planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Dec 11, 2018 12:42 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2018 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3235
I didn't see a thread on the topic, and the original Halo thread is long since buried, so I thought it was worth bringing up the matter that the halo has been credited with saving the life - or at least preventing major injury - of the F2 driver Tadasuke Makino in an incident similar to the start of Spa in 2012.

https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2018/05/ ... barcelona/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2018 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:20 am
Posts: 119
Location: London, UK
Those pictures are seriously scary and had me searching youtube for 2012 Spa.

Personally, I didn't find them too bad looking when the cars were revealed this year, certainly better than I had expected. But however one feels on the aesthetics, incidents and pictures like this show the FIA were right to get it on the cars now.

Have fun :)

_________________
The bond that links your true family is not one of blood, but of respect and joy in each other's life. Rarely do members of one family grow up under the same roof.”
Richard Bach, Illusions: The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2018 7:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4798
Some silly comments on the the JA story and I'm sure some, sadly, will follow here.

Those self-same people would be the ones sending "thoughts and prayers" to the drivers family had something horrific happened in the absence of a Halo device.

From what I can tell from the pictures in the linked article it's not definitive how much the Halo helped, but I'm willing to take the word of man who was affected that it made the difference.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2018 11:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14263
Can't say it's changed my mind. I never denied it would make racing safer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2018 11:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1325
Image
https://cdn-3.motorsport.com/images/amp/2yZrDXvY/s6/fia-f2-barcelona-2018-tadasuke-makino-russian-time-and-nirei-fukuzumi-bwt-arden-crash-8377025.jpg

Image
https://www.grandprix247.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/00724594-750x500.jpg

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2018 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 1467
Location: Far side of Koozebane
So the question I ask is this.

Hypothetically, lets say Makino's car survived the impact with nothing more than a damaged Halo & a few scratches to the body work and was able to carry on racing as normal.

Would Makino have been shown the black & orange flag, been forced to come into the pits and retire a perfectly drivable car due to the damaged Halo?

I'd hope the answer would be that anytime there's an impact involving the halo being struck the car would at the minimum be pitted and probably retired.

_________________
Question: If a compulsive liar tells you they're a compulsive liar, are they really a compulsive liar?

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2018 2:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:04 am
Posts: 1860
Jezza13 wrote:
So the question I ask is this.

Hypothetically, lets say Makino's car survived the impact with nothing more than a damaged Halo & a few scratches to the body work and was able to carry on racing as normal.

Would Makino have been shown the black & orange flag, been forced to come into the pits and retire a perfectly drivable car due to the damaged Halo?

I'd hope the answer would be that anytime there's an impact involving the halo being struck the car would at the minimum be pitted and probably retired.


That will be last thing on anyone's mind. But yes, if you have contact on your halo and have visible damage at the joint where it interfaces with the chassis or if the halo frame is bent, immediately bring the car to pits. I dont think anyone would complain after just having their life saved by that piece of hardware.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 20, 2018 5:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3235
funkymonkey wrote:
Jezza13 wrote:
So the question I ask is this.

Hypothetically, lets say Makino's car survived the impact with nothing more than a damaged Halo & a few scratches to the body work and was able to carry on racing as normal.

Would Makino have been shown the black & orange flag, been forced to come into the pits and retire a perfectly drivable car due to the damaged Halo?

I'd hope the answer would be that anytime there's an impact involving the halo being struck the car would at the minimum be pitted and probably retired.


That will be last thing on anyone's mind. But yes, if you have contact on your halo and have visible damage at the joint where it interfaces with the chassis or if the halo frame is bent, immediately bring the car to pits. I dont think anyone would complain after just having their life saved by that piece of hardware.

Given the strength of the halo, if it were damaged then it is almost certain that far more of the car would be broken than the halo making this hypothetical as probable as the Alonso dinosaur related incidents.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 3:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:04 am
Posts: 1860
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
Jezza13 wrote:
So the question I ask is this.

Hypothetically, lets say Makino's car survived the impact with nothing more than a damaged Halo & a few scratches to the body work and was able to carry on racing as normal.

