By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
It's an attempt at minimising the risk of bouncing detatched wheels or other debris hitting drivers. But it isn't 100% effective. F1 wanted to maximise safety while still keeping an open cockpit. It's an ugly compromise.
It's an attempt at minimising the risk of bouncing detatched wheels or other debris hitting drivers. But it isn't 100% effective. F1 wanted to maximise safety while still keeping an open cockpit. It's an ugly compromise.
The Jules Bianchi crash has also been a huge factor too
The Jules Bianchi crash has also been a huge factor too
Yes, legal action from Bianchi's family has definitely led to F1 wanting to be seen to do all it can and to be seen to be consulting with drivers at every step.
How much difference the Halo would have made to Bianchi is debatable. It could have made a huge difference for Massa (but, depending on angles of entry etc could have deflected the spring in a way which was more detrimental...).
It's an attempt at minimising the risk of bouncing detatched wheels or other debris hitting drivers. But it isn't 100% effective. F1 wanted to maximise safety while still keeping an open cockpit. It's an ugly compromise.
yes I do, and I still dont quite see how the halo protects against that particular type of incident, and what actually was an incredibly rare happenstance given the number of components/miles the cars cover on track. bouncing wheels are different
but how come Indycar have come up with a far more suitable solution
F1 tried the screen once and just dropped it in favour of this thing, which I guarantee as all 20 cars head into turn 3 tomorrow at racing speed possibly also in the wet...one of the drivers who crashes will say I didnt see so and so make their move because the halo blocked my view.
when you have to move start lights lower down, and even the pitstop traffic lights the teams use to an almost extreme angle in some cases, you are admitting the halo blocks the drivers full vision.
yes I do, and I still dont quite see how the halo protects against that particular type of incident, and what actually was an incredibly rare happenstance given the number of components/miles the cars cover on track. bouncing wheels are different
but how come Indycar have come up with a far more suitable solution
F1 tried the screen once and just dropped it in favour of this thing, which I guarantee as all 20 cars head into turn 3 tomorrow at racing speed possibly also in the wet...one of the drivers who crashes will say I didnt see so and so make their move because the halo blocked my view.
when you have to move start lights lower down, and even the pitstop traffic lights the teams use to an almost extreme angle in some cases, you are admitting the halo blocks the drivers full vision.
I agree. I was just explaining what it is. I see it as something implemented to be seen to be doing something after consultation with drivers, post-Bianchi. It's a lawyers compromise, and the visibility issue is surely a more dangerous problem.
It could have helped Massa, but it might have deflected the spring down into his visor rather than helmet (leading to more traumatic facial injuries and loss of blood) or worse into his neck potentially severing his artery or nerves.
Those two negative outcomes are less likely than it deflecting the spring up and over, but not impossible.
It's bouncing wheels where it could make a big difference.
But to sacrifice not just peripheral vision but also a chunk of central vision is bizarre.
yes I do, and I still dont quite see how the halo protects against that particular type of incident, and what actually was an incredibly rare happenstance given the number of components/miles the cars cover on track. bouncing wheels are different
but how come Indycar have come up with a far more suitable solution
F1 tried the screen once and just dropped it in favour of this thing, which I guarantee as all 20 cars head into turn 3 tomorrow at racing speed possibly also in the wet...one of the drivers who crashes will say I didnt see so and so make their move because the halo blocked my view.
when you have to move start lights lower down, and even the pitstop traffic lights the teams use to an almost extreme angle in some cases, you are admitting the halo blocks the drivers full vision.
It looks crap,and is crap,its hard enough to see out of the cockpit without sticking that fkn stupid thing there!
yes I do, and I still dont quite see how the halo protects against that particular type of incident, and what actually was an incredibly rare happenstance given the number of components/miles the cars cover on track. bouncing wheels are different
but how come Indycar have come up with a far more suitable solution
F1 tried the screen once and just dropped it in favour of this thing, which I guarantee as all 20 cars head into turn 3 tomorrow at racing speed possibly also in the wet...one of the drivers who crashes will say I didnt see so and so make their move because the halo blocked my view.
when you have to move start lights lower down, and even the pitstop traffic lights the teams use to an almost extreme angle in some cases, you are admitting the halo blocks the drivers full vision.
Indy car & F1 are two completely different types of racing
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
