F1 race director Charlie Whiting says protected cockpits will happen

[Rob]

FIA technical director Charlie Whiting is convinced protected cockpits will one day be introduced into open-wheel racing as motorsport's governing body prepares to conduct further testing.

The death of Justin Wilson after being struck by debris from another car during the Pocono IndyCar race on Sunday has again brought the topic of open cockpits into question.

Since the death of Henry Surtees in 2009 when he was killed by a loose wheel in a F2 race, a week ahead of Felipe Massa sustaining life-threatening injuries when struck on the helmet by a component from another car at the Hungarian GP, the FIA has strenuously looked into providing some form of head protection for drivers.

Initial designs focused on a closed cockpit akin to a fighter jet, but following exhaustive tests this idea was dismissed given concerns surrounding the strength of the cover and a driver's safety should he become trapped following an accident.

Roll bars were also examined and discarded as they obscured a driver's view, but now the FIA is to look into two further designs towards the end of next month.

'Tradition' is no argument against closed cockpits

Whiting told AUTOSPORT: "We've been working on this for a few years and come up with a number of solutions to test, some more successfully than others.

"We had the fighter jet cockpit approach, but the downsides to that significantly outweighed the upsides.

"We also came up with some fairly ugly looking roll structures in front of the drivers, but they can't drive with it as they can't see through it.

The FIA Institute continues to work on safety improvements

"So it's been really, really hard to come up with something that is going to do it.

"But we have two other solutions on the table, with the first something from Mercedes.

"It doesn't cover the driver, you can still take the driver out, which is one of the most important things, and it's a hoop above the drivers head and forward of it, but with one central stay.

"We are also looking at another device which is blades of varying heights which will be set on top of the chassis and in front of the driver at angles which will render them nearly invisible to him."

The tests comprise objects, which include a complete wheel and tyre, being fired at a chassis, with a driver's head simulated in the cockpit.

'THERE MUST BE A WAY'

Whiting feels even if the FIA has to go back to the drawing board again should these latest two designs not be up to scratch, they will find a solution that will help prevent injury or death.

"We have put in a huge amount of time, effort and research into this project, which has not been easy, in fact bloody hard," added Whiting.

"But I can definitely see the day when this will happen. One day there will be something that will decrease a driver's risk of injury.

"Whether it will be as good at protecting a driver from an object coming towards him as a fighter jet cockpit, I doubt that, but it will offer him protection.

"We have to persevere. We must make something, even if it's not 100 per cent in terms of protecting the driver under all circumstances.

"But if it improves the situation it has to be good. There must be a way."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120489

[AfterLife]

That is what I call good news. Hopefully it will be a proper solution that can cover every aspect of head injuries.

[FerrariSteve]

This was a very sad and tragic accident but I hate knee jerk reactions. F1 shouldn't have closed cockpits, would that stop all deaths? Of course not!! and people might die because of it, if you crash and the car rolls over and catches fire. I do not want to see another horrific Roger Williamson accident.

Safety has come on leaps and bounds but it will NEVER be totally safe to race wheel to wheel at over 200mph. I totally disagree with closed cockpits and I hope the drivers are against them.

[jragona]

Maybe we should just cancel the races, that would be the safest option

[jragona]

Maybe the drivers could jump out of their cars at the start line and run the track

[Hornet]

Just because safety isn't guaranteed 100% doesn't mean we should not improve them. It's a poor argument to say just because it cannot prevent all possible injuries, lets not improve safety at all.

Safety always comes first before purist. F1 was never really defined by it's cockpit design anyway. The purist may want the car to remain as retro as possible, but nostalgia is no good reason to do that over safety.

ps: Here's what Max Chilton have to say.
http://maxchilton.com/news/time-for-change/

Our sport will remain a dangerous one to an extent and we have to accept that. We can’t stop huge impacts but the one vulnerable area left is the head and in this area there is more we can do. Some won’t like the idea but it’s time to get cockpits protected. In 10 years time we will look back to racing today as we look back at the safety precautions 20 years ago and say “what were we all thinking?”

If the drivers too are demanding for more safety, then the fans have no right to demand that nothing should be done. IMO.

[512 TR]

Knee jerk reactions is the twin of political correctness. Two things that are destroying, especially, the western societies. It's a cancer and it gets worse every year and every decade. They might as well cancel F1. What's the point of open-wheel racing anyway...

[jragona]

The FIA are so obsessed with safety, but they run an inherently dangerous sport... are they hypocrites?

