HALO Device

Panther_99FS said:
Also note that I said "it did its job", again nowhere in the thread did I mention saving life....
Click to expand...
The HALO was introduced in order to save lives. Therefore its 'job' is to save lives, and if there was no threatened life to save it didn't do its job since it hadn't to. :a1310:

More seriously, even if it was by a wheel or a whole car, Leclerc's HALO has been hit and did not collapse. This alone is a kind of achievement.
 
Frontal head protection is important TO SAVE LIVES. See what happened to Henry Surtees and Justin Wilson (to name a few). I am not mentioning Jules Bianchi since in that case even the HALO would have collapse.

Once again, since nothing would have hit his head anyway, Charles Leclerc didn't need protection in that case and he would not have been hurt with or without the HALO.
 
wombat666 said:
How about we (all) agree to disagree. :applouse:
Click to expand...
Or maybe I should just stop arguing with people over 50. I have to do so every day at work, and it is just a PIA. Even if you show them factual and/or numerical facts as a proof they will never change their mind. Last month I spent one week (8 hours a day, 5 days a week) trying to show an elder colleague what he was planning to do was unrealistic and would lead to a disaster. He never listened to me, did things as he wanted to, and of course the anticipated disaster occured...
 
Roxane-21 said:
Or maybe I should just stop arguing with people over 50. I have to do so every day at work, and it is just a PIA. Even if you show them factual and/or numerical facts as a proof they will never change their mind. Last month I spent one week (8 hours a day, 5 days a week) trying to show an elder colleague what he was planning to do was unrealistic and would lead to a disaster. He never listened to me, did things as he wanted to, and of course the anticipated disaster occured...
Click to expand...

Your problem was that you automatically jumped into assumptions that I never stated in the title nor within the responses.
Has absolutely nothing to do with being over 50......:mixed-smiley-010:
 
wombat666 said:
How about we (all) agree to disagree. :applouse:
Click to expand...

I think we agree on the point that the HALO hasn't been the most beautiful thing added to the beautiful shape of an aerodynamic car...... :biggrin-new:

Roxane-21 said:
Or maybe I should just stop arguing with people over 50. I have to do so every day at work, and it is just a PIA. Even if you show them factual and/or numerical facts as a proof they will never change their mind. Last month I spent one week (8 hours a day, 5 days a week) trying to show an elder colleague what he was planning to do was unrealistic and would lead to a disaster. He never listened to me, did things as he wanted to, and of course the anticipated disaster occured...
Click to expand...

Don't tell me about it! You don't know how much time I have to spend explaining young engineers, that what they want to do has already been tried and is has already been proven that it can't work. Even when I provide them the scientific reports, they still have doubts. Or when I have to explain to them that the thing they are about to invent can be ordered already in the first hardware shop around the corner :biggrin-new:.

I have worked with many young engineers for most of my career and still do. Mutual respect is the key to be successful. Youngsters will help me to keep the dust from my ideas and they can benefit from my 30+ years of experience. And I still enjoy working with brilliant youngsters of half my age) and its never a PIA .

And a great design isn't always the best solution. I still often use the example of the paper-mate ballpoint and the ordinary carbon pencil. When you don't know this example, perhaps you should try to learn from the technical failures in history.

Cheers,
Huub
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top