[goingout]

Originally Posted by ecenandu

Great to see inputs coming from an open wheel racer. I would like to know how safe you guys feel while racing in Indian open wheel series compared to European counterparts.

Racing in India is also governed by the FIA and all international safety rules are strictly followed.

The Formula cars are either imported (like the Formula BMW) or assembled to the same spec as the international ones (FF1600). The safety harness we wear is imported and has FIA certification.

The circuits also have to follow strict rules and are inspected regularly by FIA.

So overall it's pretty much the same as racing anywhere else in the world. In fact I've seen better marshaling in India compared to some other F1 circuits abroad

[Knowall]

My two cents as a follower of F1 for a while, Im not in favor of such a change. Reason being that F1 is inherently a dangerous sport and any driver who wants to driver a open wheel race car has in his/her mind made a choice and accepts the dangers for what it is, else would have joined a safer sport(Golf).

Pro-Boxers do not wear headgear while boxing.. Tyson, Ali would laugh at the opponent.
Sky Divers : They know the dangers of jumping off a plane before doing it..
UFC: A head kick can knock you out, that's how it is..Its the way the game is played

How can you expect a knife to be blunt!

If F1 drivers wanted to race in a safer category they would have done so. F1 in my opinion is turning soft. V12 to V6...Fuel efficiency is not a priority when you go racing and if it is then do not race or join the Le Mans team or Formula E category.

It is one of the reasons why people are losing interest in the sport. The sport is now too soft.

[rangakishen]

Originally Posted by Knowall

My two cents as a follower of F1 for a while, Im not in favor of such a change. Reason being that F1 is inherently a dangerous sport and any driver who wants to driver a open wheel race car has in his/her mind made a choice and accepts the dangers for what it is, else would have joined a safer sport(Golf).

Pro-Boxers do not wear headgear while boxing.. Tyson, Ali would laugh at the opponent.
Sky Divers : They know the dangers of jumping off a plane before doing it..
UFC: A head kick can knock you out, that's how it is..Its the way the game is played

I agree with you on the turning soft part but with one big difference.

The Halo concept is a step in the right direction. No doubt about it. Your comparisons are not on par with what is happening.
Going in without a reserve parachute is equal to not having halo concept (any of the alternatives).
Not wearing head gear? Because protecting or guarding your own head is part of fighting. Else there would be no knock outs. Same with UFC.

Protecting your head isnt part of F1. Driving is. Halo concept is meant to protect driver against stuff out of his control.

Where is agree with you is that F1 is too soft. What would be good to see is far less run off areas. Or gravel traps much closer to the track. Such that drivers lose a lot more than just a run across the astro for making a mistake. Walls would have been best but with current speeds it might be too dangerous. But drivers now have a false sense of security because their mistakes arent penalized. Everybody carries the maximum possible speed through corners knowing that a mistake will cost nothing.

This is the only place where you can compare your examples. Head gear - run off areas. Basically things that make up for athlete error.

I hope I was able to get my message across.

Edit: and no! fuel efficiency has always been a part of F1. Everybody paints a picture of F1 as if it burned fuel like nobody's buisness. It has always been part of racing. So has been tyre saving. Nobody remembers it. Now everybody focuses on it because FIA has has put some regulation on it. Nothing wrong with it. F1 is about pinnacle of technology. Not just outright power. Dragster do that. Crazy engine lasting just one run etc., F1 engines produce 900+ bhp from 1.6 l engine at just 100kg/hr fuel limit. And just 5 such engines for 20 odd races. Even less this year if I'm not wrong. Benz has claimed 45+% thermal efficiency. That is EPIC. It is rightly the pinnacle of technology!

[Knowall]

Originally Posted by rangakishen

I agree with you on the turning soft part but with one big difference.

The Halo concept is a step in the right direction. No doubt about it. Your comparisons are not on par with what is happening.
Going in without a reserve parachute is equal to not having halo concept (any of the alternatives).
Not wearing head gear? Because protecting or guarding your own head is part of fighting. Else there would be no knock outs. Same with UFC.

Protecting your head isnt part of F1. Driving is. Halo concept is meant to protect driver against stuff out of his control.

Where is agree with you is that F1 is too soft. What would be good to see is far less run off areas. Or gravel traps much closer to the track. Such that drivers lose a lot more than just a run across the astro for making a mistake. Walls would have been best but with current speeds it might be too dangerous. But drivers now have a false sense of security because their mistakes arent penalized. Everybody carries the maximum possible speed through corners knowing that a mistake will cost nothing.