Would Makino have been shown the black & orange flag, been forced to come into the pits and retire a perfectly drivable car due to the damaged Halo?

I'd hope the answer would be that anytime there's an impact involving the halo being struck the car would at the minimum be pitted and probably retired.


That will be last thing on anyone's mind. But yes, if you have contact on your halo and have visible damage at the joint where it interfaces with the chassis or if the halo frame is bent, immediately bring the car to pits. I dont think anyone would complain after just having their life saved by that piece of hardware.

Given the strength of the halo, if it were damaged then it is almost certain that far more of the car would be broken than the halo making this hypothetical as probable as the Alonso dinosaur related incidents.


Yeah, it was always going to be hypothetical question. Given the strength of the impact that will be needed to damage halo, the rest of the car would be in pretty bad shape.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 1467
Location: Far side of Koozebane
funkymonkey wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
Jezza13 wrote:
So the question I ask is this.

Hypothetically, lets say Makino's car survived the impact with nothing more than a damaged Halo & a few scratches to the body work and was able to carry on racing as normal.

Would Makino have been shown the black & orange flag, been forced to come into the pits and retire a perfectly drivable car due to the damaged Halo?

I'd hope the answer would be that anytime there's an impact involving the halo being struck the car would at the minimum be pitted and probably retired.


That will be last thing on anyone's mind. But yes, if you have contact on your halo and have visible damage at the joint where it interfaces with the chassis or if the halo frame is bent, immediately bring the car to pits. I dont think anyone would complain after just having their life saved by that piece of hardware.

Given the strength of the halo, if it were damaged then it is almost certain that far more of the car would be broken than the halo making this hypothetical as probable as the Alonso dinosaur related incidents.


Yeah, it was always going to be hypothetical question. Given the strength of the impact that will be needed to damage halo, the rest of the car would be in pretty bad shape.


Well what's the strength of the impact needed to damage the Halo sufficiently to warrant retiring the car?

Are these specified somewhere and if so how are they measured? Are there impact sensors on the Halo or is it purely via visual inspection? What if there's an impact that doesn't deform the Halo but may have been of sufficient strength to possibly cause a minor fracture in the structure?

In my hypothetical world we'd know the spring flew out of the back of the car but luckily it ricocheted off the Halo away from the driver. Now, hypothetically, the Halo looks ok visually and the driver is saying everything's fine so is this car allowed to carry on or does it need to be retired from the race?

You can mock my question & say it's as hypothetical as Alonso's dinosaur but I bet you'd have said the same about Massa's accident in Hungary, or Surtees's accident at Brands or Wilsons accident, or dozens of other accidents before they actually happened but dealing with hypothetical scenarios is how we remove or mitigate the risk of injury when a scenario moves from the hypothetical to the factual.

There are different levels of impact and different levels of damage. It's simplistic to think its a case of either the Halo being perfectly fine or trashed and I think it's also simplistic to think that a driver would happily retire his car if the Halo had been struck by something. Think Derek Warwick, Monza 1990 or Martin Brundle, Australia 1996. Two monumental accidents that could so easily have ended tragically but what was the first thing they did when they go out of the car? They ran back to the pits to get in the spare car and do it all again.

No I don't think anyone would complain about the Halo saving their life but i'd expect the driver to not be too happy about having to retire a perfectly normal working car because the Halo may have been damaged in an incident.

_________________
Question: If a compulsive liar tells you they're a compulsive liar, are they really a compulsive liar?

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 9:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3235
Jezza13 wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
Jezza13 wrote:
So the question I ask is this.

Hypothetically, lets say Makino's car survived the impact with nothing more than a damaged Halo & a few scratches to the body work and was able to carry on racing as normal.

Would Makino have been shown the black & orange flag, been forced to come into the pits and retire a perfectly drivable car due to the damaged Halo?

I'd hope the answer would be that anytime there's an impact involving the halo being struck the car would at the minimum be pitted and probably retired.


That will be last thing on anyone's mind. But yes, if you have contact on your halo and have visible damage at the joint where it interfaces with the chassis or if the halo frame is bent, immediately bring the car to pits. I dont think anyone would complain after just having their life saved by that piece of hardware.

