Jump to content
Christmas Period - Codemasters Staff and Support Read more... ×

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Do we need Halo on 2018?

Recommended Posts

I mean we drive virtuel not real? Also we got already a Master Chief so maybe CM find a solution for this future Cars..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In real life, I prefer the idea of a completely open cockpit (being able to see the drivers helmets as they go past) and if I was racing would prefer to be able to get out very quickly in an accident. I feel F1 is relatively safe right now, and if they want to make F1 safer they could simply limit the cars to 100mph, but the fans and the drivers obviously wouldn't want that - that isn't what F1 is about. I know this has divided opinion among the drivers, and I am sure many drivers want to be as protected as possible in the cockpit, so I would support the idea of the halo being optional with each driver choosing whether or not to run it on their car.

Like I say, F1 is already very safe when you take into account the speeds that they are doing, and I think the money spent developing the halo would probably be better spent improving the safety of junior categories, many of which aren't as safe as F1. Although, I guess the halo development will be passed on to junior categories in the next few seasons though.

Anyway, without a drastic U-turn by the FIA the halo will be in 2018, so in the game, I feel it must be there - I want the game to be as realistic as possible even if I dont support the idea itself.

My impression though is that 2017 is likely to be the last season of open cockpit F1 - with LMP2 having moved to closed cockpits for 2017, I guess the FIA are pushing for closed cockpits and the halo is just one step closer to fully closed cockpits in F1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a good idea when regarding this issue. Seeming how all these recent deaths in Motorsports have been freak accidents, i came up with solutions for all the different scenarios.

  • Jules Bianchi - Just don't allow big machinery on the track. simple as that, he had a 1/100 chance of hitting the machine, and was unlucky, so to stop others from doing that, don't allow machines on the track, or if they need to be, release a full safety car, not a VSC.
  • Justin Wilson - For those who don't know, Justin Wilson was hit on the head with the nose cone of a front wing in an Indy Car. Everyone says these days how front wings are over-complex and hurt the racing, so why not limit the amount of wing-lets allowed as this would dramatically reduce the amount of shit left on the track and can stop the carbon shower happening when a front wing is broken.
  • Henry Surtees - Again, another freak accident, and there have been measures taken to ensure that wheel don't go flying off after an accident, that's what the tethers are for, just strengthen them up to minimise the risk of them ever breaking..
  • Felipe Massa - I can not understand for the life of me how the Halo is actually meant to protect people from this, I mean, there's a giant gap which the spring would go through and therefore would not protect anyone. In Massa's case, the helmet did its job in absorbing the impact, and that's what saved his life.

I mainly bring this up for the front wing solution, as that carbon spray caused by front wings is not only dangerous to drivers, but also to marshals and spectators. In saying this, you are also killing two birds with one stone by simplifying the front wings, as its safer and allow drivers to follow behind another car, as the dirty air effect is not felt as badly with a simple front wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if you strengthen front wings and reduce winglets youll still have a carbon shower its simple youre getting paid the big bucks to go F1 racing were not little boys in go karts no more so harden up and face the fact of your in the pinnacle of motorsport safety is never going to be 100% so harden up a little bit nd accept it its fine how it is yes its unfortunate that they die but without the danger wheres the fun? Its supposed to be an extreme race stop wrapping them in cotton wool for god sakes just get on with the racing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a good idea when regarding this issue. Seeming how all these recent deaths in Motorsports have been freak accidents, i came up with solutions for all the different scenarios.

  • Jules Bianchi - Just don't allow big machinery on the track. simple as that, he had a 1/100 chance of hitting the machine, and was unlucky, so to stop others from doing that, don't allow machines on the track, or if they need to be, release a full safety car, not a VSC.
  • Justin Wilson - For those who don't know, Justin Wilson was hit on the head with the nose cone of a front wing in an Indy Car. Everyone says these days how front wings are over-complex and hurt the racing, so why not limit the amount of wing-lets allowed as this would dramatically reduce the amount of **** left on the track and can stop the carbon shower happening when a front wing is broken.
  • Henry Surtees - Again, another freak accident, and there have been measures taken to ensure that wheel don't go flying off after an accident, that's what the tethers are for, just strengthen them up to minimise the risk of them ever breaking..
  • Felipe Massa - I can not understand for the life of me how the Halo is actually meant to protect people from this, I mean, there's a giant gap which the spring would go through and therefore would not protect anyone. In Massa's case, the helmet did its job in absorbing the impact, and that's what saved his life.