This is the only place where you can compare your examples. Head gear - run off areas. Basically things that make up for athlete error.

I hope I was able to get my message across.

Edit: and no! fuel efficiency has always been a part of F1. Everybody paints a picture of F1 as if it burned fuel like nobody's buisness. It has always been part of racing. So has been tyre saving. Nobody remembers it. Now everybody focuses on it because FIA has has put some regulation on it. Nothing wrong with it. F1 is about pinnacle of technology. Not just outright power. Dragster do that. Crazy engine lasting just one run etc., F1 engines produce 900+ bhp from 1.6 l engine at just 100kg/hr fuel limit. And just 5 such engines for 20 odd races. Even less this year if I'm not wrong. Benz has claimed 45+% thermal efficiency. That is EPIC. It is rightly the pinnacle of technology!

Okay yea..maybe.. My points of Boxing, UFC, Sky Diving is that a sport is suppose to be what it is meant to be. Racing is suppose to be racing, with whatever factors come with it.

Yes the car make 720bhp + 160EBHP but now the cars are alot more heavier (Power to weight ratio is not comparable).

The pre 2004 era had very little fuel management, if you remember when the races started noone knew whether the cars started with light fuel of with high level of fuel depending on race strategy and lighter cars would have to come in 2/3 in a race to fill fuel depending on race strategy.
Fuel efficiency was never a factor previously like now where nowadays half the race is a driver running with on a Eco Map until the engineer goes .. Its Hammer Time :-)

If you've followed the pre-season testing.. you would know that the engines are now like a Toyota Corolla, where they just keep going and going...Its like a duracell battery ad. I would rather them push performance rather than reliability like when in the past one V12 engine would be used per race and would hopefully last.If racing was no different to real life cars wheres the fun and that why we watch motorsports.If not then we might aswell go buy a Corolla that will last a lifetime...Apologies but I liked the past... but some good points shared by you.

[StarrySky]

I think the "F1 is a dangerous sport" argument is over-used. By that token, we should resist any changes to make helmets better, ban the HANS device, ban fire-resistant overalls etc. After all, the drivers know it's dangerous. But, if all those are accepted in the name of safety, why not the halo device? The only "crime" of the halo device is that it makes the cars uglier to look at. I would take a safer car over a prettier car.

Batsmen know and accept that they may get hit by the cricket ball while batting. Does that mean that we should not let them use helmets?

F1 is not about putting drivers' bodies and lives on the line, it's about racing. I think the halo device does not take anything away from racing. If it helps to protect the drivers, then in my opinion, it should be on the car. I would prefer to see my favourite driver racing with these halo devices than lose him to some accident which this device could've prevented.

[asr245]

The past may have been beautiful but no longer sustainable. A safer car does not neuter the sport.

Originally Posted by rangakishen

F1 engines produce 900+ bhp from 1.6 l engine at just 100kg/hr fuel limit. And just 5 such engines for 20 odd races. Even less this year if I'm not wrong. Benz has claimed 45+% thermal efficiency. That is EPIC. It is rightly the pinnacle of technology!

More on that here

https://www.formula1.com/content/fom...ore-races.html

AC: These power units really are incredible feats of engineering. We're now running at more than 47% thermal efficiency and producing historic highs of power - and all with an ICE restricted to consuming fuel at a rate of just 100kg/hr. The old-fashioned, naturally aspirated engines peaked at 29% thermal efficiency during the V8 era - while the last time we saw these levels of power in Formula One was back in 2005, with a V10 that guzzled fuel at a whopping 194kg/hr. To halve the fuel flow rate for the same amount of power is quite something.

Now if that's not pinnacle, I don't know what is.

[ashwin.terminat]

Those saying that this might save in Jules Bianchi like situation, I am not quite sure.

Jules struck a tractor at dangerously high speeds. It is unlikely that any safety contraption will be able to safeguard a driver from such instant impact.

As for the car itself, I am all for safety measures. I have seen flying F1 cars come dangerously close to driver's heads. It is about time we start thinking with our minds and not our hearts.

And if this is going is going to drive away certain F1 viewers, I am not sure what can retain them.

[AJITHAAA]

Looks like we are heading to the drone and Ironman territory as taking the driver out of the equation seems to be the only way to ensure his safety completely. The Jules Bianchi situation was the culmination of all the things that could go wrong, went wrong at that moment. The Halo is of no use in the Felipe Massa kind of situation. The full canopy is the best possible solution but that applies only in air(partially), on ground it could contribute to a bigger disaster as a crash could possibly jam it and a fire in the cockpit would cook the driver.
My two paise .