Given the strength of the halo, if it were damaged then it is almost certain that far more of the car would be broken than the halo making this hypothetical as probable as the Alonso dinosaur related incidents.


Yeah, it was always going to be hypothetical question. Given the strength of the impact that will be needed to damage halo, the rest of the car would be in pretty bad shape.


Well what's the strength of the impact needed to damage the Halo sufficiently to warrant retiring the car?

Are these specified somewhere and if so how are they measured? Are there impact sensors on the Halo or is it purely via visual inspection? What if there's an impact that doesn't deform the Halo but may have been of sufficient strength to possibly cause a minor fracture in the structure?

In my hypothetical world we'd know the spring flew out of the back of the car but luckily it ricocheted off the Halo away from the driver. Now, hypothetically, the Halo looks ok visually and the driver is saying everything's fine so is this car allowed to carry on or does it need to be retired from the race?

You can mock my question & say it's as hypothetical as Alonso's dinosaur but I bet you'd have said the same about Massa's accident in Hungary, or Surtees's accident at Brands or Wilsons accident, or dozens of other accidents before they actually happened but dealing with hypothetical scenarios is how we remove or mitigate the risk of injury when a scenario moves from the hypothetical to the factual.

There are different levels of impact and different levels of damage. It's simplistic to think its a case of either the Halo being perfectly fine or trashed and I think it's also simplistic to think that a driver would happily retire his car if the Halo had been struck by something. Think Derek Warwick, Monza 1990 or Martin Brundle, Australia 1996. Two monumental accidents that could so easily have ended tragically but what was the first thing they did when they go out of the car? They ran back to the pits to get in the spare car and do it all again.

No I don't think anyone would complain about the Halo saving their life but i'd expect the driver to not be too happy about having to retire a perfectly normal working car because the Halo may have been damaged in an incident.

It's the same hypothetical situation as if the drivers were only allowed one helmet, and in some freak accident the helmet got destroyed (but somehow the driver was totally unharmed and it was the only damage. Would the driver be happy to retire from the race when the car was perfectly functional?

The halo is a safety device, if it's damaged then they can't race. We have already seen a precedent for this in Baku last year when Hamilton's headrest got damaged - he had to pit and replace it costing him the win. If it was not fixable he would have had to retired.

Just because we didn't have the halo last year doesn't mean it's ok to race with a damaged one now. At one point the sport didn't have seat belts or fire resistant overalls, but the cars won't be allowed on track without those either.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 331
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 1:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1325
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


Agreed in full. When was the last time we saw a car continue racing, that was struck by another that was airborne? When one can provide an example, then this conservation becomes valid.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:24 am
Posts: 2201
I don't think it has ever been denied that halo would make situations like this safer. The debate was always about other situations where the halo could make things worse.

We would have to see a situation where a wrecked car is upside down and on fire to make a proper judgement. Also a situation where a driver is trapped in a car with spinal injuries and the extra maneuvering to get them around the halo (especially in an Alonso in Melbourne scenario) leaves them permanently paralysed.

Hopefully no such incidents occur and halo remains a positive influence on safety.

As for this particular photo, whilst the wheel hit the halo I'm inclined to think the side protection would have kept the car away from his head had it not been there.

_________________
I remember when this website was all fields.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 331
Banana Man wrote:
I don't think it has ever been denied that halo would make situations like this safer. The debate was always about other situations where the halo could make things worse.

We would have to see a situation where a wrecked car is upside down and on fire to make a proper judgement. Also a situation where a driver is trapped in a car with spinal injuries and the extra maneuvering to get them around the halo (especially in an Alonso in Melbourne scenario) leaves them permanently paralysed.

Hopefully no such incidents occur and halo remains a positive influence on safety.

As for this particular photo, whilst the wheel hit the halo I'm inclined to think the side protection would have kept the car away from his head had it not been there.


While I don't have the technical know how to contradict you, what intrigued me last year in Baku, was just how soft the side protection looked in Hamiltons hands when he was trying to put it back into place.

