Future F1 cars could have windscreens

F1 Fanatic round-upPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Felipe Massa, Ferrari, Hungaroring, 2009

Windscreens may be added to F1 cars to prevent a repeat of Felipe Massa’s crash last year.


Le Formula Uno avranno il parabrezza? (Autosprint)

Formula 1 cars could be fitted with windscreens in future – see the article for an artist’s impression.

We had a discussion about this following the David Coulthard-Alexander Wurz collision at Melbourne in 2007 and again last year when Felipe Massa suffered a head injury in Hungary:

Chapman family backs Group Lotus (Autosport)

“In a statement issued on Thursday on behalf of the Chapman family by Clive, who is managing director of Classic Team Lotus, he says he is fully behind the efforts of Group Lotus CEO Dany Bahar.”

Vettel to drive for us ‘sooner or later’, says Montezemolo (Crash)

Apparently the story was originally in the Daily Express but it wasn’t on their site when I checked.

Bianchi to race with Lotus ART in 2011 (Jules Bianchi)

Ferrari reserve driver Jules Bianchi will remain in GP2 with ART (sponsored by Group Lotus) in 2011.

Jerome d’Ambrosio confirms he is paying for drive (ESPN)

“Of course there is talent, but also a commercial aspec. There are people, partners who are working with me in Belgium, as well as Gravity, who are always working with me, with Eric Boullier. We managed to put together the package we needed to be able to sign.”

An IndyCar Christmas wish (Motorsport)

“Three-time Indy 500 winner Unser is among those who hope the 2012 Indycar will prove to be a spectacular machine, requiring more judicious use of the throttle in the grand tradition of the great Indycars of the past. ‘The fact is Indycars just got too easy to drive,’ he says. ‘They don?t have enough horsepower and they drive around running wide-open all the time with the throttle on the floor. They have to make the cars more difficult to drive and more impressive like Indycars always were.'”

John Surtees talks to Phil Catterick (Pitpass)

“You cannot take away from Michael [Schumacher] that he has that immense experience. OK he struggled this year partly because of the regulations regarding testing. In the past he meticulously prepared himself but this year he couldn’t because of the ban. Yes he’s older and he may not take that added chance, but the skills are still there and after a year with the team and the latest developments you can’t rule him out.”

R??ikk??nen close to Citroen WRC deal (Autosport)

“R??ikk??nen recently agreed to remain at his current Citroen Junior outfit for 2011 so he can build on the experience he gained this year.”

There are also reports in the Finnish press that R??ikk??nen’s father passed away recently.

Team Lotus End of 2010 Season (Youtube)

Comment of the day

Renault’s decision to retain Vitaly Petrov for two years set tongues wagging. Casanova is among those not impressed by the decision:

I can?t understand this. Taken in isolation, yes, he showed moments of promise and you could understand giving him another season.

But surely Hulkenberg, Sutil and Heidfeld would all have jumped at that seat. Hulkenberg is rated highly and looking for a seat. Sutil has an option to remain at Force India for another season but would surely relish the chance to prove himself elsewhere. And Heidfeld has been cast out in the cold again, but remains a reliable, proven talent of the second-from-top drawer. It?s hard to argue that none of them would outperform Petrov.

This betrays Genii to be running the team from a finance perspective rather than a racing one. Yes, Petrov comes soaked in roubles, but once you put that above racing talent in your driver decision, you lose all credibility in my eyes.

From the forum

Luigismen asks how long it will take one of the new teams to score a point in 2011.

Happy birthday!

Four birthdays today – all the best to Andrew, Richpea, wasiF1 and Willian Ceolin!

81 comments on “Future F1 cars could have windscreens”

  1. Typical over-reaction. Felipe Massa’s injury was a freak accident. We haven’t seen anything of its kind in the 18 months since it happened. And only now they’re talking about windshields? Is this just a slow news day?

    1. Agree, the example picture from that link is silly. If they are going to go that far they might as well just have a dome over the driver like in the LMP1 cars.

