JustStopDude
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 7, 2017
Jesus Christ. You can't help but freeze up, expecting it too stop. Kudos to the fence builder.
Imagine if that car got into the stands. It would have been a disaster.
Formula 1 Discussion - And favourite driver?
- Thread starter TopCat
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
Imagine if that car got into the stands. It would have been a disaster.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2022
Extremely hot take incoming.
The Halo is majorly over-rated, and the overwhelming majority of instances where it has been praised is because we simply don't know what would have happened without it. Were the track marshals at Bahrain even more incompetent than they were during the 2020 finale, Grosjean probably would have burned to death regardless. I can also recall an early incident where Raikkonen was trapped in his car because of a malfunction.
Who, in all honesty, died in open wheel racing throughout recent history (i.e. 1980s onwards) as the result of a head injury? I can think of two; Henry Surtees in 2009, and Justin Wilson in 2015, both of them freak occurrences. This is motor racing; accidents like that are going to occur. It's not a case of who will be the last person to die, period, in a particular discipline such as F1 or GT cars, but who will be the last person to die in a while. Allan Simonsen, driving a modern-specification GTE car, still died at Le Mans in 2013. All the safety measures and precautions in the world cannot change the fact you are driving a 1-ton hunk of metal at speeds of over 200 MPH along with many other people doing the same, and accidents WILL happen. The human body was never designed to go anywhere near these speeds, and will not develop any evolutionary traits to accomodate for this for a good few centuries.
A Massa-type event can still happen were the part positioned at just the right angle and aimed at just the right trajectory, through one of the two gaps in the Halo. It is a compromise, otherwise open-wheeled racing would cease to exist, and there were other solutions, like Red Bull's aeroscreen for instance, which is much more fitting for a sport like F1 as many cars in the '60s and '70s did have a similar windshield in the days before full-face helmets.
Jules Bianchi died as a result of failing to follow correct racing procedure and would have died even with a closed cockpit, contrary to the many revisionist redditors out there with comparatively minimal wheel knowledge. Now because of him, every race that has >5mm of rain will be red-flagged, like we saw in Monaco.
I am sick to the fucking gills over early 20s-redditors who read a book or two on F1 after following DTS and suddenly think they're an expert on the sport. I've been watching since 1998, through thousands of practice, qualifying and race sessions. In that time, I've seen many rollovers, shunts, and close calls. Not once have I seen a driver die due to a head injury. Other than Massa (and Sutil fucking up Schumi's neck), I have never seen an injury in F1 that directly affected the driver's head/neck, as that's what HANS was designed for.
Of every 10 incidents they blindly praise the Halo (PBUH), probably 8 or 9 of those the driver would have walked from. That old jew Nissany for instance had more or less the same accident as what happened at the start of Belgium twice in the last decade. No-one died during either of those crashes. I am fed up of people in general thinking every minor shunt in F1 can be directly attributed to the Halo, when this simply isn't the case. If Webber's flip at Valencia 2010 is anything to go by, Zhou probably would have survived unscathed.
What was far more concerning about that accident is the fact the catchfence barely caught Zhou's car, and we could have easily seen a repeat of Le Man 1955 had the rear tyre not dug in and absorbed a lot of the inertia.
The Halo is majorly over-rated, and the overwhelming majority of instances where it has been praised is because we simply don't know what would have happened without it. Were the track marshals at Bahrain even more incompetent than they were during the 2020 finale, Grosjean probably would have burned to death regardless. I can also recall an early incident where Raikkonen was trapped in his car because of a malfunction.
Who, in all honesty, died in open wheel racing throughout recent history (i.e. 1980s onwards) as the result of a head injury? I can think of two; Henry Surtees in 2009, and Justin Wilson in 2015, both of them freak occurrences. This is motor racing; accidents like that are going to occur. It's not a case of who will be the last person to die, period, in a particular discipline such as F1 or GT cars, but who will be the last person to die in a while. Allan Simonsen, driving a modern-specification GTE car, still died at Le Mans in 2013. All the safety measures and precautions in the world cannot change the fact you are driving a 1-ton hunk of metal at speeds of over 200 MPH along with many other people doing the same, and accidents WILL happen. The human body was never designed to go anywhere near these speeds, and will not develop any evolutionary traits to accomodate for this for a good few centuries.
A Massa-type event can still happen were the part positioned at just the right angle and aimed at just the right trajectory, through one of the two gaps in the Halo. It is a compromise, otherwise open-wheeled racing would cease to exist, and there were other solutions, like Red Bull's aeroscreen for instance, which is much more fitting for a sport like F1 as many cars in the '60s and '70s did have a similar windshield in the days before full-face helmets.
