Enclosed Cockpit. Good idea? Bad Idea? [Archive]

Nem14

20th October 2011, 23:24

Polycarbonate canopy would also help to keep fire and spilled fuel out of the cockpit, which is another real benefit. Mark C.
For how long? What is the melting temp of polycarbonate? Looks like only 267° C (512.6°F) according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycarbonate
It looks like ethanol has an autoignition temperature of 362°C (683.6°F).

How does polycarbonate react chemically with racing fuels? Could the canopy trap smoke or other possibly harmful fumes?

Wouldn't there need to be a way to let air flow through the cockpit even if the driver was air conditioned?

What happens when the car you're following blows an engine and coats the canopy with oil and water?
For that matter, how would you keep bug hits from obscurring a drivers vision a they rocket along at 200+ mph. In an open cockpit they have tear-offs on their visors.

How would drivers cope with a low sun angle?

When the polycarbonate canopy deforms from a blow, what, if anything, keeps the canopy itself from hitting the driver's head and causing injury?

I saw the video of the wheel hitting a polycarbonate canopy at 225 kph (140 mph), but what happens when its a gearbox/engine still attached (or unattached) to a tub, or the damaged, blunt, sharp edged nose of a carbon fiber tub?

How much would a canopy cost? How many would a team need per season/per car?

call_me_andrew

21st October 2011, 02:11

Sounds great. Like locking a puppy in a car with the windows closed at noon in New Mexico.

nigelred5

21st October 2011, 02:20

I would go with something like what is very common in off shore boats, an open topped f16 canopy before a fully enclosed canopy which presents quite a few issues and is a much easier initial step, provides a good measure of protection from flying debris and coule be reinforced with kevlar and carbon fiber to restore some of teh rigisity that is lost when the canopy is scalped. Something like the Adrian Newy Redbull car is a total re-design, however if Indycar is going to do anything, now is the time before too many Dallaras are delivered.

http://www.lov2xlr8.no/visitor/bilder/boat3.jpg

00steven

21st October 2011, 03:29

As much as I think something should be done with the open cockpit, I don't know if it would be well recieved. The open cockpit is a trademark of open wheel racing. I think the true problem lies with the design of the now old Dallara design, allowing cars to launch off of each other. As fast as Indycars have always been, you never saw cars lauch like that at the track. I'm just relieved something has been done with the 2012 model.

Zeakiwi

21st October 2011, 03:33

For a car to have a canopy, the design is different. The end result is likely to be closer to a lemans series sports car than the existing open wheeler Formula car.

The temperatures can be kept down and not need the use of air conditioning if the air flow is right and using gold .(see the Audi article).

http://www.thunderboats.org/history/history0117.html (Short history of the f16 canopy use in powerboats)

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2011/10/cockpit-canopies-under-discussion-again-after-wheldon-accident/

http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cetera/formula-1-cars-may-get-fighter-jet-canopies-20110718/

http://www.audiworld.com/news/11/climatic-tunnel/

Even Formula Fords have launched off each other at times.
For the Las Vegas circuit there might have been restrictor plates for the engines to reduce 225 mph, 650 hp (3.5 litre v8 ) etc, 150 mph would have been plenty on the LV track.

Mark

21st October 2011, 07:54

Also see the (very long) thread in the F1 forum about canopies. Started long before the accident.

Mark

21st October 2011, 07:57

.
For the Las Vegas circuit there might have been restrictor plates for the engines to reduce 225 mph, 650 hp (3.5 litre v8 ) etc, 150 mph would have been plenty on the LV track.

Engine power isn't the problem. It's the excess of downforce allowing the corners to be taken at high speed.

chuck34

21st October 2011, 12:32

I would rather see a "cage" type structure. Something like a top fuel dragster. Enough to cover your head from impacts, but open enough to get out in case of fire etc.

FIAT1

21st October 2011, 14:57

Stupid idea. Overreacting is wrong. More hp, less downforce, no pack racing would be much better idea. I love F1 and Indycar for what they allways been. Machine where the fastest, skilled and the brave race and brake records in speed and tech. Unfortunate creation of irl and dumbing down cars that everyone can drive oround flat has brought us this mess. I believe it would be great disservice to iron man of the past and to Dan to make idiotic reaction. This is racing and accidents happen and anfortunately as cruel as it may sound this wont be last one. Don't forget how many drivers survived amazing distraction of the cars including this one therefore to make it better or safer does not have to be extreme. People die in hydroplane racing too.

heliocastroneves#3

21st October 2011, 16:11

Chris R

21st October 2011, 18:14

FIAT1 - excellent post!

Nem14

21st October 2011, 18:39

From watching Dan Wheldon's car as it was up against the fence, I doubt a canopy would have helped any. A canopy may well have been torn from the car.

