In one of the replay video, it is very clear that Alonso's car was actually bounced off Lecrec's halo.
'Halo' Proves Worth in Opening Lap Crash at Spa
- Thread starter Paul Jeffrey
- Start date
Well the halossticks out from the line drawn from the air intake/roll cage to the front the cars to just because something hits the halo doesn't mean it would hit the drivers at all.
If you read until the end in here you'll see a second video from a torro rosso onboard and see that Alonso's front wheel and some part of the side pod hits the halo.
"Hey look, drivers get so much money and fame, they should face the risk to loose limbs or their lives entirely." Man, you are a maniac. This isn't ancient rome, normal people don't enjoy other people's (potential) suffering.
Last edited:
I'm done with this topic...too many illogical responders.
Hopefully, I'll never occupy the same bit of simracing track as you folks knowing your true opinions about racing or should I say....'wrecking'.
I can now understand why there is so much intentional wrecking in simracing.
It's because some get an adrenalin rush from seeing them.
Sad...very, very sad.
Hopefully, I'll never occupy the same bit of simracing track as you folks knowing your true opinions about racing or should I say....'wrecking'.
I can now understand why there is so much intentional wrecking in simracing.
It's because some get an adrenalin rush from seeing them.
Sad...very, very sad.
Last edited:
Hi Rasmus, interesting perspective there. I would add, the front wing would have hit his head or between shoulder and neck, anyway, the outcome could have fatal as the front wing with its weight and the fact that it is connected with the car nose would have released significant energy to Charles head before bending or falling of. It is by far not a ski binding....
I can understand the debate about whether the halo actually saved Leclerc or not, but at the end of the day it is meaningless: you may survive a bike crash without an helmet, that does not mean you will make it without it next time. Removing the halo after such an accident where there is clear evidence that a tyre was getting within the driver's critical space sounds like utter stupidity to me.
Unfortunately piling up safety devices will never guarantee full safety to the drivers because of the speed and busy tracks. It will only reduce the likehood of serious damage. Wickens' accident is there to remind everyone of that. So amateurs of crashs and broken careers and lives will always have something to get excited about.
Unfortunately piling up safety devices will never guarantee full safety to the drivers because of the speed and busy tracks. It will only reduce the likehood of serious damage. Wickens' accident is there to remind everyone of that. So amateurs of crashs and broken careers and lives will always have something to get excited about.
Excuse me, F1 back in the 50ties, 60ties and early 70ties safety measures were so weak, they killed a couple of drivers almost every year. They were already driving in the high 200 km/h at the times of Jochen Rindt and Lauda later in 1976 at Nordschleife, so the discussion whether or not HALO safed Charles is by no aspect of the matter "meaningless", it means everything as it meant everything in the past.
There is no 100% safety, this is clear, but there is a lot more safety in all classes of racing nowadays than ever before.
There is no 100% safety, this is clear, but there is a lot more safety in all classes of racing nowadays than ever before.
Not sure you read my full post but you misunderstood me ^^. Let me make my point clearer: whether or not Leclerc would have actually been hit by that tyre is meaningless; the single fact that there was an actual risk of the tyre hitting the driver (as shown by the contact with the halo) is enough justification for the halo.
Dan Costa
World Champ Procrastination n' Hoarding Series
its very conclusive that the tyre was on track to hit charles in the head. The impact was strong enough to break the suspension upwards
This is exactly the kind of ignorance that pervades the whole argument over the halo; it's all based on assumptions, beliefs and people's opinions on what it should be, without any regard to actual engineering or facts. They block the air to a driver's head?! Why should this be an issue that prevents it from being implemented? Are you saying that the drivers will all die from heatstroke if we remove the airflow? If that's really a concern, the allow teams to introduce something similar to the F-duct that McLaren had. That'll INCREASE the airflow in the cockpit.
Don't ever say, it won't work because "X'. Instead say, this is an issue, how do we fix it. The FIA is guilty of this, as are you.
About Alonso’s car was a little joke as unquoted reaction to on another post. Of course his car was largely intact. The debris wasn’t the problem. But the angle Alonso’s car made upon going over LeClerc’s car was pretty nasty and could have had a bad ending without the halo.
The HALO literally saved a young (potential champions) life!
Honestly, this discussion is farcical...
To be honest, I don't even notice it at all anymore, got used to it maybe after round 3/4?
Those who disagree just look at the image and tell me it hasn't already done it's job.
It looked stupid last year, but since it's been integrated into the design and chassis along with the livery it's all good to me
Last edited:
Yep, exactly!
