore.

 

Wow, that does look good!

I don't know... an enclosed cockpit would help clean up the aerodynamics. I can't say I'd be too aghast if future F1 cars looked like that.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

If you don´t like the windshield in a F1 car for aesthetical or historical reasons, it´s OK. Personally I´m not sure if I like it or not. But we can´t try to justify our opinion with weird safety concerns.

A sports-car driver can´t kick the windshield out either and lately nobody has died trapped in the car. I don´t know how thick those windscreens are, but the problem is not the strenght of the windshield, but the lack of space. The driver just can´t rise the legs to kick the windscreen with ease. But I don´t know why he would want to do that, as there are doors in both sides of the car.

Of course, in a weird accident someone could get trapped inside the car, but many people said the same thing about seat belts years ago and nobody wants to drive without them today. And what if someone gets trapped inside car? How many wild fires have you seen in Formula 1 lately? Yes, the medical assitance would get to the driver a bit later, but it´s a small price to pay for avoiding the risks of open cockpits.

 

What's next??

Remote controlled race cars.

That would be really safe.

 

OK, let´s suppose that motor racing has to be dangerous to be a real sport.

But how much dangerous?

1950 levels? Remove seat belts and helmets?

1960 levels? Remove armco barriers from all circuits? Plant trees in gravel traps?

1980 levels? Remove composite chassis?

Even with a canopy, driving a Formula 1 is going to be a dangerous activity. Less than in 1950, but more than in 2050.

 

Or just give all the drivers an X-Box. That would cut down their budgets too

Natan Tazelaar

 

It's not that the added risk of open cockpits is why I prefer them but because you no longer will see the driver once they close the cockpit like this.

 

Well... to be fair, you don't see much of the driver now - just the colour of his helmet as he streaks past at 190mph.

Perhaps if they enclosed the cockpit, they'd be able to put cameras inside to look at the driver's eyes. That might be nice to see on the action replays.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Not really true: For the most part the grandstands are near turns and chicanes and you have a good clear view of the drivers' helmet. Just as you see it on TV. Once you put a canopy over that you won't be able to tell the difference anymore and you don't see what the driver is doing (like e.g. turn his head to look into the mirrors etc).

 

With a single piece transparent canopy, you would be able to see the driver almost as clearly as now.

 

Exactly, I don't get the argument that people won't be able to see the drivers. Think of the Pope Mobile.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Your picture makes my point:

Look at the Pope: He is in the shade and "foggy" through the thick glass. Without the glass you'd see him as clearly as the security guy in the front.

And lets not even talk about the driver of the Popemobile: Can you even spot him?

As soon as they put up the canopies there will be less light illuminating the driver and there will be sunlight reflections further disturbing the view of the driver. And all that for what?

How many F1 drivers of the recent history (as in the last 20 years) have been hit/wounded on the head?

PS: I saw the Pope in Rome in an open vehicle. It was a lot more intense as a connection and rewarding for us in the audience. That was one month before the attack.