TBK-Light.com

Just noticed on this picture that there aren't any marks on the halo at this point:



That being the case, it looks like Leclerc basically drove forwards into Alonso as he moved sideways and forward relative to Leclerc. I think that his tyre could have made contact with Leclerc's helmet if the halo wasn't there, but it would have only been a glancing blow given that they were moving in similar directions. It certainly wouldn't have been anything like Jos Verstappen and Brundle in Brazil 94.

I've gotten used to the halo being there, so I'm not going to argue against it (although I still maintain a screen is far more effective for stopping debris).
However, all I've seen on social media is how LeClerc would have been killed without the halo. Personally I'm not sure if Alonso's car would have even hit him. At worst it may have clipped the edge of his helmet. I don't think halo made any difference at all (not saying it won't in a future accident, but just an observation from this one).

Looking at that shot it seems like he might have been hit in the head without the halo.

I'd say the Halo prevented Charles from having supercool tyre marks on his helmet to show his kids/grandkids some day. #FuckHalo.

I must not read enough social media, because all I've seen is people here saying this crash proves nothing and the halo is still pointless. I myself don't have any stronger opinion than that those tire marks probably would have been in Charles' helmet if not for the halo, I don't think it would have killed him, but he's probably happier to have the halo there after this.

Beyond that, I really don't notice the halo at all anymore and am unsure why a debate on it's worth needs to happen everytime something gets close to a helmet when it's already here and it's not going anywhere soon.

_________________

Oh my God, a professional race driver literally went half a meter from death during a motorsport event.

Christ, that does make it a lot clearer where the car was heading

The FIA have issued a press release about it and Charlie Whiting has been uncharacteristically vague about it. A lot of 'maybe' and 'possibly' in it, but their assessment so far is pretty much in line with this video.

It seems increasingly clear that the distance was due to the safety device that people still have such an irrational hatred of, but yeah, pussification of F1 and so on...

For me F1 doesnt have to be dangerous but I feel the message the FIA is sending out is wrong. Racing will never be safe. Yet all they do is jerk off on how safe F1 is.

Go back to the early 90s. We had a few very hard licks and everyone was raving how safe F1 was and that no-one will ever die in a car ever again. An then Imola happened and everyone panicked.

When (when, not if) the day comes it goes horribly wrong again everyone will be up in arms and panic again.

Just to be clear, I will never argue that the Halo is not effective or that it will not save a couple lives in the future (if not already). That would be dishonest.
I am questioning the very need for this extra safety, due to where I personally put the cursor between aesthetics, danger, and safety in motorsports. I understand that it's different from where most people of my generation (and the FIA) puts that cursor, and I accept that I have zero leverage over it, but I'll keep unnecessarily running my mouth about it every once in a while.

I don't know, I just feel like there's a lot of emotional bullying when it comes to discussing Halo on concrete examples like yesterday's crash. If we want nothing bad to ever happen to any of our favourite drivers (and God knows I'd be devastated if anything happened to Charles in particular), we should stop being hypocrites and tell them to go fishing or golfing rather than strapping themselves to rockets on wheels for our personal entertainment. I truly think that sparing us that sorrow every 5 or 10 years is not worth that kind of change to the whole sport.

Well. Let's wait for the next crash. So far we've only seen entire cars thrown at cockpits. We're still due a debris/wheel, and a cockpit-first crash into a barrier (or a flip for that matter). Looking forward to it, because part of the entertainment to me is that heartbeat skip you feel when something like yesterday happens, and 99% of the time, the huge relief when they come out of their cars.

You know what? I disagree with the majority of your opinion here, but I'm grateful that you actually took the time to explain it so clearly. What we disagree on here is the fundamentals, so I'll stop with the sarcastic comments.

You're quite right that this really is only one test of the halo itself. It's a big one, but not all scenarios have played out by any means.

Actually now that I see this, I believe halo saved Leclerc's hands from injury.

_________________
"Indy doesn't give you a second chance. You have to earn it."

The thing that those of us without supercomputers can't tell is how Alonso's car would have behaved without the Halo, because the one thing that is very clear right now is that it pushed his car up and away from the cockpit.

Without this acceleration it's not really easy to work out if he would have slid over the front of the cockpit (like Grosjean did) or if Leclerc could have taken both the wheel and front of the tub to the face. The second one doesn't bear thinking about tbh.

Wow, you really see the front wheel of Alonso go up and over the halo. It does change direction because of the halo. I hate to admit it but it seems that the halo really prevented worse.

Yeah, I've watched this a few more times in fullscreen with the YouTube slow-motion cranked up and it looks like the wheel might have been less of a problem than the front of the monocoque and the nose. Until the wheel hits the halo the whole front end of the car is basically rotating towards the cockpit

...of course, there are still people on Facebook claiming that the wheel didn't even hit it.

/Edit I should be clear that I'm not trying to pull an 'I told you so' on people who don't like the halo, whatever the reason. I'm honestly just a bit shocked at some of the footage that is coming out, which suggests that a legitimately unpopular rule change might literally have prevented a terrible outcome.

so my first assumption was right, the car barely touched halo, butthe protection worked properly because the wheel is the main concern

now that the cars are safe drivers are prone to drive like meatheads? maybe with Strulovich in a better car

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: everything is a bad taste joke now

4-wide action in F1

This is the kind of picture people will bring up a couple decades when in rose-tinted glasses mode about how it was "so much better before". Between the battle and the immense passionate crowd behind, you'd think like it's the best sport ever... unless you actually watched the race.

Ocon was wise to have backed out of that. He would've never made the corner from that acute angle and likely taken out a car or two if he had stuck with it.

Fully agree Karan. Incidentally, that's exactly what Grosjean did in one of his early years, causing a small pile-up there with Hamilton, Button and others

Perfect positioning by Vettel there. Cut off any attempt by Lewis to re-overtake and gave just enough room for Ocon but not enough to allow him to mount a proper overtake attempt. Vettel did all of that without making multiple moves.

_________________
BTCC Pick Em's Champion 2010
Formula Fun Cup Champion 2013
http://www.the-fastlane.co.uk