I doubt a canopy would have benefitted any of the other Indy car drivers killed since 1996 either;

Jeff Krosnoff
Scott Brayton
Greg Moore
Paul Dana

While the F1 forum has a discussion going, it was an Indy Car and driver that focused that discussion on the possibility of enclosing an open wheeled car's cockpit.

I can envision an enclosed cockpit Indy Car getting upside-down, the canopy being ground partially away by the pavement, and a driver being trapped in a burning car.

Racing boats are poor for comparison because they race on water, not pavement.

In other words, I think an enclosed cockpit is a bad idea, and not a viable solution.

nigelred5

21st October 2011, 19:26

I don't think anything you could have done to a car would have saved Greg Moore considering the nature of the impact. Even a cage would have been crushed in that impact. The others, Im not sure as they were all very different accidents.

You ever hit the water at over 100 mph????. I have.... and have many hospital bills to show for it. Trust me, its is very hard and I have seen boats absolutely disintegrate in a crash. My friend's back was broken when the safety cage on her race boat was crushed in a crash. 14 drivers had died in unlimited Hydroplane accidents prior to adopting the F16 canopy. None have died as a result of an accident in a canopy boat since? A safety capsule has eventually been mandated by almost every major form of boat racing ever since.

Chris R

21st October 2011, 20:34

I know the capsules work well for a boat - but I think the key is the capsule part, not so much the canopy in and of itself but the canopy as an integral and necessary part of a survival capsule SYSTEM..... Obviously the concept would not work without a canopy because it would sink to fast and water has properties which allow it to do alot of damage if it is not excluded from an area.... Also, not to downplay the significance of hitting the water at 100mph - but if you hit a concrete wall of Safer barrier at the same speed you'd be dead... the properties of the "barriers" in the two sports are completely different - both potentially lethal - but in very different ways....

The problem with the canopy on the Indycar is that the survival capsule concept won't work the same way. you cannot have the survival capsule break away easily - no capsule (or more importantly its occupant) is going to survive being hit dead on by a car going 200+mph if the capsule is ejected too easily. Second, Hydroplanes etc. have no walls to hit - the capsule just sort of skates away - bouncing along taking very significant hits but significantly "lighter" hits than a concrete wall or even the ground....

So, for the car to properly protect its occupant, the core has to stay together pretty well and that is not an insignificant structure and without buoyancy from water to help its is going to be difficult to turn it upright if it lands upside down....

More importantly , what about the low speed rollover (which is not all that uncommon)?? The poor driver caught under a largely intact car can more or less scramble out now - not so with a canopy (and one that is quickly filling with various hot and stinky fluids from the engine and fuel tank). Similarly, Simona would have been absolutely fried if there was fire in cockpit when those guys tried to rip her out of the car......

NASCAR has multiple escape route in their car (two windows/doors and a roof hatch). A sports car has two doors. An openwheeler with a canopy has one route of escape that is most likely going to be dependent on someone else to get you out of the car. If you think the fallout from Dan Wheldon dying nearly instantly in a horrific crash is bad it would be nothing like the fallout of burning a driver to death because they were trapped in the car or suffocating them with noxious fumes, of having them bleed to death because you can't get he thing off even though his legs were just ripped off and the crash damage made the canopy difficult to get off (and make no mistake it would have to be VERY secure to be effective at all....

The more I think about it the worse idea I think a canopy is for Indycars..... It is great for hydroplanes etc - but not Indycars....

fan-veteran

21st October 2011, 21:56

Look guys, let face it - high speeds lead to a higher risk of harsh impacts and as a result sometimes unfortunately to the death of a driver. Pay attention to the word "unfortunately" - it involves the probability factor, call it luck or lack of it if you want. It is a matter of a chance to survive a heavy impact.

Look in Youtube the crashes of Jovy Marcelo in 1992 or Scott Brayton in 1996 - they don't look special but yet were fatal. And some others really heavy crashes from Indy 500 in 1992 where drivers survived.

Remember Kenny Brack in 2003 in Texas - he survived by incredible luck. Jeff Krosnoff in 1996 was not lucky in a similar impact.

Patrick Bedard in 1984 survived, but Greg Moore in 1999 didn't.

Gonzalo Rodriguez in 1999 hit the wall (with tyres) head on and died, Roland Ratzemberger in F1 in Imola 1994 broke his neck and died, yet Mark Blundel in 1996 suffered a broken leg.

And no one of these accidents has nothing to do with presence of canopy or lack of it.

00steven

21st October 2011, 22:22

Marcelo, Brayton, Rodriguez, and Ratzenberger all died from basilar skull fractures without a HANS device. Krosnoff, Moore and Dan Wheldon all passed away from cockpit facing catchfence/wall. Racing is inevitabley dangerous, but look at the changes that have been made in the last 15 years in the name of safety.