      1. The problem then is that in the event of a serious accident, it will be be harder to get a driver free of a damaged cockpit. Although given the reception the Red Bull X1 (now the Red Bull X2010) received in Polyphony Digital’s Gran Turismo 5, I don’t think too many people would be opposed to it.

        But it’s simply too late to add windscreens to the cars. The 2011 cars are well into their development cycle, and adding windscreens will have major effects on aerodynamics. You can’t just stick them on and expect them to be competitive – they’ll just create drag.

        1. dyslexicbunny
          24th December 2010, 2:28

          Clearly they need cockpits. And by extension, ejector seats. But then we might have other problems. GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSE!

          If anyone needs me, I’ll be jamming out to Danger Zone. Just like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvkvrvSy5GE

        2. I would expect there to be a big effect on cooling as well. Just think of sitting under a canopy all race in Brazil, Malaysia, Bahrain or Abu Dhabi.

          I think this is a major difference with sports cars as well. The closed cocpit cars are allowed some extra power to cope with this.

      2. Even the “artist’s impression”, wouldn’t do its job. A bit of glass in front of the driver certainly wouldn’t have saved Henry Surtees or Massa, since the windscreen doesn’t protect the top of the driver’s head.

        Useless idea from “Auto”.

        1. It’s true that over the last couple of years drivers had some problem with the open cockpit the most noticeable has been Massa’s & Surtees incident.But on the other hand I don’t think that having a wind screen wiper will solve the problem as in a crash like Webber 2010 Valencia or Kubica 2007 Canada things could have been bad for them then it was.

          1. ula 1 cars could be fitted with windscreens in future

            God I hope not

        2. I’m glad someone brought up Henry Surtees, I was thinking the same thing.

          My opinion: stupid idea.

      3. With the example windscreen shown in the picture to the article, would the drivers actually be able to see through it properly? I don’t think so.

    2. They would have the problem of cleaning these mini-screens anyway

      I’d like to see the drivers lean out to give their dirty screens a wipe at 160mph

      They only alternative would be a windscreen wiper and the extra weight that entails you would need a bigger screen.

    3. Well, it may have been a freak accident, But you haven’t forgotten Schumacher almost having his head knocked off in Abu Dhabi have you? I think a reality of F1 is, sooner or later, someone will die. And their head is the most at risk place in a modern F1 car.

      Having said that, the artist impression is a terrible idea. Either leave it as is, Or go towards Le mans style closed cockpits. Anything in between is not fixing the problem, or helping the sport.

      1. Mike, you’re absolutely right.

        F1 has advanced too far to continue with this primitive open cockpit phenomenon that dates back to the 1920s and 30s.

        The problem with a closed cockpit, though, apart from the added weight (but since all cars will have that no one will be at a particular disadvantage), is the fact that the driver cannot be seen in action, punching the air after a victory, or as Alonso did at Abu Dhabi, showing the fist at someone in anger. This human element is one of the charms of open wheel racing.

        Cameras within the cockpit could go to some extent to capture these moments. But is there a possibility of incorporating tranparent cockpit domes made of some strong material? I don’t know whether such a material exists, though. The engineers among you should be able to answer that.

        1. What about when it rains? What happens if the cockpit is jammed in an accident and the car is on fire? What happens if the car rolls and the driver can’t get out because the cockpit can’t open far enough?

          1. Obviously, these are all problems, but the question is which problems are the biggest? Perhaps windscreens could be the lesser of two evils?

          2. well considering that there has been 1 fatality in F1 from being hit byoutside material, and several incidents of drivers dying from not being able to get out of the car, you do have to wonder which is the lesser of two evils. In a serious accident it is absolutely vital for crews to be able to reach the driver, especially if they are incapacitated.

            For mine, its much more dangerous having enclosed cockpits because of the extraction issues than, quite frankly, a freak occurrence of being hit from outside.

          3. Ned, thankfully drivers getting hit on the head is rare. Rain is not. The windshield will also be no use against a Henry Surtees kind of accident. It’s also conceivable that with Massa’s accident, with the object being slowed by travelling through the windshield it could have been deflected, punctured Massa’s lung with a broken rib and killed him.