So yes, I do agree the side protection is there to protect, but it always seems those freak accidents somehow tend to go around them. Hence the name, freak accidents, I guess.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14263
paul_gmb wrote:
Banana Man wrote:
I don't think it has ever been denied that halo would make situations like this safer. The debate was always about other situations where the halo could make things worse.

We would have to see a situation where a wrecked car is upside down and on fire to make a proper judgement. Also a situation where a driver is trapped in a car with spinal injuries and the extra maneuvering to get them around the halo (especially in an Alonso in Melbourne scenario) leaves them permanently paralysed.

Hopefully no such incidents occur and halo remains a positive influence on safety.

As for this particular photo, whilst the wheel hit the halo I'm inclined to think the side protection would have kept the car away from his head had it not been there.


While I don't have the technical know how to contradict you, what intrigued me last year in Baku, was just how soft the side protection looked in Hamiltons hands when he was trying to put it back into place.

So yes, I do agree the side protection is there to protect, but it always seems those freak accidents somehow tend to go around them. Hence the name, freak accidents, I guess.


Well yeah, the non freak ones deflect off them which they are supposed to do :lol: :lol:

The inside facing the driver is soft the outside is hard.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 331
mikeyg123 wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
Banana Man wrote:
I don't think it has ever been denied that halo would make situations like this safer. The debate was always about other situations where the halo could make things worse.

We would have to see a situation where a wrecked car is upside down and on fire to make a proper judgement. Also a situation where a driver is trapped in a car with spinal injuries and the extra maneuvering to get them around the halo (especially in an Alonso in Melbourne scenario) leaves them permanently paralysed.

Hopefully no such incidents occur and halo remains a positive influence on safety.

As for this particular photo, whilst the wheel hit the halo I'm inclined to think the side protection would have kept the car away from his head had it not been there.


While I don't have the technical know how to contradict you, what intrigued me last year in Baku, was just how soft the side protection looked in Hamiltons hands when he was trying to put it back into place.

So yes, I do agree the side protection is there to protect, but it always seems those freak accidents somehow tend to go around them. Hence the name, freak accidents, I guess.


Well yeah, the non freak ones deflect off them which they are supposed to do :lol: :lol:

The inside facing the driver is soft the outside is hard.


:thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 7:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2062
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


- a closed cockpit would increase safety
- banning free wheels would increase safety,
- and, above all, massively reducing speed would increase safety.

So, here is your program for the non-idiots ...

;) :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2018 8:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4798
Banana Man wrote:
I don't think it has ever been denied that halo would make situations like this safer. The debate was always about other situations where the halo could make things worse.

We would have to see a situation where a wrecked car is upside down and on fire to make a proper judgement. Also a situation where a driver is trapped in a car with spinal injuries and the extra maneuvering to get them around the halo (especially in an Alonso in Melbourne scenario) leaves them permanently paralysed.

Hopefully no such incidents occur and halo remains a positive influence on safety.

As for this particular photo, whilst the wheel hit the halo I'm inclined to think the side protection would have kept the car away from his head had it not been there.

There's a video out there where the FIA engineers put someone in a mockup tub with a Halo on it and flipped it over and he was able to get out just fine. It probably wasn't any more difficult than Alonso being up against the barrier in Oz.

If there's a concern about spinal injuries the seat is designed to get the driver out while still strapped into in it whether there's a Halo on the car or not.

Go to about 18:20 in this video to see the discussion of egress and the demonstration I talked about above.
https://youtu.be/AYkGjUHstKY

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 2:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 607
Location: Kansas
Jezza13 wrote:
So the question I ask is this.

Hypothetically, lets say Makino's car survived the impact with nothing more than a damaged Halo & a few scratches to the body work and was able to carry on racing as normal.

Would Makino have been shown the black & orange flag, been forced to come into the pits and retire a perfectly drivable car due to the damaged Halo?

I'd hope the answer would be that anytime there's an impact involving the halo being struck the car would at the minimum be pitted and probably retired.


