5 ms·

> It isn't as if they are ever going to leave him in a wreck for a second longer than needed. Actually, the goal is generally not to pull a driver out of a wre

> It isn't as if they are ever going to leave him in a wreck for a second longer than needed. Actually, the goal is generally not to pull a driver out of a wreck as fast as possible. For example, if the driver has some broken bones (especially spinal ones), rescuers might want to act carefully to avoid any further damage if the circumstances allow that. But if the wreck is catching fire or the driver is in danger of suffocating (as potentially detectable with those gloves), they'll have to act faster and "trade" potential additional injury for saving the driver's life.

sandworm101 9y ago
And they need/will trust the gloves to tell them if the wreck is or isnt on fire? Fire and/or danger of suffocation happens long before anything these gloves could detect. I know that this data is medically interesting but cannot see how it could impact actual procedure trackside. Someone will be at the scene asap regardless of data. They will check for fire and breathing issues. If either driver isnt talking or car on fire, driver is comming out now. After out, or sometimes before, gloves are off and other sensors applied. Decisions such as the use of a spinal turn on danger, not medical data: always a spinal unless car about to explode. I dont see the case for this data as it only means something long after more apparant dangers have already dictated decisions. (In my work i regularly draft ERPs for aviation crashes, a similar senario. I just last month completed a hypoxia course in a hypobaric chamber where o2 sat was a very big deal)
- avdmerwe 9y ago
  This will indeed not slow down anyone's initial response, but it will hopefully give us an insight into what happened before anyone gets there, or while the rescue evolves. We would have really liked to know what happened while we were underway to the scene in this scenario: https://youtu.be/QOM5SzxEFGU?t=1m50s https://youtu.be/QOM5SzxEFGU?t=1m50s And a driver under a few 100kg of Tecpro barriers takes a while to get to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJN-b-ovkQQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJN-b-ovkQQ
  - HorizonXP 9y ago
    It's also important to note that it's only a fairly recent development that fatal injuries in F1 are a rarity. The previous last death in F1 was Ayrton Senna in 1994, with Barrichello being injured and Roland Ratzenberger dying that same weekend. Ayrton was a big proponent of driver safety, and his death sparked a huge push to improve safety in the sport. It wasn't until 2014 when Jules Bianchi crashed in Suzuka that F1 saw another death during a race. Now, a biometric sensor probably would not have helped Jules, but it may have alerted the medical team to the seriousness of his injuries. Oximetry and heart rate may not have indicated much, but I think it's a great first step towards other sensors that could eventually be incorporated. F1 tries to be at the forefront of automotive technologies. Driver safety always has been and should be a huge part of that.
    - avdmerwe 9y ago
      Exactly this. And I'd add that because we are now looking for tiny incremental improvements (most of the big, obvious things have been addressed already), we're going to need some data in the areas we're looking to improve.
    - JshWright 9y ago
      > Driver safety always has been and should be a huge part of that. But we can all agree no one like the halo... (I kid...)
    - philjohn 9y ago
      Indeed - just look at Kubica's 300 Kph crash in Canada[1] - that would more than likely not have been survivable in the early to mid 90's. The Hans device, protective monocoque, wheel tethers and other incremental improvements are nothing short of stunning, and though he has many legitimate gripes against him, Max Moseley was key in pushing this forward in his time as head of the FIA. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtrzvwayniM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtrzvwayniM
philjohn 9y ago
That's why the seat can be removed in one piece, with the driver still in it - acts like a spinal board.

sandworm101 9y ago

And they need/will trust the gloves to tell them if the wreck is or isnt on fire? Fire and/or danger of suffocation happens long before anything these gloves could detect. I know that this data is medically interesting but cannot see how it could impact actual procedure trackside. Someone will be at the scene asap regardless of data. They will check for fire and breathing issues. If either driver isnt talking or car on fire, driver is comming out now. After out, or sometimes before, gloves are off and other sensors applied. Decisions such as the use of a spinal turn on danger, not medical data: always a spinal unless car about to explode. I dont see the case for this data as it only means something long after more apparant dangers have already dictated decisions. (In my work i regularly draft ERPs for aviation crashes, a similar senario. I just last month completed a hypoxia course in a hypobaric chamber where o2 sat was a very big deal)

avdmerwe 9y ago
This will indeed not slow down anyone's initial response, but it will hopefully give us an insight into what happened before anyone gets there, or while the rescue evolves. We would have really liked to know what happened while we were underway to the scene in this scenario: https://youtu.be/QOM5SzxEFGU?t=1m50s https://youtu.be/QOM5SzxEFGU?t=1m50s And a driver under a few 100kg of Tecpro barriers takes a while to get to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJN-b-ovkQQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJN-b-ovkQQ
- HorizonXP 9y ago
  It's also important to note that it's only a fairly recent development that fatal injuries in F1 are a rarity. The previous last death in F1 was Ayrton Senna in 1994, with Barrichello being injured and Roland Ratzenberger dying that same weekend. Ayrton was a big proponent of driver safety, and his death sparked a huge push to improve safety in the sport. It wasn't until 2014 when Jules Bianchi crashed in Suzuka that F1 saw another death during a race. Now, a biometric sensor probably would not have helped Jules, but it may have alerted the medical team to the seriousness of his injuries. Oximetry and heart rate may not have indicated much, but I think it's a great first step towards other sensors that could eventually be incorporated. F1 tries to be at the forefront of automotive technologies. Driver safety always has been and should be a huge part of that.
  - avdmerwe 9y ago
    Exactly this. And I'd add that because we are now looking for tiny incremental improvements (most of the big, obvious things have been addressed already), we're going to need some data in the areas we're looking to improve.
  - JshWright 9y ago
    > Driver safety always has been and should be a huge part of that. But we can all agree no one like the halo... (I kid...)
  - philjohn 9y ago
    Indeed - just look at Kubica's 300 Kph crash in Canada[1] - that would more than likely not have been survivable in the early to mid 90's. The Hans device, protective monocoque, wheel tethers and other incremental improvements are nothing short of stunning, and though he has many legitimate gripes against him, Max Moseley was key in pushing this forward in his time as head of the FIA. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtrzvwayniM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtrzvwayniM

philjohn 9y ago

That's why the seat can be removed in one piece, with the driver still in it - acts like a spinal board.