Jules Bianchi died as a result of failing to follow correct racing procedure and would have died even with a closed cockpit, contrary to the many revisionist redditors out there with comparatively minimal wheel knowledge. Now because of him, every race that has >5mm of rain will be red-flagged, like we saw in Monaco.
I am sick to the fucking gills over early 20s-redditors who read a book or two on F1 after following DTS and suddenly think they're an expert on the sport. I've been watching since 1998, through thousands of practice, qualifying and race sessions. In that time, I've seen many rollovers, shunts, and close calls. Not once have I seen a driver die due to a head injury. Other than Massa (and Sutil fucking up Schumi's neck), I have never seen an injury in F1 that directly affected the driver's head/neck, as that's what HANS was designed for.
Of every 10 incidents they blindly praise the Halo (PBUH), probably 8 or 9 of those the driver would have walked from. That old jew Nissany for instance had more or less the same accident as what happened at the start of Belgium twice in the last decade. No-one died during either of those crashes. I am fed up of people in general thinking every minor shunt in F1 can be directly attributed to the Halo, when this simply isn't the case. If Webber's flip at Valencia 2010 is anything to go by, Zhou probably would have survived unscathed.
What was far more concerning about that accident is the fact the catchfence barely caught Zhou's car, and we could have easily seen a repeat of Le Man 1955 had the rear tyre not dug in and absorbed a lot of the inertia.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2022
What was lodged under Max's car. The only Alpha Tauri finishing in the points.
Horner said it resulted on a 20% downforce loss.
Horner said it resulted on a 20% downforce loss.
Ferrari are so busy trying to be... ethical? And the good guys? They have this paralysis of making team orders or a decision, like they're trying to play this weird balancing act between Sainz and Leclerc. Look, Binotto. Leclerc is your championship contender. You're making a very nice effort to give Sainz a chance but you are not gonna win this way.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- May 6, 2020
The HALO dickriders, for lack of a better term, are an interesting bunch. I think the best explanation is they are pretending they were the ones who were in favor of adding it in 2017/8 and are rubbing it in for all the other fans.
It’s not even that I would want to remove it now, because in history there are confirmed instances of objects entering the cockpit such as what happened to Martin Brundle in Brazil 1994, but the way these guys talk is the type of thing that makes you instinctively want the opposite of what they say. The most annoying part is how they think in terms of black and white
before 2018, the f1 cars were death traps and drivers were dying left and right from tyres flinging directly at their head at 200mph, and after 2018 there will never be any more driver fatalities and F1 safety is mathematically solved. And they ignore other safety improvements that have had a bigger impact such as the HANS device (which saved goatifi from series injuries during the same first lap crash), track safety such as run off areas and tyre and techpro barriers, car survival cell, helmet reinforcement. No, the halo is the thing we were missing all along. If senna had a halo on his car, he would have survived running into the concrete wall head on at full speed.
Yesterday I noticed someone posted a question in r/f1technical that was suspiciously similar to what I said here recently, that the flat top of the halo may have made Zhou’s crash worse by sliding on the top instead of resting on its side. And he got bullied by many people’s snarky pro halo replies who ignored his question and the opportunity to even increase driver safety.
Maybe the most annoying thing is that this is fed to us by the mainstream F1 media too, people like ESPN F1 and Sky F1 commentators bring this up even during the race. Because forget sliding into the wall at low speed and breaking your feet, forget basilar skull fractures, forget small pointy objects penetrating the helmet (would not be stopped by the halo btw), no, the halo is the single greatest invention in F1 history, somehow.
Weeb Slinger
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2019
I wonder whether the events of Austria 2002, where Barrichello allowed Schumacher to pass him after the final corner, still resonate within Ferrari.
Rubens had been ordered to let Michael go several laps before but had refused, only to relent at the 11th hour following what he claims was a threat that was broader than his contract with the team. The switch made an enormous dent in the reputation of Ferrari and Schumacher. I don't generally get emotional when I am watching sports but I remember standing up and swearing at the TV.
At Silverstone, it's possible that Ferrari feared a publicity backlash, if they took away a long overdue race win from Sainz on the auspicious occasion of his 150th race start. I don't begrudge him the victory but, however their drivers lined up at the end, this should have been a 1-2 finish.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
Adding on to @Becky McDonald and @Full Race Replay's posts (which I can't quote), there's an argument to be made that the incredibly safety standards in F1 give rise to drivers like Maldonado and Mazepin. As funny as it was watching them crash out every other race, they did ruin things for all the other drivers, and in Maldonado's case jeopardized the team's finances.
These two drivers could only have existed in today's F1, because if they had competed in the 70s, they would have been killed in their second race. No way could Mazepin have lasted a full season in Stewart's era.
