It's worth investigating. Anything that saves a human life is worth investigating. You know, because you only get one and all.
I agree its worth investigating. Any time there is a death it should be evaluated to see if anything could have kept it from happening. I also do not believe that we change the rules for a statistical anomaly. I guess the question is how much risk is acceptable. I do not know that answer.
No its not you are correct. I guess what I meant but did not say. Is there are known things we can do but don't. that was a example. Instead of a closed cockpit would anything els have made a difference? Not disagreeing with you just trying to see all sides.
The thing about Earnhardt brings up an interesting point though--and one tha Mario Andretti made right after the accident, that in the end the driver's should decide. I have mixed feelings about it--in F1 it was the drivers pushing for safety, in NASCAR, at least initially, the old school drivers pushed against it, it's changed over the past 15 years though. It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out, I hope some good can come out of it.
It really is a bit of a quandary. Like football (and many other sports), the pros become role models for the "kids" coming up. A good argument can be made that those pros should be modeling good decision making and safe behavior. But it's also nominally a "free country" and I'm generally in favor of letting adults elect their own degree of risk, at least where they are capable of understanding and weighing it. I'm caging my car both because (a) I understand the risk (probably better than most people), and want to mitigate it as much as practical while not putting a roof on the car, and (b) I want to model good behavior for my kids and others. But mostly (a). My 15yo son HATES the idea of me building another topless car, and DEMANDS that I build a hardtop. Ain't happening. Because, for me, topless is a key part of my joy of driving. Motorcycle helmet laws come to mind. I think you'd have to be an IDIOT to ride a motorcycle without one. And perhaps there's a public cost to a rider ending up in a long term vegetative state because of it. But most of the risk is borne by the individual (and their dependents), and I think the individual is capable of weighing the risk for themselves, mostly. Of course, with motorsports, when the performance of the cars is affected, you're going to have to mandate "like" equipment in the interest of fairness. So it's ultimately not going to be an individual driver's or team's decision, like HANS could be in NASCAR a decade ago.
I like the idea of a windscreen versus the full bubble. If they can make one that has acceptable performance then it would be the best compromise for now. It could also be a good pathway toward a full bubble.
Lots of other racing series have closed cockpits. Open wheel racing stays open because it's part of the "look". There are are lot of benefits besides protection. They just need to want to do it enough.
Some of the reluctance is the old "it isn't going to happen to me" thing. I understand that, but as I have gotten older, I started thinking "it could happen to me" and take what safety measures I can.
So true....10 years ago, cage was for wimps. Then about 7 years ago, a rollbar seemed like a good idea to my wife, I was ambivalent about it but did it to keep her happy. Now, full cage, and HANS, cage was my idea with enthusiastic support from my significant other, and the HANS she insisted on, especially given I've had neck issues.
Nope, not if you design crush zones like on a street car. Or like at the front and rear of an F1 car.
People shouldn't die in a race car. PERIOD We can't go back to the 60s & 70s attitude. One is too many. Something must be done.
Sorry, this isn't correct. Crush zones help,and are part of the equation, but there is much less energy directed at the driver when the car sheds pieces. It' fact. They're engineered specifically for this due to zillions of dollars of research.
Nope again. The physics simply dictates that size and materials needed to attain the required energy dissipation. Cars will need to be bigger to accommodate the crush zones, but any amount of energy can be dissipated.
I may be wrong, but I believe the nose cone that came off of Karam's car was a crush-able structure. The problem lies in it coming off the car & becoming a projectile. That needs to be looked at. Should it be tethered to the car so that doesn't happen, I'd think yes. I'm no engineer or designer just a race fan that wants no one else to die like Justin.
Sure, we can have 30 foot cars, and have some pretty good RV racing. Realistically it ain't going to happen. A completely solid car is a step backward. Absolutely agree 100% on the tethering Crashton, and I'd be very surprised if this isn't added ASAP, most car series have tethered hoods, no reason not to tether the cowl.