[rangakishen]

Originally Posted by Knowall

Yes the car make 720bhp + 160EBHP but now the cars are alot more heavier (Power to weight ratio is not comparable).

The engine alone makes 900+bhp. So that 900+160 for the whole powertrain. Power to weight ratio is higher now.

The 2.4l v8s only produced around 700 bhp and the 3l v10 around 900 bhp.

Anyway we are off topic.

[abhishek46]

Originally Posted by rangakishen

I agree with you on the turning soft part but with one big difference.

The Halo concept is a step in the right direction. No doubt about it. Your comparisons are not on par with what is happening.
Going in without a reserve parachute is equal to not having halo concept (any of the alternatives).
Not wearing head gear? Because protecting or guarding your own head is part of fighting. Else there would be no knock outs. Same with UFC.

Protecting your head isnt part of F1. Driving is. Halo concept is meant to protect driver against stuff out of his control.

Where is agree with you is that F1 is too soft. What would be good to see is far less run off areas. Or gravel traps much closer to the track. Such that drivers lose a lot more than just a run across the astro for making a mistake. Walls would have been best but with current speeds it might be too dangerous. But drivers now have a false sense of security because their mistakes arent penalized. Everybody carries the maximum possible speed through corners knowing that a mistake will cost nothing.

This is the only place where you can compare your examples. Head gear - run off areas. Basically things that make up for athlete error.

I hope I was able to get my message across.

Edit: and no! fuel efficiency has always been a part of F1. Everybody paints a picture of F1 as if it burned fuel like nobody's buisness. It has always been part of racing. So has been tyre saving. Nobody remembers it. Now everybody focuses on it because FIA has has put some regulation on it. Nothing wrong with it. F1 is about pinnacle of technology. Not just outright power. Dragster do that. Crazy engine lasting just one run etc., F1 engines produce 900+ bhp from 1.6 l engine at just 100kg/hr fuel limit. And just 5 such engines for 20 odd races. Even less this year if I'm not wrong. Benz has claimed 45+% thermal efficiency. That is EPIC. It is rightly the pinnacle of technology!

Hi there!
You points are all correct. It may be the pinnacle of engineering efficiency. But wait a minute, are we building some super efficient vacuum cleaners here? Since when did Maximum Fuel & thermal efficiency became the goal of a racing car?

Racing for many of us was about speed, power, thrill and excitement. In the 90s the 1.5 turbos used to produce in excess of 1200hp during race and a scalding 1500hp during qualifying. To see the drivers in those days struggle to keep the cars in a straight line used to literally give goosebumps. The viewers literally were able to feel that power and thrill even from your TV screen. That was the spirit and magic of F1. That madness gave birth to legends like Senna, prost, Schumacher and many other mad men. That was the F1 we loved and we want now.

The last thing on earth that we want is a glorified vacuum cleaner with some high tech gizmo wizardry in the name of thermal efficiency. On a lighter note, What next for f1 then? Bullock carts probably. (May be they realize the cows have better thermal efficiency than engines)

The above are of course my own views, no way intended to offend anyone.

[ecenandu]

Originally Posted by abhishek46

In the 90s the 1.5 turbos used to produce in excess of 1200hp during race and a scalding 1500hp during qualifying. To see the drivers in those days struggle to keep the cars in a straight line used to literally give goosebumps.

Who said these cars are easy to drive, in rain with all these torque its a beast to drive. Need proof, see below.

Vettel on slicks, but even then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJdbMH4sZic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CowtAuigNz8

An ex-Formula 1 driver - Martin Brundle's perspective.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnrkPQDqoCA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEiyQ8aQGWc

Old is gold, never gets old, don't they. I was too young to follow Formula 1 in 90's live but have seen recorded feeds. I agree the car looks twitchy but racing, overtaking per se, it was similar to what we have now. The pace difference between a top team and a back marker was huge, back then.

The current F1 drivers are equally good compared to the previous generation, give them any car, they will get top of it, not everyone but most of them.

Off topic:
The fastest kart I have driven is the shifter karts with six gears, It was quite a jump from four stroke rental karts. I got a ride in my friend's kart since I beat him in the rental kart . My best time was 10 sec off the record, the braking was also savage, this had front disk brake as well. The circuit is only 800m long. This beast will hit 120-130 in the long straight. Can't wait for the summer to kick, so I can go in this beast again, this time properly.