These two drivers could only have existed in today's F1, because if they had competed in the 70s, they would have been killed in their second race. No way could Mazepin have lasted a full season in Stewart's era.
Quiritium
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2020
And that's why I, a lifetime McLaren fan, want the Great Satan, my teams' arch-nemesis, Ferrari, to win this year. Because they are acting the way I believe every team should. I really fucking hate what the Merc/RB years did to the sport...
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2015
"Broader than his contract". What are we talking about, is Ferarri even more mobbed up than I thought?
Weeb Slinger
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2019
I took it to be a general threat to his professional racing career - you won't race for us or for anyone else - though I suppose even that is open to different interpretations.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2016
Can't quote the Halo-discussion, so here goes:
I was completely opposed to the Halo cause it looks fucking stupid (and I thought it migth act like a funnel for small and heavy debris like the spring that hit Massa in the head), but there have been plenty of instances where it showed its worth, like only this weekend in the F2 video I posted. I am very much in favor of it now. People that go "The halo saved [insert driver]'s life!" at the drop of a hat are silly, but it can't be denied that there have been a lot of close calls where the least bit you can savely assume is that the Halo widely decreased the probability of severe injury. If these guys said "The Halo improved his odds of coming out without severe injury" they'd be spot on in 90% of the cases.
I doubt anyone would question Grosjean's fate without the Halo, but in Zhou's case, I am willing to wait for the analysis of what made the roll-hoop fail and how that interacted with the Halo. If the roll-hoop was sheared off in such a way that without the Halo, the car would have slid upside down across the concrete with Zhou being squeezed in-between his car and the tarmac/gravel-pit, there would have been no need to call a medic.
Maybe even the failed roll-hoop would have been enough to protect Zhou during his crash, but that would have been a very, very close shave, whereas the Halo quite obviously did a fine job keeping enough space above Zhou's head.
It's also nice to have side protection when hitting a fence and falling down between fence and barriers, that shit looks jagged as fuck:
I mean, sure, we don't know if the Halo actually prevented one of those bars to touch Zhou or not in this situation, but the Halo offers protection from such a danger in general.
But I'd be lying if this crash didn't make me wonder how the Halo changes how a car interacts with a gravel-pit, when it's sliding upside down.
Accidents with roll-hoops digging into the gravel have always been terrifying, so I am willing to bet that the Halo doesn't make it much worse (if it even makes it worse at all, that is).
I was completely opposed to the Halo cause it looks fucking stupid (and I thought it migth act like a funnel for small and heavy debris like the spring that hit Massa in the head), but there have been plenty of instances where it showed its worth, like only this weekend in the F2 video I posted. I am very much in favor of it now. People that go "The halo saved [insert driver]'s life!" at the drop of a hat are silly, but it can't be denied that there have been a lot of close calls where the least bit you can savely assume is that the Halo widely decreased the probability of severe injury. If these guys said "The Halo improved his odds of coming out without severe injury" they'd be spot on in 90% of the cases.
I doubt anyone would question Grosjean's fate without the Halo, but in Zhou's case, I am willing to wait for the analysis of what made the roll-hoop fail and how that interacted with the Halo. If the roll-hoop was sheared off in such a way that without the Halo, the car would have slid upside down across the concrete with Zhou being squeezed in-between his car and the tarmac/gravel-pit, there would have been no need to call a medic.
Maybe even the failed roll-hoop would have been enough to protect Zhou during his crash, but that would have been a very, very close shave, whereas the Halo quite obviously did a fine job keeping enough space above Zhou's head.
It's also nice to have side protection when hitting a fence and falling down between fence and barriers, that shit looks jagged as fuck:
I mean, sure, we don't know if the Halo actually prevented one of those bars to touch Zhou or not in this situation, but the Halo offers protection from such a danger in general.
But I'd be lying if this crash didn't make me wonder how the Halo changes how a car interacts with a gravel-pit, when it's sliding upside down.
Accidents with roll-hoops digging into the gravel have always been terrifying, so I am willing to bet that the Halo doesn't make it much worse (if it even makes it worse at all, that is).
Dude, have you seen how they treat their drivers when they have decided to replace them and just sit out their contracts? Ferrari trying to be the "good guys" when they treat like 75% of their former star drivers with utter contempt is rather improbable.
I just imagined Barrichelo getting the Jimmy Hoffa treatment. He just vanishes and overnight, there's a suspiciously fresh patch of grass somehwere in the Variante Ascari.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2015
Did the Halo save Hamilton at Monza last year?
- Joined
- May 6, 2020
The roll hoop did, because the tyre came from behind, if it collapsed like on Zhous car than who knows
Leon Breitling
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2019
I freely admit that my earlier statement that Zhou might be dead without the halo was entirely a response at the moment, and other things could have been a bigger factor in his safety afterwards.