      2. Well, it may have been a freak accident, But you haven’t forgotten Schumacher almost having his head knocked off in Abu Dhabi have you?

        No, I haven’t – but I’m also pretty sure that if it came down to it, the only difference a bit of plexiglass in front of Schumacher would have made would be to let him live for a split second longer than he would have without it. This proposal for windshields is little more than a knee-jerk reaction. It’s a non-solution dressed up as a safety feature. If there’s a problem it needs a bigger fix; for now, putting windshields on the front of the car is like putting a band-aid on a broken leg.

      3. I think a reality of F1 is, sooner or later, someone will die.

        That’s right. And then the knee jerk reactions will start. Why not do something about it now rather than shutting the gate after the horse has bolted?

        1. I think the reality is, people do die, even in sports like bird watching (vicious stuff).

          Now I don’t want to sound like a horrible person, but I know I will with this. I think, F1 should keep open cockpits, just as it is now. Simply because, F1 with closed cockpits isn’t F1. PT is right, Seeing Alonso get angry at Petrov makes me feel so much more involved than if I couldn’t see it.

          Now, there are ups and downs to having a closed cock pit, and inevitably I think closed cockpits would be safer. So in effect what I’m saying is that I’m willing to put drivers at risk for my own entertainment. Which for me is actually quite troubling.

          But I think, If you do this, and everything else to make f1 safer, then you will be taking away a lot of the sports appeal.

          One thing I think should happen, is people should make sure not to get sucked into the F1 is perfectly safe mentality that I think is going around, This happened in the years preceding Senna’s death, where no one had died for 10 years. Then they had two deaths in a row.

          I wonder if people realise how lucky we are that we haven’t had to deal with this so far, I mean, let me list just a few of the times someone could have died.

          Liuzzi (inadvertently) hitting Schumacher in Abu Dhabi.
          Marks acrobatics after hitting the Lotus in Valencia.
          Rosberg’s wheel coming of as he travelled down the pit lane.
          Buemi’s wheel flying over the safety barrier in China.

          And those are just the ones I can remember that all happened this year.

          On top of this we have all the crashes that could potentially be fatal, Like Vettel hitting Webber in Turkey, or Alonso crashing in Monaco.
          And then Buemi’s crash should have reminded us that freak car failures do still happen. and that at any moment something could potentially go horribly wrong.

          I think the idea that F1 is safe, is a blind one.
          I also think the cockpits should stay as is.
          Does that make me a bad person?

    4. It’s very rare and I think that advantages and disadvantages balance themselves, so I say let’s remain without.

    5. I hope it’s just a slow news day! We have already lost our revs and cylinders, now they’re thinking about getting rid of the entire thrill associated with F1 altogether? I wish the media would just take a holiday over the off-season so the FIA don’t get any silly ideas off them! :P

    6. Sweet, can they come with air bags as well?

  2. How embarrassing. Just watched 1 minute of that Lotus video. Can’t believe they are claiming all that history.

    What a ridiculous team. I really hope they have to change their name in 2011.

    1. Well, the Chapmans have finally broken their silence and publicly declared their support for Lotus Renault GP. They’re opposed to the Team Lotus name appearing in the sport once again. I suspect they feel having two teams known as Lotus will only damage the brand, and by declaring for Bahar, Fernandes will have to change his team’s name.

      1. dyslexicbunny
        24th December 2010, 2:33

        But didn’t the Chapmans give support to Tony? Or was that only in private?

        Perhaps they just didn’t like the results from Fernandes’ outfit and once Group Lotus forced themselves in, they jumped on board.

        This whole thing is a complete mess.

        1. They supported Lotus Racing. Fernandes wanted to contribute to the Lotus name in Formula 1, but it seems that the Chapmans feel that claiming the Team Lotus name is taking things too far.