[AfterLife]

Formula1 have gone through lots of changes compare to old days. Head protection for open cockpit cars is the next change that is essential.

[ferrari4life]

The FIA are so obsessed with safety, but they run an inherently dangerous sport... are they hypocrites?

so then suggestions on making it safer should not happen?

[Hornet]

The FIA are so obsessed with safety, but they run an inherently dangerous sport... are they hypocrites?

You argument makes no sense. Everyone knows motorsport is dangerous, but that doesn't mean safety cannot be improved. It has been improved over the years, and the one remaining area of weakness is the cockpit.

Improving the safety of the cockpit will not, in any way, be detrimental to the quality of racing. So naturally it has to be done. The only weird obsession here is with open cockpit for no good reason other than the fact it's open. Open cockpit doesn't make racing any more exciting, it was just merely a design grandfathered in from the early years where race cars had no cockpit.

[jragona]

The danger is one of the most exciting aspects of motor racing, every time it is reduced the excitment is reduced - these are supposed to be modern day gladiators battleing lions. Saftey is slowing killing the sport. If we want it to be completely safe, lets get the drivers to remote pilot the cars round the track, that would be really good to watch and I'm sure many people would pay to see it...

Saftey is the reason cars are getting slower, not faster. Why the 2004 cars are still the fastest. F1 is not better or more exciting today. You can't have it both ways.

Nobody wants to see anyone get hurt but safety is should not detract from the sport. Remember the drivers do it willingly, they are not forced they sign their contracts with a gun to their heads, if they thought F1 was too dangerous they wouldn't do it. Every time they get in their cars they know the risks and they do it anyway.

[Giallo 550]

ps: Here's what Max Chilton have to say.
http://maxchilton.com/news/time-for-change/


If the drivers too are demanding for more safety, then the fans have no right to demand that nothing should be done. IMO.

Who's Max Chilton? Mark Webber's car ******* flipped through the air a couple of seasons ago and he didn't cry about the need for closed cockpits. Safety has come such a long way in Formula 1, and it's important to note that Jules Bianchi died due to the FIA's negligence regarding the unsafe conditions and the placement of that crane on the track. Listen, I'm all for pioneering safety technology, but drastically altering the very nature of a sport that is inherently dangerous is absurd. Instead of worrying about closed cockpits, why don't they dump a bunch of money into developing even better helmets? The fact of the matter is that the best drivers in the world are being paid massive amounts of money because there is high demand, they are highly skilled, and there is high risk.

[Hornet]

The danger is one of the most exciting aspects of motor racing, every time it is reduced the excitment is reduced - these are supposed to be modern day gladiators battleing lions. Saftey is slowing killing the sport. If we want it to be completely safe, lets get the drivers to remote pilot the cars round the track, that would be really good to watch and I'm sure many people would pay to see it...

Saftey is the reason cars are getting slower, not faster. Why the 2004 cars are still the fastest. F1 is not better or more exciting today. You can't have it both ways.

Nobody wants to see anyone get hurt but safety is should not detract from the sport. Remember the drivers do it willingly, they are not forced they sign their contracts with a gun to their heads, if they thought F1 was too dangerous they wouldn't do it. Every time they get in their cars they know the risks and they do it anyway.

But how does open cockpit adds to the excitement? Right now, the sport is viewed as usually unexciting by many fans, and the main complain is the lack of competition. Open cockpit don't have anything to do with that.

LeMans LMP have both open cockpit and closed cockpit designs. I've never heard of anyone complaining about LMP 1 car being closed cockpit, and demand that they all be open cockpit. Yet people are excited about LMP 1, probably more so than any other categories. It's closed cockpit wasn't detrimental to the race's excitement.

The thing is, many people do not want to change merely because they prefer sticking to what they are familiar with. Similar to low profile tires. When Pirelli tested the low profile tires, there were resistance and people claim it's not F1. F1 wasn't defined by it's tire's height to begin with, but people just want to stick to something they are familiar with. That's the problem.

The difference is however, this time we're not talking about aesthetics, we're talking about safety as in the case of cockpit design.

[Giallo 550]

But how does open cockpit adds to the excitement? Right now, the sport is viewed as usually unexciting by many fans, and the main complain is the lack of competition. Open cockpit don't have anything to do with that.