I forget who made the complaint at the time they were testing that or the Indy style windscreen that the screen "distorted vision," which I found hilarious because there's a pillar dead center of your FOV with the halo. I figure you'd get used to either if your job is to drive the car, but it amused me all the same.
End of the day I'd rather they have it and not need it than need it and not have it, I suppose.
I forget who made the complaint at the time they were testing that or the Indy style windscreen that the screen "distorted vision," which I found hilarious because there's a pillar dead center of your FOV with the halo. I figure you'd get used to either if your job is to drive the car, but it amused me all the same.
End of the day I'd rather they have it and not need it than need it and not have it, I suppose.
- Joined
- May 6, 2020
I have heard drivers and other people discuss this, because your eyes see slightly differently and the brain combines them into a 3D image, the center of the halo actually not too much of a headache. It's like if you hold your finger a few feet in front of you and focus on something in the distance.
By the way, if we had the indycar windscreen Grosjean would be dead because the top of the halo was blocked and he escaped through the side.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2016
The tyre did hit Hamilton in the head, though. Bit of an in depth analysis.
Verstappen's car was catapulted airborne by the curb and the wheel-contact and moved across Hamilton's car:
It slid over the roll-hoop as Hamilton's car slowed down:
In that moment, the Halo at least kept the side-skirts of the floor away from Hamilton:
(Notice the black flap of floor in front of the letters "Re". That wasn't particularly dangerous to Hamilton, but a risk nonetheless)
And then the whole car came back down:
You can see Hamilton's head gets pushed down.
I've tried approximating the cars' positions here:
Verstappen's rear-wheel was completely over the cockpit of Hamilton and I think the rear suspension cleared the roll-hoop, so there was nothing in the way of the tyre going down on top of Hamilton save for the Halo and he did indeed get a bit of a tap on the helmet.
I doubt that without a Halo, this crash would have killed Hamilton, but depending on the force and direction, it could have caused significant injury to the neck. It could also have turned out fatal, though that would have been very unlikely imho.
There was a very similar crash in the 80s or 90s I think, where a tyre went across someone's helmet and even left a rubber mark, the driver wasn't even hurt iirc (goddamnit, someone jog my memory, who was that?), though the way the head was jolted around by the tyre looked really unpleasant.. But it's always hard to compare accidents, cause some key factors are always slightly different and that can significantly alter the effect. For instance the difference in sitting postions of modern F1 cars and old ones.
Edit
I think I found the video:
Martin Brundle in the McLaren gets hit by Jox Verstappen's wheel in the opening race of the 1994 season. Brundle made it out okay, despite his helmet being split by the force of the impact. Watching his head flop around is damn scary. Though now that I look at this footage, it's not as similar as I thought it was.
He did? I thought he had to squeeze through a gap between the Halo and the barrier by twisting himself into a pretzel and getting out over the side of the Halo, cause the path straight out was blocked. I don't even think a driver would fit through the gap between Halo and car tbh.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
One thing I will give the HALO is that the driver can't see the protestor on the track in front of them. YMMV whether this is a good or bad thing.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2016
I personally had to think about the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
Prosser: Have you any idea how much damage this bulldozer would suffer if I were to let it roll straight over you?
Arthur Dent: How much?
Prosser: None at all
Though I would unironically gather all those protester faggots in a cell for 24hours and have the Tom Pryce/Jansen Van Vuuren footage on loop throughout the entire time.
Maybe I'd spice things up by having a dramatic reading of a few snippets of the respective Wiki article on loop as well... just to set up the mood for the footage.
Just to highlight that last bit, in the first video I linked, you can tell that the marshall that made it across the track unharmed actually looks at Van Vuuren's remains and does not react at all. Neither does the driver. Van Vuuren was mangled so badly, people looking at him didn't even identify him as a corpse until others that had seen the accident rushed in, it seems.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2020
Funny thing: when Bernoldi blocked Coulthard in monaco till kingdom come (that was 2001 if i remember correctly) allegedly Dennis and Haug paid Bernoldi a visit and told him he will never make it in F1 or something along those lines. Se4ems like back in those days acting like Mafia bosses was the order of the day
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2022
It was Seb and it was the shield, not the aeroscreen. The latter was discarded because the top bar was low enough for a tyre to hit a driver on the top of the helmet. Of course, this could've easily been fixed, but we went with the ugly ass halo instead.
The way of stopping this crash would be to replace sausage kerbs with a strip of grass or astroturf. As proven by this, the F2 crash, Abbie Eaton's crash and the F3 crash at Monza a few years ago, they're incredibly dangerous and a death waiting to happen.
Stupid, stupid idea, I don't know why they ever implemented them.