Following the fatal accident of Jules Bianchi in 2014 and the death of Justin Wilson in the IndyCar series in 2015, the discussion about closed cockpits in Formula One has increase dramatically. And with the Grand Prix Drivers’ Association reportedly hoping for driver protection to be added as soon as 2017, it would appear as though closed cockpits are immanent in the coming seasons.
There are three main closed cockpit designs that are under discussion at the moment. There is the “Halo” design that was originally dreamed up by Mercedes. This is probably the easiest to implement onto the current cars and the one that we will probably see arrive at Formula One, if any. There is also the jet fighter cockpit design and what appears to be similar to the cockpit of a World Endurance Championship car.
But are closed cockpits really a good idea? I touched on this topic in the wake of Bianchi’s accident in Japan in an article entitled “Closed Cockpits Are Not The Solution”. It explained the increased escape time and the potential of more debris that can cause injuries. These points are still valid, even with the introduction of the Halo concept. I thought it would be beneficial to revisit the flaws of this system.
The first major flaw is the increased escape time in an accident. The first case is in the event of a fire or accident where the equipment is not damaged. Adding another safety device that the driver needs to remove in order to escape the car will increase escape time. When you factor in faulty or damaged safety equipment, then you increase the time required to escape even more. This means that there is a risk of getting trapped in a car that is on fire.
Another major flaw is the deforming and dislodging of components in an impact. When adding any components above the driver’s head, you run the risk of the components being crushed in an impact. Since the device would collapse towards the driver’s head, you now run the risk of severe head injuries and a more difficult driver extraction that would make medical treatment take longer. Projectiles also become a big concern with the new safety devices. If an impact is hard enough, it has the potential to break or dislodge the safety device, creating potentially sharp projectiles that could hit the driver’s head. This could mean that they will get hit in the head with debris or even have a piece of this debris pierce their helmet. Dislodged components are not as much of an issue with the other designs, but it would be for the Halo design.
Although the head protection could prove to be beneficial in some cases, it would be the opposite in other situations. In the case of Jules Bianchi, his unfortunate death could not have been prevented by any form of closed cockpit. His car struck the recovery vehicle with so much force that it completely destroyed the rear end of the car, including the roll hoop, which is supposed to be strong enough to take a large impact when the car overturns. This means that adding a head protection system would have only worsened the injuries from the impact.
Making Formula One 100% safe is an impossible task and one that we can never expect to achieve. Although there has been a bit of testing by the FIA and other companies with the closed cockpits, not nearly enough has been done and not all of the situations that can occur have been examined. It’s possible that the closed cockpit can be perfected, but it is far from that point at the moment. Putting this safety device on the cars would be an irrational mistake by the governing body of the sport and will pose much more of a safety threat than it prevents.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other agency, organization, employer or company. Assumptions made in any analysis contained within this article are not reflective of the position of any entity other than the author.