Have seen drivers meatballed (American lingo for black and orange flag) for problems with roll bar, seat belt, helmet visor, window netting (closed cockpit cars), and blown fire bottles. So yeah, I could see getting the meatball flag for a noticeably damaged halo.

From the pics I don't see any noticeable damage on Makino's halo other than scratched paint and deposited rubber. I am guessing that FIA have taken possession of Makino's halo for testing after the incident. Will probably do Xray, ultrasound, and maybe even destructive testing on the surviving part.

_________________
Mission WinLater


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 8:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 331
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


- a closed cockpit would increase safety
- banning free wheels would increase safety,
- and, above all, massively reducing speed would increase safety.

So, here is your program for the non-idiots ...

;) :lol:


I know for what I stand, and have watched F1 for enough years to see major crashes and wonder if he will come out alive.

It just doesn't make sense. If one is thrilled by danger and wants excitement, ask Anthony Joshua to punch you.

Again, the opinion of those sitting on the couch SHOULD NOT matter, especially when it comes to safety.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 8:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23911
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.

I don't think that last line is fair.

There are plenty of things that one could do that would make the cars safer, which have been outlined above. Would discussing open wheels also be a conversation only for idiots?

People question the halo because its safety credentials are debatable, in that it is only useful in very specific circumstances. It's here now, which kinda makes the debate moot, but I don't think it's right to criticize people for arguing against it. F1, and to a extent all motor sports, is always going to make some compromises where safety is concerned, otherwise a driver would never turn a wheel.

It's worth pointing out that several drivers have spoken out against the halo, so it's not just couch potatos throwing their weight around, either


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 9:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14263
paul_gmb wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


- a closed cockpit would increase safety
- banning free wheels would increase safety,
- and, above all, massively reducing speed would increase safety.

So, here is your program for the non-idiots ...

;) :lol:


I know for what I stand, and have watched F1 for enough years to see major crashes and wonder if he will come out alive.

It just doesn't make sense. If one is thrilled by danger and wants excitement, ask Anthony Joshua to punch you.

Again, the opinion of those sitting on the couch SHOULD NOT matter, especially when it comes to safety.


What about the drivers ? Many of them were against the halo?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 5:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:17 pm
Posts: 570
Location: illinois
mikeyg123 wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


- a closed cockpit would increase safety
- banning free wheels would increase safety,
- and, above all, massively reducing speed would increase safety.

So, here is your program for the non-idiots ...

;) :lol:


I know for what I stand, and have watched F1 for enough years to see major crashes and wonder if he will come out alive.

It just doesn't make sense. If one is thrilled by danger and wants excitement, ask Anthony Joshua to punch you.

Again, the opinion of those sitting on the couch SHOULD NOT matter, especially when it comes to safety.


What about the drivers ? Many of them were against the halo?



it looks the halo did some good in that accident, how much, i can't really say.

it has been pointed out about a million times that many drivers were against seat belts and the hans device. none of them would race without either device today


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 5:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 747
The Halo is starting to grow on me, I just wish they could maybe decrease its thickness by maybe 50% to reduce its visual impact and allow a better view of the driver.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 6:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3235
mikeyg123 wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


- a closed cockpit would increase safety
- banning free wheels would increase safety,
- and, above all, massively reducing speed would increase safety.

So, here is your program for the non-idiots ...

;) :lol:


I know for what I stand, and have watched F1 for enough years to see major crashes and wonder if he will come out alive.

It just doesn't make sense. If one is thrilled by danger and wants excitement, ask Anthony Joshua to punch you.

Again, the opinion of those sitting on the couch SHOULD NOT matter, especially when it comes to safety.


What about the drivers ? Many of them were against the halo?

Hamilton was one of the most vocal against it at the start, yet:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/36877774


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14263
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


- a closed cockpit would increase safety
- banning free wheels would increase safety,
- and, above all, massively reducing speed would increase safety.

So, here is your program for the non-idiots ...

;) :lol:


I know for what I stand, and have watched F1 for enough years to see major crashes and wonder if he will come out alive.

It just doesn't make sense. If one is thrilled by danger and wants excitement, ask Anthony Joshua to punch you.

