Technical Can we talk about the Halo?

[Dario Resta]

Dario Resta - I can't agree on Wilsons crash. The Halo could have been the thing that diverted the nose cone before it hit his head.

Slyboogy - I also agree that knee jerk reactions aren't the best way to go about it. However there have been tests and some serious thought put into these designs.



Like a helmet? I wonder if people made the same argument when metal helmets were introduced? Or even when full face helmets were introduced? I had a little chuckle at that one. Perez said something similar the other day about how times are changing.

I know that if I were a driver I'd want to be as safe as possible. It will never be 100% safe, but I'd like the sport to be as close to it as possible. If all the drivers were against it I would support them. But some of them are against it.

Leaving it off because it looks silly isn't the right argument. Leaving driver safety up to the drivers also isn't the right way to go about it. Back before safety features were really implemented the organizers suggested that if a driver wanted to be safe he should drive slower. Racers don't do slower on purpose.

Times are changing. Just because we bring the halo in now doesn't mean it will have to be the only solution and never improved upon. Let's get it on there and be a little safer as we look for a better solution.

I had another look at the Justin Wilson incident, and it seems to me the nose section struck the top of his crash helmet? I can't be sure, but if that is the case, then the halo demonstrated on Raikkonen's Ferrari wouldn't have helped. It wouldn't have stopped the spring that hit Barrichello either.

 

[teabagyokel]

"We must do something. This is something, therefore we must do it."

- Always be careful of something that looks like it could fit that statement.

 

[cider_and_toast]

Oh I am going to use that at work.

 

[Andyoak]

If it is a safety feature imposed by the FIA then Lewis won't have any choice in the matter...
I may admire him as a racer; but I wouldn't want him arguing my side in any dispute.

 

[Titch]

Is he arguing about it then ? If he is he can't be the only one .

 

[Lewywo4]

Titch......Nico Hulkenberg is another driver who dislikes this Halo concept. Lewis said in regards to the use of a Halo on his car, " I really, really hope not, and if it does come in, then I hope that we will be given the option of not using it, because I will not be using it on my car." The position Rosberg takes is one that I totally agree with him, and rather than that of Hamilton. Nico feels the device is as he said was , " quite cool to look at, and is a massive step in safety." Sebastian Vettel has an interesting take on the subject, declaring it can be as ugly possible, an felt that " Henry Surtees and Justin Wilson could still be around," if we had that type of system.

 

[Andyoak]

It looks awful and will have little benefit to safety from what I can see.
I don't want to see it on the cars; but Lewis's statement is just childish; unless his retirement will stop it... In which case it shouldn't be implemented in any case.
Why can't people accept that accidents happen?

 

[Lewywo4]

It would have been childish on Lewis's part, if he would have just flatly said, I will not be using it in my car, but that simply wasn't the case.

Maybe you don't want to see it on those cars, but the same can't be said for drivers like Vettel and Rosberg.

 

[Kewee]

Lewis has every right as a driver to have an opinion and voice that opinion, a far greater right than we have as spectators considering it has an impact on him as a driver. I'm sure he's well aware of the impact on his own safety. Expressing his opinion isn't childish in any way.

 

[canis]

Personally I don't like the look of the Halo, but for me it comes down to one question :-

Can it improve the safety of the drivers in one way without impacting it in another?

I am not sure the current design can answer yes to that question (the design does appear to limit the drivers line of sight for objects directly in front of them).

From my point of view, if I invented a system for road cars that guaranteed every driver would be protected from a head on collision and impact from above and it would remove all major injuries from that type of accident then I would be hailed as a hero, but if it involved sticking a large steel bar in front of every drivers line of sight then I would be laughed out the room because it has the potential to increase the number of accidents I was trying to protect against.

I would also be very interested in the way it behaves in the wet. From my experience of open top cars with an object in front of the driver (all be it a clear object such as a windscreen) wet weather is made worse than not having anything there at all (the obstructing object can direct water run off direct towards the drivers face).

Not sure this option has been completely thought through

 

[Greenlantern101]

How a system that puts a bar directly in the drivers line of sight has got this far into the process really does beggar belief. Do you have to have your common sense removed to work in F1?

 

[The Pits]

Well, I spend every waking moment, including cycling, driving and working with a metal and plastic frame stuck to my face, and it hampers me more when I don't have it.

Having never driven an F1 car, nor worked within the design of them, I do not feel in a position to comment, however, what I can say, is that the brain has great capacity for working around things that you do not focus on. I agree that testing the design at circuits with more gradients, like Spa would be a must.

Personally, I don't like the look of them, but them, I don't like the look of the front wings, and they seem to work ok. The upshot is, as canis has said, whether it can prevent injury without adding to the risk in other ways. and although we may feel there to be a restriction to the vision, 2 F1 drivers have driven with it, and not said the same thing, at least in public. My main concern here is whether the powers that be are more able to implement a rule for safety than they are for engines etc, which I have no experience of, although safety is one thing that the teams can be forced to agree on, and where the FIA has power of veto. Lets not forget, most of the other areas of the rules, the powers that be are largely the teams themselves, and disagreements usually arise to prevent one team losing/gaining an additional advantage.

 

[sobriety]

Can it improve the safety of the drivers in one way without impacting it in another?

One thing that struck me with this design is what happens when an object richocets off of the bottom of the top bar an into the drivers chest, which is unprotected compared to their head. Law of unintended consequences anyone?

 

[olegg]

Question memory of those killed in motor racing is certainly not an occasion for humor.
But... what would be do if after the introduction of a "halo", something else will happen and including the fault of the "Halo"?
Then will be needing, perhaps, armored glass self fires back capsule coupled with ejection seat?
And it would be 100% guarantee for eliminate accidents in the formula race?
Admittedly this will already be quite different formula.

 

[Shogun]

One of my coworkers and I were talking about the halo the other day and he has an interesting take on it. He said why not let the drivers decide. If a driver doesnt like the halo and doesnt want to use it, let it be their choice. His take was that racing is dangerous and F1 is one of the more dangerous forms of racing, so if a driver is willing to assume the risk, let them decide. I believe that Nico said something similar the other day, when he said that the FIA should consult drivers when making decisions like this.

 

[Andyoak]

To elaborate on my "childish" comment: a childish comment is simplistic and unconsidered. My problem with Lewis (and Nico and Seb) is that their comments, as reported, are too simplistic. I want to know their honest, considered and justified opinions. If Lewis doesn't want to race with a halo; why not? Likewise, Seb and Nico don't elaborate on why they think it is an improvement.

In this vein I should clarify why I have issues with the halo:
1 It misses the whole basis of health and safety; eliminate the hazard and then control the remaining risks. Bianchi died because there was a bloody big hazard that didn't need to be there.
2. Does the proposed solution control one risk but increase others? In my opinion it does by restricting vision and means of rescue. I believe there are better solutions available.
3. I'm concerned that unless it is a standard bolt on unit manufactured independent from all competing teams it will become another piece of aero; and safety will be compromised to race performance: negating the point of it.

 

[gethinceri]

I agree with you Andyoak. 100%

 

[Greenlantern101]

What he said Andyoak

 

[Bill Boddy]

Surely with binocular vision if there is something in the centre of your vision but close enough to be well out of focus it will disappear. Otherwise Jimmy Durante must have had a terrible life.

 

[Bleu]

I think Wilson was hit on the top left, near where the Honda logo is in this (old) pic.