Nem14

22nd October 2011, 00:37

Tony Renna got up into the catch fencing too, in 2003 at Indy.

Between 1979 and 1996, 17 years, Indy car racing only had 2 driver fatalities, Gordon Smiley (Indy) and Jim Hickman (Milwaukee), both occurring in 1982. (prior to Smiley the last fatality at Indy was in 1973)

Since 1996 there have been 7 incidents of fatal injuries, 2 of them on street/road courses Krosnoff, Rodriquez). Of the 5 incidents on ovals only 2 have occured during a race (Moore, Wheldon), the other 3 being during practice (Brayton), testing (Renna), and during warm up laps (Dana).

Dan Wheldon's incident is the only one on an oval that involved multiple cars. Indeed it looks like Wheldon's car was launched up into the catch fence by the impact, from behind, of another car.

call_me_andrew

22nd October 2011, 02:55

NASCAR has multiple escape route in their car (two windows/doors and a roof hatch).

You realize there are no actual doors on a stock car, right? And I think the roof hatch was abandoned after a single race.

Chris R

22nd October 2011, 03:08

You realize there are no actual doors on a stock car, right? And I think the roof hatch was abandoned after a single race.

I just meant the windows in the "doors" - didn't want anybody to think I thought you could actually get out the front or back windows if they were busted out........... I thought the roof hatch was a mandatory part of the COT - just does not need to be used all that much.....

Mark in Oshawa

22nd October 2011, 18:10

The Capsule works in boats because water isn't abrasive. If you had such a capsule in an Indycar, you would grind it away against the fence or track. There are many reasons and issues that would make it not practical.

The solution for the most part is eliminate the launching of the cars over top of each other putting the car in the fence in the first place. the new design has the fairing around that rear tire..that will stop the front wheels from climbing up and over and the body work wont have them interlocking. Eliminate the airborne race cars for simple incidents on track, and a lot of this goes away. Not all of it...I am not naive enough to assume we wont have some incidents, but it is clear that the things that made this wreck horrific in scope was the pack racing (solved by loosening the rules and upping the power and taking away wing) and the wheels launching cars which the 2012 car will do. A semi enclosed cockpit like the open water boats have pretty much is where they are at now...you only see half a helmet of the driver as it is....how Wheldon died is a true tragic situation and I am sure that f16 cockpit would have been done in had he had one....lets face it, the fence tore the roll hoop off the car..and that is not supposed to happen either...

Nem14

22nd October 2011, 23:09

Time will tell if the 'rear bumper' is effective, or not.

I wouldn't be surprised to see one shatter when hit by a rapidly turning front wheel and allow wheel-to-wheel contact anyway.

nigelred5

23rd October 2011, 02:44

They already essentially are in a safety capsule. The tub is barely different than the APBA's capsules. Not all hydro capsules mandate the canopy part. Granted the majority of the focus is on DW's accident, but nothing addresses the incidents involving debris like Massas accident, or a deer like DaMAtta's accident at Road america, or even the suspension uprights that pierced Sennas visor. I'm actually not advocating a closed car, but an open top canopy or just a thick clear high sided wrap around windscreen that is taller than the driver's head. A roll bar does zero for that.

There's really two to three, maybe even four different issues to address. Wheel to wheel contact, flying cars, and driver protection in the cockpit. Indycar is taking steps in the new car to lessen the possibility of wheel to wheel contact. Flying cars, I'm sceptical at best. That doorstop nose and big flat floor are awfully ominous to me. Mario's backflip was caused by a piece of foam, not ramping over the rear of another car. I agre, all cars have the potential to fly at over 200 mph, but that incident to me is evidence of a very fundamental flaw in the aerodynamics of the old Dallara. That should NEVER happen. Cars do however flip and climb over each other frequently without flying, and there is still danger to a driver's head. How many times have we seen drivers under another car, or nearly hit by broken suspension parts or other cars. Incidents like the Herta Barron crash in turn 5 at Road America. Herta ended up with a car on his head. Miracles of miracles he wasn't hurt, but he easily could have been speared by the nose of Barron's car. How many of us drive a car down the street with no windshield? A practical solution can be found.

A rigid screen has the potential to deflect an impact, even one as severe as wheldon's. Would it have saved him? hard to say, but changing the nature of an impact from a blunt impact with the driver and the headrest to a glancing blow is significant. What I think we can all agree on is there will be changes. Changes to the indycars, changes to tracks, and changes in the way races are run in the future. This has been a very dangerous year in Indycars between crashes, near misses with the course workers, and questionable track safety. Something has to change.

