Why is nobody discussing Bottas' Halo problems?

[NathanOlder]

Add some wheels and wings to that rig the FIA had and you will see the car would rotate another 10 degrees, The FIA rig looks like its sitting roughly 45 degrees. The Force India here has rolled over an extra 10 degrees. Now that gap the guy just squeezed through in the FIA video would be smaller gap and then would be interesting to see.



Then add some gravel to that, so the car would sink in a few more inches and its quickly becoming a death trap.
So when your stuck in the car, upside down, on fire, you would wait for the fire crew to come and cut the halo (while in a ball of flames, just so you could get out afterward

[NathanOlder]

I know its old, but its the first one to spring to mind, No way a driver gets out of a car like this, if it had a Halo.

[turbof1]

Add some wheels and wings to that rig the FIA had and you will see the car would rotate another 10 degrees, The FIA rig looks like its sitting roughly 45 degrees. The Force India here has rolled over an extra 10 degrees. Now that gap the guy just squeezed through in the FIA video would be smaller gap and then would be interesting to see.

http://e0.365dm.com/15/07/16-9/20/sergi ... 0724112558

Then add some gravel to that, so the car would sink in a few more inches and its quickly becoming a death trap.
So when your stuck in the car, upside down, on fire, you would wait for the fire crew to come and cut the halo (while in a ball of flames, just so you could get out afterward

In all fairness, I don't think the driver would be able to exit anyhow in that case, even without the halo. Infact, extraction would still be easier because the car is still raised. Cutting the bar of the halo and the driver than able to escape, would be faster than rolling the car over.

That's the thing: you are correct to state that the bars could block an potential escape route, but if you are cutting it that short getting yourself out of there will take some time because you are dealing with a very cramped space. With a halo, once the bar is removed, you actually have more space and ease to get out of the car, so also potentially faster.

Mind I'm not a lover of the halo by a long shot. I hate it because it is easthetically unpleasing. But I do think it is a safety benefit.

[strad]

And that better safety will lead to less safety because that drivers will take more risk... that is just stupid, naive and very very ill informed.

.
Obviously you did not watch the video.

[NathanOlder]

@Turbo
It certainly is a benefit in a few ways, im just pointing out it creates other problems, and of the problems it solves and creates, Id rather face the few problems it solves. As i cant think of anything more terrifying than being trapped in a car while on fire.

As for the Halo holding the car up higher, surely it wont when its in gravel, the Halo will just bury itself in gravel. And cutting part of the halo while the cars weight is on it , is surely a risk ? remembering the halo would have already been weakened due to a roll.

Too many unanswered questions by the FIA, they could have presented this way better than they did, and answered everything within the first, week.

I just hope to god Im not the one saying, I told you so, I hope its you guys saying it to me.

[turbof1]

As for the Halo holding the car up higher, surely it wont when its in gravel, the Halo will just bury itself in gravel. And cutting part of the halo while the cars weight is on it , is surely a risk ? remembering the halo would have already been weakened due to a roll.

I think if it does sink into the gravel, the roll hoop without the halo would certainly as well, so you are stuck in both cases. Infact, I'd argue because you have with the Halo more contact surface with the gravel, you have less chance to sink/bury into the gravel.

No, it's not a risk to cut the halo. You'd be leaving the central pillar alone, where all the weight is put on, and cut the exposed sidebar for extraction. Also, the halo is designed to withstand 15x the static load of the car, putting it on par with the roll hoop structure. That's a very tough structure! I can't recall the roll hoop structure to ever have crumbled. The exception maybe being the Jules Bianchi one.

I just hope to god Im not the one saying, I told you so, I hope its you guys saying it to me.

It's good to question a solution to make absolutely sure it is going to be a benefit. My opinion is that the FIA really did challenge itself on that regard and still found it to be a good solution. I can't think of one accident in F1 the last 10 years where the Halo would pose a risk for a driver. At best being a bit of nuisance because it hinders immediate extraction in cases where the driver was fine and not being in immediate danger.

