Durge Driven
DD
hehehe
I sure you get what I driving at
High speed corners should be for the brave ...........like Kimi
Not for Stroll flat out whilst texting
'Halo' Proves Worth in Opening Lap Crash at Spa
- Thread starter Paul Jeffrey
- Start date
hehehe
I sure you get what I driving at
High speed corners should be for the brave ...........like Kimi
Not for Stroll flat out whilst texting
Critics and contrarians that like to "disagree" every pro-halo post have the head so up in their ass they are unable to see the point of it. Yes, the pexyglass windshield screen like with indycar would have been better looking and alonso claimed to hate the halo, but F1 requires something on top of the helmet as a safety measure, that is a truth that people might like or dislike, but it doesn't change that it IS the truth.
Durge Driven
DD
Good example when I suggested F1 control tyres after seeing how they brought V8 closer racing
You would not have believed the storrm I caused on this particular F1 site
Most of it was staright out abusive and admin did nothing to stop it
Not even a Motorsports commentator or site was canvassing the idea too scared to say what they thought
As always I never let things like that worry me, what's the point right
Anyways if I turned around now and said they should go back to multiple tyre manufactures
I would meet the same outcome
Like try to work that out
With all this debate about whether Halo saved Leclerc's life, has no one bothered to look at the cause of Alonso's car getting so airborne and putting Leclerc's life in danger in the first place?.
When Hulkenburg's car slams into the back of Alonso his car actually lifts Alonso up, add to this the fact that open wheeled cars are renowned for climbing over each other's wheels and going airborne, then include the force of the impact propelling him forward at a rapid rate and the result is that Alonso was always going to end up in the air.
The Halo is ugly no debate there, but it was introduced due to the death of Bianci, but would not of stopped his injuries. The FIA needs to take a good look at stopping cars from getting airborne in the first place, in karting they introduced a rear bumper to stop karts from getting airborne during wheel to wheel contact. Maybe a similar approach needs to be considered, or redesign the front nose so it can't lift another car up during high speed impact's.
Motorsport is dangerous no matter if your karting or flying at 300kph in an F1, it's up to the governing bodies to explore every effort to keep drivers safe via safety innovation, but it would seems in F1 the buck stops with Halo and the FIA are happy with that, but the Halo would not of helped Massa when he was hit by the component from another car.
Whats disappointing is that it takes a drivers death to bring about changes in motorsport safety and imo this is not good enough, if the governing bodies were always looking at advancing safety Senna, Bianci, Wilson and many other drivers might still be alive today.
When Hulkenburg's car slams into the back of Alonso his car actually lifts Alonso up, add to this the fact that open wheeled cars are renowned for climbing over each other's wheels and going airborne, then include the force of the impact propelling him forward at a rapid rate and the result is that Alonso was always going to end up in the air.
The Halo is ugly no debate there, but it was introduced due to the death of Bianci, but would not of stopped his injuries. The FIA needs to take a good look at stopping cars from getting airborne in the first place, in karting they introduced a rear bumper to stop karts from getting airborne during wheel to wheel contact. Maybe a similar approach needs to be considered, or redesign the front nose so it can't lift another car up during high speed impact's.
Motorsport is dangerous no matter if your karting or flying at 300kph in an F1, it's up to the governing bodies to explore every effort to keep drivers safe via safety innovation, but it would seems in F1 the buck stops with Halo and the FIA are happy with that, but the Halo would not of helped Massa when he was hit by the component from another car.
Whats disappointing is that it takes a drivers death to bring about changes in motorsport safety and imo this is not good enough, if the governing bodies were always looking at advancing safety Senna, Bianci, Wilson and many other drivers might still be alive today.
Last edited:
Durge Driven
DD
Guaranteed if you took it away in a few years time all the drivers would say they feel naked
So... @Chobonator . You have "disagreed" my post. And others. Would you be so nice , and tell us why and what your point of view is ?
I feel like all of the math and frame by frame analysis of this crash is missing the point.