[abhishek46]

Originally Posted by ecenandu

Who said these cars are easy to drive, in rain with all these torque its a beast to drive. Need proof, see below.



Attachment 1484330

hello there,
I did not say that the current generation car are easy to drive. With tons of settings and information thrown at the driver, DRS and other things they are no doubt a challenge. But the challenge is less physical and more mental.
That is what Martin also has said previously.

We cant really compare the drivers of one generation vs other. I chose to compare the machines, not the men!

By the way, if we feel the current gen cars are tricky in the rain, let us imagine the 90s era cars in rain.

Lastly, Overtaking back then did not have the stringent rules that we have today. In past there have been over takings which are nothing sort of spectacular due to laxity of rules.

[polopm]

Originally Posted by abhishek46

hello there,
I did not say that the current generation car are easy to drive. With tons of settings and information thrown at the driver, DRS and other things they are no doubt a challenge. But the challenge is less physical and more mental.
That is what Martin also has said previously.

We cant really compare the drivers of one generation vs other. I chose to compare the machines, not the men!

By the way, if we feel the current gen cars are tricky in the rain, let us imagine the 90s era cars in rain.

Lastly, Overtaking back then did not have the stringent rules that we have today. In past there have been over takings which are nothing sort of spectacular due to laxity of rules.

The new cars are better "managed" both by the pit and also the driver. There are so many driver aids these days that the car is such a sophisticated machine.
Not just the cars but circuits too have got wider run off area that make sure no one has their race cut because of driving over gravel or grass.

You have sponsors who have their own dos and dont's and so these days you do not get guys like James Hunt .

F1 needs to be like street food, you always risk diarrhea or any other predicament which you know can come any day. You still want it for it's taste. You might not get the same in a 5 star hotel. The new F1 is becoming a 5 star version under various interest groups.

There are in-numerous safety features which have come in like reinforced structures , better helmets which do not reduce the fun/risk factor in any way but have saved lives and limbs. These are a definite YES. Not hoops. It has always been open racing.

The current idea to have the hoop in front of the driver is for "safety". Don't get me wrong, It is just one more step in making the sport sterile.

For all those who admired the movie Rush. Here's a nice link - http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0253541/quotes
and it has got quite a lot on safety.

[shyn]

Originally Posted by tharian

That was a bad crash for Alonso. Race red flagged.

Alonso is fine.

It was an interesting race, hopefully it continues the same way.

Good to see Ferrari back to what they do best.



What is power unit used by RedBull racing?

Originally Posted by F2005

That was a very bad accident. Thank God, Alonso is safe



https://www.Youtube.com/watch?v=1cnhfMgc72A

Originally Posted by ecenandu

Reminded me of Jacques Villeneuve - Ralf Schumacher crash in 2001 Australian GP. Thank goodness, Alonoso walked off unhurt. TV feed only showed Gutierrez car then I saw mangled remaining of another car, scary sight, actually. Alonso was walking gingerly at first, nothing bad at the end, thankfully.

What an arrogant prick Max is turning out to be, Jeez. That kid has to take it bit easy. What does he think about himself, did he wanted Carlos to move out of his way, always.

Originally Posted by RocketRaccoon

Uploading some close up pictures of the Alonso crash.

Attachment 1488098

Attachment 1488099

Attachment 1488100

The fact that Alonso walked away from that crash and that too so safe snd quick and all by himself goes to show how safe the cars, drivers and tracks are. Had there been a halo or canopy then Alonso would have been caged in and trapped inside a belly-up car and wait for help to arrive and break him free and then extract him!
The accident was freakish and halo or canopy could have actually made matters much worse for Alonso. Just saying.



P.S: I think Bernie needs a tire or a spring hit his head to knock some sense back.

[StarrySky]

Originally Posted by shyn

Had there been a halo or canopy then Alonso would have been caged in and trapped inside a belly-up car and wait for help to arrive and break him free and then extract him!

The halo device prototype tested by Ferrari was not removable by the driver, but the proposal is to have something the driver can remove himself. So, I think, unless the airbox structure itself is destroyed, there will be no danger to driver getting stuck in the car.

On the other hand, the accident also displayed why F1 is shifting to tarmac runoffs as opposed to gravel traps. Alonso was launched in the air as soon as he hit the gravel trap. If those barriers were a little bit closer, he could've hit them flying (like Dan Wheldon). The accident would've been much less spectacular with a tarmac runoff.