Wes,
Your first suggestion sounds good but is one more thing that the
driver has to remove to exit the cockpit....I would tend to vote
against it for that reason.
On the cage issue and the 4" limit.....make it 2" and make it include
the driver's torso as well as his/her head.....then nothing can
move.....much. Any reduced acceleration distance will help reduce
injuries. Doug's canopy idea is a good idea....I may do it this year.
Got to be careful of chassis vibration getting to the driver's helmet tho.
Skip
At 10:44 AM 6/14/2006, Wester Potter wrote:
>I'm wondering what possibility there would be to an additional
>netting across the front of the helmet that is stabilized by
>attaching it to the shoulder harness much like the wrist restraints
>are involved. It could be designed to release when the harness is
>released but with proper attachment and engineering the helmeted
>head would have very little forward or side to side motion. The
>webbing could be the type, like a woven belt, (we old fatter guys
>appreciate this) where as stress hits it there is a limited
>give. That would allow necessary head movement but stabilize sudden
>movements in an incident.
>
>As roll cages become increasingly the subject of discussion perhaps
>there is a need for fitted high impact padding inside the cage,
>possibly driver specific like the seat shells in IRL and CART, that
>changes for different drivers. That would limit side motion to far
>less than the up to 4" now allowed. I'm sure that drivers have
>strong opinions about what they like but the fact that most of them
>spend far more time getting from #3 in line to the start than they
>do on the course during a run shouldn't influence safety at the
>sacrifice of comfort.
>
>Wes
|