FIA tests closed cockpit possibilities

[patrick]

http://vimeo.com/26098946

http://jalopnik.com/5821198/watch-what- ... at-140-mph

Undoubtedly prompted by the tragic death of Henry Surtees and Felipe Massa's incident in 2009, I remember further whisperings last year especially after Schumacher's incident in Abu Dhabi.
So, with this test video surfacing, and the results being passed on to the TWG, is the FIA seriously considering a move to closed-cockpit cars?

[F1000X]

Interesting, but all I can think of is that there are SO MANY problems the FIA is going to have if they do this.

What do you do when it rains? Do you RainX the canopy? Do you design and use complicated tearoffs? Do you have windscreen wipers?

Do F1 drivers wear cool suits? Once you go closed cockpit, you have to either go a/c blown helmet, cool suit, or both, and that's more weight the F1 teams are going to try a skimp out of at the for the sake of performance.

If everyone has to use the same canopy, them obviously that has some implications about the shape of inner part of the tub. Does that mean we can eliminate the high airbox?

What about glare from sunlight? Condensation inside the canopy?

They've got to figure how to make it quick to remove from both inside and outside the cockpit.

Most importantly, this makes it harder for the viewer to see inside the cockpit, and for Sebastian Vettel to be seen waving his finger.

That said, it would be really cool to see teams turning up with tinted canopys for the sunny races.

I'm really looking forward to Mario's post about this. Good find man.

[S951]

There is always going to be a chance of danger in any motorsport regardless of it being open wheel or not. With the way the cars have been recently they are pretty dam safe I think it's a case of them wanting to avoid another massa incident maybe?

[East Londoner]

I read somewhere (probably the 2002 Season Preview book I used to own) that Mark Webber said, after his spectacular accident in the 1999 Le Mans race that he would never step into a closed cockpit race car again. Wonder what he'll say about all of this.

I can appreciate the safety aspect of it all (no-one wants another Henry Surtees/Felipe Massa type accident to happen), but the flaws in this idea are massive. Seriously, an F1 car with windscreen wipers. Come on! And how are they going to make it possible to exit the cockpit in the maximium alloted time the FIA normally state. And what if, in an accident, the screen gets jammed on or shatters?

[dr-baker]

Many of the doubts being expressed here might equally be expressed about the LMP1 prototypes at Le Mans (although the volume of space within those cockpits are larger, I imagine). I would like to know how much transfer of information there might be between LMP1 closed-cockpits to F1 closed-cockpits.

[patrick]

In terms of speedy cockpit exit I am reminded of the Mercedes-Benz SLS-AMG (which we know as the current FOM safety car). The SLS-AMG has unconventional "gullwing" doors that would be difficult to open in the event of the car rolling onto its roof. To remedy this, Mercedes-Benz fitted a safety device that detatches the door from the car (I believe this is actually an explosive) allowing it to be free from the vehicle.
And of course, fighter jet canopies like the one the FIA tests in the video are also fitted with detachment devices that blast off the canopy for the ejector seat to leave the plane - often in less than a few seconds.

I think both sides have their advantages and disadvantages, just as open and closed wheel has its differences.
Personally, with the biggest threat coming from heavy, detached wheels I think the FIA should focus on wheel tethers (which they have increased this year). Of course, as a certain Brazilian would tell us, any part of a Formula 1 car can be damaging at high speed and the work also lies in the hands of the helmet manufacturers to continue developing strong and safe devices. I don't think a closed cockpit is necessary right now.

I also remember Jack Brabham once using a closed or semi-closed cockpit, does anyone have more background on this?

[Phoenix]

At least the idea isn't entirely new - take a look at this:



This is a Protos F2 car. It has a near encasing canopy. It was built in 1967.

I think that it's not a bad idea and is worth doing some studies and investigations about it. I think all those issues F1000X has mentioned have a not very complicated solution.

[eagleash]

At least the idea isn't entirely new - take a look at this:



This is a Protos F2 car. It has a near encasing canopy. It was built in 1967.

I think that it's not a bad idea and is worth doing some studies and investigations about it. I think all those issues F1000X has mentioned have a not very complicated solution.

Agreed, all easily resolved issues probably.