I mainly bring this up for the front wing solution, as that carbon spray caused by front wings is not only dangerous to drivers, but also to marshals and spectators. In saying this, you are also killing two birds with one stone by simplifying the front wings, as its safer and allow drivers to follow behind another car, as the dirty air effect is not felt as badly with a simple front wing.

it was the nose cone section itself from the other car that hit justin wilson, not  pieces  from the actual front wing. The front wing and the nose cone are two different pieces and the nose cone needs to break away in a crash. With jules, that why he was pushing at that moment. He/the team knew it was moments away from the safety car being call out and he was trying to pit before it came out gaining spots. They have never said it would stop everything and without a doubt it would stop some things.  As far as tethers, it cant hold a wheel if what it is tether to breaks away like open wheel cars are made to do from the roll hoop back. That said I hate the halo thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's now been confirmed for 2018. It's a sad day for F1 in my opinion, and if the halo cannot be removed in F1 2018 in game, i shall no longer be buying an F1 game after more than 25yrs of buying every F1 game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure they've made anywhere near enough progress with the development of the shield/halo going by Vettel and Grosjeans opinions when they've tested them, I believe both drivers have said they made them feel sick and from seeing Vettels test lap with it on last week I can see reflections from sunlight being a huge issue. 

I wouldnt say id never buy another F1 game in the future if they added the feature (which of cours they would), but it would be nice to have an option to have it or not. 

Personally I'm on the side that F1 is already safe enough and that if you remove all risk entirely then it does lose its edge. Of course it's down to the drivers at the end of the day. If they feel they would like even more safety in the form of the halo/shield then that's understandable, but from what I've read there seems to be a lot more complaints coming from the drivers than positives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to say that i think even the concept of having this now is ridiculous...absolutely ridiculous!
Firstly, the 'halo' idea which has already been stated would not protect the driver buy smaller objects, only lager items such as wheels...or even a car landing there.

Secondly, in relation to the 'shield' concept....I don't even want to get started on that because i'd be writing a full page worth of thoughts!
A friend of a friend went to the British GP last weekend and he stated that when Vettel took to the track, all the fans began to laugh...some literally hysterically lol - I wish i'd have been there! :smiley:

I'll bet all other the drivers in private all think this idea is stupid! - (Shame they're 'told' what to say most of the time)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the game implemented a fuzzy effect on the cockpit (like Project CARS at speed) then it might be less noticeable. But most F1 cars have aerials on the nose of the car currently, and those don't get in the way when driving. It does depend on how realistic the seat position is in the cars in-game, as if Codemasters make it slightly higher than reality (for ease of seeing where you're going) then the halo may block your view entirely!

We don't yet know how the final halo will look, Mercedes study didn't look quite as bad, but then I guess it's too thin there:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqi9AUcMEfE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, T-Cam view FTW

I get they want to improve safety, but I do not like the Halo concept. Great, we've thought of a way to limit certain injuries which are already extremely rare. When was Massa's freak accident again? How does Halo hold up against a crane at 70mph? Not well I'd bet.

Part of this is to do with the current "silhouette" the F1 cars must adhere to. If they changed the shape of the F1 silhouette to get rid of the long flat noses and changed the cockpit shape to something a little less akin to having fallen through the bottom of your sun lounger, there would be more opportunity to design something less hideous.


P.S. Yes we need it in the game. Big question is will they still be running Halo by the time Codies F1 2018 is released or will the aero-screen or shield have had further development to replace it? Its not inconceivable that it could be dropped completely if it turns out having 22 drivers with a real or perceived hindrance to their forward vision have a lot of accidents. It would not be the first time something brought in on the grounds of "safety" has been abandoned as it was actually more dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
R4pp3r said:
Even if you strengthen front wings and reduce winglets youll still have a carbon shower its simple youre getting paid the big bucks to go F1 racing were not little boys in go karts no more so harden up and face the fact of your in the pinnacle of motorsport safety is never going to be 100% so harden up a little bit nd accept it its fine how it is yes its unfortunate that they die but without the danger wheres the fun? Its supposed to be an extreme race stop wrapping them in cotton wool for god sakes just get on with the racing


F1 is the fastest and probably safest form of motorsport the drivers have ever driven in, and as I mentioned above, I think the FIA need to start focusing more on improving the safety of junior categories.

Karting as you mentioned is where most F1 drivers started out, and although it is far slower than F1, it still appears to be more dangerous.