          And I wouldn’t say Group Lotus are “forcing” their way in. It’s a popular misconception, largely because Lotus Racing was already there. Under Dany Bahar, Lotus Cars is planning on simultaneously being involved in multiple internationa motorsport categories: Formula 1, GP2, GP3, and Indycar and some of the cars unveiled at the Paris Motor Show have been designed with GT2 and GT4 campaigns in mind. Plus, they’ve talked about building a Le Mans Prototype or possibly sponsoring a team. This is clearly not something they have come up with overnight, and without Formula 1, it’s not going to be very effective. And to top it all off, a French journalist broke the story that Lotus Cars were planning on entering Formula 1 and running a black and gold livery three days before Lotus Racing unveiled their original livery plans. They’re not muscling their way in – they’ve been planning this for some time now. Tony Fernandes was just a spanner in the works, and his presence doesn’t mean that Group Lotus have no right to be there. It’s just the way that everything has been reported has led to bias in facour of Fernandes.

          1. dyslexicbunny
            24th December 2010, 3:25

            Fair enough. I just think it’s disappointing that they couldn’t have come to some working collaboration. I do think it’s absurd for either group to claim the previous history of Team Lotus.

          2. Well, they apparently tried to come to some sort of deal. Bahar maintains that Group Lotus approached Tony Fernandes, but Fernandes offered terms that Group Lotus didn’t like and couldn’t be talked down. Fernandes denies that Group Lotus approached them at all. There’s no real evidence in favour of either side, so it’s a case of Bahar’s word against Fernandes’. But there’s behaviour on both sides that demonstrates that neither is fit to the Lotus mantle.

          3. Prisoner Monkeys,

            And what a bias it has been! I just can’t figure out what was so charming about Tony Fernandes that the public and even one seasoned journlaist (not referring to F1Fanatic) got to making him a hero and Bahar the vilest villain out there. Now since the Chapman family has spoken, it’s their turn to keep quiet.

          4. I think the bias has come largely because Lotus Racing was already in the sport. If both Lotus Racing and Group Lotus were looking to enter the sport in 2011 in some capacity, then there would be less bias.

          5. This article is about the Formula One team which started competing in 2010. For the 1958-1994 motorsport team, see Team Lotus. For the team that is partly owned by Lotus Cars and which will race as Lotus Renault GP, see Renault F1.

            This quote demonstrates how messy the situation is becoming.

      2. They haven’t *broken their silence*.

        That is an utterly disingenuous thing to say.

        They have had plenty to say in support of Fernandes Lotus for a full year.

        Bahar bullies and threatens the existance of Classic Lotus and pays the Chapmans off with a museum and perhaps a thin slice of the giftshop takings. Despicable behaviour both ends up.

        What is to be admired here? The ruthless intimidation or the squalid brown envelopes?

        He cynically wins the headline, and in the process tells us all we ever need to know about the true and unpleasant character of the man.

        1. Bahar bullies and threatens the existance of Classic Lotus and pays the Chapmans off with a museum and perhaps a thin slice of the giftshop takings.

          Sorry, but I think you’ve been paying way too much attention to the media bias that portrays Fernandes as some kind of hero.

          1. Fortunately, what you are sorry about or otherwise doesn’t affect the material facts for the rest of us.

            Bahar threatened to pull the plug on Classic Lotus, Bahar paid-off the Chapmans with a tatty little museum to have them issue something that read like a hostage statement.

            Bullying and barefaced bribery, that’s the issue here, not ant utterly irrelevant delusions of “media bias”. We managed to just about flush characters like Briatore and Mosely out of the sport, last thing we need is another one slithering back in.

          2. Bahar threatened to pull the plug on Classic Lotus, Bahar paid-off the Chapmans with a tatty little museum to have them issue something that read like a hostage statement.

            What’s with the assumption that Bahar is corrupt? A French journalist broke the story that Lotus Cars were considering entering Formula 1 in an alliance with Renault and a black and gold livery three whole days before Fernandes unveiled his plans for a similar livery. Looking at Bahar’s plans to have Lotus Cars sponsor teams in half a dozen different forms of motorsport at once, it’s pretty obvious that this has been in the pipeline for quite some time now.

