I’m sorry you ‘hate’ the argument, but some rules in F1 are doubtless decades old, and with that in mind surely are restrictive to the designs of the cars. In fact I would argue that antiquated F1 regs hold back the evolution of much better safety designs, because they have to be confined to the F1 rule book. Do you think open cockpit driving is the safest way to go? I’m not convinced (Massa/Surtees/Senna).
Double diffusers aren’t unsafe, nor are the f-ducts seemingly as the drivers can handle that but they’re out next year too. How many rules in the rule book say: ‘don’t do stuff, because enough people lobbied that you’re too fast’. Or perhaps too expensive.
The way to go would be to create a prototype format, and demonstration league. The designers could find ways of making the cars incredibly safe.
In terms of g-forces, air force pilots go through more, they wear special G-suits, to help them deal. Why could a track not have a massive run off area and a time penalty, instead of a concreate wall so the energies aren’t dissipated in sudden abrupt halt (Senna/Ratzenburger). Some sort of double strength fly-by-wire monocoque closed pod, that protected the driver in an accident.
I didn’t say don’t limit it, I said don’t hold it back with all the same regs as F1 currently has. I’m sure if you put Brawn, Newey and a handful of others in room with all the experience and lessons learnt from F1, they could find some set of rules that would give the cars a massive time increase, without the danger aspect increasing unduly.
Ultimately I’m saying, look at a fresh start using the vast experience of F1 and other realms, but not being ‘tethered’ to it. Put the best and most educated in their field in a room and see what goes. With the best imagination, will and finance, why not? If you stamp on it’s tail out of fear, you’ll never get anywhere, and one day, someone will.