& the whole debate is nothing new whatsoever; it, or something fairly similar has often been mooted in the past, & last emerged really after the Surtees/Massa 2009 incidents. A quick "google" reveals a raft of info. including this very thread of course!!

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid ... d+cockpits

[mario]

At least the idea isn't entirely new - take a look at this:



This is a Protos F2 car. It has a near encasing canopy. It was built in 1967.

I think that it's not a bad idea and is worth doing some studies and investigations about it. I think all those issues F1000X has mentioned have a not very complicated solution.

Agreed, all easily resolved issues probably.

& the whole debate is nothing new whatsoever; it, or something fairly similar has often been mooted in the past, & last emerged really after the Surtees/Massa 2009 incidents. A quick "google" reveals a raft of info. including this very thread of course!!

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid ... d+cockpits

Well, it has been rumbling on for some time, it must be said, and the suggestion of closed or partially closed cockpits has been floating around for some time. A few other posters mentioned the Schumacher accident in Abu Dhabi, which also seems to have lead to calls for better cockpit protection, although that seems to have lead to a decision by the FIA to ban the current generation of high noses instead (since a high nosed car is much more likely to ride over the top of a tyre and flip or ramp up over a car).

Interesting, but all I can think of is that there are SO MANY problems the FIA is going to have if they do this.

What do you do when it rains? Do you RainX the canopy? Do you design and use complicated tearoffs? Do you have windscreen wipers?

Do F1 drivers wear cool suits? Once you go closed cockpit, you have to either go a/c blown helmet, cool suit, or both, and that's more weight the F1 teams are going to try a skimp out of at the for the sake of performance.

If everyone has to use the same canopy, them obviously that has some implications about the shape of inner part of the tub. Does that mean we can eliminate the high airbox?

What about glare from sunlight? Condensation inside the canopy?

They've got to figure how to make it quick to remove from both inside and outside the cockpit.

Most importantly, this makes it harder for the viewer to see inside the cockpit, and for Sebastian Vettel to be seen waving his finger.

That said, it would be really cool to see teams turning up with tinted canopys for the sunny races.

I'm really looking forward to Mario's post about this. Good find man.

The issue of cockpit temperatures could probably be negated fairly easily, and a/c might not be necessary (the Audi R18 channels air through the cockpit, coupled with electric fans, to blow enough air through the cockpit to keep the temperature relatively low). Air conditioning units in racing cars is hardly a new phenomenon either - Porsche used air conditioning on the 917 series back in the 1970's to keep the cockpit temperatures down (which, in turn, meant that the drivers were less likely to become fatigued behind the wheel and could drive longer stints).

As for the issue of visibility in wet weather, you'd probably see a lot of RainX being used (or perhaps potatoes in the lower teams - apparently, potato starch is also pretty effective at preventing rain building up), and you could integrate heating wires into the windscreen, as is fairly common on modern cars these days, to prevent condensation/misting up of the front windscreen.

I agree, though, that the most likely objections to partially closed cockpits would be on safety ground - even with a quick release system, I doubt that many drivers would be that keen on something that could restrict them getting out of the car in an emergency, and I believe that some medical crews have raised the issue of being unable to access a driver if a car flips over and lands upside down. Yes, you could design in a system akin to the SLS's doors (which, as patrick correctly guessed, uses an explosive bolt to allow the doors to detach), but even so, I expect that there could well be a number of concerns raised by medical staff due to restricted access.

[dr-baker]

I agree, though, that the most likely objections to partially closed cockpits would be on safety ground - even with a quick release system, I doubt that many drivers would be that keen on something that could restrict them getting out of the car in an emergency, and I believe that some medical crews have raised the issue of being unable to access a driver if a car flips over and lands upside down. Yes, you could design in a system akin to the SLS's doors (which, as patrick correctly guessed, uses an explosive bolt to allow the doors to detach), but even so, I expect that there could well be a number of concerns raised by medical staff due to restricted access.

Banning a safety device on safety grounds?!?!?! That would be one crazy world if it were ever to happen...

There were no problems with the safety of the Audis at Le Mans this year, when two of them had massive shunts, were there, despite being closed-cockpits?

[Jordan192]

There were no problems with the safety of the Audis at Le Mans this year, when two of them had massive shunts, were there, despite being closed-cockpits?