Marbles

24th October 2011, 03:30

I believe the existing cockpit is much too confined for any sort of overhead protection. Any roll bar or such thing would be more of a hindrance than a help in case of an emergency rescue. A larger cockpit would be required and then you'd only be a few square feet of carbon fiber away from a Le Mans car.

Didn't power boats at one time use explosive bolts on enclosed cockpits?

nigelred5

24th October 2011, 16:59

They have a means of releasing the canopy yes.

I still see implementation of a ballistic polycarbonate windscreen at least 4-6" tall before they ever go to a full canopy. It's a step to protect the driver some impacts with debris that wouldn't require a 100% redesign of the car. I suspect we will see a modification of the new tub to increase the sides of the cockpit before it is raced and possibly a reinforcement of the roll hoop.

EagleEye

24th October 2011, 17:02

Some facts;

A canopy would not have saved Dan, Greg or Tony.

Plexiglass in place of of fence posts, would not have saved Dan, Greg or Tony.

The two major items, that need to be addressed are;

A-Cars taking flight

B-Pack Racing

They corrected the cause for Greg's car taking flight, but the IRL never did get rid of the issues for the current chassis. This is concern #1 for the drivers. If the cars do not take flight, you do not have to worry about fences, and canopies.

The next is to reduce the packs. More HP, less grip and downforce. Every time one car crashes, you increase the chance of injury and death. 15 cars crashing, is crazy.

There has been talk of a windscreen, to prevent debris, tires and bits from striking the driver's head. This is what caused Massa's injuries, and killed Surtees.

numanoid

24th October 2011, 21:08

EagleEye

24th October 2011, 22:49

These sound more like speculation and opinion rather than facts.

Apologies for the graphic nature.

Greg Moore was killed due to major injury to his head and upper torso, after his car got airborne after crossing a transition road. It was one of the highest decelerations ever recorded, and was the highest spin rate ever measured. The fact that is his head made impact with the wall, and his upper torso was partially ejected and subject to injury.

A canopy, would have been destroyed with the initial impact.

Tony Rena was kiiled when his car went up to catch fence, and the car and Tony wore torn apart. You can look at a Krosnoff type accident with a Gordon Smiley like result.

A canopy, would have not have helped as it was major trauma to the body, not just the head.

Dan's, is still under investigation. However, the roll hoop was demolished, most likely by the fence pole. I have no knowledge of what Dan's helmet hit, but the post would be the likley culprit.

The steel roll hoops have held up quite well over the years, with several incidents. The design paramteres are: 25KN lateral force, 50KN longitudinally, and 70KN vetical and they are very stout.

The force required to remove one, is quite large. Much larger than any polycarbonite canopy could withstand.

But, if the car never left the ground in these three instances, the driver's should have survived. There are too many variables that come in to play, once a car leaves the ground.

Talking with with our driver after the race, the pack racing and airborne car's has to stop.

The discussion of safety should include all angles, and there could be changes in several areas. But, we have to start with the first domino.

00steven

24th October 2011, 23:38

Apologies for the graphic nature.

Greg Moore was killed due to major injury to his head and upper torso, after his car got airborne after crossing a transition road. It was one of the highest decelerations ever recorded, and was the highest spin rate ever measured. The fact that is his head made impact with the wall, and his upper torso was partially ejected and subject to injury.

A canopy, would have been destroyed with the initial impact.

Tony Rena was kiiled when his car went up to catch fence, and the car and Tony wore torn apart. You can look at a Krosnoff type accident with a Gordon Smiley like result.

A canopy, would have not have helped as it was major trauma to the body, not just the head.

Dan's, is still under investigation. However, the roll hoop was demolished, most likely by the fence pole. I have no knowledge of what Dan's helmet hit, but the post would be the likley culprit.

The steel roll hoops have held up quite well over the years, with several incidents. The design paramteres are: 25KN lateral force, 50KN longitudinally, and 70KN vetical and they are very stout.

The force required to remove one, is quite large. Much larger than any polycarbonite canopy could withstand.

But, if the car never left the ground in these three instances, the driver's should have survived. There are too many variables that come in to play, once a car leaves the ground.

Talking with with our driver after the race, the pack racing and airborne car's has to stop.

The discussion of safety should include all angles, and there could be changes in several areas. But, we have to start with the first domino.

Great post. Every point you made is accurate.

If you look at it, both Greg and Tony Renna's crash started as the car lifted off the ground when they hit the grass. Dan's car lifted as a result of a poor chassis design.

Racing is dangerous yes, but there are always ways to improve safety in auto racing.

anthonyvop

25th October 2011, 02:41

Somebody's idea of the new car with an enclosed cockpit.

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/308134_262905660413070_172521979451439_675488_1533 007781_n.jpg

numanoid

25th October 2011, 16:30

Somebody's idea of the new car with an enclosed cockpit.

