F1 - Indycar safety.

[Django x2]

I'm pretty sure F1 chassis are much stronger than IndyCar. As has been said though, it is the nature of the crash that's important. In Webbers incident I mentioned, he hit a moving target which probably wasn't far less than his terminal speed anyway. Of course, air got under the car and that was that. Head on's into stationery objects is always going to hurt.

 

[Skillmister]

I think the crashes are bound to happen and theres not a lot you can do about it without limiting the speeds/number of cars etc. The fact that they all burst into flames is something that should be looked at though.

 

[Peg]

F1 had it's Ayrton Senna Moment, Nascar had it's Dale Earnhardt Senior moment and I think Indycar had it's moment last night. There is no excuse for racing with a 7 year old Chassis and the fuel that they use in Indycar.

 

[Morbius]

There is no excuse for racing with a 7 year old Chassis and the fuel that they use in Indycar.

The chassis and fuel had zip all to do with why he was killed. He was killed because he hit his head on a wall.

 

[Peg]

The chassis and fuel had zip all to do with why he was killed. He was killed because he hit his head on a wall.

So the roll bar failed to do its job and that's part of the chassis.

 

[Glaucus]

So the roll bar failed to do its job and that's part of the chassis.

It hit in a direction and with a force that meant it failed.
You can't create indestructible crash safety cells. Most are designed with maximum loading in a certain direction. Once you start applying that loading at a different direction, then you greatly reduce that components maximum loading.

 

[Peg]

It hit in a direction and with a force that meant it failed.
You can't create indestructible crash safety cells. Most are designed with maximum loading in a certain direction. Once you start applying that loading at a different direction, then you greatly reduce that components maximum loading.

The advances in technology mean they can build stronger safety cells than the ones in 7 year old chassis which is what my point was.

 

[Glaucus]

They have to abide by rules.
New safety is being introduced next year.

 

[Morbius]

The car was a seven year old design, but it had year-on-year updates, including to the safety cell I believe.

 

[NathanE]

They need roll bars that cover the entire head of the driver. Not just behind him.

This could be easily done in a "dune buggy" style fashion, two long and curved metal poles above either side of the head that start near the airbox intake and finish in front of the steering wheel. It would maintain the "open wheel, open cockpit" racing and the fans would still be able to see the drivers head easily.

That would have prevented this death, I think.

F1 may need to respond to this death as well.

 

[Glaucus]

With out the front cross beam connecting the two sloping side bits. They'll have no lateral strength and would collapse into the drivers safety space.
With that connecting bar, they wouldn't be able to get in and out like they do.

 

[CSMonkeh]

Do they have any form of crashing-testing in Indycar? No amount of testing etc would have prevented last nights events, because it was a freak accident, but just curious.
Remember, Senna would have survived his accident but for a suspension component hitting his head...

 

[NathanE]

With out the front cross beam connecting the two sloping side bits. They'll have no lateral strength and would collapse into the drivers safety space.
With that connecting bar, they wouldn't be able to get in and out like they do.

You're probably right, I haven't thought it through entirely. But I think some sort of roll cage concept is clearly going to be needed in the future of open cockpit racing. There's been too many incidents of late. Drivers getting killed by tyres bouncing on their head, or hitting catch fencing at speed... it just isn't right when the problem can be so easily solved.

I think an elegant and unobtrusive (for the fans and driver) roll cage could be designed that provides sufficient protection in these sort of horror accidents in open cockpit racing.

 

[Glaucus]

I just don't think it's possible, either you stick with open cockpit and except the risk, or we go closed cockpit. Tbh I don't really care, the open cockpit doesn't do much for me, it's nice seeing emotion and hand waving. But co après to the tech and racing. It's nothing.

 

[Morbius]

You need to be able to escape quickly in the event of fire. No one has been able to come up with a closed cockpit design for a formula-style car that allows for this.

 

[NathanE]

Closed cockpit is fine on TV as they just put cameras in the cockpits, problem solved. But for spectators, it's a bit more of an issue, I think.

 

[Skeeter]

With a closed cockpit, there is always the possibility the car lands in a position where it cannot be opened.

 

[NathanE]

With a closed cockpit, there is always the possibility the car lands in a position where it cannot be opened.

What if every car had an eject button? No joke. An air piston could be fired if the car was fully upside down, to self-right the car. Robot wars style. And once righted, the canopy could be released with explosive bolts.

Might sound far fetched I know. But I think there is always solutions to things.

 

[Skeeter]

Again, both a 'sri-mec' and exploding bolts have vulnerabilities in certain directions depending on how they are designed.

 

[Glaucus]

With a closed cockpit, there is always the possibility the car lands in a position where it cannot be opened.

No different to open cockpit landing on its top.
As for fire, the cases of fire have been low, being hit in the head has been high. So I don't see that as an argument against closed cockpits either.
The two Audi lemans cars showed what can be done in closed cockpit.

It's just wether you want it in such a sport.