            Bullying and barefaced bribery, that’s the issue here, not ant utterly irrelevant delusions of “media bias”.

            There hasn’t been any bullying or bribery, and I honestly think you’re a hypocrite for claiming that the Chapmans’ integrity can be bought for the price of a museum, but that the Team Lotus name – their only reason for being embroiled int he dispute – has remained free of corruption. All this hatred towards Bahar stems from news reports that painted him as the villain from the outset.

            Tony Fernandes announced his intentions to use the Team Lotus name. Bahar claimed that Fernandes had no claim to it, and that the rights to the name rested with Group Lotus. He then pulled the rights to use the Lotus racing name out from under Fernandes, because why should he continue to allow Fernandes to race under a Lotus name that is proven to have come from Group Lotus when Fernandes is in the process of trying to take control of something Group Lotus believe to be their own. Why the hell should Bahar let Fernandes use his name to try and take something Bahar believes to be his own? Whether or not is actually is his is open to debate, but Fernandes fired the first shot when he annouced his intentions to use the Team Lotus name without consulting Group Lotus about it first.

          3. I think you’ll find the courts are to decide the ownership of that name, it is not up to you, or Bahar to prejudge that particular outcome. No matter how inconvenient it is to your narrative.

            The threat was to pull the license for Classic Lotus, as Bahar had already pulled the Group license.
            A small museum, a new truck perhaps, a few quid to make it right … all Chapman manages to do here is show clearly once again that he is not his dad. I doubt Colin or Peter Warr would have bent over for a bully.

            Some people still think that right and wrong do matter, and that character, integrity and honesty are important values. That they still count for something. Some people therefore refuse to be impressed by thuggish arm-twisting and refused to be snow-jobbed by PR or to be cynically manipulated, spun or played for saps. Your mileage may vary.

            The silver lining, when Bahar reveals himself to be yet another blow-dried empty suit, and the snakeoil fails to persuade the marketplace, when the debts collapse the whole thing from Group thru Proton to it’s inept government paymasters … perhaps a guy very much like Fernandes, will give the much put-upon Malaysian taxpayers a break, and pick-up the whole sorry shambles up for a ringgit.

      3. Well, the Chapmans have finally broken their silence and publicly declared their support for Lotus Renault GP.

        I don’t understand that at all. Isn’t Lotus Renault GP Lotus Cars, whilst Team Lotus Renault is the actual Lotus racing that ended in 1994? I don’t see why the Chapmans have supported Bahar and Lotus cars, and going against the team the family had originally? Please explain this to me! Every time I think I;ve got my head around it, something else happens, and I am back to square one!! :(

        1. Champans don’t want Fernandes or anyone to run under Team Lotus brand. They supported him as long as he got licence of Lotus Racing from Lotus Cars.

          Plus apparently its Lotus Cars that in the past was bulding cars that Team Lotus was running in F1 (I repeat someone’s words). So if that’s true – Lotus Cars has indeed right to say they are real lotus and they are coming back. Fernandes questioned that since begining but to me he is more to be questioned.

    2. Unfortunately I agree, definitely bad PR strategy for Team Lotus.

      1. Now suddenly the wind blows toward Group Lotus? It’s funny how Fernandes recently stated that his outfit never claimed for being a part of Team Lotus history, and yet this video tells exactly the opposite. Wonder what joe saward’s response about this

        1. Well the videos by Group Lotus have also been claiming all the Team Lotus history.

        2. To tell you the truth, i already feel sick when i knew the first time Fernandes named the team first f1 car Lotus T127, like its the predecessor of the Chapman’s Team Lotus. And the sickness was getting worse whenever i heard about Collin’s hat, 300 something race in Turkey. I’m done of this historic Lotus debacle and arguments about which one the real Lotus

        3. Nadya,

          I’m looking out for Joe Saward’s response too. He’ll still come up with something to praise Fernandes. He’ll probably suggest that Bahar coaxed the Chapman family to say this, since the family’s rights to the Classic Team Lotus moniker is apparently provided by Group Lotus.