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/308134_262905660413070_172521979451439_675488_1533 007781_n.jpg

Rahal and Dixon seem to like it quite a bit. It certainly gives the car better lines.

Chris R

25th October 2011, 20:15

Rahal and Dixon seem to like it quite a bit. It certainly gives the car better lines.

Gotta say, it look nice - but so did many of the early renderings of the new car....

I also agree with EE's points - the canopy would not have saved any of those drivers. I think canopies would serve best to make us FEEL better but I do not think they would help all that much....

To add to EE's post - IIRC Krosnoff's car was actually torn up from below when the bottom of the tub struck the light post...

Keeping the cars on the ground is the key

MrJan

25th October 2011, 20:40

Some facts;

A canopy would not have saved Dan, Greg or Tony.

I've only ghosted into this thread because I'm bored, but I'm interested to know how that's a 'fact'. Not seen any of the accidents (don't follow IRL and didn't want to see Wheldon's crash), but I don't see how you can say that with certainty. Yes it may be unlikely that a canopy would've helped, but without seeing identical accidents in cars that are the same, but with canopies, you simply can't say that those are 'facts'.

Phoenixent

25th October 2011, 21:08

MrJan

25th October 2011, 21:11

Regardless of experience he simply cannot state that it's a fact without evidence. That's not an IndyCar/knowledge thing, it's a semantics thing.

Phoenixent

25th October 2011, 21:26

Regardless of experience he simply cannot state that it's a fact without evidence. That's not an IndyCar/knowledge thing, it's a semantics thing.

Have you seen any of the wrecks? I have seen those wrecks except for tony's and for the most part the tubs were destroyed in the wreck.

He can state that it's fact if he has first hand knowledge on those wrecks or have access to the crash report...

nigelred5

25th October 2011, 21:30

Having seen Dan and Greg's accident's live on TV and photos of Renna's accident, I have to agree, especially Greg Moore's. Dan's a canopy could possibly have deflected the impact enough, but that's questionable.

I agree, keeping the cars grounded is a priority, but at least a higher windscreen or the canopy provides another level of protection for m a host of other, possibly more comon incidents with debris, fuel spills, etc. How many drivers have been burned from fuel spilling into hte cockpit when the fuelling rig fails? If the fuel never gets into the cockpit, there's less danger to the driver. Massa would have hardly noticed the spring hitting his car. It's a next step in safety, not an answer to a single problem.

Hell, fit them with a rocket motor and some deployable wings and LET them TAKE flight ;)

MrJan

25th October 2011, 21:40

Have you seen any of the wrecks? I have seen those wrecks except for tony's and for the most part the tubs were destroyed in the wreck.

No, like I said I don't follow the series (or anything on that side of the pond).

He can state that it's fact if he has first hand knowledge on those wrecks or have access to the crash report...

Perhaps, it would depend on the detail of the report that he could see. But none of that's in his post, hence why I posted that I was interested to know how he could categorically state them as facts. Just stating 'fact' does not make something so, I've seen far too much bull**** on forums to believe anything that's posted without some sort of evidence/backup.

EagleEye

25th October 2011, 23:51

I've only ghosted into this thread because I'm bored, but I'm interested to know how that's a 'fact'. Not seen any of the accidents (don't follow IRL and didn't want to see Wheldon's crash), but I don't see how you can say that with certainty. Yes it may be unlikely that a canopy would've helped, but without seeing identical accidents in cars that are the same, but with canopies, you simply can't say that those are 'facts'.

In Dan's case, where the the roll cage was torn off (25KN lateral force, 50KN longitudinally, and 70KN vetical) a canopy would have been destroyed. There is no canopy in the world, that I am aware of that can withstand the stated forces for the Indycar roll hoop.

The numbers for the roll hoop, are listed in the Indycar rule book. The highest rated canopy I found, was one with 5K N strength. This rating falls far below the force measured by the accidents I wrote about. I have not seen the data from Dan's car, but given the rated strength of the roll hoop, the force would again exceed that of the canopy.

I looked at and helped analyze the data from Greg's and Tony's accidents. I do not wish to rehash the violence of each of these impacts, but again, a canopy would not have provided ANY benefit for these three crashes. One of the reasons the canopy has a lower rating, is that it as explosives in and must be able to be shattered so a pilot can eject safely.

As correctly pointed out above, it might have helped Mike Spence, Massa, Surtees and others.

numanoid

26th October 2011, 00:06

In Dan's case, where the the roll cage was torn off (25KN lateral force, 50KN longitudinally, and 70KN vetical) a canopy would have been destroyed. There is no canopy in the world, that I am aware of that can withstand the stated forces for the Indycar roll hoop.

