IndyCar says it is keen to learn from the outcome of the investigation into Romain Grosjean’s accident at last year’s Formula 1 Bahrain Grand Prix.
Grosjean survived a high-speed accident in Bahrain in which his Haas VF-20 pierced the barrier and split in half, at which point it erupted into flames.
The Halo head protection device, which was introduced into Formula 1 in 2018, played a major role in saving the Frenchman’s life.
Prior to selecting the Halo Formula 1 had previously evaluated the Shield and the Aeroscreen, the latter having been created by Red Bull Advanced Technology, which was eventually introduced into IndyCar in 2020 following further development.
Formula 1’s governing body, the FIA, and IndyCar share a working relationship regarding safety and the series’ president Jaye Frye wants to learn from any findings from the crash in order to help improve standards.
“We’ve had one off-season team manager meeting and another one coming up here shortly, and we’ll go through this and standardize some things,” IndyCar President Jaye Frye told Racer.
“We all saw what happened with [Grosjean], and what’s the result? Well, the result was what you want, and the driver was okay.
“And obviously it was a big incident, so we were already looking at some quick disconnect options on a few things, and when we get the report – the findings – on the F1 crash, we’ll also see if there’s anything in there we could do better, do differently with our frame and screen.
“Our system is different than theirs, but there’s a lot of similar things that can carry over.”
Frye nonetheless praised the Aeroscreen after it was put to the test in the first race of the Iowa double-header when Colton Herta mounted the left-rear corner of Rinus VeeKay’s ECR-Chevrolet and made contact with the device before getting launched into the air.
“Throughout the course of the year, there were a few incidents that certainly came into play that had the positive results that we will always want, which was the drivers walked away,” Frye added.
“Overall, you don’t get too loud when something does its job like the aeroscreen did; I mean, that’s what it’s there for. But it was a real success that a lot of people were part of, and we’re really proud of it.”
The main thing that should be carried through is the need to properly analyse the specific sequence of events, and alternative outcomes for different mitigation devices.
This was a recommendation (R6) from the Jules Bianchi Accident Panel over 6 years ago which has never been addressed.
The fundamental principle of the ARMCO barrier, from the 80s is that it should deflect the vehicle and certainly not be pierced! However, if it had performed that way, would the G Force have been even higher, and like JB not survivable.
The main thing that help survivability, was the long established safety cell, already incorporating a rool bar in front of the driver. The halo is an additional element, The system could have performed better in that the pedal box failed and trapped Grosjean’s feet. Having aided his protection from the ARMCO rail (with the helmet?), the halo then seemed to interfere with self extraction, a drawback that has always been pointed out.
Hopefully, as suggested 6 years ago, ALL these benefits and drawbacks will be properly analysed, and maybe quantified like any industrial, aviation, or other technical investigation.