In formula 4, Billy Monger sadly lost both of his legs, and that crash was terrifying, but he was travelling at 120mph (walking speed for F1 cars), and this shows that the safety of F1 cars is not passed down to junior categories.

Similarly in BTCC - I know this isn't formula racing, so isn't comparable, but Luke Davenport had to be put in a coma for a few days after a multi-car crash at Croft - once again these cars dont go anywhere near as fast as F1.

Personally I reckon the money spent developing the halo would be better spent by getting the teams to work together to produce a chassis that is as safe as F1 chassis, and can be used throughout the junior formula - Formula 2, F3, F4, GP3 and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FRACTURED said:

P.S. Yes we need it in the game. Big question is will they still be running Halo by the time Codies F1 2018 is released or will the aero-screen or shield have had further development to replace it? Its not inconceivable that it could be dropped completely if it turns out having 22 drivers with a real or perceived hindrance to their forward vision have a lot of accidents. It would not be the first time something brought in on the grounds of "safety" has been abandoned as it was actually more dangerous.

The trouble is, the FIA are doomed if they do and doomed if they dont.

If they don't introduce it and a tragic accident happens that could have been prevented by the screen/halo, then they will be under harsh scrutiny, being asked why they didn't introduce it.

If they introduce it and a tragic accident happens due to issues with the device, such as the forward vision you mentioned, then the same thing will happen, with the FIA being asked why they introduced a dangerous device.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the halo was on Massa's car in 2009 he could have died. Because there is such a large gap the spring could have deflected of the halo and then could have went straight through his chest, in which he would have definitely been killed if that happened. The halo is a shit solution to make it look like they are doing something about Bianchi's death even though the halo or anything else,other than the recovery vehicle not being there, would have saved him. If they want to do something either go with the aeroscreen not some halo bullshit which is just a half-hearted attempt to improve the safety. On top of this they are just rushing the introduction of the halo when other ways are clearly better. What is the fucking point of a metal bar going around the cockpit with massive gaps in it and also having your view obstructed??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I mean given the geniuses in F1 surely one of them noticed Jules car was completely ripped into by a recovery vehicle that shouldn't be there in the first place so the given the halo is made of carbon fibre just like the car it is rendered completely useless, fine it is a strong material but not as strong as a solid metal digger and for the life of me I don't understand why THEY STILL BRING DAMN DIGGERS ON TO THE TRACK! YES it is dry but still just takes a wheel on the grass and someone is off and game over! Bianchi's death was all the FIA's fault and trying to justify it with 'Jules' death was an extremely unfortunate accident but hopefully it will help us take safety precautions so nothing like this will ever happen again' 

First of all bull**** and secondly why did this have to happen? If you are going to do something you do it right so why this which helps nothing and impairs visibility why not a fighter jet style transparent enclosed cockpit? It's the best solution and for car manufacturers like Mercedes and Renault it's helps them make safer windshields. I mean I don't know but that definitely makes a whole lot more sense than this ugly flip flop design! They complain about a lack of viewers on TV well having this piece of **** in the way of the camera won't help! The FIA are just stupid old men who make stupid biased decisions and the same with all other organisations like them like ADAC for example fining Sophia Floersch €10,000 for her posting a video of nearly being killed by a *safety* car type vehicle -_- 

Sorry bout the rant but I feel that had to be said :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reub09 said:
I mean given the geniuses in F1 surely one of them noticed Jules car was completely ripped into by a recovery vehicle that shouldn't be there in the first place so the given the halo is made of carbon fibre just like the car it is rendered completely useless, fine it is a strong material but not as strong as a solid metal digger and for the life of me I don't understand why THEY STILL BRING DAMN DIGGERS ON TO THE TRACK! YES it is dry but still just takes a wheel on the grass and someone is off and game over! Bianchi's death was all the FIA's fault and trying to justify it with 'Jules' death was an extremely unfortunate accident but hopefully it will help us take safety precautions so nothing like this will ever happen again' 

First of all bull**** and secondly why did this have to happen? If you are going to do something you do it right so why this which helps nothing and impairs visibility why not a fighter jet style transparent enclosed cockpit? It's the best solution and for car manufacturers like Mercedes and Renault it's helps them make safer windshields. I mean I don't know but that definitely makes a whole lot more sense than this ugly flip flop design! They complain about a lack of viewers on TV well having this piece of **** in the way of the camera won't help! The FIA are just stupid old men who make stupid biased decisions and the same with all other organisations like them like ADAC for example fining Sophia Floersch €10,000 for her posting a video of nearly being killed by a *safety* car type vehicle -_- 

Sorry bout the rant but I feel that had to be said :/


I believe the rules have changed since Jules Bianchi's accident - I believe the diggers can only be brought out unless the SC or VSC is deployed. And sometimes they are necessary, such as when cars cannot be pushed away by marshals, as they have a broken wheel etc.