[NathanOlder]

If the front part of the Halo is where all the strength is, then couldnt they just make a Shark fin shape blocker in front of the cockpit, instead of the halo.

[strad]

In most cases IF they can stabilize his neck they would just turn the car right side up before extraction and in the case of fire, extinguishing it would take priority.
There is also the possibility that if the HALO did dig into the gravel it would serve to flip the car back over on it's wheels. lotsa possibilities.

[Just_a_fan]

I can't recall the roll hoop structure to ever have crumbled. The exception maybe being the Jules Bianchi one.

Pedro Diniz at the 1999 Nurburgring GP. The roll hoop was ripped off the tub during a rolling crash. That was the crash that helped usher in roll hoop testing etc., I think.

[Ennis]

Add some wheels and wings to that rig the FIA had and you will see the car would rotate another 10 degrees, The FIA rig looks like its sitting roughly 45 degrees. The Force India here has rolled over an extra 10 degrees. Now that gap the guy just squeezed through in the FIA video would be smaller gap and then would be interesting to see.

Then add some gravel to that, so the car would sink in a few more inches and its quickly becoming a death trap.
So when your stuck in the car, upside down, on fire, you would wait for the fire crew to come and cut the halo (while in a ball of flames, just so you could get out afterward

I'm not seeing a big difference here. Firstly, with the current fire safety its very unlikely that any driver is every going to be trapped in a firebomb. There is so much protection already built in for that.

Additionally, if they're buried in the gravel whilst on fire they are stuck with or without the halo. As someone else alluded to, the halo may actually prevent the car from burying as much as it otherwise would.

And additionally additionally, the halo is always going to bring some level of risk. There's not much that comes with 0 risk, but they need to calculate that it reduces x% risk whilst adding y% risk. If x is higher than y, it's the right thing to do - focusing on the things which make up the y doesn't change that.

I still don't want the thing, right enough. But I'm selfish.

[NathanOlder]

But some people cant see any risk in the Halo. Im just pointing out there are problems with it.

Two things i see are

1. Being trapped in the car.
2. Halo deflecting debry down on to the driver.

[Jolle]

But some people cant see any risk in the Halo. Im just pointing out there are problems with it.

Two things i see are

1. Being trapped in the car.
2. Halo deflecting debry down on to the driver.

so, I guess with being trapped in the car you suggest in the case of fire? When was the last time a car caught fire after an accident (since we had the kevlar bladder system)? I think it was Berger in 1989, 29 years ago. The halo wouldn't make any difference because he was out cold. A crash doesn't start a fire anymore, unless the impact is so severe that the driver looses conscious. In a crash that big, any protection is welcome.

Drivers these days have more risk of being trapped under barriers. The latest one of those was Sainz. If he had a halo at that time, there would have been a lot less to worry about.

by the way, what gravel traps? do we still have those?

deflecting debry? like small pieces of carbon? of larger objects? objects that could cut off their fingers sticking outside the cockpit without a center pillar? You do realise that for small objects drivers are very well protected. Not just their crash helmets but also (not intentionally) two large plates of carbon over their chest (from the HANS). Small objects doing any kind of serious harm while being deflected by the halo is very very small.

[NathanOlder]

But some people cant see any risk in the Halo. Im just pointing out there are problems with it.

Two things i see are

1. Being trapped in the car.
2. Halo deflecting debry down on to the driver.

so, I guess with being trapped in the car you suggest in the case of fire? When was the last time a car caught fire after an accident (since we had the kevlar bladder system)? I think it was Berger in 1989, 29 years ago. The halo wouldn't make any difference because he was out cold. A crash doesn't start a fire anymore, unless the impact is so severe that the driver looses conscious. In a crash that big, any protection is welcome.