Yes and no. It didn't cause any problems, as McNish was neither severely injured, nor was the car on fire, but he was trapped in the car for a good minute or two while it was on its roof - and was only able to get out once the marshalls had put it back on its wheels.
Slightly different circumstances could make that kind of delay or dependence on outside assistance a big deal.

Is that more likely to happen than a helmet impact? I wouldn't want to be the one to make the call.

[Ferrim]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

[dinizintheoven]

I read somewhere (probably the 2002 Season Preview book I used to own) that Mark Webber said, after his spectacular accident in the 1999 Le Mans race that he would never step into a closed cockpit race car again. Wonder what he'll say about all of this.

Something tells me Red Bull will be absolutely delighted if the closed cockpit idea is made compulsory. One, it'll make Mark Webber quit F1, if what East Londoner says is correct, thus opening the door for a proper lackey for The Finger who will do exactly what he is told every time, plus... never forget that they've got something of a head start.

[Waris]

I read somewhere (probably the 2002 Season Preview book I used to own) that Mark Webber said, after his spectacular accident in the 1999 Le Mans race that he would never step into a closed cockpit race car again. Wonder what he'll say about all of this.

Something tells me Red Bull will be absolutely delighted if the closed cockpit idea is made compulsory. One, it'll make Mark Webber quit F1, if what East Londoner says is correct, thus opening the door for a proper lackey for The Finger who will do exactly what he is told every time, plus... never forget that they've got something of a head start.

I'm still hoping they're secretly building the Red Bull X1 in real life, testing it at their own Red Bull Ring, to enter it at Le Mans in a few years.

[GroupLotusRenault]

Another issue is if (and now its rare in F1) the car catches on fire. The cliosed cockpit cars must take longer to get out then the open cockpit. But maybe theirs ways to get out of the car.

[Phoenix]

Another issue is if (and now its rare in F1) the car catches on fire. The cliosed cockpit cars must take longer to get out then the open cockpit. But maybe theirs ways to get out of the car.

The only real issue would be if the car was upside down. If not, I'm figuring drivers would be able to exit the cars fast enough anyway (and the fireproof clothing and equipment is very strong nowadays).

[TimmyB]

If the screen had some sort of anti-glare coating then I think you'd actually end up seeing more of the drivers than you do now, which would be cool, especially for trackside spectators.

Maybe Jaques was right...

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

I find all of this bathplugging ridiculous! I mean, now basically what they're doing is getting rid of open-wheel! I find all these 'safety improvements' way more than excessive, it's just amazingly stupid. I'm not saying I want to see people die, but the chances of getting killed in a road accident are higher in my opinion. Motorsport, as much as we should be improving its safety, should always have that danger factor there.

[FMecha]

If the screen had some sort of anti-glare coating then I think you'd actually end up seeing more of the drivers than you do now, which would be cool, especially for trackside spectators.

Maybe Jacques was right...

(fixed typo)

The car in the "1997 WDC turned Hang Up the Keys contender"* game cover, you posted above, does look unrealistic, though

*HWNWNTBMOVG - He whose name was not to be mentioned on video games.

[Cynon]

I find all of this bathplugging ridiculous! I mean, now basically what they're doing is getting rid of open-wheel! I find all these 'safety improvements' way more than excessive, it's just amazingly stupid. I'm not saying I want to see people die, but the chances of getting killed in a road accident are higher in my opinion. Motorsport, as much as we should be improving its safety, should always have that danger factor there.

If you were old enough I'd buy you a drink.

[Faustus]

When I first read this, I had to double-check if it was the 1st of April. What a load of rubbish! Open-wheel cars have open cockpits, closed-wheel cars can have either open or closed cockpits, depending on the category. End of story.
If this idiotic idea is really a reaction to the Massa and Surtees accidents, it's ridiculous. Both were incredibly unfortunate accidents and completely unforeseen. How often do springs and things fall off cars? Very. How often do they hit other cars? Very. It was incredible bad luck that the spring hit Massa. Henry Surtees' accident is even more unfortunate. The wheel bounced a few times and it could have gone in any direction and unfortunately it hit Surtees in the absolute worst possible way, straight down on his helmet.
These accidents could not be foreseen and unfortunately are inherent to the dangers of the sport, which all the participants accept.