The thing is as well, if the halo was unbelievably strong and could withstand the forces of a crash with a digger, that would mean the car would come to an instant stop, and in this scenario the g-forces would be so unbelievable that sadly there would still have been no hope of survival.

Finally, I always thought that F1 was set out in a way to ensure that the crowd are most protected from injuries, then the marshals then the drivers. However, they are happy for marshals to push away cars under just double waved yellow flags, how is it that these VOLUNTEERS aren't protected by the safety car or VSC each time they have to put themselves at risk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why they don't have a helmet redesign to cope with heavier impacts with materials such as kevlar and carbon honeycomb. Denser construction methods until new materials come into the market (Limpets teeth as an example)  Structures similar to what you find and the underside of a lorry bolted to the back of mobile tractors on circuit to decreased the chances of a vehicle being lodged underneath the damn thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL8DQIAqZms

Basically the Halo and Visor don't solve the problem. In fact it makes things more dangerous at the cost of the drivers on track.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chromatic said:

I don't understand why they don't have a helmet redesign to cope with heavier impacts with materials such as kevlar and carbon honeycomb. Denser construction methods until new materials come into the market (Limpets teeth as an example)  Structures similar to what you find and the underside of a lorry bolted to the back of mobile tractors on circuit to decreased the chances of a vehicle being lodged underneath the damn thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL8DQIAqZms

Basically the Halo and Visor don't solve the problem. In fact it makes things more dangerous at the cost of the drivers on track.  


The trouble with making the helmets stronger is that you generally have to make them bigger as you add extra layers of protection, and bigger means heavier.

This isn't normally an issue, but then you have to take into account g-force - I'm not talking about the cornering and braking forces, as it would be possible for drivers to train their necks to withstand this extra weight. However, some F1 crashes have peaked at close to 100G, so every extra kg of weight added to the helmet could be an additional 100kg of force put on the driver's neck (I know the HANS takes out most of this force) during a heavy crash, so the helmet designs have to be a compromise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Honestly, ik this is wrong and I do have an interest in increasing the safety of the sport. But being hit on the head is a freak incident, and rly it takes away from the sport, it makes it harder to appreciate from the outsider since there's no risk to it at all. And it looks ugly, just as the cars were going back to looking alright they've done a U-turn. It's like the v6 engines no one wants them, but they just went and did it cause that's better for the environment. But since WHEN has f1 cared about the environment. But I kinda like the energy recovery systems now cause it supplies me with a possible job in 2 or so years so meh. 
But rly it's not gonna prevent the 3 most recent deaths in the support, being Roland, senna and bianchi. Also not forgetting Maria, aswell who dies because tje went into the back of a truck. Like come on guys pick up on this one aswell. It would prevent none of these.
So from what I have seen the fia are mainly deciding it on the abilty to deflect, and mainly a tire. But rly this is not necessary like when was the last time we saw a wheel fall off and hit a driver at speed. It would be more effective to make a halo for the legs when crossing the grass.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chromatic said:

I don't understand why they don't have a helmet redesign to cope with heavier impacts with materials such as kevlar and carbon honeycomb. Denser construction methods until new materials come into the market (Limpets teeth as an example)  Structures similar to what you find and the underside of a lorry bolted to the back of mobile tractors on circuit to decreased the chances of a vehicle being lodged underneath the damn thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL8DQIAqZms

Basically the Halo and Visor don't solve the problem. In fact it makes things more dangerous at the cost of the drivers on track.  


The trouble with making the helmets stronger is that you generally have to make them bigger as you add extra layers of protection, and bigger means heavier.

This isn't normally an issue, but then you have to take into account g-force - I'm not talking about the cornering and braking forces, as it would be possible for drivers to train their necks to withstand this extra weight. However, some F1 crashes have peaked at close to 100G, so every extra kg of weight added to the helmet could be an additional 100kg of force put on the driver's neck (I know the HANS takes out most of this force) during a heavy crash, so the helmet designs have to be a compromise.