Again, the opinion of those sitting on the couch SHOULD NOT matter, especially when it comes to safety.


What about the drivers ? Many of them were against the halo?

Hamilton was one of the most vocal against it at the start, yet:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/36877774


Hamilton changed his mind as he has every right too. Was he an idiot when he was opposed to it though? Is Hulkenberg?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 7:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2062
paul_gmb wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


- a closed cockpit would increase safety
- banning free wheels would increase safety,
- and, above all, massively reducing speed would increase safety.

So, here is your program for the non-idiots ...

;) :lol:


I know for what I stand, and have watched F1 for enough years to see major crashes and wonder if he will come out alive.

It just doesn't make sense. If one is thrilled by danger and wants excitement, ask Anthony Joshua to punch you.

Again, the opinion of those sitting on the couch SHOULD NOT matter, especially when it comes to safety.


So, please be consistent and argue in favour of slowing down the cars massively!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 9:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:21 am
Posts: 460
If halo was responsible for saving life in this accident, then can anyone remind me when the last fatal accident happened, during which driver was killed after being struck in their head/body by competitor's tyre/wings/floor, well, car in general?

Because I've watched, most of them live, so many accidents, when cars climbed on top of each other, from all different angles and nothing bad ever happened. We are not talking about bouncing tyre (or in Wilson's case, nosecone with ballast mounted inside to cure innate understeer of DW12), which is basically 50-50 situation, pure luck, you hit it - you die, you miss it - good for you. We're talking about dozens of accidents, solid database of all different scenarios with only one outcome - positive.

Martin Brundle was actually hit in the head by Jos Verstappen's tyre during infamous crash at Interlagos in 1994:



Without HANS, without high cockpit protection sides, completely exposed:

[Unsourced image removed]

Was he dead? No. Was he lucky? Yes, very, but it still shows even in the worst case, with less safer cars and helmets, such accident can be survivable with no lasting negative effect.


Fast forward to 2018 and when you see any kind of accident, it's safety this, safety that, more safety. I'm very glad I've tasted racing when it was safe enough, but still a little bit risky and when these guys were actually being challenged in proper wet conditions. Today it's a sad parody of what it used to be and I wouldn't be surprised if in the next 10 or 20 years all races will be held on circuits without any gravel or grass, only in dry conditions, with drivers remotely controlling their cars sitting in the pitlane. Safety first, right?

_________________
I know what I'm talking about.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 10:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3235
mikeyg123 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Hamilton was one of the most vocal against it at the start, yet:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/36877774


Hamilton changed his mind as he has every right too. Was he an idiot when he was opposed to it though? Is Hulkenberg?

At what point have I accused you of being an idiot for your opinion? If you are going to start putting words in my mouth then this is not a discussion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 10:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3235
Armchair Expert wrote:
If halo was responsible for saving life in this accident, then can anyone remind me when the last fatal accident happened, during which driver was killed after being struck in their head/body by competitor's tyre/wings/floor, well, car in general?

Because I've watched, most of them live, so many accidents, when cars climbed on top of each other, from all different angles and nothing bad ever happened. We are not talking about bouncing tyre (or in Wilson's case, nosecone with ballast mounted inside to cure innate understeer of DW12), which is basically 50-50 situation, pure luck, you hit it - you die, you miss it - good for you. We're talking about dozens of accidents, solid database of all different scenarios with only one outcome - positive.

Martin Brundle was actually hit in the head by Jos Verstappen's tyre during infamous crash at Interlagos in 1994:



Without HANS, without high cockpit protection sides, completely exposed:

Was he dead? No. Was he lucky? Yes, very, but it still shows even in the worst case, with less safer cars and helmets, such accident can be survivable with no lasting negative effect.


Fast forward to 2018 and when you see any kind of accident, it's safety this, safety that, more safety. I'm very glad I've tasted racing when it was safe enough, but still a little bit risky and when these guys were actually being challenged in proper wet conditions. Today it's a sad parody of what it used to be and I wouldn't be surprised if in the next 10 or 20 years all races will be held on circuits without any gravel or grass, only in dry conditions, with drivers remotely controlling their cars sitting in the pitlane. Safety first, right?