Maybe it’s because I work in healthcare, but in many ways I think a “near miss” is just as bad as the adverse event. It means we were only one coincidence away from a potentially major error. We have had more than enough near misses in the past decade to warrant action regarding head safety. Speculation about whether Leclerc would have been struck in the head (and probably killed) is irrelevant in my opinion. The fact that the bottom of a car hit his halo at all should be enough to demonstrate why it is there.
I can’t even get started on the straw man arguments that
1) Halo wouldn’t have saved (Senna, Wheldon, Bianchi, etc): You can’t go back in time to save them, but you can (and did) deflect a car away from the general vicinity of a driver’s head today.
2) racing needs to be dangerous/more people die in other types of racing (e.g. Isle of Man TT, Dakar rally) : I don’t even need to explain the fallacy of that logic...
Maybe it’s because I work in healthcare, but in many ways I think a “near miss” is just as bad as the adverse event. It means we were only one coincidence away from a potentially major error. We have had more than enough near misses in the past decade to warrant action regarding head safety. Speculation about whether Leclerc would have been struck in the head (and probably killed) is irrelevant in my opinion. The fact that the bottom of a car hit his halo at all should be enough to demonstrate why it is there.
I can’t even get started on the straw man arguments that
1) Halo wouldn’t have saved (Senna, Wheldon, Bianchi, etc): You can’t go back in time to save them, but you can (and did) deflect a car away from the general vicinity of a driver’s head today.
2) racing needs to be dangerous/more people die in other types of racing (e.g. Isle of Man TT, Dakar rally) : I don’t even need to explain the fallacy of that logic...
Why do people think the Halo is SO ugly? Beyond Ugly? Of course you can have your opinion. I think maybe, "Not amazingly Beautiful"? its kinda cool looking in some ways.
And ofcourse, Still having your Squash intact is always cool!
Threads usually end up being closed with those kind of questions. Now it is forbidden to hit the disagree without a proper argument?I don't like people, that just hit the disagree-rating, but not posting here WHY they disagree.
Yes, i know..... my post will recieve mass disagree-ratings. Trolls all over the place......
This place is getting more strange by the day
Solution: more chainsaws, spikes and whirling blades. Rotorsport instead of motorsport
THANK YOU! This has been the core of my argument all along. I want safety in motor-sport, I've never argued against the concept of head protection. But when news broke that the Halo would be used for 2018, almost no-one besides Ferrari was expecting it. General consensus was that the Halo had flaws that were probably unsolvable, and that the Shield had more potential. And it was seemingly too late in the season to make such a key change to the technical regulations before 2019.
Also, 9 out of the 10 teams voted against the Halo, and were misled by the FIA into thinking it was a democracy and not a dictatorship. All of it reeked of a rush-job, the FIA introducing head protection because something obliged them to, without putting in the effort necessary to make it a good long term solution. With some development to solve the flaws, the Shield could've done everything that the Halo allegedly does now, AND protected the drivers from smaller debris, AND given them an unimpeded field of vision.
In short, the fact that it makes the cars look like thongs was always just one of many reasons why I oppose the Halo so fiercely.
That's great and all, but it still sucks.
They should come up with an alternative that is pleasing to the eye.
They should come up with an alternative that is pleasing to the eye.
I stand by my post in saying safety has gone too far. I also state that I don't want to see death obviously but if there's car parts flying, I'm all for that! When you next talk to your mate or whoever about the grand prix, the first thing you say isn't "What about the Bottas overtake" no, it's "Wow what a crash, what a mess! People never want to miss the start of the race because yes their favourite driver might gain positions before turn 1 but.......... They know there is a big chance of an incident. Sky tv advert at the moment advertising ultra hd show the 2 ferrari cars crashing into each other and close up of car parts, they're not showing some overtake. Why? Because it's excitement. I think all the disagreements on my first post are really meant to be the green ticks and you're probably the same people who don't know the difference between lose and loose lol.
so u say u dont want to see deaths lol read the whole dribble u write n u say entertainment i guess seen people suffer makes u sleep at nights
Mod Edit: no personal abuse please.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mod Edit: for personal abuse.
Last edited by a moderator:
Benutzername
www.hasenkamp-motorsport.de
Of course crashs are exciting!
But injurys or death does not make them more exciting. If the crashs are safer, great.
