- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Here is the shield in its actual real world debut
2017 F1 Constructor technical info/developmentFormula 1
- Thread starter LMSCorvetteGT2
- 2,124 comments
- 136,451 views
- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
I think on cars designed from the ground up with the shield in mind will look better. Also, having it start further forward and flowing back more with the car would help.Here is the shield in its actual real world debut
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Well we haven't seen a side view, but you can't tell from that image that it's pretty far forward, more so than this
The shield seems to start right after where the tag heure logo is at
- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
True. I suppose it'll be better to make judgements when the car hits the track.Well we haven't seen a side view, but you can't tell from that image that it's pretty far forward, more so than this
The shield seems to start right after where the tag heure logo is at
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
That's what the original concept had in mind. The angle was much more shallow. I don't think it was done for aesthetics, either - the shallow angle was designed to push incoming debris aside as a steep angle created a much greater likelihood of flicking debris upwards.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Here is what it should look like when it hits the track
Judging from the image of it head on it does seem to end at the second winglet furthest from the driver
Judging from the image of it head on it does seem to end at the second winglet furthest from the driver
- 2,938
- Shrewsbury
- pezzarinho17
Well we haven't seen a side view, but you can't tell from that image that it's pretty far forward, more so than this
The shield seems to start right after where the tag heure logo is at
That the aeroscreen, not the shield. They are different designs (and concepts?) though very similar.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
He's pointing out how the shield differs from the aeroscreen.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Uh yeah I know that, you misunderstood the point of why I posted that. I posted it to demonstrate to @catamount39 that unlike the RBR solution the shield extends much further in front of the driver and has a longer slope. The problem is the original picture I posted of the shield didn't demonstrate that. So I gave him a comparison photo and worded my post to help him understand how far the shield extends in comparison to the aeroscreen.
I'm not sure why you'd think me of all people would have confused this but okay...
Here is a side view for @catamount39, so the aeroscreen would have come to about the radio antenna I believe, this goes out much further. Doesn't look great head on, but from other view points it's pretty nice I think.
Last edited:
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
I think a lot of the issues that were discussed during FP1 could easily be remedied. The glare reflected off the shield could be offset by polarising the perspex and the buttons set into the monocoque could be relocated to a more accessible position. The driver access could be an issue, but during practice in Austria there was a shot of an access panel on Vandoorne's car that had been removed to give access to the suspension assembly. If the shield could be mounted to such a panel that could be released by pressing an external button and an internal button (not at the same time, if course), the issue could be fixed.
- 2,938
- Shrewsbury
- pezzarinho17
Apologies, it was the image along with saying "The shield seems to start right after where the tag heure logo is at" - I would describe the aeroscreen as starting after the Tag Heuer logo, and the shield as starting before the logo. That's the only reason for confusion, no matter who posted it.
Both options are inoffensive aesthetically, far better than the thong halo... But it becomes a completely moot point until the shield has actually passed any safety tests?
Both options are inoffensive aesthetically, far better than the thong halo... But it becomes a completely moot point until the shield has actually passed any safety tests?
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Oh I don't care about any of that, I was just saying the shape of it looks ugly head on, looks like a giant bubble or false jet fighter canopy, just strange.
I saw people on other sites, complain about the glare or how they couldn't see the driver, but it was strange to me because the driver sits so low down you can't see much of what he's doing anyways without the shield. Just seemed like trivial complaints for an exercise in potential future safety.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
After is relative, for me it's the bottom of the logo, for you it's the top. The shield would have ended at the bottom of the logo, thus being a further extension than the aeroscreen would have.
I agree both are better than the halo, but the aeroscreen always seemed too wide as if it was a windscreen from an LMP1 car that somehow fit an f1 car.
Also here is the new wing that McLaren used in the previous gp it curves downward the first element to meet the front of the wing below it.
What's interesting is McLaren seem to be using HD cameras pointed directly at the win in practice earlier today to analyze further.
Here is the new FI wing as well
And this is the fix to the headrest issue that happened in Baku with Lewis. Now they have more sturdy pins it seem that connect better.
Last edited:
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
This was clearly a device that was attached to an existing design after the fact. If it was incorporated into the design from the outset the aesthetic appeal would probably improve, especially if the teams aimed for aerodynamic efficiency.
- 2,938
- Shrewsbury
- pezzarinho17
Yeah, I always count relative to the car itself when describing something. So the front wing will also come before the rear wing, etc. It's funny though, I apply the same thing when talking about my own car - I'll tell the mechanic I need the front left looking at, and so it takes me a while when they say driver side / passenger side. And I have never known what "nearside / farside" are - near to me as the driver, or near to the kerb? 