That perspective changed my opinion about the whole thing. I mean. Maybe not dead as the tyre might've slipped through in front of him and the front wing wouldn't have pierced through the helmet but it would not have been nice either way!
The HALO literally saved a young (potential champions) life!
Honestly, this discussion is farcical...
To be honest, I don't even notice it at all anymore, got used to it maybe after round 3/4?
Those who disagree just look at the image and tell me it hasn't already done it's job.
It looked stupid last year, but since it's been integrated into the design and chassis along with the livery it's all good to me
View attachment 266757
I agree with you but that image doesn't show anything. If the floor of the car, like it looks in that picture would've landed on the car without the halo it would just have hit the air intake, which definitely holds up as it's part of the "roll cage" and the front of the car, which also holds up as it's part of the monocoque.
Nothing would happen but since the halo sticks out of the "roll cage line up", it got hit.
To proof your point, which I agree with, you need to use the picture from the video above where you see the tyre hitting the halo with Alonso's car spinning around and probably hitting the helmet with the front wing.
If the drivers (2 of the best on the grid btw at the start/end of their careers) who were involved in the ACTUAL INCIDENT themselves can't convince you lot then you're a lost cause ... It's so bloody obvious that this was a career ending injury at the VERY least... FFS this is not a SIM ..... You absolute dingbats... Also, WTF Hulk??? That was just lazy braking into turn one at Spa? Useless, no wonder no big team has picked you up... Basically another Heidfeld, off you go to formulaE soon...
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12...ited-for-helping-charles-leclerc-avoid-injury
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45316834
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12...ited-for-helping-charles-leclerc-avoid-injury
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45316834
Last edited:
The moment the crash happened I knew that people would say, that HALO saved his life, wich is only one part of the truth. By that logic it would be the right time to stop racing alltogether and use remote controlled cars.
For me personaly danger is an important part of motorsport, besides noise, smell and great looking cars and something that makes me look up to the guys who drive - motorsport needs to be something that is done by brave people and not just by the Strolls of today. In that regard F1 has been pretty unexciting for me the last couple of years, because it feels like that pilots get more and more used to their comfy cars and tracks, so mistakes like they happened at the start of the Spa race get more frequent. Wich just leads to the consequence that F1 has lost it's status of being the pinacle of motorsport. And yes, F1 drivers should be the gladiators of our era. It is not that I want drivers to get killed, but I want to see them taking risks. Driving an F1 car over the tilke-parking-lots is safer than my way to work.
For me personaly danger is an important part of motorsport, besides noise, smell and great looking cars and something that makes me look up to the guys who drive - motorsport needs to be something that is done by brave people and not just by the Strolls of today. In that regard F1 has been pretty unexciting for me the last couple of years, because it feels like that pilots get more and more used to their comfy cars and tracks, so mistakes like they happened at the start of the Spa race get more frequent. Wich just leads to the consequence that F1 has lost it's status of being the pinacle of motorsport. And yes, F1 drivers should be the gladiators of our era. It is not that I want drivers to get killed, but I want to see them taking risks. Driving an F1 car over the tilke-parking-lots is safer than my way to work.
I have read this debate with some interest,and I am confused as to why it is dismissed out of hand that Halo would not have saved Sennas life?
They say that he would have survived the impact with the wall ,and that what killed him was a wheel flying up and striking his head.
Surely the Halo device may have deflected this..........I am NO expert ,so could someone please explain why it is stated here so often that Halo would not have helped in Sennas crash.
By the way I am no big fan of the HALO myself just curious as to the answer to my question!!
They say that he would have survived the impact with the wall ,and that what killed him was a wheel flying up and striking his head.
Surely the Halo device may have deflected this..........I am NO expert ,so could someone please explain why it is stated here so often that Halo would not have helped in Sennas crash.
By the way I am no big fan of the HALO myself just curious as to the answer to my question!!
The drivers are contractually obliged to say nice things about the Halo, regardless of whether or not they actually like it. The FIA holds all of the power to make their lives miserable if given a reason to do so, and the teams might not want to keep a 'controversial' driver around either. PR is far too micromanaged these days for me to take any driver comments at face value.
if i remember correctly it wasn't a wheel but the broken steering column - or whatever the piece of metal behind the steering wheel is called - which killed him by piercing his breast. if that was indeed the case, the halo would not have helped at all.
the death which pushed the halo to the forefront was the one in indycar at pocono where a nose was torn off a car and crashed into the next chap's helmet, killing him, if i remember correctly. sorry too lazy and busy to research both cases on the net (plus, it's a rather morbid thing to do, maybe tomorrow in broad daylight).
