so in the event of a fire you would pump the cockpit (giggidy) with a highly flamable gas (Oxygen)? I reacon there could be a material that is very rigid and could withstand high impact but in the event of a criticle accident a button which a marshall could press would either release the dome or shatter it.
It all sounds too complicated and problematical - why not develop a force field in front of the driver to protect him?
Could end badly though if you got confused between the DRS button and the on switch for the light sabre.
very true - you could also find yourself slashing at the missile coming towards you, miss, and slice through the steering wheel.
I must admit, El_Bando; I did not consider this during my brainstorm. Of course I was not suggesting it for a fire incident, but a 'general crash'; but you have a point.
Warning, this gets a little technical... It's far from my area of expertise, but couldn't the canopies be constructed from a material designed with a material weakness? I would imagine that 90% or more of the impacts these canopies aim to prevent come from objects within the drivers field of vision, I can't think of many freak incidents where debris could fly up from beyond the drivers vision and do serious damage. Therefore, a material could be designed where the area to the side, slightly behind the drivers head is incredibly weak, allowing the driver, or a marshall, to simply press relatively hard onto this area, and the design of the material would then cause the entire canopy to shatter? It's a similar concept to how carbon fibre is layered for strength, such as in the flexi front wings. The carbon fibre is layered so as to provide strength in a specific direction, and not others, in order to allow the flex. In the same way, the canopy could be constructed to provide strength in many directions, but a weakness in one particular one, to allow rapid removal, which would be fail-safe due to the lack of mechanism. To my understanding, fighter jet canopies are (or at least can) be made of a polymer called trivex. When cast, the polymer self assembles in such a way that gives hard and soft regions, which in the final canopy provide optical clarity, strength, and the ability to deform. Rather than allowing this self-assembly, it might be possible to interfere on the molecular level, so that in a specific region the balance of hard/soft regions is different, making it weaker, yet as the material is homogenous with the rest of the canopy it wouldn't effect the performance of the majority of the canopy, which needs to work as in a fighter jet. The idea is mainly comprised of my limited knowledge of nanomaterials and a quick search online, so it may not be anywhere near as easy as I'm making it out to be, or even as effective, but in principle the design would result in a canopy which had the high performance necessary to stop debris, yet be easily removable in a fire or accident to allow the driver to exit as easily as possible. Another option might make use of more easily understandable chemistry. The canopies could be designed to be physically strong, but chemically weak. With the exception of water and rubber, fuel and oil, there are very few chemicals which would spend a significant amount of time on the canopy. None of the chemicals mentioned are basic in nature, so the canopy could be designed to be very weak in basic conditions. In the event of an accident, the driver could have a system in the car which coats the canopy in a strong base, rapidly dissolving the canopy, or if this fails (or the driver is incapable of activating the system) the marshals could be provided with a bottle of the base which would have the same effect. Drivers overalls are already quite chemical resistant, and if necessary could be modified to increase protection against this chemical. Overall, this system could be as fool-proof as possible. Sorry if thats a little tricky to understand, I sort of got on a role and kept typing, I'll probably edit it in a bit to make more sense.
Good and interesting ideas, but in relation to your first one it would not help the driver if something like this happened. [video=youtube;pc0SxqHFhxY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc0SxqHFhxY&feature=related[/video]
True, but I don't think to be honest much would. An F1 car weighs 600kg, or more, so any canopy would not be able to sustain that impact. I think the change in nose cone height aims to deal with those sort of instances, as with the FI/Schumacher incident at the end of last season. With hindsight, I'm more fond of the chemical weakness idea, which I think is much more plausible, but as always with motorsport, it's never going to be perfectly safe.
Superb post Canary. Some very innovative ideas there. As to how feasible this would be: I don't have a clue - but I hope you're working for NASA… +Rep [edit: I was unable to, yet again]
They're experimenting with a forward roll hoop idea now. I don't like this as much as the canopy idea, it's not as effective against smaller objects such as the torsion bar that hit Massa which could easily fit between the bars. It also obstructs the driver's view and is a bit of an eyesore from an aesthetic point of view. [video=vimeo;40140808]http://vimeo.com/40140808[/video]
Agreed. It looks clumsy, and hardly fits with the sleek aero/weight concious design of the cars. A glass (or other material) canopy would look great, and signal another dramatic change in the look of F1 cars. It could even lead to HUDs, life support/air management etc.
Im pretty sure the fatal piece of bodywork came up through the cockpit, a canopy would have been of little effect. And we were left paying our respects to Michele Alboreto when he crashed testing the open cockpit Audi R8 in 2001
In this ridiculous litigious and acutely safety conscious world we live in it's inevitable that eventually motor sport as we know it will be banned, but before that happens cockpit covers will become a feature of F1 for sure, no idea when but !! The new form of F1 motor racing will be achieved by the use of simulators until someone dies, ffs.
In regards to the cooling issue, couldn't the canopy be joined to the roll hoop, with a hole for the air intake to the engine. This should be aerodynamic with the air that travelling directly towards it, as the air isn't being blocked, but always flowing. As it's joined to the roll hoop, it could probably add safety, so cars are more likely to bounce like Webber's Red Bull at Valencia. There wouldn't be much cooling, but surely small holes could be placed around the canopy where it doesn't affect the strength, and Red Bulls's air-vent-nose could be used as well, although it looks ugly. I don't like the idea of the forward roll hoop, cause that tyre still looks too close. And the fact that smaller objects at a lot of different angles can get through as well. I think with the ideas that have come up on this thread, I don't see why F1 isn't run by this forum!!
Hows about air-con and Connolly hide upholstered seating, I mean F1 has been dumbed down to increase the entertainment value for some, might as well make it a nice comfy Sunday afternoon excursion and home in time for tea.
Ernie - what a stupid idea - air-con indeed. Don't you realise the drivers would be concentrating on the fanspeed and temp setting while taking a death-defying corner and go straight off into the sand? Now IF we made the cars 2 seaters - the 'significant other' could be employed to fiddle with the damn controls while the driver negotiated the corner. There is always an answer.
I think Todt had better watch out Bergy, there is an emerging contender in the wings, with ideas like that you could easily head up the FIA, remember Balestre he also was full of stupid ideas.