Drivers these days have more risk of being trapped under barriers. The latest one of those was Sainz. If he had a halo at that time, there would have been a lot less to worry about.

by the way, what gravel traps? do we still have those?

deflecting debry? like small pieces of carbon? of larger objects? objects that could cut off their fingers sticking outside the cockpit without a center pillar? You do realise that for small objects drivers are very well protected. Not just their crash helmets but also (not intentionally) two large plates of carbon over their chest (from the HANS). Small objects doing any kind of serious harm while being deflected by the halo is very very small.

So now fires are impossible ? I saw a lotus burn big in hungary a few years ago, and with todays cars, electrical fires are very very possible. As for the berger reference even though its totally irrelevant, if he had a halo, it takes longer to get out, let along trying to pull someone out. I think extracting an unconscious driver would be so much harder, as you wouldn't be able to just grab him under the arms and yank him straight out.

Deflecting debry like others have pointed out, Massa in hungary, the spring could have been deflected down and into the chest. And the hans device doesnt even cover half the chest. At the moment there is nothing to deflect any debry down on to the driver, the Halo will give us something to defect down, thats a fact.

And yes we do have gravel, if you tuned in a few times this year, you would have seen them.

[Jolle]

But some people cant see any risk in the Halo. Im just pointing out there are problems with it.

Two things i see are

1. Being trapped in the car.
2. Halo deflecting debry down on to the driver.

so, I guess with being trapped in the car you suggest in the case of fire? When was the last time a car caught fire after an accident (since we had the kevlar bladder system)? I think it was Berger in 1989, 29 years ago. The halo wouldn't make any difference because he was out cold. A crash doesn't start a fire anymore, unless the impact is so severe that the driver looses conscious. In a crash that big, any protection is welcome.

Drivers these days have more risk of being trapped under barriers. The latest one of those was Sainz. If he had a halo at that time, there would have been a lot less to worry about.

by the way, what gravel traps? do we still have those?

deflecting debry? like small pieces of carbon? of larger objects? objects that could cut off their fingers sticking outside the cockpit without a center pillar? You do realise that for small objects drivers are very well protected. Not just their crash helmets but also (not intentionally) two large plates of carbon over their chest (from the HANS). Small objects doing any kind of serious harm while being deflected by the halo is very very small.

So now fires are impossible ? I saw a lotus burn big in hungary a few years ago, and with todays cars, electrical fires are very very possible. As for the berger reference even though its totally irrelevant, if he had a halo, it takes longer to get out, let along trying to pull someone out. I think extracting an unconscious driver would be so much harder, as you wouldn't be able to just grab him under the arms and yank him straight out.

Deflecting debry like others have pointed out, Massa in hungary, the spring could have been deflected down and into the chest. And the hans device doesnt even cover half the chest. At the moment there is nothing to deflect any debry down on to the driver, the Halo will give us something to defect down, thats a fact.

And yes we do have gravel, if you tuned in a few times this year, you would have seen them.

Yes fires are possible and happen but in the last 25 years never after an accident, only as an isolated incident. In fact, these types of fire are a bit dangerous because of fumes in a closed canopy solution. At none of the incidents at accidents or fires had a driver to be extracted of came even close (non regulated refueling aside). By the way, all suits have handles on top to drag someone out without trouble.

So, how many close calls we had the past few years on head injuries vs how many close calls we had with fires and drivers being trapped since the Kevlar bladder?

And for massas accident, if he had the choice between a life threatening head/brain injury that basically ruined his career vs a flesh wound and possible a broken arm...

[NathanOlder]

So a spring 1kg lump of metal hitting you in the chest at 100+mph is a flesh wound. Yeah ok, ill leave it at that, that one has just made me chuckle.

Just like to add, fires havent happened for 25years as you say, and before 2014 you'd be telling me no one is ever going to hit a JCB.

I dont get why you think the Halo has no risk, you design it by any chance ? Your surname Halo ?

I see the benefits, i also see the negatives, and you wont even acknowledge 1.