[dnhrudi]

When I was a kid there was at the very least one death a year in F1 alone. That is certainly not something I want to see again. That said there has not been a fatal accident in F1 for 17 years. I consider that to be pretty damn safe if you ask me. This is not after all the world bath chair championship... yet

[dr-baker]

I was reading about this in the Autosport magazine yesterday, and found the following of interest:

Inevitably, anything designed to deflect loose objects such as wheels could lead to flying debris becoming a danger to marshals and the crowd.

An FIA Institute video of the impact test shows the wheel being directed upwars when it strikes the canopy. The wheel came to rest well over a mile [>1.61 km] from the impact.

The introduction of a canopy or deflector shield would also change the characteristics of an F1 car, and the aerodynamic effect would result in a loss of performance.

...A video of the test is available at http://www.institutequarterly.com

I haven't been to the quoted website yet, but to have a tyre bounce off and thus be launched further than the length of any of the straights in F1 is concerning.

[dnhrudi]

I was reading about this in the Autosport magazine yesterday, and found the following of interest:

Inevitably, anything designed to deflect loose objects such as wheels could lead to flying debris becoming a danger to marshals and the crowd.

An FIA Institute video of the impact test shows the wheel being directed upwars when it strikes the canopy. The wheel came to rest well over a mile [>1.61 km] from the impact.

The introduction of a canopy or deflector shield would also change the characteristics of an F1 car, and the aerodynamic effect would result in a loss of performance.

...A video of the test is available at http://www.institutequarterly.com

I haven't been to the quoted website yet, but to have a tyre bounce off and thus be launched further than the length of any of the straights in F1 is concerning.

Would need to be splinter proof as well if it breaks. can you imagine a shard of plexi coming at you at 180 MPH!

[mario]

I was reading about this in the Autosport magazine yesterday, and found the following of interest:

Inevitably, anything designed to deflect loose objects such as wheels could lead to flying debris becoming a danger to marshals and the crowd.

An FIA Institute video of the impact test shows the wheel being directed upwars when it strikes the canopy. The wheel came to rest well over a mile [>1.61 km] from the impact.

The introduction of a canopy or deflector shield would also change the characteristics of an F1 car, and the aerodynamic effect would result in a loss of performance.

...A video of the test is available at http://www.institutequarterly.com

I haven't been to the quoted website yet, but to have a tyre bounce off and thus be launched further than the length of any of the straights in F1 is concerning.

So, in other words, covering the cockpit, whilst protecting the driver, would significantly increase the risk of propelling a wheel at high speed towards people who are likely to be in a more vulnerable position (e.g. marshalls, spectators etc.).

I think that the FIA and TWG really need to think about situations like that, because improved track safety extends beyond that of the drivers - after all, it was because of flying debris, and the death of a marshall at the 2000 Italian GP, that we had stricter safety measures to reduce the chances of a wheel flying into the stands or a marshalls post. In effect, what they're proposing doesn't really make things any better, as it simply shifts the problem elsewhere, not solve it.

[dr-baker]

I was reading about this in the Autosport magazine yesterday, and found the following of interest:

Inevitably, anything designed to deflect loose objects such as wheels could lead to flying debris becoming a danger to marshals and the crowd.

An FIA Institute video of the impact test shows the wheel being directed upwars when it strikes the canopy. The wheel came to rest well over a mile [>1.61 km] from the impact.

The introduction of a canopy or deflector shield would also change the characteristics of an F1 car, and the aerodynamic effect would result in a loss of performance.

...A video of the test is available at http://www.institutequarterly.com

I haven't been to the quoted website yet, but to have a tyre bounce off and thus be launched further than the length of any of the straights in F1 is concerning.

So, in other words, covering the cockpit, whilst protecting the driver, would significantly increase the risk of propelling a wheel at high speed towards people who are likely to be in a more vulnerable position (e.g. marshalls, spectators etc.).

I think that the FIA and TWG really need to think about situations like that, because improved track safety extends beyond that of the drivers - after all, it was because of flying debris, and the death of a marshall at the 2000 Italian GP, that we had stricter safety measures to reduce the chances of a wheel flying into the stands or a marshalls post. In effect, what they're proposing doesn't really make things any better, as it simply shifts the problem elsewhere, not solve it.

