What do you mean by F1?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
The fans clearly don't want it.
You should be asking FOTA and see if you can catch them out!
Printable View
What do you mean by F1?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
The fans clearly don't want it.
You should be asking FOTA and see if you can catch them out!
The fans don't want it? You mean a few stick in the mud people on a forum. If you put roofs on and fairings on the wheels 99% of people would still watch........Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
A few? The majority on this thread said no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
It's been asked before and the majority said no.
Go watch DTM. They weigh about a tonne, V8s, fancy aero mods.
I said people on the forum. No doubt 9/10 of them would still watch anyway.
Of course. Seeing two open wheelers going wheel to wheel is a greater spectacle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
A lot of fans dislike the idea of smaller engines and turbos but I bet they'd still watch it as well.
It's not like tin-tops or endurance racing where there is a credible alternative.
Was certainly an enormous hit, and I think people feared the worst from looking at the aftermath, but I can think of a few similarly large impacts in recent open wheel history. Mike Conway at the Indy 500 springs to mind, as does Kubica at Montreal. Thinking back to some of the more scary "sudden stop" impacts in F1, you have Luciano Burti at Spa 2001 and Jos Verstappen at Spa 1996, both of which were gigantic. I'd agree that the fact McNish and especially Rockenfeller got out unhurt is amazing, but I'm not sure it necessarily means prototype racing is safer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
NO!Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Are you thinking something similar in spirit to the Caparo T1 perhaps?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
http://designapplause.com/wp-content...09/02/t1-1.png
That seems to be the logical design step from where Daniel has suggested and to be perfectly honest, a field of field of 26 of cars similar to this would be ab-so-lute-ly-fan-tas-tic!
[sarcasm]OMG I've just realised that there is a lower possibility of the driver being hit by debris and the wheels aren't going to be able to run over each other! I'm definitely not watching a health and safety fest like that!!!!!![/sarcasm]Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
It's an interesting idea but this leads me to the question of where do you stop. If f1 were to go down the coupe route then the feeder formula below would surely follow suite. Before you know it you've wiped out open top single seater racing full stop.
Well, when F1 starts allowing formula fords on the F1 grid, then we might have a comparable situation to set up the speed differentials involved in the accident to which you refer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I'm not talking about the cause of the incident, simply the way the car survived a massive shunt. Anyone who thinks that F1 will continue on without fatalities is delusional....Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I see what you're saying. But there were two bad incidents in the last couple of years which involved things hitting drivers in the head. Surtees and Massa of course. Now there's nothing to stop either of those accidents happening in F1 and IMHO this is no different to the change from having no seatbelts to having seatbelts or aluminium fuel tanks to the safer ones we have today.Quote:
Originally Posted by GridGirl
i simply don't get what is so bad about the car below or the Caparo T1. The F1 genes are still very much apparent, but you have lessened the risk of wheel to wheel accidents and the risk of Surtees/Massa style incidents. But then I guess as usual someone has to die in F1 for it to want to be safer.....
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....type-front.jpg
I can somewhat see the point of enclosed cockpits, however I don't really see the point of completely enclosing the wheels. Look at the McNish accident, the wheels went into the crowd just as easily as they would have done with F1.
But that's imaterial. The point of enclosing the wheels in F1 is to stop 1 wheel hitting another and sending one of the cars flying. You only need look at the Webber v Kovalainen incident to see how bad wheel on wheel contact can be. Whilst I realise that having his front wing knocked off was part of the problem, it was the wheel on wheel contact that sent the car flying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Well, Kubica survived an equally terrifying shunt in Canada, and Rubens crash in '94 was, to say the least, miraculous that he survived.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I know that, but would you honestly go as far as to say F1 is 100% safe?Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Walking out of my house and down my street isn't 100% safe. Statistically, flying in a jet propelled cocoon filled with highly flammable kerosene is safer than crossing the street....Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
The point is that F1 is immeasurably safer than 10/20 etc years ago, and they are constantly looking to improve the safety for this kind of open wheel racing.
I simply don't see why there need to be open wheels? Of course that's the way it was in the past by the goat argument then applies. Tell me why F1 needs open wheels other than the fact that this is how it's always been?Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Why are people so desperate for it to stay open wheel?
Because F1 always has been, and IMHO always should, be an open wheel formula.Quote:
Originally Posted by barryfullalove
Shouls we advocate stabilisers for the bike racers? :crazy:
Because that's what it's been like for ages man! People seem to have un unrational attachment to having the wheels uncovered.Quote:
Originally Posted by barryfullalove
Listen, I don't think F1 should go towards being front engined, electric, fwd, or anything like that. But covering the wheels and cockpit would make the cars safer (aside from what Sonic mentioned with a car rolling, but even then a driver can't get out of an open top cockpit anyway) and would make the cars so much more fuel efficient (green racing anyone? ;) ) and somewhat minimise the need for DRS as the cars will have far less drag.
Why?Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Your stabiliser argument is ridiculously crap as it completely changes the sport.
Mud, meet stick, stick, meet mud.
Well for a good 30 years it was extremely dangerous and lacked sufficient safety, so lets go back to that. It would be nice to see a few more drivers die or be seriously injured, you know like in the good old days.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Tradition shouldn't stand in the way of safety. I'm not saying that I want to see closed wheel F1, just that 'it always has been' is a **** argument.
Mud and stick know each other well, they've been carrying on for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Well, are you advocating we should do away with HANS, medical air, cockpit raised sides, roll bars, wheel tethers, crash structures, self sealing fuel tanks?Quote:
Originally Posted by barryfullalove
All measures taken to dramatically improve safety while keeping the spirit of the open wheel formula, no?
Gotta be better that a goat straddling your airbox Daniel.... :dozey:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Spirit :up: :rotflmao: Now you're just heading further towards needlessly indefineable definitions of what F1 is or should be.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
It's merely an example of why we don't need to keep things the same because they have been like this for a time......Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Au contraire - F1 running coupes becomes sportscars, not F1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
And how does enclosing wheels and cockpits not completely change the sport of F1 then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Completely agree. Interlocking wheels only serve to cause accidents and open wheels only cause drag.Quote:
Originally Posted by barryfullalove
If F1 cars ran at Le Mans with the same size fuel tanks as the R18 and 908 then they would probably only do 4 laps of the 24 hour circuit per tank whereas the Peugeot's were above to do 11 or 12. Now of course they're diesels, but the energy contained in dismal isn't THAT much more than contained in petrol.
That's like saying that a sheep that's been shorn and a sheep that hasn't, are totally different creatures.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I think it's up to you to show how it DOES change the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
F1 is an open-wheel, open-cockpit series. To enclose the wheels & cockpit would completely change the sport.
How?Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, because it is no longer open wheel open cockpit racing.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Cobblers! Take the engine cover off an F1 car, and it remains an F1 car. Enclose the wheels on any open wheel car, and it is no longer an open wheel car, and therefore not eligable to run in an open wheel racing series.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
You still haven't proven to me that with fairings over the wheels, that an F1 car isn't still an F1 car.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I refer the honourable gentleman to the FIA Technical Regulations re: Formula 1 cars. If it's not in there it's not an F1 car.
Otherwise "proof" is an arbitary concept, you can't be the sole arbiter of what is proven or not proven.