The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.

What proposal would you back?

The Halo as proposed by Ferrari
4
3%
The small screen proposed by Red Bull
21
15%
The Proposed Shield
24
17%
None of the above
92
65%
 
Total votes: 141

J.A.W.
49
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:10 am
Location: Altair IV.

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by J.A.W. » Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:26 am

Utterly amateurish for F1 - that a flimsy/flappy distortion-raddled screen is presented - for on car test..
..what an embarrassment for Ferrari..

As if a properly mounted, flat panel, optically correct, frameless-interlocking 'Lexan' slab unit, could not be done..

Any capable fish-tank maker - worth his salt - could do better than that Ferrari effort..
Sturmbannfuehrer Dr von Braun sez..
"Oberste Prioritat hat es Londoner Terror zu vergelten. Und danach, der Mondflug!"

RedNEO
-13
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:58 am

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by RedNEO » Sat Jul 15, 2017 8:03 am

I'm glad the poll reflects my own views. Grosjean at least was able to speak his feelings publicly and he said it's as bad as the halo and f1 should stick to open cockpit which I πŸ’― agree with

jz11
26
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 8:32 pm

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by jz11 » Sat Jul 15, 2017 8:04 pm

J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:26 am
Utterly amateurish for F1 - that a flimsy/flappy distortion-raddled screen is presented - for on car test..
..what an embarrassment for Ferrari..

As if a properly mounted, flat panel, optically correct, frameless-interlocking 'Lexan' slab unit, could not be done..

Any capable fish-tank maker - worth his salt - could do better than that Ferrari effort..
the whole thing looks like it was forced upon the designers by higher power, who has no clue how much work actually goes into a proper canopy glass, so the designers and makers of the thing put as little effort as possible, just to be able to check the box on the paper

when I saw the thickness of that thing, first thought - why did they even bother...

as someone previously said in this topic - this whole debacle with the halo and the screen now seems like product of some high ranking officials that feel a desperate need to be doing something, which very is popular in today's bureaucratic world

any engineer just looking at the halo and this screen in about 5 seconds will conclude - that halo will do nothing for a debris like the spring that hit Massa, it might work for some freak accident where the car is impacting something like a tyre barrier while being upside down (very much dependent on the speed), and this screen - as flimsy as it is now, will only deflect light things, it will not do anything for the upside-down crash situation, and both of these things will do nothing in the Bianchi crash, halo - maybe, but then again it may fail in some unpredicted way and actually serve as a conduit to transfer the impacting thing into the helmet

IMHO the effort could have produced much better results if they put the thought into some uber safe F1 special helmet - hans system - specifically integrated into the safety cell sort of solution, something along those lines, if they care about the side impact (Bianchi case again), then that can be solved via the safety cell design as well, and also incorporating some bumper type attachments to any moving equipment that might share track and run off areas while the race is in progress, and even then there is a chance of some unbelievable coincidence happening that will launch a piano from a transport plane from 10km high up and land right on some unlucky race car...

krisfx
27
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:07 pm

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by krisfx » Sat Jul 15, 2017 8:55 pm

J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:26 am
Utterly amateurish for F1 - that a flimsy/flappy distortion-raddled screen is presented - for on car test..
..what an embarrassment for Ferrari..

As if a properly mounted, flat panel, optically correct, frameless-interlocking 'Lexan' slab unit, could not be done..

Any capable fish-tank maker - worth his salt - could do better than that Ferrari effort..
It was designed and manufactured by the same company that makes the windscreens on aircraft and the 599XX, not Ferrari. #-o

J.A.W.
49
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:10 am
Location: Altair IV.

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by J.A.W. » Sat Jul 15, 2017 11:17 pm

krisfx wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 8:55 pm
J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:26 am
Utterly amateurish for F1 - that a flimsy/flappy distortion-raddled screen is presented - for on car test..
..what an embarrassment for Ferrari..

As if a properly mounted, flat panel, optically correct, frameless-interlocking 'Lexan' slab unit, could not be done..

Any capable fish-tank maker - worth his salt - could do better than that Ferrari effort..
It was designed and manufactured by the same company that makes the windscreens on aircraft and the 599XX, not Ferrari. #-o
K-fx, are you suggesting that Ferrari have wilfully fitted & 'tested' - a knowingly dud set-up?
In a.. ah.. transparent.. attempt to 'prove' the windscreen idea won't work in a 'real F1' - application?
Sturmbannfuehrer Dr von Braun sez..
"Oberste Prioritat hat es Londoner Terror zu vergelten. Und danach, der Mondflug!"

krisfx
27
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:07 pm

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by krisfx » Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:15 pm

J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 11:17 pm
krisfx wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 8:55 pm
J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:26 am
Utterly amateurish for F1 - that a flimsy/flappy distortion-raddled screen is presented - for on car test..
..what an embarrassment for Ferrari..

As if a properly mounted, flat panel, optically correct, frameless-interlocking 'Lexan' slab unit, could not be done..

Any capable fish-tank maker - worth his salt - could do better than that Ferrari effort..
It was designed and manufactured by the same company that makes the windscreens on aircraft and the 599XX, not Ferrari. #-o
K-fx, are you suggesting that Ferrari have wilfully fitted & 'tested' - a knowingly dud set-up?
In a.. ah.. transparent.. attempt to 'prove' the windscreen idea won't work in a 'real F1' - application?
No, just correcting a false accusation of bad engineering on their part. It's most likely an FIA decision anyway

Stormy
1
User avatar
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:34 pm

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by Stormy » Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:21 pm

I really don't understand this stupid Halo thing. It's not like it could've saved Jules' life.

