F1 race director Charlie Whiting says protected cockpits will happen

[Hornet]

Carbon Fibre Monocoque and HANS didn't change how the cars looked substantially (Carbon Fibre actually made it faster). I am actually interested in Mercedes' blade option that the FIA is gonna test soon. Maybe it might look ok and may actually prevent more head injuries. I just don't like the closed cockpit idea but I'm open to safer open cockpits.

There have been many changes introduced throughout the history of the sport that changes the looks of the car. And as I mentioned, it's not unsurprising that many fans often are uncomfortable with changes, whether we admit it or not. A recent example would be the switch from traditional engine to PU concept. But it's really no different than what fans experience back when F1 introduced wings, safety helmet, the arrival and departure of turbo during the 70s, the list goes on.

And what's going to happen if the latch on the canopy fails and a driver burns inside the cockpit? Do we install ejection seats and blow the canopy hinges with small pyrotechnic charges? Come on guys. Knee jerk reactions are not the way to solve anything. This is why the good people of England can't own firearms and yet have to deal with the highest violent crime rate of amg developed country in the world.

You can't solve problems with visceral, reactionary decisions. You need to examine the cause, and then propose solutions not just scream "he hurt his head let's change the cars"

It's rediculous.

That's not what it's about. They are not changing the car just to have a different looking car, only the critics are fixated on the aesthetic consequence of it.

The proposed changes are no different than say lowering the front nose. Ugly, yes, but that aesthetic changes was merely a consequence of making the front of the car safer, but it wasn't the objective.

Now of course you do raise a valid point in terms of safety of the canopy, that's fine. It's an engineering problem that needs to be addressed. The problem is when people opposed not because of the safety of canopy, but because they are resistant to something unfamiliar, to visual changes to the car. That is a very poor argument really.

[ALO]

That's nice. But where're the mirrors?

Maybe there are cameras, and screens inside the cockpit, instead of mirrors...

with Mirrors

https://www.formula1.com/content/fom...n-concept.html

[jragona]

The canopy would be far more aerodynamic than the open cockpit or the Mercedes thing - which look like it would generate quite a bit of drag.

The canopy could actually speed up the cars just because of the drag reduction they would provide.

[Brakefade]

Why were hybrid PU and saving fuel more important to the FIA than protecting the drivers? F1 teams should've been forced to develop closed cockpits instead of the hybrid PUs. Save the drivers first, then worry about the environment... Or rather your "green" image.

[stefa]

with Mirrors

https://www.formula1.com/content/fom...n-concept.html

Ugly!!!!

[WS6TransAm01]

sorry off topic, but no we have not, and whats going on in the land of the free over past week?

http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top...ime-rates.html

Uh, yes you do Rob.

2011
UK 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people
US 386 violent crimes per 100,000 people

You are forgetting to compare the violent crime rate to the total population. Yes the firearm murder rate in the U.S. is 4 times higher, but it's hard to murder someone with a gun when you can own one, so it's really a non point.

I think these figures were also quoted in a local London Newspaper.

The point is, reactionary measures rarely do what they are promised to accomplish because they take a very narrow view of the problem and present a solution to a public that is foaming at the mouth for an answer. The sheep will accept just about anything at this time because they are are running an raw emotion.

What happened to Massa and the Wilson are freak accidents. I know we all loved Jules but come on guys, is your love so great that you can't see the forest through the trees? Okay, maybe it should have been red flagged, maybe he didn't see the yellows or the marshals, but the conditions were such crap that maybe he should have backed off 10% and he would not have slid off the track. As a driver you have to know your limits the limits of the track and your equipment and push to that limit. If you push beyond it, it will bite you in the a$$. Jules accident was a tragedy for sure. But it was not the fault of the car's design and there is no need to change it in the wake of his passing.

[abbottcostello]

The sport has gone from this in the early '50'sto this present daySeeing how much it has already changed since the early days, not sure what the fuss is all about. They want to further protect drivers, I am all for that goal! It will not be perfect or foolproof in all regards, but as long as it has no unwanted consequences I'm for it.

[Stormy]

Canopies will look ugly, that's for sure.
But it will stop a loose tire or a huge part of a car to hit the drivers head and that's that.