There needs to be more meeting's with the FIA and the teams to sort out the various issues. Just bringing some new device without any concrete evidence it actually improves safety without effecting the vision and risks of a overturned car unable to actually get out of it in case of a fire. Actually looks like an act of desperation by the FIA. That roll bar located under that trailer in that video if properly fixed to recovery vehicle a.k.a  a mobile crane would eliminate any chance of any other car in future being wedged underneath it.

When is comes to helmets the added weight would be a problem but it doesn't mean per-say Bell Arai and any other helmet manufacturers shouldn't do any R&D on there test stands. With there helmets. With sudden flying pieces of debris spring's etc to maintain strength and rigidity. I'm sure and hope somebody out there has probably thought of this already for F1. If they haven't they need too.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chromatic said:
Chromatic said:

I don't understand why they don't have a helmet redesign to cope with heavier impacts with materials such as kevlar and carbon honeycomb. Denser construction methods until new materials come into the market (Limpets teeth as an example)  Structures similar to what you find and the underside of a lorry bolted to the back of mobile tractors on circuit to decreased the chances of a vehicle being lodged underneath the damn thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL8DQIAqZms

Basically the Halo and Visor don't solve the problem. In fact it makes things more dangerous at the cost of the drivers on track.  


The trouble with making the helmets stronger is that you generally have to make them bigger as you add extra layers of protection, and bigger means heavier.

This isn't normally an issue, but then you have to take into account g-force - I'm not talking about the cornering and braking forces, as it would be possible for drivers to train their necks to withstand this extra weight. However, some F1 crashes have peaked at close to 100G, so every extra kg of weight added to the helmet could be an additional 100kg of force put on the driver's neck (I know the HANS takes out most of this force) during a heavy crash, so the helmet designs have to be a compromise.

There needs to be more meeting's with the FIA and the teams to sort out the various issues. Just bringing some new device without any concrete evidence it actually improves safety without effecting the vision and risks of a overturned car unable to actually get out of it in case of a fire. Actually looks like an act of desperation by the FIA. That roll bar located under that trailer in that video if properly fixed to recovery vehicle a.k.a  a mobile crane would eliminate any chance of any other car in future being wedged underneath it.

When is comes to helmets the added weight would be a problem but it doesn't mean per-say Bell Arai and any other helmet manufacturers shouldn't do any R&D on there test stands with there helmets with sudden flying pieces of debris spring's etc to maintain strength and rigidity. I'm sure and hope somebody out there has probably thought of this already for F1    

The trouble with the idea of the bars like that on the lorry, which have been on the road for many years and work very well with road cars, is that I'm not sure if that would work with an F1 car. F1 cars have fairly low noses, that slope upwards, so this could actually increase the chance of the car going underneath.

The solution to this is that you make it so that the bar is just a cm or two off of the ground, but then it will bog down when recovering cars in gravel or grass - yet another argument for tarmac run off.

Anyway, this isn't why the halo was introduced - it wouldn't prevent an accident similar to Jules Bianchi's.

With the helmets, I would guess Arai and Bell etc. do a lot of research bearing in mind they offer helmets throughout racing, but like you say, there must be some improvements that can be made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you guys are acting like this is the first time the FIA has made a rule that makes these cars god awful ugly. Like its the first time fans had to accept some terrible thing being put on the car. All thur the decades of the history of F1 something of this nature has been done to the car. You guys are making this so dramatic and its nothing more than giving you a taste of what us old timers F1 fans have always been going thur to watch the sport.   If you would let a ugly part of the car stop you from watching it then you wouldnt have lasted very long watching F1 back in the day. If you love the sport then how can a simple part on the car being ugly make you turn away from it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the simple part on the car car being ugly makes the whole car ugly. Leslie Ash actress was beautiful until she decided to have her lips done turning her into a fugly mess, can't bear to look at her now..same difference. :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you don't want to risk death, then it's probably not a great idea to drive a car round a track at 200 mph in the first place.

I read somewhere (can't remember where) the argument "how would you feel if a halo saved a drivers life knowing you were against it?" 

That's a completely spurious argument IMO. I mean surely it just extrapolates to "how would you feel watching a sport where people can get killed". So best ban it altogether.

For the game, I hope that they come up with a good solution. One might be instead of Tcam view have a camera right at the front point of the halo. The other might be an option to run tcam view with the halo off. Off course people will complain that that is not realistic, but TBF driving a car in tcam view isn't exactly realistic either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It comes down to Martin Brundle's conclusion really doesn't it - if you don't want the possibility of drivers being injured or killed racing, take them out of the car altogether. Motor racing is dangerous, and anyone who doesn't want to be a part of that can do something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×