Exactly. Thanks for expanding upon it, Mario.

[dr-baker]

BBC have an article on this as well now, including video.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/14199629

[Sponge]

I was reading about this in the Autosport magazine yesterday, and found the following of interest:

Inevitably, anything designed to deflect loose objects such as wheels could lead to flying debris becoming a danger to marshals and the crowd.

An FIA Institute video of the impact test shows the wheel being directed upwars when it strikes the canopy. The wheel came to rest well over a mile [>1.61 km] from the impact.

The introduction of a canopy or deflector shield would also change the characteristics of an F1 car, and the aerodynamic effect would result in a loss of performance.

...A video of the test is available at http://www.institutequarterly.com

I haven't been to the quoted website yet, but to have a tyre bounce off and thus be launched further than the length of any of the straights in F1 is concerning.

The test was simulating a car traveling at 225kph and hitting a comparatively stationary wheel by shooting it at 225kph at a stationary canopy. I imagine in a real world accident the wheel will be propelled upward but not really that far in any other direction, at least, no more than it would if it hit a canopy-less car. Unless of course a wheel comes off at 225kph and hits a stationary car....

[mario]

I was reading about this in the Autosport magazine yesterday, and found the following of interest:

Inevitably, anything designed to deflect loose objects such as wheels could lead to flying debris becoming a danger to marshals and the crowd.

An FIA Institute video of the impact test shows the wheel being directed upwars when it strikes the canopy. The wheel came to rest well over a mile [>1.61 km] from the impact.

The introduction of a canopy or deflector shield would also change the characteristics of an F1 car, and the aerodynamic effect would result in a loss of performance.

...A video of the test is available at http://www.institutequarterly.com

I haven't been to the quoted website yet, but to have a tyre bounce off and thus be launched further than the length of any of the straights in F1 is concerning.

The test was simulating a car traveling at 225kph and hitting a comparatively stationary wheel by shooting it at 225kph at a stationary canopy. I imagine in a real world accident the wheel will be propelled upward but not really that far in any other direction, at least, no more than it would if it hit a canopy-less car. Unless of course a wheel comes off at 225kph and hits a stationary car....

The wheel would have to have some momentum in order for it to bounce high enough for it to be level with the cockpit opening, so the closing speed could well be quite considerable nevertheless. And there would still be the potential issue of debris being deflected away from the driver and towards potentially more dangerous areas, such as a marshalls post (which, by its nature, is quite close to the edge of the track) or a group of spectators.

I know that some point to Henry Surtees's accident in the Formula 2 race at Brands Hatch, but to be honest there were a great deal of problems beyond the possible solution of an enclosed driver cockpit. After all, a major contributing factor to that accident is the very limited crash protection zone that allowed a tyre to rebound off an unprotected barrier and straight back onto the circuit at high speed (and a little while ago, Top Gear posted a video clip that showed how a touring car went straight over the barrier at the first corner and came to rest halfway up an access road - thankfully, it was not being used at the time). In that case, making alterations to the circuit, whilst perhaps unpalatable in some quarters, would almost certainly have been just as effective, not to mention potentially making things much safer for everyone, particularly the marshalls (more than once we have seen marshalls coming close to being injured at Brands Hatch).

Yes, an enclosed cockpit might well work - although there would almost certainly have to be some sort of compromise in the design - but, if the FIA are going to enact some changes, then perhaps they should look at other alternative solutions which might be just as effective without requiring such radical changes.

[f1-gast]

Time to kick Todt out of his position !

if he cars get a closed ockpit it's no longer a "Formula"/"Open wheel" serie, so no more formula 1.
I don't understand why they have those stupid idea's.

[Waris]

Maybe it's better to look at HANS for the solution, rather than closed cockpits. The problem with wheels is mostly that if a wheel hits a driver in the head, no matter how strong the helmet is to protect the face, the neck will bounce back from the impact, which is too big for a human neck to sustain. The driver would likely suffer spine fractures. Maybe if HANS were stronger, or had some kind of "rebound" system, this danger would be averted.

