Has ever f1 ever had closer cockpits? I'm inclined to say try it, and let's see how the public reacts. Nothing wrong in giving it a shot. They gave v6s a shot, and we all hate them, so hopefully we'll go back to v10s.
designs and tech have improved so much in the past 50 years, that maybe it won't flop this time? idk I'm always for trying something but making sure to listen to feedback and change it back if people are dissatisfied.
I think it's (unfortunately) inevitable that F1 cars will get closed cockpits. The reasons will be "improved safety" and "improved fuel mileage". But I also think someday racing will no longer be an acceptable sport for the same and other reasons. 1) Dangerous 2) Pointless 3) wastes energy 4) promotes "bad" behavior 5) pollutes too much 6) not really a sport but instead just an advertisement method for car companies, oil companies, tobacco, banks, and liquor 7) a dinosaur from the 20th century that has no relationship in a world filled with Google and Apple driverless cars
Do you think NFL football will also be done in that case? All those points apply there more or less. What about boxing? When is that day? ; )
I would not be surprised if Beer and Liquor advertisements (as well as Junk food) are banned from NFL sponsorship and advertising in the future. They did it with tobacco. There is already a movement on the concussion issue that could radically change the NFL if taken literally. But car racing is different because not everyone plays football yet almost everyone drives. The message of driving fast, challenging death, and wasting fuel is an easy one to say it's no longer needed. Besides, in 20 years I bet 20% of the people will not drive their cars anymore with "safe" computer controlled cars -- and the rest will be automatically governed to prevent speeding or logs sent in to authorities to issue tickets automatically. Driving will be seen as reckless and dangerous for the public. Therefore, racing is pointless.
I think you are right. Motor racing will be seen in retrospect as something anti-social and pointless. I doubt if future generations will see interest in any sort of competition.
: O I hope I'm dead in your future! ; ) It's possible sure, but insane. It's people's right, at least in the US of A, to kill themselves with crappy food and liquor. They got tobacco with the marketing to kids, not the "it's bad for you argument". For example, more than half the sates in the US still have no motorcycle helmet law for adults. I agree. It will be interesting to see if the NFL continues to grow revenue and if we see less football players as a percentage of available sports at younger ages. I have to think parents will be less inclined to allow their children to play a sport like football with what we now are beginning to understand about brain injuries. I think the reality is that the demographic might simply change. For example, you very rarely see championship boxers come from wealth. Almost all of them come up from nothing, where getting punched in the face with gloves on is a luxury compared to getting punched in the face without them...or shot dead. Same deal for smashing heads with helmets on IMHO. But most people are more likely to know someone who has been killed or severely injured playing football than auto racing. Almost everyone knows someone that played football. Most people do not know anyone who races cars seriously. Basically all contact sports are pointless and unnecessary, but I think that is specifically what attracts fans - the element of something other than the life they live...a connection to athletes doing something amazing. I think a good portion of this is true, but I don't think you can take the competitive spirit out of human beings - it's coded into our DNA. Perhaps people will lose the taste for it, but it is safer each year, so I'm not sure that will happen. Some portion of this also requires pissing on the constitution in the US, but we are already well on are way with our naked body scans to fly, cameras everywhere, etc. People don't even mind. How many people love their progressive OBD2 spying device in their car to save some money...or not? Ugh.
I understand...but respectfully, we are talking about F1 here. Besides Massa's incident, I can't think of anything else pointing that we need to go for closed cockpits
Article from NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/28/opinion/close-formula-one-cockpits-save-lives.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=opinion-c-col-right-region®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region
In risk management there are two types of events that one has to attempt to mitigate. High probability events that have low outcomes, and low probability events that have huge outcomes. In F1, although the probability of someone getting speared through the face with a carbon fiber wing piece is small, the impact to the sport would be huge. The videos and photos from the crowd could not be contained. Pictures of the wealthy, young, handsome, dead F1 driver with a wing fragment sticking out from his faceplate on television and on the internet would kill the sport. Photos of his beautiful model-wife, sobbing trackside, would only highlight the barbarity and pointlessness of racing. As under-fire F1 is already (from ecological and economical forces), F1 heads must be incredibly sensitive to situations or misfortunes that would direct the alarmist populations against the sport. I'm sure that they are looking at every way (including adding goofy electric motors and cockpit covers) to reduce the risk of that happening during their tenure.
Isnt F1 like all "live" events on a 20 seconds delay so you would never see the gruesome reality? Aside from the fact that this is an insanely unlikely event. If anything we are more likely to see a F1 driver being decapitated. That is actually a real risk, which has almost happened in the past ten years and nobody talks about it
It's very hard to agree with something that has no substance. There simply are no details provided on what or how the enclosure would work or look. There seems to be little consideration given to the potential threats created by entombing a driver in the car. All-in-all those supporting this idea are very light on specifics, with the only anecdotal supporting evidence.
Several solutions have been proposed over the years, from a canopy to roll-bars in front of the driver. The idea that closed cockipts would mean the driver"entombed" in the car is ridiculous. Just look at LMP; are the drivers "entombed"? In fact, adopting a LMP configuration around a single seater would be a solution. Drivers are increasingly less visible anyway, compared to 20 or 40 years ago, that closed cockpit wouldn't make much difference to the spectators.
Exactly right - so which are we considering I beg to differ, eg an unconscious driver in a burning car. If you're proposing a LMP1 type enclosure then it does not have the ability to resist all potential impacts so it wont do the job. Additionally it now represents something additional that the driver can impact as well as something that can break and impact the driver. Seems to me from a lot of the posts here that it most certainly does make a difference to them.
Obviously the issue is still being discussed, so a firm decision hasn't been taken yet. Objecting about LMP car type of cockpit pointless. They are a lot stronger and protect the driver better than an open cockpit would do. The driver is fully protected by a DOUBLE roll cage around him. The risk of fire has been taken into consideration; it's not greater in a closed cockpit car than in an open cockpit one. If closed cockpit have been judged to improve safety in endurance, they would surely do the same in any open-cockpit series. What the authorities have to fight against are so-called traditions, and the "never-been-done-before" attitude of the critics. Anything that improve safety has to be welcomed instead.
Please steer clear of P&R comments, they need to be reserved for another part of the forum and are prohibited in the F1 section. All the best, Andrew.