[512 TR]

I usually never talk about accidents but I will say this. One can argue that the HANS was what never gave Jules a chance. Maybe without the HANS he would have been able to lean his head to the right at the impact with the crane and at least take away some of the blow to his head? But since his head was fixed inside the HANS he was never even given a chance to do that. Why was the HANS created in the first place? To reduce the whiplash risk, right? Well, having a whiplash is preferable to being trappaed inside a potential death trap. In the old days you can see drivers leaning their head outside of the cockpit to either get some fresh air or to loosen the neck muscles. With HANS that's impossible. The next step is to close off the only exit a driver has. There is a sentence for that...kill somebpdy with kindess. I don't like it and I hate knee-jerk reactions to freak accidents.

[Nand0Nand0]

Stupid idea IMO.
For those stuck on the any-rule-that-prevents-death-I'm-all-for-it bandwagon I have a rule that guaranteed will prevent any further death from F1 racing.
I can't wait to hear someone say canopies are such a great idea they think they should be introduced to MotoGP :)

[TigerKing]

Stupid idea IMO.
For those stuck on the any-rule-that-prevents-death-I'm-all-for-it bandwagon I have a rule that guaranteed will prevent any further death from F1 racing.
I can't wait to hear someone say canopies are such a great idea they think they should be introduced to MotoGP :)

I'm sure Marquez would've liked that idea today

[Rob]

I usually never talk about accidents but I will say this. One can argue that the HANS was what never gave Jules a chance. Maybe without the HANS he would have been able to lean his head to the right at the impact with the crane and at least take away some of the blow to his head? But since his head was fixed inside the HANS he was never even given a chance to do that. Why was the HANS created in the first place? To reduce the whiplash risk, right? Well, having a whiplash is preferable to being trappaed inside a potential death trap. In the old days you can see drivers leaning their head outside of the cockpit to either get some fresh air or to loosen the neck muscles. With HANS that's impossible. The next step is to close off the only exit a driver has. There is a sentence for that...kill somebpdy with kindess. I don't like it and I hate knee-jerk reactions to freak accidents.

Might want to read this about HANS device..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HANS_device

[Greig]

Stupid idea IMO.
For those stuck on the any-rule-that-prevents-death-I'm-all-for-it bandwagon I have a rule that guaranteed will prevent any further death from F1 racing.
I can't wait to hear someone say canopies are such a great idea they think they should be introduced to MotoGP :)

I imagine the sport will decide if it's stupid or not, drivers and the teams and not some fans who sit on their sofa. End of the day you can call preventing a death stupid but I imagine the drivers feel very differently about it.

If the cockpit protection saves 1 drivers life then it's enough for me.

[Nand0Nand0]

.. saves 1 drivers life then it's enough for me.

So your all for a 10kph F1 speed limit then :)

[Greig]

So your all for a 10kph F1 speed limit then :)

Or you could comment on what I actually said and not half quote.

[Nand0Nand0]

Or you could comment on what I actually said and not half quote.

Ah, so it was a different Greig I was verbatim quoting.

Feel free to keep digging the massive hole you're in :)

[Greig]

I imagine the sport will decide if it's stupid or not, drivers and the teams and not some fans who sit on their sofa. End of the day you can call preventing a death stupid but I imagine the drivers feel very differently about it.

If the cockpit protection saves 1 drivers life then it's enough for me.

Ah, so it was a different Greig I was verbatim quoting.

Feel free to keep digging the massive hole you're in :)

I will even make it bold for you, cutting off half my comment is a) not verbatim and b) rather silly. Note the "If the cockpit protection" part as it is rather relevant.....

And you want to say I am digging a hole?......

[Silent Bob]

So what will be the response if these canopies are adopted and it results in a death? Where do we go from there? If a wheel falls off and hits a driver, even though it's tethered, should we then enclose the wheels? That would make the driver's, spectators, mechanics a lot safer.

[Greig]

So what will be the response if these canopies are adopted and it results in a death? Where do we go from there? If a wheel falls off and hits a driver, even though it's tethered, should we then enclose the wheels? That would make the driver's, spectators, mechanics a lot safer.

Enclosing the wheels does not stop them coming off and the tethers do a very good job. There is no certainty they will introduce a canopy either people seem to think cockpit protection = canopy.

[Tony]

I'm probably one of the few on here that's quite bored with the way F1 cars currently look... it's been too many years of evolution, I'd like to see a fundamental change in their appearances and if it helps improve driver safety then all the better!!

[Silent Bob]

I see some cars have a small windscreen in front of the driver. Why not just put a larger one and strengthen it. Won't wreck the appearance and add to safety.

[TigerKing]

I see some cars have a small windscreen in front of the driver. Why not just put a larger one and strengthen it. Won't wreck the appearance and add to safety.

