Skip to main content

F1: Closed Cockpits Are Not The Right Response To Bianchi Accident

Bianchi remains in a critical condition two weeks after
his Japanese GP accident.
There has been much talk about investigating closed cockpits for F1 cars following the terrible accident that befell Jules Bianchi in Suzuka a fortnight ago. And whilst closed cockpits certain add a degree of protection for some accident types it's unlikely they would have prevented the injuries which have left the French driver in a critical condition.

The problem in this accident was the violent and sudden deceleration of Bianchi's head - restrained by the HANS device - which could not be matched by the brain inside the head. Bianchi's brain will have suffered a heavy impact his skull, which is what lead to the widespread brain injury. This is different from the injury suffered by Michael Schumacher, for example, where the injury was caused by an impact to the head causing bleeding inside the cranial cavity.

The HANS device may sound like it's the problem, but actually the restraint is probably the only thing that has allowed Jules to continue fighting for so long. Without the HANS device the outcome would have been far worse. The last driver to die in an F1 car was Ayrton Senna. Whilst a lot of discussion has been had around the suspension arm from Senna's Williams puncturing his helmet and skull it should be remembered that Senna suffered a Basal Skull fracture which would have almost certainly been fatal anyway. Roland Ratzenberger's death was caused by the same injury, as were NASCAR drivers Adam Petty and Dale Earnhardt.

A basilar skull fracture is caused by the sudden deceleration of the shoulders and the continued forward motion of the head and helmet causing the skull/neck to fracture at the point where the spinal cord enters the skull. Whilst not always fatal in normal life, the violence and forces involved in racing accidents mean they usually are.

The HANS device can prevent that stretching of the neck, but in a violent impact like that experienced by Bianchi the organs of the body have so much momentum that they continue moving until they hit something solid - ribs, skull, pelvis, etc.

Had Bianchi been enclosed in his cockpit it's unlikely that the outcome would have been significantly different. The collision with the tractor resulted in his car decelerating significantly harder than a collision with the tyre wall that was behind it and it is this that needs to be the focus of the investigation.

Closed cockpits are not the wrong answer for F1, but to ensure that Bianchi's accident can't happen to somebody else more work needs to be done to ensure that cars leaving the track only impact with barriers that have been designed to soften an impact.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…

WhartonBrooks Indiegogo Windows 10 Mobile Even More Doomed To Failure Than Usual

WhartonBrooks is currently crowd-funding its latest Windows Mobile smartphone on Indiegogo. If crowdfunding isn't already a bad enough idea, a company trying to crowdfund a Windows Mobile device should be warning enough for you.
Not that anyone seems to be taking the project too seriously. With a few weeks left to run the campaign has managed to ensnare just 2% of its $1.1m target.
If you want a better indication of how few Window Mobile loyalists remain I doubt there is one. Of 3,900 Windows Phone enthusiasts Wharton Brooks was seeking for its new phone, it has managed to entice just 50.
Windows for Phones is dead, even if the corpse hasn't stopped twitching yet.