Safety systems in F1?

[Zico]

I watched a documentary on the five human senses last week which also contained a section on military helicopter flight safety where they tested a device known as a tactor(s) which are worn against the skin and vibrate at varying intensities depending on what sensors are used and for what parameters. Every year the military were having chopper crashes soley from pilot error from having so many sources of visual information to compute and failing to notice one of the less obvious but equaly as critical height, drift or orientation resulting in aprox ten fatal crashes each year.

They tested these tactors in a helicopter simulator, flying blind and guided soley by the vibrating info of the tactors programmed in this case for height and side drift, the pilot easily suceeded and remarked that it was like having a 6th sense.

It got me wondering if there could/should ever be a place for safety reasons within F1 for a device like this when the drivers have such a limited view and such a large blind spot that they do not always know when someone is there... It might sound a bit ridiculous at 1st but I was thinking of the Lewis/Webber incident in Singapore in particular. The limited vision the drivers have is clearly a problem. Anything that increases safety is always good until it interferes with what the sport is all about.. I suppose it could be set up as a back up side radar to detect what the mk1 eyeball missed or wasn't visable in the mirrors.

See http://www.eaiinfo.com/Tactor%20Products.htm

Your thoughts?

[maxter]

Definitely a possibility for the future, especially as F1 is all about stretching the boundaries for automotive technology, not least safety related. So my first thoughts are; sure, why not? I can imagine people feeling it would spoil some of the excitement, but I'd rather like to think it would be one step towards closer racing with more overtaking. That for me is more exciting than the possibility of crashes.

[maximilian]

I'm not so sure. It sounds more like another hi-tech driver aid to me, and the less we get of that, the better. Even though it may be for safety, but I am sure the teams will quickly find ways to abuse it to their advantage, taking skill requirement away from the driver. I mean, if someone can fly a helicopter BLIND, then you could surely argue that's an AID! :)

[Zico]

I'm not so sure. It sounds more like another hi-tech driver aid to me, and the less we get of that, the better. Even though it may be for safety, but I am sure the teams will quickly find ways to abuse it to their advantage, taking skill requirement away from the driver. I mean, if someone can fly a helicopter BLIND, then you could surely argue that's an AID! :)

Very valid point.. couldn't argue with that. If they ever did use the technology I suspect if it would make overtaking even more dificult for the overtaker by making it easier for the driver in front to defend it with what effectively could be a 180 deg rear radar, and if the FIA were perpared to go as far as implementing something like tactors, why not just make larger mirrors mandatory in the 1st place?

[Valve Bounce]

It is unfortunate that you chose the Hamilton Webber incident because a Tactor would have warned both Lewis Hamilton and Mark Webber that each was there, which both drivers were well aware of. The incident occured because Lewis Hamilton thought he was clear of Mark Webber when he steered his car into the corner.

The point I wish to make here is that if a driver needed a Tactor to let him know another car is approaching from behind, that's fine. But it certainly would not have prevented many of the incidents this year where both drivers were very well aware the other guy was there but still managed to collide/contact with the other car.

The only help that I can discern are when drivers are being lapped.

P.S. I really didn't mean to be so negative, but it just occurred to me that many of the incidents which have occurred in F1 resulted in dumbass moves made on the spur of the moment by drivers who should/might have known better. The question of perception/reaction time also comes into play here.

Maybe we can use Tactors in wet conditions when visibility is poor. Sorry for such a negative view. :(

[maxter]

A device as described would surely, if functioning properly and as accurately as I'd like to think it would, do just what is needed to prevent such incidents, i.e. tell Hamilton that he was in fact not clear of Webber in that particular situation.

Though I have to say that I do prefer the racing to be analogue with the focus on the drivers skills and not aids, and the idea of F1 always pushing the technology forwards doesn't really blend well with that tbh... So I'm a little torn.

[Valve Bounce]

A device as described would surely, if functioning properly and as accurately as I'd like to think it would, do just what is needed to prevent such incidents, i.e. tell Hamilton that he was in fact not clear of Webber in that particular situation.

.

Hamilton was going slightly faster at the time, and maybe he thought if he pulled across, Mark would back off. Mark had no intention of backing off and I think he actually braked later to claim the corner. Decisions were made in split seconds here, and I really don't see how any electronic device could have helped to prevent this incident. The only move that could have avoided the incident was for one of the drivers to back off; neither decided to.

[maxter]

Alright, I do see your point and you may very well be right. :) I'll just leave it at that for now, as I said I'm a little torn as far as my personal vision for the sport goes, and I can't confidently predict how it would influence the actual racing.

[Valve Bounce]

Alright, I do see your point and you may very well be right. :) I'll just leave it at that for now, as I said I'm a little torn as far as my personal vision for the sport goes, and I can't confidently predict how it would influence the actual racing.

I can see how such a system would benefit Helicopter pilots, especially warning of nearby transmission lines (how a good friend of mine was killed) or crop dusters, or even light plane pilots who have blind spots.

But we are talking about sensible people who have the perception/reaction time to correct a situation. In F1 we are talking about drivers who make split second dumbass moves. :p :

[Zico]

If anyone wants to watch it its called 'Horizon, seeing is believing' The documentary as a whole is pretty interesting but the tactors part is at aprox 45 mins here...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vhw1d/Horizon_20102011_Is_Seeing_Believing/

[ZEROX]

If that tech is to use in Formula 1, it would be a BIG major step to improve safety on Formula 1. The sports is all about technology right ?

No.That's my answer.It also about driving skills.So that tech is a part of driving aids too.

I don't know about it but if the FIA/FOTA knows about that. I predict it'll be a big discussion. ;)

[Sleeper]

I can see it being a big help in the wet with poor visibility, but in the dry, no. Plus, it would have to be very complicated, vibrating at different intensities depending on the distance of the car and the drivers would have to spend a long time learning what they are feeling means, adding a lot of information to the large amounts they already get. In the end I just cant see it being much help.