[R1king]

As discussion is getting confused on the other thread I though it worth while to transfer the canopy discussion here. We are talking about a fighter jet style cockpit that protects the driver from flying objects etc just to be clear.

Could we have a poll for this maybe as it was requested earlier????

Also further thoughts on this idea.

PS: No talk of covered wheels and Le Mans style racing cars..

[extessarere]

Easy. NO!

[sbgctsa]

Absolutely.

Massa's incident showed that an errant component could have serious consequences.
I'd also suggest that it's probable that Senna would not have been killed at Imola either.

[TRASIAOREXOLA]

As I said before the FIA will do whatever they're going to do regardless of what some people on a forum think so in the interests of keeping my blood pressure down I'm going to opt out of this one.

Say whatever you want to say, but if the FIA can make it work then there'll be canopies on F1 cars in the future and there'll be nothing that a bunch of forumers think.

P.S In the recent spirit of trolling for no reason, Henners, what did you say about my goat you drugged out hippy?

[bug_user]

No

Creates more problems that it prevents.

[Avgustslim]

I don't know if Senna would have died if a canopy was fitted. He died by the wheel hitting his cranium, a piece of the upright striking the helmet and also a broken piece of suspension driving through the visor. When you have a collision with a concrete wall that caused the damage to the car that Sennas accident did, it is likely that the canopy would have been ripped off as well. It would need to be designed to disengage during a collision to avoid it being jammed after the event I would have thought. The main protection would always be and will always be the crash helmet.

There is only 1 benefit that I can see to a canopy and that is to protect the driver from flying debris such as Rubins's accident. However the risk of this is incredibly small (I cannot think of any serious incident other than that one crash) whereas the risk of canopies is much more obvious. Less visibility and problems in rain, risk of jamming during an accident, additional time taken to exit the car etc.

[StivRichardOff]

There is only 1 benefit that I can see to a canopy and that is to protect the driver from flying debris such as Rubins's accident.

When did that happen?

[Qwjyrgij]

The roof would have to be really strong to have any sort of impact at all, and that would severely restrict the driver's ease of getting out / being extracted from the car. I'm all for safety measures, but this would not only be to the detriment of the sport, but I'm not even certain it would work. Maybe it would've saved Massa from that accident, but could, say, Kovalainen's fire last year have become a big problem?

[zoppereurvito]

The roof would have to be really strong to have any sort of impact at all, and that would severely restrict the driver's ease of getting out / being extracted from the car. I'm all for safety measures, but this would not only be to the detriment of the sport, but I'm not even certain it would work. Maybe it would've saved Massa from that accident, but could, say, Kovalainen's fire last year have become a big problem?

Did you not watch the videos posted earlier in this thread?

[furious1]

Did you not watch the videos posted earlier in this thread?

I missed those as well

[WhileKelf]

Yes they definitely should!

[freddyujnf]

Nah, can you imagine how hot it would get in the hot races. It would be even more like racing in a sauna.

[nickayary]

Did you not watch the videos posted earlier in this thread?

I should have reposted those video's in my opening post, doh.

[BDDkDvgZ]

FFS. FFS. FFS. FFS. FFS.

No. No. No. No. No.

[pesty4077]

Nah, can you imagine how hot it would get in the hot races. It would be even more like racing in a sauna.

To be fair canopies would allow for air conditioning.

[freevideom]

No reason to go to a full canopy. virtually the same level of protection could come from an open top "canopy" as long as it was above the level of the drivers head. Senna, Surtees and Massa's accidents woudl all have been absorbed by such a canopy. I'm not against the idea of a full canopy as I have a family of friends that have been saved several times by fully enclosed canopies in their hydroplanes, I just don't believe a fully enclosed cockpit/canopy is necessary to provide the level of protection we are really talking about.

[g4YthYXx]

To be fair canopies would allow for air conditioning.

I can see it now. I walk into the showroom and the salesman says that the latest Red Bull hybrid comes with air conditioning as standard but cruise control would be an optional extra.

If an F1 canopy behaves anything like my windscreen then five minutes out of the garage will see a huge bug splatter right in the middle of my sight line and totally sh*t me until me I can clean it off.

[Inettypofonee]

No

Danger is part of the sport and its appeal - as Stirling Moss says: "danger is the important ingredient, like salt is to cooking".

[mypharmalife]

No

Danger is part of the sport and its appeal - as Stirling Moss says: "danger is the important ingredient, like salt is to cooking".

[Opislossy]

No

Danger is part of the sport and its appeal - as Stirling Moss says: "danger is the important ingredient, like salt is to cooking".

I appreciate what you are saying Wedgie but safety must be paramount. There will always be an element of danger which is all part of the excitement but if there was a valid reason for canopies, I haven't read it yet. The only example is for a Massa type accident and thankfully, they are so rare as to be insignicant. However, the additional danger of canopies seems to greatly outweigh the justification for them.