[East Londoner]

I must say this news story was probably inevitable given the tragic events of Sunday, but it has brought up the issue of closed cockpits in open-wheel racing again.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/oct/18/dan-wheldon-cockpits-formula-one

[nome66]

we need to remember, it doesn't have to be fully closed. maybe just a little lip of lexan infront of the steering wheel like they used to have. Protos had a great plan, and may i say, it looks pretty cool!
The american NHRA drag racing series has some teams using the same idea.

not to mention less drag. drivers can go farther on a tank, which would play in favor of the no-refuelling regs.

[DanielPT]

I must say this news story was probably inevitable given the tragic events of Sunday, but it has brought up the issue of closed cockpits in open-wheel racing again.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/oct/18/dan-wheldon-cockpits-formula-one

I think they believe nothing more can be made to improve helmets. Or that they gave up. When someone died from head injuries the helmets often improved afterwards (Like when Senna died). Granted, helmets keep improving all the time, but people keep dying. What one must calculate is if the death toll in the absence of closed cockpits is worse than the possible death tool caused by difficulties in taking the drivers out of their flipped burning cars. If eventually the latter is deemed smaller than the first, closed cockpits will be inevitable.

[Captain Hammer]

I must say this news story was probably inevitable given the tragic events of Sunday, but it has brought up the issue of closed cockpits in open-wheel racing again.

I don't think it's a wise idea. Rushing cockpits in because of one accident in a completely different series is a bad idea that doesn't address the issue. It's questionable if a canopy would have saved Dan Wheldon at all. More research is needed. If it is found that cockpits are right for Formula 1, then by all means, they should be introduced. But not as a knee-jerk reaction to Wheldon's accident. Rushing them in will ignore the acutal issue (assuming there is one) and possibly even overlook it entirely, creating a false sense of security.

[mario]

I must say this news story was probably inevitable given the tragic events of Sunday, but it has brought up the issue of closed cockpits in open-wheel racing again.

I don't think it's a wise idea. Rushing cockpits in because of one accident in a completely different series is a bad idea that doesn't address the issue. It's questionable if a canopy would have saved Dan Wheldon at all. More research is needed. If it is found that cockpits are right for Formula 1, then by all means, they should be introduced. But not as a knee-jerk reaction to Wheldon's accident. Rushing them in will ignore the acutal issue (assuming there is one) and possibly even overlook it entirely, creating a false sense of security.

I agree that there needs to be a much longer period of reflection and methodical analysis of what exactly happened in that fateful crash - we saw that there was a similarly rash call for action in the wake of Massa's injuries and Surtees's fatal accident, though in those circumstances there were several other complicating factors. After all, in the case of Wheldon's accident some have pointed out that there might be other areas which need to be looked at, such as the design of the barriers, the types of venues used by IndyCars and the abnormally large grid that took part that day, all of which played their part.
However, what I fear is that there might be some pressure on the governing bodies to act quickly, which, as you say, might not make things better and potentially just shift the danger elsewhere.

[Captain Hammer]

There's a meeting of the Technical Working Group and the F1 Commission set for India. If they feel it is worth discussing, they will discuss it there. But honestly, I don't see there being that much pressure on Formula 1 compared to Indycar, since Indycar is so very different - Formula 1 does not race wheel-to-wheel in identical cars on short-track oval circuits designed to encourage the cars to go as fast as possible, and the grid size is capped, with drivers needing a certain licence to get into the sport in the first place (Indycar drivers do no need Superlicences), and who mostly race on circuits they are already familiar with before they get into Formula 1. To the untrained eye, Formula 1 and Indycar aren't that much different, but if someone starts putting pressure on Formula 1, I think the Powers That Be can make a compelling case against it if they do not think it is the right way to go.

Plus, any addition of canopies will change the aerodynamics of the car. Given that Formula 1 is not a spec series, changes to the car will dramatically affect the performance. Naturally, the teams will want to have a lengthy discussion about this because it will affect them individually more than it will affect Indycar teams.

[East Londoner]

This issue has turned up again, in a different guise. It looks like the FIA will not go for full closed cockpits, after some tests were conducted. Nor will they go for a large windscreen...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/18104886

[14 Hundred Hours]

Interesting idea, but by the sounds of it they're still going to have to do a fair bit more thinking, especially when "driver egress" is concerned.

[TheBigJ]

Why the necropost?