The numbers for the roll hoop, are listed in the Indycar rule book. The highest rated canopy I found, was one with 5K N strength. This rating falls far below the force measured by the accidents I wrote about. I have not seen the data from Dan's car, but given the rated strength of the roll hoop, the force would again exceed that of the canopy.

I looked at and helped analyze the data from Greg's and Tony's accidents. I do not wish to rehash the violence of each of these impacts, but again, a canopy would not have provided ANY benefit for these three crashes. One of the reasons the canopy has a lower rating, is that it as explosives in and must be able to be shattered so a pilot can eject safely.

As correctly pointed out above, it might have helped Mike Spence, Massa, Surtees and others.

Since you are fleshing out your earlier post, can you tell me why you think that had the fence pole been replaced with a different material the crash would still have been fatal? To me, it seems like the fence post was the immovable object that did all the damage. The SAFER barrier wouldn't have caused it and I doubt other materials with "give" would have as well.

I'm not saying plexiglass or other strong netting is the answer, but had that pole not been there, I think we would have had a different outcome.

libra65

26th October 2011, 00:13

More importantly , what about the low speed rollover (which is not all that uncommon)?? The poor driver caught under a largely intact car can more or less scramble out now - not so with a canopy (and one that is quickly filling with various hot and stinky fluids from the engine and fuel tank). Similarly, Simona would have been absolutely fried if there was fire in cockpit when those guys tried to rip her out of the car......

NASCAR has multiple escape route in their car (two windows/doors and a roof hatch). A sports car has two doors. An openwheeler with a canopy has one route of escape that is most likely going to be dependent on someone else to get you out of the car. If you think the fallout from Dan Wheldon dying nearly instantly in a horrific crash is bad it would be nothing like the fallout of burning a driver to death because they were trapped in the car or suffocating them with noxious fumes, of having them bleed to death because you can't get he thing off even though his legs were just ripped off and the crash damage made the canopy difficult to get off (and make no mistake it would have to be VERY secure to be effective at all....The more I think about it the worse idea I think a canopy is for Indycars..... It is great for hydroplanes etc - but not Indycars....

My thoughts when they first brought up the canopy. If they had trouble cetting a canopy off, the results would be 10x worse.

garyshell

26th October 2011, 02:11

Regardless of experience he simply cannot state that it's a fact without evidence. That's not an IndyCar/knowledge thing, it's a semantics thing.

Since it is a known fact that the roll hoop was sheared off in the impact, I don't see how it takes any sort of leap of faith to accept that as EE said, a canopy would not have helped. Not even ballistic plexiglass is that strong.

Gary

nigelred5

26th October 2011, 02:54

Since it is a known fact that the roll hoop was sheared off in the impact, I don't see how it takes any sort of leap of faith to accept that as EE said, a canopy would not have helped. Not even ballistic plexiglass is that strong.

Gary

The difference is, you are then talking about a curved surface and more of a glancing blow than a blunt impact with a flat surface like the face of the roll hoop/air box opening. The catch fencing did exactly what it was intended to do unfortunately, it caught and shredded the car.

fan-veteran

26th October 2011, 03:49

With HANS device being already used maybe a simple improvement will be just to make helmets heavier (say + 1 kg more than today) and therefore quite stronger, with some redesign of HANS.

anthonyvop

26th October 2011, 04:20

chuck34

26th October 2011, 15:50

With HANS device being already used maybe a simple improvement will be just to make helmets heavier (say + 1 kg more than today) and therefore quite stronger, with some redesign of HANS.

As anthonyvop said, the drivers would have a harder time holding them up under normal circumstances. Add to that what would happen in an accident. Now you would have 1kg more times however many g's the accident incured of force trying to literally rip the driver's head off. F=ma. Yes perhaps a redesign of the HANS could help head-on issues, but it would do nothing for side impacts. Just making the helmet heavier is a bad idea. However, if you could make it stronger without adding weight that's always good. And most helmet manufacturers are looking into that already.

Plus a stronger helmet might not have done anything in Dan's case. I have not seen his helmet (nor do I really want to), but I would not be surprised if it doesn't really look too bad from the outside. I would suspect that all the damage to Dan was done by a sudden deceleration of his head, but his brain kept going, slamming into his skull. Sorry for the somewhat graphic nature of that. As an example, I do know that is exactly what happened to Stan Fox. He didn't die, but he did have fairly severe mental issues after his accident in '95, and his helmet looked perfect on the outside.

fan-veteran

26th October 2011, 17:07

The whole idea of canopies is to protect the driver's head from flying debris, smaller or bigger. But statistics displays that such accidents happen not so often (compared to other types of crashes and their hazards), nevertheless are dangerous and of course some of them were fatal. Canopies cannot absorb (in most cases) energy/impulse of a car smashing into a wall, saferbarrier, fence.