LeMans LMP have both open cockpit and closed cockpit designs. I've never heard of anyone complaining about LMP 1 car being closed cockpit, and demand that they all be open cockpit. Yet people are excited about LMP 1, probably more so than any other categories. It's closed cockpit wasn't detrimental to the race's excitement.

The thing is, many people do not want to change merely because they prefer sticking to what they are familiar with. Similar to low profile tires. When Pirelli tested the low profile tires, there were resistance and people claim it's not F1. F1 wasn't defined by it's tire's height to begin with, but people just want to stick to something they are familiar with. That's the problem.

The difference is however, this time we're not talking about aesthetics, we're talking about safety as in the case of cockpit design.

F1 is not LMP. Formula 1 is open wheel and open cockpit racing. There hasn't been a single death in F1 between Senna and Bianchi, and like I said in my above post, Jules's blood is on the hands of the FIA, not the open cockpit.

[Hornet]

I do not agree that F1 is defined by open cockpit any more than it is by shaped floors, or wings. It just happens to be a design that did not changed from early racing car design. Back then, they did not have any aerodynamic knowledge hence they went with open cockpits and open wheels.

But imagine this. I'm sure when they started learning about aerodynamics and they introduced wings to the car, there were people back then complaining that it looked bad, this is not F1, we should do away with wings. But we don't complain about that today, because we are used to the idea of race cars having wings today. The point is, there was that transition period, and F1 went ahead (and survived) with that transition as the sport was never defined by it's aesthetics.

Likewise, sooner or later, something will have to changed with cockpit designs, and for reasons that are arguably more important than the introduction of wings. It would be difficult for current fans today as it did for the fans many decades ago. But future fans would not lose sleep over it the same way we don't today about wings, or diffusers for example.

[AfterLife]

In addition to Hornet's points, F1 cars used to have engine in front but now the engine is at the back. So what? Tradition has gone?!

[Giallo 550]

Why don't we just make the top speed 65 miles per hour while we're at it too? There's no smoking gun here. What happened to Felipe Massa was a freak accident that happened almost ten years ago and is the exception, not the rule. Again, why not just invest in improving helmet technology?

[Greig]

If cockpit protection stops another death or serious injury in the sport then I am all for it.

[jragona]

But how does open cockpit adds to the excitement? Right now, the sport is viewed as usually unexciting by many fans, and the main complain is the lack of competition. Open cockpit don't have anything to do with that.

LeMans LMP have both open cockpit and closed cockpit designs. I've never heard of anyone complaining about LMP 1 car being closed cockpit, and demand that they all be open cockpit. Yet people are excited about LMP 1, probably more so than any other categories. It's closed cockpit wasn't detrimental to the race's excitement.

The thing is, many people do not want to change merely because they prefer sticking to what they are familiar with. Similar to low profile tires. When Pirelli tested the low profile tires, there were resistance and people claim it's not F1. F1 wasn't defined by it's tire's height to begin with, but people just want to stick to something they are familiar with. That's the problem.

The difference is however, this time we're not talking about aesthetics, we're talking about safety as in the case of cockpit design.

I'm not against closed cockpits, I suppose I am just tired of all the sanitisation of F1 these days. The cars should be getting faster year on year, lap records should be set each year, the cars should be more and more powerful and tougher to drive, the challenge should increase. THe reality is that the opposite is happening which is frustrating.

[erinha]

I guess if it was safer, they could easily make it faster too.

[TigerKing]

I hope when he means protected cockpits he doesn't mean closed cockpits, more like a "windshield" or something to protect the direct helmet. However, i don't see this doing anything for the driver because Wilson's head got hit by the nosecone from the top. I think if he had a closed cockpit the glass would've almost been guaranteed to shatter all over his body.
This is a typical knee-jerk response but unfortunately, too many important people are following into this. Maybe MotoGP riders should driver 500cc scooters instead to be safer. Oh wait, they don't because that's what makes the drivers badasses.
Wouldn't it be ironic if open cockpit cars became less "badass" because of the knee-jerk response to Badass Wilson's death. It would be shameful for his namesake IMO.

[Brembo]

An extremely better hemet, and face shield going down the drivers neck. Do they now use kevlar on helmet and face shield? Also I remember helmets being used with water retained inside to lessen impact. Maybe some sort of side air bags.