Also will reduce aerodynamic drag!

[Nova]

There is no guarentee that cockpits will prevent something tragic. WEC/Lemans cars have canopies (closed cockpits), yet there are still casualties. Racing always was and still is a dangerous sport. Drivers always know this, yet they still do it..no one forces them, they love it. It will never be a non dangerous sport.

Now F1 is talking about how to make it safer, yet they themselves dictated that pirelli should make tires that degrade quickly. How many blowouts the last race? Yet the fia wants to make racing safer. Id call that hypocritical.

[FerrariSteve]

I don't believe canopies will even save drivers from high mass objects, small stuff possibly but a part of the front wing (Wilson) or a loose wheel (Surtees) and the amount of energy involved is so huge that even a canopy would be shattered and it wouldn't take enough energy off the impart to stop it being fatal imo.

[Greig]

There is no guarentee that cockpits will prevent something tragic. WEC/Lemans cars have canopies (closed cockpits), yet there are still casualties. Racing always was and still is a dangerous sport. Drivers always know this, yet they still do it..no one forces them, they love it. It will never be a non dangerous sport.

Now F1 is talking about how to make it safer, yet they themselves dictated that pirelli should make tires that degrade quickly. How many blowouts the last race? Yet the fia wants to make racing safer. Id call that hypocritical.

Indeed protecting the drivers head might not be 100% but nothing ever is, it's about lessening the risk of such a injury from happening. The tyres are not designed or requested by the FIA to blow out, degrade yes but not to blow up. FIA could ask for a tyre that lasts all race like in 2005.

[Hornet]

Stupid idea IMO.
For those stuck on the any-rule-that-prevents-death-I'm-all-for-it bandwagon I have a rule that guaranteed will prevent any further death from F1 racing.
I can't wait to hear someone say canopies are such a great idea they think they should be introduced to MotoGP :)

He's a question you should ask your self honestly. Is aesthetic the real reason why you are against the idea of improving cockpit safety? Do you think aesthetic is more important than driver's safety?

When the FIA proposed other safety changes in the past, I've never seen these kind of reaction from the fans. Yet the very idea of enclosing the cockpit suddenly made people opposed the idea of protected cockpit, to the point of claiming racing will always be dangerous so nothing should be done about it. Where we you guys when the other safety changes were introduced? What difference is a protected cockpit compared to HANS, or carbon fiber monocoque, or the banning of shaped floors, the banning of fan car, or ride height restrictions.

[aroutis]

Indeed protecting the drivers head might not be 100% but nothing ever is, it's about lessening the risk of such a injury from happening. The tyres are not designed or requested by the FIA to blow out, degrade yes but not to blow up. FIA could ask for a tyre that lasts all race like in 2005.

Yes please let' s turn it into endurance racing. Like 2005..

We need to introduce variables, taking into consideration safety. Surely that should not be so hard to implement.
This means, the teams should have a choice of tyres that will not blow out on their face and no, they will not unpredictably stop working, and no, they should not be forced to do what they do now, which is use two different set of tyres per race, unless -they- want to.

[Silent Bob]

He's a question you should ask your self honestly. Is aesthetic the real reason why you are against the idea of improving cockpit safety? Do you think aesthetic is more important than driver's safety?

When the FIA proposed other safety changes in the past, I've never seen these kind of reaction from the fans. Yet the very idea of enclosing the cockpit suddenly made people opposed the idea of protected cockpit, to the point of claiming racing will always be dangerous so nothing should be done about it. Where we you guys when the other safety changes were introduced? What difference is a protected cockpit compared to HANS, or carbon fiber monocoque, or the banning of shaped floors, the banning of fan car, or ride height restrictions.

A lot of the previous safety items didn't significantly change the appearance of an F1 car. If the cockpit is closed, and then in the name of safety, the wheels are covered (to stop delaminating tires and such), is it still F1? Or does the fundamental element of the sport get erased and become something else? Not sure if F1 can remain F1 with a comprehensively different looking car.

[Greig]

F1 is open wheel racing, and there is no talk about enclosing wheels.

[Silent Bob]

Agreed. but it is and has always been open cockpit. So I'm just saying if we are to make the cars as safe as possible, then it is logical to have an enclosed cockpit and covered wheels. Just asking.. what is F1 if you get rid of its characteristics. I'm not in favour of a closed cockpit, but an unobtrusive safety measure would be fine. I think enclosing the cockpit is like covering the wheels, it changes what F1 is.