So first possibility is to redesign HANS devise to use with a quite heavier helmet (say two times the current) which should be much stronger also and take some measures for dealing with accelerations during cornering or breaking, in other words to support drivers head and helmet not only in the period of an accident but while racing.

Second measure leads to a redesign of the car - to include an impact energy absorbing structures not only in front but laterally and on top. Which would lead (just as an assumption) to semi-open wheels or cars similar to late 70-s and early 80-s appearance in around cockpit and frontal region.

Phoenixent

26th October 2011, 18:47

Chris R

26th October 2011, 19:21

Just noticed looking at the photos of the wreck that the fencing is on the outside of the poles and not the side facing the track. That was the same issue they had with Kenny Bracks wreck at Texas that almost cost him his life. At that time they stated they were going to make sure all the tracks they raced at had the fence on the track side so the cars would not tangle with the poles. Was that statement back then just BS to appease the media on Brack's 2003 Texas wreck and if so it came back to haunt Indycar at LVMS 2011. Fencing and placement should be the next big step on ovals for safety.......

good point, in the event they cannot move the fence due to the force of gravity (perhaps whatever might secure the fence is not strong enough to deal with the fence hang down toward the track??) they could at least design the posts with a large bevel (like 12-18 inches) to create a sort of deflector ramp to stop roll hoops etc. from getting hooked on the post (I am assuming that the ultimate problem was not so much contact in and of itself as the the hoop getting "caught" on the post....)

Andrewmcm

26th October 2011, 19:51

Marbles

27th October 2011, 01:24

If you want to put a roll cage on an Indycar then the cockpit better be three times as wide as it is now for the sake of rescue as Chris R and myself mentioned. If you think a "canopy" would be a real increase in safety than you better start looking for transparent aluminium. You can't design an Indycar to be safe when it pancakes a cement wall or gets shredded along a catch fence any more than you can design a Porsche to be safe if it launches off a highway at 250 K into a bunch of Oak trees.

What you can do is spend all your R&D on making sure the Indycar or the Porsche doesn't leave the road.

I've seen no documentation or video on real world safety of the new car versus the old and to honest if that bumper is what it looks to be -- that is a fragile carbon fibre shroud as opposed to a real bumper -- I have my doubts about Dallara and Indycars earnestness.

Phoenixent

27th October 2011, 06:24

Pardon my ignorance on this matter, but if the horizontal fencing between the posts fails / gets snapped by the impact of the car, then does it really matter which side of the fence the posts are mounted?

The post and cables on track side create traps that allow debris to catch and grab. Not sure if it is fact ir not but only SMI tracks have this configuration were IMS and ISC tracks have it the other way around trying to eliminate those traps. The catch fence still tears the cars up but they do their job of keeping them out of the stands. The sad part is that I would rather have 10 Dan Wheldon's than one of these cars or a cup car in the stands. The best thing that they can do is put the driving back in the drivers hands by dumping the down force on the cars.

fan-veteran

27th October 2011, 20:47

The best thing that they can do is put the driving back in the drivers hands by dumping the down force on the cars
But the problem lies in the fact that high banked ovals (24 degrees for example) allow OW indycars to negotiate those oval turns with very little downforce, tyres have a lot of grip.

Nem14

28th October 2011, 03:24

This caption is under a photo from Las Vegas on the Hot News page:

After getting about 20 feet in the air that's Power hitting the wall with the bottom of his car. To the left is Dan Wheldon's car with the flames bursting out going headfirst into the catch fence. This photo was taken a split second after Wheldon's head likely hit the pole, so he was probably already dead. The pole also sheered off the rollover hoop behind his head. But given the direction of the car his head probably hit the pole first, then the roll hoop. A canopy over the cockpit probably would have saved him.

The line "a canopy over the cockpit probably would have saved him" would seem to be highly speculative and just an opinion, unless supported with more information.

If there had been a canopy, and it deformed like the one in the video that was linked to of the FIA tests, could the canopy itself have delivered a fatal blow as it deformed from an impact with the fence post?

Andrewmcm

29th October 2011, 16:20

As far as I'm aware there is no direct evidence to suggest that a canopy would have saved Wheldon. The FIA have done some testing with tyres striking a canopy, but nothing approaching the kind of forces that would have been involved in the accident two weeks ago.

Anything and everything regarding canopies at this stage is pure speculation.

Nem14

30th October 2011, 03:07

So, who was the journalist who wrote that line, "A canopy over the cockpit probably would have saved him." violating journalistic ethics?

I was also wondering about the line, "He could easily have landed on JR Hildebrand’s head and killed him instantly. ", in this caption:

Will Power flies through the air in Las Vegas. He could easily have landed on JR Hildebrand’s head and killed him instantly. JR was lucky he hit the roll hoop instead of his head first

I'm not journalist, or familar with their ethics, but some of these clearly speculative comments seem well beyond normal reporting.