[Greig]

I hope when he means protected cockpits he doesn't mean closed cockpits, more like a "windshield" or something to protect the direct helmet. However, i don't see this doing anything for the driver because Wilson's head got hit by the nosecone from the top. I think if he had a closed cockpit the glass would've almost been guaranteed to shatter all over his body.
This is a typical knee-jerk response but unfortunately, too many important people are following into this. Maybe MotoGP riders should driver 500cc scooters instead to be safer. Oh wait, they don't because that's what makes the drivers badasses.
Wouldn't it be ironic if open cockpit cars became less "badass" because of the knee-jerk response to Badass Wilson's death. It would be shameful for his namesake IMO.

Can't really understand this post, seems like you are saying you would be unhappy if the sport tried to stop someone dying or being injured?

[Hornet]

Why don't we just make the top speed 65 miles per hour while we're at it too? There's no smoking gun here. What happened to Felipe Massa was a freak accident that happened almost ten years ago and is the exception, not the rule. Again, why not just invest in improving helmet technology?

I believe plenty has been done with helmet's design ever since Senna's death, and even more after Massa's injury. We may be at the limits of what can be done.

I hope when he means protected cockpits he doesn't mean closed cockpits, more like a "windshield" or something to protect the direct helmet. However, i don't see this doing anything for the driver because Wilson's head got hit by the nosecone from the top. I think if he had a closed cockpit the glass would've almost been guaranteed to shatter all over his body.
This is a typical knee-jerk response but unfortunately, too many important people are following into this. Maybe MotoGP riders should driver 500cc scooters instead to be safer. Oh wait, they don't because that's what makes the drivers badasses.
Wouldn't it be ironic if open cockpit cars became less "badass" because of the knee-jerk response to Badass Wilson's death. It would be shameful for his namesake IMO.

FIA have done test with jet aircraft's canopy, and it survived a wheel hitting it at 140 mph.

But that's not the only possible solution. LMP 1 closed cockpit is another possible solution, where the cockpit is part of the monocoque (rather than just a glass canopy on top).

You can also have the cockpit structure without windshield, if we do not want a fully enclosed cockpit. Not a full protection, but good enough to shield the driver from large objects such as the car's body or wheel.

This is an example of LMP 1 monoque, and it's not very different from current F1 design.


There are plenty of ways to improve cockpit safety, I don't believe that it's not possible to find one solution that works. It's a matter of whether we want to do it or not. And it's better to do it now rather than wait for another death.

And no, open cockpit doesn't make a car more "badass". In fact, from a technical point of view, it's a silly design as it creates huge amount of drag.

[Rob]

In addition to Hornet's points, F1 cars used to have engine in front but now the engine is at the back. So what? Tradition has gone?!

that was for performance gains.

[Rob]

These have all been "freak" accidents. Happens like a blue moon. Yes, can happen, but its not every race. Call me old fashioned, but F1, open wheel racing has and should always been open cockpits. If F1 goes closed, could call it Formula Prototypes. Im all for safey, but knee jerk reactions is not the solutions. All drivers in open cockpit racing, knows the danger of the racing.

If anything, lets look at making the helmets more safer. If it means making them another kilo heavier with kevlar or what ever else, fine.

[AfterLife]

that was for performance gains.

Introduction of head protection is for safety gains.

[AfterLife]

Introduction of head protection is exactly like introduction of seat belt for drivers back in the old days and I am sure there were some people that questioned introduction of seat belt in motorsport.

Flying debris hitting drivers head is just one part of the problem. The other part is cars landing on each other in the accidents like we saw in Spa 2012 Romain Grosjean and Fernando Alonso and Austria 2015 Kimi Raikkonen and Fernando Alonso. Those accidents could easily crush drivers skull and neck.

[AfterLife]

The most recent accidents that I am aware of them:

2009- Henry surtees - Wheel hitting his head - Death
2009- Felipe Massa - Spring hitting his head - Crushing part of skull
2012- Romain Grosjean and Fernando Alonso 2012 Spa crash - Fortunately nothing Happened
2013- Lewis Hamiltons's tire blowup in front of Fernando Alonso in Silverston - Luckily nothing happened but engineers said that the debris could easily enter into Fernando Alonso's helmet like a bullet.
2014- Jules Bianchi - collided with the rear of a tractor crane - Death
2015- Kimi Raikkonen and Fernando Alonso Austria - Fortunately nothing happened
2015- Justin Wilson - part of the other car's nose hitting his head - Death

7 head related and near miss accidents in 7 years that 3 of them were fatal and the rest could be fatal easily.

By the way I have experienced a minor concussion and it took me 3 to 4 months to recover. It really hurts alot. Believe me.