Senna was killed by a suspension arm and also a part of the upright piercing his helmet. Either of those were fatal. Not the impact of the tyre, although that certainly didn't help.
Last edited:
F1 Testing 2016: Week 2 Barcelona (1st - 4th)
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
Senna was killed by a suspension arm and also a part of the upright piercing his helmet. Either of those were fatal. Not the impact of the tyre, although that certainly didn't help.
Switch those 2 elements around, then ask the question "would the suspension/upright have hit his head, if the tyre they were attached to been deflected by the halo, or would they have themselves been deflected by the halo.
Its a lot harder to argue he still would have died with the halo then it is to argue he would have survived.
Soldato
Thanks for just giving a number and in no way explaining how or why you think the halo would not be able to withstand such an impact
To put that in comparision though, quick google suggestions the nose cone crash test is done at 54km/h (15m/s) which equals 78,750 joules.
The nose cone disintegrates on impact which disapates energry and the nose cone is larger than the halo etc. which all is going to change the outcome of an accident but simply quoting figures is pointless. The whole point of the halo is to protect the driver in impacts so it is going to be subject to tests to ensure it can survive, or at least disapate energy, in expected impacts.
Read a page back.
Soldato
Williams are doing very well. I hope they get some wins this season
Care to elaborate, particularly on Bianchi.
Last edited:
Soldato
You mean the previous page where you calculate the energy of a .44 magnum bullet, the spring the hit massa and even the wheel that killed Surtees and claim that the "Halo wont stop anything other than a fly" and "doubt that halo could withstand a small sledge hammer swung by a person" but provide no information as to why you hold these beliefs.
The 78,750 Joules I calculated is a force that an F1 car can take and has to take to be able to race. Obviously the halo is a different shape etc but using similar materials and manufacturing why do you think the halo wouldn't be able to take withstand 1/5th of the forces of the nose?
Just because I had the spreadsheet open to work it out, for the wheel estimated at 12kg that killed Surtees to have as much energy as invovled in the 15m/s(54mph) nose crash test it would need to be doing over 250mph.
Caporegime
I'd agree except for Bianchi. The impact tore the whole rear structure off the car, I'm doubtful that the Halo would much difference to that sort of impact.
Considering the specifications of the Halo are aimed around preventing such an accident, how do you want me to explain it further?
Yeap because of the roll over hoop and how that also went under the rear of the recover vehicle. I wouldn't expect the halo to stop that either, yet that is behind the driver and doesn't matter what happens to it, as long as the driver is better protected.
The way the car went under the recovery truck, a halo could have a significant affect on how the recovery vehicle would have been shifted differently. It only needed an extra inch of movement away from his head to have an entirely different outcome where JB would have been walking away from the accident with brown overalls being the worst of his concerns.
Last edited:
Soldato
It's not about the car. It's about what the driver\halo can take.
You best inform the FIA as they said that was the force that killed him.
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/07/28/how-hard-was-massa-hit/ a good read
Last edited:
Bianchi's injuries were caused due to massive sudden, non specific deceleration of his skull. It was not caused by an impact of his helmet or head with anything.
The halo would not have altered the speed at which he decelerated.
In short, Bianchi wasn't hit on the head, his head stopped moving forward suddenly and his brain tried to carry on. No halo, canopy or any other head protection would have saved him.
Soldato
On sky sports news Horner just described it as a big piece of carbon fibre.
Hmm. titanium I could see working, but carbon fibre is likely to shatter. CF is very very strong in one direction, but fragile as hell in the others. Tubes of CF would be strong with longitudinal compression (is that the correct term?), yet this setup means they would be hit at an angle.
Of course this specific one on the Ferrari could simply be a light weight Cf mock up designed to assess driver visibility,
Actually his head slammed in to the counter weight at the back of the recovery crane, funnily enough that impact was the cause of the sudden deceleration. As I already suggested, the halo would have prevented that contact and there would have been much greater scope for the remaining crash structures on the car to do their job soaking up energy from the impact. Which they went on to do, but it was to late.
Soldato
Well, after seeing it today it looks even worse live than it does on the pictures and TV. Horrible.
Anyway, a few observations from today at the track. I think Williams' pace is a little deceiving. Traction out of the slower corners is noticeably off compared to Ferrari and Mercedes, both of whom were rock solid again all day. Raikkonen was pretty smooth on his fastest lap but the Mercedes just continues to look completely unruffled. I'd feel sorry if Grosjean took any stick for his two offs - the Haas was a real handful under braking. The Honda engine continues to perplex me a little, as it can sound glorious one lap and an absolute dog the next. I guess they're actually testing! Sauber and Renault were again unremarkable, and Red Bull just seemed off the pace today on the long runs.
Good day again at the track - a bit cooler and more of a breeze.
Obligatory photos...
Fernando Alonso by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Max Verstappen by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Daniil Kvyat by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Romain Grosjean and Nico Rosberg by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Nico Rosberg by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Fernando Alonso by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Kimi Raiikonen by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Felipe Massa by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Romain Grosjean by Greg Kingston, on Flickr
Anyway, a few observations from today at the track. I think Williams' pace is a little deceiving. Traction out of the slower corners is noticeably off compared to Ferrari and Mercedes, both of whom were rock solid again all day. Raikkonen was pretty smooth on his fastest lap but the Mercedes just continues to look completely unruffled. I'd feel sorry if Grosjean took any stick for his two offs - the Haas was a real handful under braking. The Honda engine continues to perplex me a little, as it can sound glorious one lap and an absolute dog the next. I guess they're actually testing! Sauber and Renault were again unremarkable, and Red Bull just seemed off the pace today on the long runs.
Good day again at the track - a bit cooler and more of a breeze.
Obligatory photos...
Fernando Alonso by Greg Kingston, on FlickrMax Verstappen by Greg Kingston, on FlickrDaniil Kvyat by Greg Kingston, on FlickrRomain Grosjean and Nico Rosberg by Greg Kingston, on FlickrNico Rosberg by Greg Kingston, on FlickrFernando Alonso by Greg Kingston, on FlickrKimi Raiikonen by Greg Kingston, on FlickrFelipe Massa by Greg Kingston, on FlickrRomain Grosjean by Greg Kingston, on FlickrPretty sure the CF one is only for mock-up.
Sorry, don't see how the Halo would have prevented Senna's death
Ratzenburger was also due to massive deceleration rather than impact to the head.The other's are maybe open to debate, but Senna was killed by a suspension arm piercing his helmet which would have been too small to be stopped surely?
http://blog.parathyroid.com/race-car-deaths-medical-causes-racing-deaths/
Last edited:
Soldato
I'll put it in simple terms of a simple question for you - Can you provide any evidence or even a logical explantion as to why you believe the halo would be so weak in the event of an impact? You know like the impact of, to quote, "a small sledge hammer swung by a person"?
For further clarification, I never said it was about the car or wasn't about the halo. My point was, in F1 they have the technology to build a nose cone that take 5 times the amount of energy that killed Surtees. Yes a nose cone is a very different thing to the halo and I think it is a safe bet that the the halo will be nowhere near as strong as the nose cone. However, with that amount of material technology do you not think it is possible to build a halo that could, even if not entirley stop the wheel that killed Surtees, at least taken enough enery out of it so that the impact with his head was not fatal?
Driver reactions to the 'halo'
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/raikkonen-says-halo-makes-little-difference-to-visibility-677157/
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/raikkonen-says-halo-makes-little-difference-to-visibility-677157/
Soldato
The suspension arm was attached to a wheel though. Hypothetically whether it could have still made it into the helmet we couldn't possibly know - I suppose it depends entirely on where the suspension arm broke away.