Some onboard footage of the shield, the fact it is fully clear pays off from this view much more than externally, aesthetically speaking again. I'm sure the drivers will also be very glad when it comes to looking up at the starting lights (except Bottas, who looks down at a crystal ball). Agree as well that it will look much better when factored into the design from concept, perhaps we'll see a more curved chassis where it meets the nose?
Some onboard footage of the shield, the fact it is fully clear pays off from this view much more than externally, aesthetically speaking again. I'm sure the drivers will also be very glad when it comes to looking up at the starting lights (except Bottas, who looks down at a crystal ball). Agree as well that it will look much better when factored into the design from concept, perhaps we'll see a more curved chassis where it meets the nose?
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Yes I'm sure of that as well, you could do it like the cars from the 70s or early 80s where there was a section that pulled apart with the windscreen attached. It could be like the vanity panel perhaps and have a pull latch to push it up. It could be connected around to the head rest and the entire piece removed by the driver like we see the head rest shoulder protection at the end of the GP.
- 2,938
- Shrewsbury
- pezzarinho17
Vettel says Shield made him “dizzy” in test run
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/vettel-dizzy-british-gp-shield-debut-930493/
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/vettel-dizzy-british-gp-shield-debut-930493/
- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
That can't be good. 
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Yeah I saw some tweets about this before the article came out, and it was said he only did a single lap with it rather than the scheduled three.
- 13,078
- United Kingdom
That's simple. Ferrari don't like it and deliberately designed it badly to make it disorienting, and then they told Vettel to complain about it. There's nothing wrong with a screen like that, it's just politics.
- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
- 13,078
- United Kingdom
They build that shield for that car, Ferrari could easily just adjust the shape or thickness on the I side to cause the issues. Regardless of whether that theory is true, I still think they told Vettel to slate it so it didn't get introduced.
- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
It was designed by an Italian glass manufacturer (ordered by Ferrari/FIA though I suppose), and the original design was by Red Bull. A glass canopy/front shield like this isn't alien to modern design, somebody screwed up at the factory or in the drawing room. Mainly in the fact that the screen wasn't given a subtle tinting to help with glare I'd say.
If anything, Ferrari would want this one to succeed over the extremely pointless and unhelpful "halo" (which protects against nothing), which I'm confused as go how the FIA thinks it'll help with flying springs and debris at the drivers face. The halo doesn't offer any protection, and is just ugly. Unless they plan on glass with it?
- 373
- desmodan
- what's an Xbox ?
Sounds like the sort of trick they'd pull, but to be honest from the point of view of car design I can't see any downsides. It would have a huge effect on aero efficiency which would make the car faster , more stable and more fuel efficient , as opposed to a drivers wobbly head . Plus the added protection from the elements would take a certain amount of strain off the drivers aforementioned wobbly head which would make him faster.
What's not to like ?
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
What? The drivers head in the helmet is an aero device to, that's how serious F1 teams are about aero. So their head is pretty stationary due to how low they sit, as well as being held in by g forces in various areas of a track due to loading. Also the hans device helps as well.
We don't know exactly if it and how much faster the cars will be with them first off. Second if their is a real sense of distortion looking through the glass, this is a safety concern and should be fixed before moving forward. For now it's conspiracy and we have no idea how it was through Vettel's eyes, the side mounted camera doesn't inform us so I doubt it's them wanting it to never come into the sport. I think it's more of a hint that it needs more work done before a full test can come about. And other people on the grid think 2019 is far more realistic rather than the rushed 2018.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
I get where Vettel is coming from, though. His vision is already slightly distorted by the curvature of his visor. He's then looking through the curvature of the shield, and the shape of the two are completely different. The visor is a consistent concave shape whereas the shield has a lomg, tapered shape. I imagine that it would be like two pairs of glasses at the same time, with each being of a different strength.
- 13,078
- United Kingdom
It's a plausible reason, which is why it was said. But you don't see LMP, GT or Touring Car drivers complaining about stuff like that. The drivers and the teams don't want these head protection devices and are trying to say stuff like this to stop them appearing. But if dizzying is a problem, it can easily be fixed with some optical science surely, there are clever enough people out there.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Pete05
Premium
- 7,101
- Melbourne, Australia
Hmmm not always.
I've seen drivers of touring cars & other closed cockpit vehicles racing with their visors down, be it tinted to reduce sun glare, habit or whatever and they haven't run of the track from dizziness.
It's clear 'The Shield' concept needs more work though & it's a damn sight better than the 'thong' alternative to look at.