        4. Probably something like “the Chapmans have been bullied/bribed/have no vote on this matter/any other ridiculous pseudo-argument”.
          I love this guy :D

          1. Truly one-of-a-kind, Joe Saward.

  3. Lotus vs. Lotus is getting weirder and weirder.

    On a side note, the F60 was so much prettier than the F10… 2010 cars are just tooo long.

    1. I prefer the F10. It looks a little less pretty than the F60, but more athletic.

  4. This has to be the silliest silly season of all time. The more I hear about the Lotus row, the less I want to see either of them in Formula One.

    1. It’s definitely off-puting. I like Fernandes’ team and think they’ve done a fantastic job coming so far in such a short time from scratch, but at this point they’ve earned their own spot in F1 and should probably just move on from Lotus. If the Chapman’s are against them now as well, they should consider a name change. It would have been better for everyone if Bahar had been even remotely open to working with Lotus Racing, but at this point there’s good outcome with the Lotus name. I kind of feel like any team that tries to use the name at this point is going to be slightly tainted (more so than a year ago, or even a month ago). If Fernandes is serious about starting a sportscar company in the future, he should decide what that brand will be and name the F1 team to suite.

      1. I’d agree with you, It’s a very wired stuation, and not entirely increasing my enjoyment of F1.
        I tend to side with Tony Fernandez though, and my reason is that I can’t see Bahar being a positive note in the sound of F1. I suspect he is going to make a rather large nuisance of himself.
        Not only that, but I can’t see Proton staying long term, I just can’t. This whole F1 thing is just part of a larger brand development scheme. They aren’t here to race, they are here to have their name read out. Tony I think, Is doing it the other way around, sure he’s a good businessman, So he’s not going to put himself in a position where he’ll lose a lot of money, but at the same time, It feels like his motives are, more to do with F1 racing than advertising.

        To be honest, I can’t understand the chapmins motives. Group Lotus isn’t the same company Colin founded, for starters, it’s a Malaysian one. I can’t see the benefit to them. If they were indeed fed up with the whole thing, why wouldn’t they support neither of them?

        1. Sorry Mike, i disagree on the Tony’s motives are, more to do with F1 racing than advertising bit. why do you think Fernandes fighting tooth and nails about Lotus name for his racing team? for the love of racing? don’t be naive, it’s obvious that fernandes looking for a solid brand so he can associate that brand to his company (value for investment). desperately finding sympathy from chapman’s family and joe saward, lastly the public. i think, if fernandes is really had a passion for racing he would better off start a team with his name rather than bickering with other for a name. concentrating his effort for his racing team, not a name.

          1. That’s why I said “feels”. I wasn’t so much trying to praise Tony, but suggest between him and Bahar, he is the lesser of two evils.

    2. I’m right with you on that one Jameson! I suddenly find myself cursing BMW and Toyota for pulling out of the sport. If there were still around this whole Lotus debacle wouldn’t have happened cause Lotus Racing would never have come about. Thus there would be no controversy of Bahar and his boys taking over Renault. Though I still say that is the easy way in.

      I think windscreens if not closed cockpits may enter the sport one day, but not until 2013 at the earliest.

      I really hope Vettel does not join Ferrari, but if ever he does, may he utterly destroy Alonso when arriving.

      I think Petrov shows a lot more promise than most give him credit for, but it’s sad to see the likes of Hulkenberg, Heidfeld and Sutil left out in the cold.

      There are too many good drivers and not enough good teams for them to all have seats with.

      End rant.

    3. Same here. They should be called Proton and AirMalaysia and the Chapman family should denounce both.

    4. Nah – they’re just fighting over a name. Now, 2009 and the battle for Honda/Brawn’s survival – that was a silly season! They had a new owner every week, fer cryin out loud!

  5. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO Andrew, Richpea, and Willian Ceolin.