Bouncing tyres were the reason the halo was introduced, so excluding those examples is a bit like saying "excluding the times a driver used it to turn around a corner, can you name the last time a steering wheel was useful?"

Martin Brundle not being killed by Jos Verstappen's tyre was not the worst case of that accident. Martin Brundle being killed was the worst possible case of that accident. You said it himself, he was lucky to not be seriously injured.

Drivers used to survive spectacular and horrific accidents when they didn't wear helmets, so the exact same logic could be used to justify not having those in the sport either.

You say it was the perfect era because the sport was safe enough, yet the following year - in one race weekend - Barichello was seriously injured, Roland Ratzenberger was lost and then Ayrton Senna was lost.

If today's cars ran with the same level of protection of the 1993 cars they would be far more dangerous because they are so much faster and they carry so much more energy into a collision. In China and Abu Dhabi the cars exceed 6G under braking.

In the 1970s, it was considered normal to have drivers dying every other weekend and there was huge resistance back then to the introduction of safety measures because it was considered neutering the sport.

But - what amazes me - is how people feel they are the ones being deprived if there isn't a chance someone might die on the race track, that the drivers need to be risking their lives in a very real sense of the word. For one thing, it totally undermines the danger - even with the halo attached - that drivers are in on the race track, at 200mph braking into a corner with someone alongside them. Max Verstappen had a 30+ G impact at Monaco when he crashed into the wall while driving for Toro Rosso yet the impression you get from some of these discussions is that it was a nice soft relaxing bump into some mattresses because it wasn't a concrete wall and 200G.

The halo isn't a forcefield. The racing is still dangerous, just because we are reducing risks doesn't mean it is eliminating it.

The sport recently lost Jules Bianchi. Robert Kubica was seriously injured in Rallying - a more dangerous sport - and does that loss make Formula 1 better or worse? Did losing Senna make Formula 1 better or worse? Was it better that Senna died because it showed Formula 1 drivers were risking their lives, or would it have been better to still have Senna in the sport but it safer?

And that's without getting into the whole discussion about how it is our right to see people in real mortal danger for our entertainment? I tune in to see the most highly skilled drivers risking crashing out and retiring, not crashing out and getting hurt. Quite frankly, to get enjoyment from that seems slightly perverse.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 12:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:04 am
Posts: 306

Lets continue to participate in the discussion without usings remarks such as "idiot." Plenty of other ways to get your point's across.

_________________
- Mod Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 5:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14263
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Hamilton was one of the most vocal against it at the start, yet:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/36877774


Hamilton changed his mind as he has every right too. Was he an idiot when he was opposed to it though? Is Hulkenberg?

At what point have I accused you of being an idiot for your opinion? If you are going to start putting words in my mouth then this is not a discussion.


You didn't. Read the post I was replying to initialy to understand the context of my the reply and it should make sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 8:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 331
I think no one is making another one an idiot here.

It s just some of us feel it s not worth for our own delight to see drivers facing unnecessary risks.

Brake failure and crashing heavily because of it is unfortunatelly a risk a driver has to take when racing
.

Bouncing wheels or other flying objects hitting you in the head, isn t.

But it is only my opinion , it doesn t mean i am right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 8:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14263
paul_gmb wrote:
I think no one is making another one an idiot here.

It s just some of us feel it s not worth for our own delight to see drivers facing unnecessary risks.

Brake failure and crashing heavily because of it is unfortunatelly a risk a driver has to take when racing
.

Bouncing wheels or other flying objects hitting you in the head, isn t.

But it is only my opinion , it doesn t mean i am right.


Limiting to speed to say 60MPH would make things a lot safer. Would you support that? If not then you have a line where you consider things "safe enough" just like me. Your line may fall in a different place but it's still there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 9:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3235
mikeyg123 wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
I think no one is making another one an idiot here.

It s just some of us feel it s not worth for our own delight to see drivers facing unnecessary risks.

Brake failure and crashing heavily because of it is unfortunatelly a risk a driver has to take when racing
.