Nem14

16th November 2011, 03:04

Tragically, it was demonstrated this last weekend at the boat races off of Key West, Florida that canopies are probably not the panacea many are touting.

Plus, a 22 year old car racing driver tragically lost his life in a road course race incident in South America, while driving a closed cockpit car.

Oval tracks, and open cockpit cars are not the only dangers to racing drivers. Even racing on water can cause life ending injuries.

Each racing incident has it's own, usually unique, set of circumstances.

Nem14

27th May 2012, 21:54

Canopy-less IndyCars avoid another Wheldon tragedy When Mike Conway got up into the catch fencing when he spun on lap 80 of the Indy 500 visions of Dan Wheldon ran through our head. Conway was head first into the catch fencing and riding along it, his head just missing the poles. Meanwhile a wheel from Will Power's car went bounding down the track and would have hit Helio Castroneves square in the face (perhaps with fatal results) had he not taken evasive action.
And still IndyCar refuses to consider canopies over the drivers head. We understand tradition, but they are called open wheel cars guys, not open cockpit cars.

Apparently, IndyCar is not alone, since no other racing organization has seriously considered canopies either.

Probably because there is no data (none, zip, nada) that supports the supposition a canopy would offer more protection for the driver in all crash scenarios, than an open cockpit does. Putting a canopy on open cockpit cars to mitigate just one type of accidient scenario would be foolish. It would seem that in some types of crashes a canopy could actually trap a driver in the car.

I have not seen any information on how a aerospace type canopy would stand up to abrasion on the track or a raging fire.

The one test the FIA did was maybe a start, but certainly a lot more testing would have to be done, and that takes money. In fact the FIA's test seemed more about PR than the start of a safety initive.

Both Dr. Sid Watkins and Dr. Steven Olvey have made it clear that immediate access to the driver is often of paramount importance in saving a drivers life.

Mike Conway's car was going backwards, so the air intake and roll hoop would tend to keep his head off the fence. In other words, Mike Conway's head, while close, was not directly exposed to the fence.

Dan Wheldon's car was going forward. Plus don't forget that the intrusion of the fence post into Dan Wheldon's cockpit started at the footbox, and was so severe Dan was trapped in the car by the steering wheel bulkhead being bent towards the back of the car and down onto his legs.

It is certainly possible that had there been a canopy on Dan Wheldon's car, with the intrusion starting at the foot box, a canopy may well have been ripped from Dan Wheldon's car with no change in the tragic outcome.

neophyte

28th May 2012, 00:29

bad idea. If I wanted our cars to have a canopy I would be a Nascar fan.

Phoenixent

28th May 2012, 18:32

This is Mark's soapbox and we will hear about this to the end of time of the site which ever comes first. Does anyone here or on AR1 know how rescuers get into a cockpit that has the canopy jammed???

Nem14

29th May 2012, 02:26

With a closer look at the video, we can see that the top of Mike Conway's car did in fact contact the fence.

The camera on top of the air box, and apparently a portion of the top of the air box itself was removed from the car by the fence.

Where would a canopy on an Indy Car hinge? It couldn't be on rails and slide backwards, because of the air box and plenum. On rails and slide forward?

I wonder what procedures the Air Force or Navy has regarding canopies, assuming an airplane cockpit is still intact in a crash scenario. In most airplane emergencies, the canopy gets blown off so the pilot can eject from the airplane.

Mark in Oshawa

3rd June 2012, 05:04

This thread goes in circles. It is real simple, it is easier to keep the cars on the track then to design a canopy that doesn't trap the driver's rescuers while protecting him from impacts if the car takes flight. Change the nature of racing to keep the cars on the ground and this car is much safer.

If canopy's were serious options, I suspect there would have been more talk from the builders of open wheeled racing cars years ago.

Eagle Eye's numbers and assertions are not just WAG's, they are numbers and estimates based on being a member of an Indycar team and understanding the rules.....if a roll hoop can be ripped from the car, there is no way in hell a canopy will change things much.

nigelred5

4th June 2012, 15:13

It will never be a full canopy due to just those issues, but a reinforced windscreen tall enough to block projectiles and minimal impacts is entirely feasible. Look at the height of INDYCAR and F1 windscreens in the 70's. many were taller than hte driver's head if the y were using a modern seating position. I ran a Skater 32 offshore boat for several years similar to this boat that had f16 canopies with chromoly hoops around the top edge of the canopy to restore some of the structural integrity from when the top was cut out of the dome.

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/1528/dsc00541ru2.jpg

Nothing is ever going to survive an impact like vegas.