J.A.W.
49
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:10 am
Location: Altair IV.

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by J.A.W. » Mon Jul 17, 2017 12:32 pm

krisfx wrote: ↑
Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:15 pm
J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 11:17 pm


K-fx, are you suggesting that Ferrari have wilfully fitted & 'tested' - a knowingly dud set-up?
In a.. ah.. transparent.. attempt to 'prove' the windscreen idea won't work in a 'real F1' - application?
No, just correcting a false accusation of bad engineering on their part. It's most likely an FIA decision anyway
Who made a "false accusation of bad engineering" then K-fx?
Are you suggesting that Vettel does not know it, even when he - quite literally- sees it?
Sturmbannfuehrer Dr von Braun sez..
"Oberste Prioritat hat es Londoner Terror zu vergelten. Und danach, der Mondflug!"

n_anirudh
26
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:43 am

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by n_anirudh » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:04 pm

Stormy wrote: ↑
Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:21 pm
I really don't understand this stupid Halo thing. It's not like it could've saved Jules' life.
Perhaps could have saved Massa from being hit by the spring damper.

Jules accident was a consequence of several factors - weather, speed, track conditions, daylight etc. Whatever makes F1 safer is a big plus.

krisfx
27
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:07 pm

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by krisfx » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:34 pm

J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 12:32 pm
krisfx wrote: ↑
Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:15 pm
J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Sat Jul 15, 2017 11:17 pm


K-fx, are you suggesting that Ferrari have wilfully fitted & 'tested' - a knowingly dud set-up?
In a.. ah.. transparent.. attempt to 'prove' the windscreen idea won't work in a 'real F1' - application?
No, just correcting a false accusation of bad engineering on their part. It's most likely an FIA decision anyway
Who made a "false accusation of bad engineering" then K-fx?
Are you suggesting that Vettel does not know it, even when he - quite literally- sees it?
Refer to your previous comment about Ferrari being amateurish... That kinda explains it.

Stormy
1
User avatar
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:34 pm

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by Stormy » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:00 pm

n_anirudh wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:04 pm
Stormy wrote: ↑
Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:21 pm
I really don't understand this stupid Halo thing. It's not like it could've saved Jules' life.
Perhaps could have saved Massa from being hit by the spring damper.

Jules accident was a consequence of several factors - weather, speed, track conditions, daylight etc. Whatever makes F1 safer is a big plus.
Jules' death was because of only one factor, really. Having a crane there.

J.A.W.
49
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:10 am
Location: Altair IV.

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by J.A.W. » Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:26 pm

krisfx wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:34 pm
J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 12:32 pm
krisfx wrote: ↑
Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:15 pm


No, just correcting a false accusation of bad engineering on their part. It's most likely an FIA decision anyway
Who made a "false accusation of bad engineering" then K-fx?
Are you suggesting that Vettel does not know it, even when he - quite literally- sees it?
Refer to your previous comment about Ferrari being amateurish... That kinda explains it.

Well of course it does, that's why I wrote it, & as Vettel confirmed - the engineering is bad..
Surely, in F1, a test driver ought to have checked it out & rejected it - before such a public embarrassment..
Sturmbannfuehrer Dr von Braun sez..
"Oberste Prioritat hat es Londoner Terror zu vergelten. Und danach, der Mondflug!"

marvin78
1
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2016 8:33 am

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by marvin78 » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:05 pm

J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:26 pm
krisfx wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:34 pm
J.A.W. wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 12:32 pm


Who made a "false accusation of bad engineering" then K-fx?
Are you suggesting that Vettel does not know it, even when he - quite literally- sees it?
Refer to your previous comment about Ferrari being amateurish... That kinda explains it.

Well of course it does, that's why I wrote it, & as Vettel confirmed - the engineering is bad..
Surely, in F1, a test driver ought to have checked it out & rejected it - before such a public embarrassment..
This has all 1 purpose: Show the public that they do "anything" for safety (testing new variants of a head protection). Than they can throw it away and say: We tested it and it did not work. We did everything we could but there is no way for an monoposto. => Everyone is happy (at first).

Ferrari did not do a thing to develope this shield as they did not develope Halo. They were only the first ones to test it. That's all. Halo was mainly developed by Mercedes and other companys and shield is an idea of the FIA.

cplchanb
1
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 6:13 pm

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by cplchanb » Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:41 pm

Stormy wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:00 pm
n_anirudh wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:04 pm
Stormy wrote: ↑
Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:21 pm
I really don't understand this stupid Halo thing. It's not like it could've saved Jules' life.
Perhaps could have saved Massa from being hit by the spring damper.

Jules accident was a consequence of several factors - weather, speed, track conditions, daylight etc. Whatever makes F1 safer is a big plus.
Jules' death was because of only one factor, really. Having a crane there.
and also in lesser part of his disobedience of the double yellows

void
4
User avatar
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:27 pm

Re: The "Shield" cockpit protection device - 2017 evolution

Post by void » Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:23 pm

cplchanb wrote: ↑
Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:41 pm
Stormy wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:00 pm
n_anirudh wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:04 pm


Perhaps could have saved Massa from being hit by the spring damper.

Jules accident was a consequence of several factors - weather, speed, track conditions, daylight etc. Whatever makes F1 safer is a big plus.
Jules' death was because of only one factor, really. Having a crane there.
and also in lesser part of his disobedience of the double yellows
Most of us never drove an F-1 car into this conditions, who knows how visible was the double yellow flags, but a crane there was the bigger error



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot], Diesel, Google Adsense [Bot] and 3 guests