Bouncing wheels or other flying objects hitting you in the head, isn t.

But it is only my opinion , it doesn t mean i am right.


Limiting to speed to say 60MPH would make things a lot safer. Would you support that? If not then you have a line where you consider things "safe enough" just like me. Your line may fall in a different place but it's still there.

This is typical tabloid sensationalism nonsensical logic. Limiting the speed would change the racing, they wouldn't even be racing. The only thing adding a halo does is make the car safer, the same thing with adding a helmet, or seat belts or a HANS device. It does not change the performance of the cars, it does not change the nature of the racing. The only thing it does is make the sport safer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 9:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 4:53 am
Posts: 20
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
This is for me the best proof that the Halo is a good addon.

I couldn't care less how the car looks.

Everyone is attracted by the danger of the sport, and yes it's exciting ....... especially if you are sitting in your underwear on your couch.

Stick anything on the car that would prevent injury to a driver, for all I care. I don't want anyone to get hurt because of "my personal taste" in car design.

Debating the opportunity of the HALO is just another one of those pub talks. It only exists because some idiots have nothing better to do with their life.


- a closed cockpit would increase safety
- banning free wheels would increase safety,
- and, above all, massively reducing speed would increase safety.

So, here is your program for the non-idiots ...

;) :lol:


I know for what I stand, and have watched F1 for enough years to see major crashes and wonder if he will come out alive.

It just doesn't make sense. If one is thrilled by danger and wants excitement, ask Anthony Joshua to punch you.

Again, the opinion of those sitting on the couch SHOULD NOT matter, especially when it comes to safety.


So, please be consistent and argue in favour of slowing down the cars massively!


Race: (noun) a competition in which people run, ride, drive, etc. against each other in order to see who is the fastest

Asking for safer cars is not the same as asking for change the racing and for that I don't see inconsistency here.

I don't see how the halo affects the definition of racing the way speed does.

I don't think asking for safer cars without asking for then to be slower is something inconsistent.
Not only for F1 cars but for any car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 9:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2062
So, get rid of open wheels then and introduce fully closed cockpits?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 9:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6208
Location: Michigan, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
I think no one is making another one an idiot here.

It s just some of us feel it s not worth for our own delight to see drivers facing unnecessary risks.

Brake failure and crashing heavily because of it is unfortunatelly a risk a driver has to take when racing
.

Bouncing wheels or other flying objects hitting you in the head, isn t.

But it is only my opinion , it doesn t mean i am right.

Limiting to speed to say 60MPH would make things a lot safer. Would you support that? If not then you have a line where you consider things "safe enough" just like me. Your line may fall in a different place but it's still there.

... And? How does the existence of a line where things are 'safe enough' invalidate the opinion that safety is worth striving for?

You're using a classic junk debating tactic - assigning your opponent some extreme, absurd version of their position and then mocking them for it. Not a good way to debate. If you want to actually engage in the conversation, try engaging the actual conversation instead of that straw man. Nobody is advocating limiting the whole race to pit speeds, and it's insulting to imply that there's any equivalence between something designed to protect against head hits in an open cockpit car and a cessation of racing at all. Is it not racing if people can't still be hit in the head with a wheel? Because that's what you seem to be implying with this equivalence.

I'm sure everyone has a line where they think the racing is safe enough. For me, it's when nobody dies as long as all the safety provisions and rules are followed. I think we're just about there, and I honestly think the halo is unnecessary.

Where we appear to fundamentally disagree is that you seem to regard danger - the present risk of losing one's life, specifically - as necessary for racing. I disagree wholeheartedly. The risk of a mistake ending your race is absolutely necessary, but I think sporting mistakes should have sporting penalties, not fatal ones. There is no reason I can see why racing is made better by the possibility of death following a mistake (or mechanical issue wholly outside the driver's control, even more so).

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2018 3:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 607
Location: Kansas
This, to me, is what the halo is designed for. Henry Surtees Brands Hatch Crash 2009



Might have helped Philipe Massa, but the spring could have easily slipped beneath the halo.


_________________
Mission WinLater


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group