    1. Have a great day birthday peeps!

  6. I just hope the Chapmans didn’t just sell their support to the highest bidder because it kind of looks a little that way.
    The name “Lotus” is fine but they don’t like hearing “Team Lotus”? Come on!

    And anyway why are we even debating this subject since there aren’t two Lotus next year. Renault is still Renault since the Lotus Group didn’t change the name of the team. The Lotus in-frond is just the main sponsor like Vodafone to Mclaren. The team isn’t called Lotus. So until they change their name the only Lotus on the grid will be “Team Lotus”.

    Also i don’t see how Fernandes has done something to create this fight. When he made the deal to rent the name they told him ok and they accepted. They changed their opinion afterwords when Bahar came. Then Fernades bought the “Team Lotus” name to get out of the problem and Proton is the one with the demand of everything Lotus being theirs. Fernades isn’t telling them you can’t race using the name you bought they are the ones who have demands and are picking a fight with him.

  7. Couldn’t agree with Bobby more. I’d love to see them return to cars akin to what ran in the 80’s and early 90’s. Those things were magnificent.

  8. Windscreens? What next? MotoGP riders on four wheels?!..

  9. to end this lotus vs lotus debate, Tony Fernandes will be changing his name to Colin Chapman. Hope that makes everyone happy.

  10. That’s bitter pill to swallow for Fernandes. He was given black cap from Clive but he is turning his back to Fernandes. Maybe Group Lotus are paying him or what.

  11. Kimi Raikkonen’s dad has died at the age of 56 according to gpupdate.net :(

    1. I heard that too yesterday was wasn’t confirm. Really sad to hear only saw him once during Kimi’s F1 career in Brazil 07.

  12. I think Vettel-to-Ferrari story was originally published in a German newspaper named Express:

    I, however, don’t believe it much, it’s yellow press…

    1. I believe Ferrari wants him and if he is still interested, they will persue him in the future. However, Alonso would have to be gone before Vettel got there.

  13. Big happy birthday to Andrew, Richpea, wasiF1 and Willian Ceolin! Although I only recognise Wasif and Andrew out of those users. :P Have a great day!

    1. Thanks mate for the wish.

  14. I will literally stop liking Ferrari if Vettel Joins them.

  15. wong chin kong
    24th December 2010, 13:27

    Why waste money designing and developing the windscreen for F1 car? It sure looks awful like police bike windscreen. Should look into strengthening the existing helmet visor to make it bullet proof.

    1. It will only make the helmet become more heavier

  16. Bad idea the windscreens in F1. I hope it never happens

  17. And in 10 years they are going to find out that high speed kills people, so they limit the top speed of F1 cars to 120km/h. Everyone will be thrilled, because the new F1 will be super safe, economical and more relevant to production cars. To help overtaking drivers get a boost to 140km/h once a lap when trailing another driver…

    Please let them accept that motorsport is and probably always will be dangerous.

  18. Vettel getting his butt handed to him by Fernando for a few seasons. That sounds very fun.

  19. Great idea !!
    I’m already enjoying the prospect of someone stopping, getting out, and remove a tear-off to see again !!

  20. A guy has posted about a device he envisioned to protect the driver that could save someone in Surtees’ situation. It was in Williams forum.

    1. Fyujj, thanks for the links.

      As an F1 fan I think the PCP idea is a brilliant one, and one that should be implemented. But I have another suggestion – it could be an extremely silly one, but I’d like your views.

      Can’t a cockpit shell of bullet proof glass be created in such a way that it can be popped open when the steering wheel is removed? I know bullet proof glass will make the car heavier but since all cars will have that no team will be at a particular disadvantage. Being glass the driver can be seen in action in the cockpit and it will prevent even small parts, like the spring that hit Massa, from entering the cockpit.

  21. Woohoo, my first COTD!! Cheers Keith! :D

  22. this is a late post, i know, but the Windscreen idea has happened before in the 1960s when Jack Brabham tried it, at Monza in a Pratice session but complained that it distorted his vision (or something similar. So its not an enclosed cockpit of the Le Man LM cars, but has some Aero proficencies.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.