Results 11 to 20 of 50
Thread: The halo enters F1 for '18
-
22nd July 2017, 10:31 #11
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Location
- Oradea
- Posts
- 2,637
- Like
- 75
- Liked 137 Times in 110 Posts
It looks like crap. As for those who seem to make the case this will save lots of lives, I doubt it. I've been following f1 since 1996 and I don't recall a single case when this piece of crap would have saved anybody.
-
22nd July 2017, 11:37 #12
- Join Date
- Feb 2001
- Posts
- 8,419
- Like
- 506
- Liked 793 Times in 587 Posts
-
22nd July 2017, 13:27 #13
Having the Halo won't bother me from tradition perspective... as long as the drivers don't find it too much of a PITA and vision affecting.
From the few comments I've heard from the drivers I get the impression the majority would rather not have it?
-
22nd July 2017, 17:09 #14
- Join Date
- Feb 2001
- Posts
- 8,419
- Like
- 506
- Liked 793 Times in 587 Posts
I think the effect on vision is the primary issue .
I'd rather have them with a short windscreen than any bars that would affect how much they can see .
They already have very little peripheral vision .
I think a bar along side the cockpit , instead of the solid surround would also be appropriate , so they can see better .
Indycar is doing research into the windshield idea , and seem to far better understand the parallax problem .
But , again , the rain and/or oil spray would introduce an extra surface , along with the existing visor , to keep clean .
With no disrespect intended to any we have lost , this is a solution to a rare problem , that has potential to make the sport potentially more dangerous for those participating in it .
Taking away any amount of vision from someone driving a car at extreme speeds is just not safe .
It is stupid .
And , to , rather ironically , be pushed into this reaction by , seemingly , the liability of not having been seen to do something to improve safety from frontal impact , after an incident where a driver went under a piece of track equipment that neither the halo or any windscreen could have helped him survive , is somewhere beyond that .
Oh , and Zico , what's a PITA when it's not pocket bread ?
-
23rd July 2017, 01:29 #15
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- To the right of the left
- Posts
- 3,746
- Like
- 3
- Liked 141 Times in 111 Posts
-
23rd July 2017, 15:26 #16
- Join Date
- Feb 2001
- Posts
- 8,419
- Like
- 506
- Liked 793 Times in 587 Posts
-
23rd July 2017, 21:55 #17
The correct medical terminology for a broad range of PITA ailments may range from gluteal to rectal or anal trauma.
The term 'Ring sting' could potentially also fall into that category... although BDunnell on here would be better placed to explain it better. I think he was a doctor?
It's also a more commonly used term for 'major inconvenience'.
Regarding your reply to my earlier question... yeah, fair points well put. Would be hard to disagree even if I wanted to.
-
24th July 2017, 10:04 #18
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Posts
- 2,607
- Like
- 28
- Liked 186 Times in 146 Posts
I'm not convinced this thing has been adequately tested. Only a few drivers have tried it out, and usually for just one run in one practice session. As Zico mentioned, the reports from the drivers have been mixed. It doesn't appear that it's been tested to the extent where they can be sure it won't cause a visibility problem for some driver in some situation. (We don't know how much simulator work has been done with it, I suppose.)
It's going to be a structural part of the car, so there won't be any going back if they get a couple of races into next season and find it's a problem. The real halos won't be easily removable in the way that the mock-ups are.
-
24th July 2017, 11:03 #19
- Join Date
- Mar 2001
- Location
- Sep 1666
- Posts
- 10,462
- Like
- 15
- Liked 201 Times in 155 Posts
The Old Republic was a stupidly run organisation which deserved to be taken over. All Hail Palpatine!
-
24th July 2017, 14:28 #20
- Join Date
- Feb 2001
- Posts
- 8,419
- Like
- 506
- Liked 793 Times in 587 Posts
This thing will stop 17% of flying objects hitting the driver , apparently .
Thus , we can extrapolate that these objects will still hit the driver 83% of the time .
Is that good enough , or is just good enough to say that they did something ?
Does it leave them with more than 83% of their vision ?
It doesn't seem 17% safer at all .
A nice analysis from the rally: https://dirtfish.com/rally/wrc/what-we-learned-from-rally-italy-sardinia-2024/
[WRC] Rally Italia Sardegna 2024