After hearing Prost's comments after his sons actions during the first Formula E race as one of the posts underneath referred to does have significant relevance.
However under the circumstances the safety car should have been deployed that is a given in my opinion however after Prost Jr actions he is hardly in the position to claim the rights and wrongs of racing.
It was an unfortunate happening of circumstances, that is all.
You will never stop 'freak incidents' happening IN ANY WALK OF LIFE let alone motorsport so move on before we all need a safety car just to get out of bed in the f'kn morning!
If there was mist across the track, Alain didn't want to race. Watch Senna getting close to him, driving a Toleman at Monaco.
comment by TUX (U5315)
posted 3 minutes ago
It was an unfortunate happening of circumstances, that is all.
You will never stop 'freak incidents' happening IN ANY WALK OF LIFE let alone motorsport so move on before we all need a safety car just to get out of bed in the f'kn morning!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
there are certain circumstances where a safety car is a must tux , for me i just think there was fundamental error in not having a safety car on track when there was standing water around and heavy machinery trackside -
fully agree on a dry track it was arguably ok
-------- but with standing water on track and a 4 ton lump of metal a few yards away ??
The conditions were the mistake with the safety car. This said however the line upto turn 7 is in F1 terms quite steep and the rain had not been falling long enough for the level of water to build up to cause aquaplaning where Bianchi crashed to the best of my knowledge. However from a viability view point alone with that kind of machinery there should have been a safety car.
However this is fundamentally academic as it will not change the fact that a young bright talent will probably never drive again. But sweeping changes is not the answer in this case and that for me is the fact of this matter.
" However this is fundamentally academic as it will not change the fact that a young bright talent will probably never drive again. But sweeping changes is not the answer in this case and that for me is the fact of this matter".
He lost it, it happens that's why they get mega dollars. FACT.
I used to race bikes (1000cc) in the 90's. I've ridden in all kinds of conditions and crashed far too many times to tell a stranger. Sunday was not 'treacherous' but 'difficult'.
You mention a dry track. Had the track been dry and a similar event happened it would have been at a far greater speed (broken suspension/missing wing/haywire elecs!) then what bud?
I'm real pleased for the safety improvements throughout but Motorsport is and always will be dangerous. Period.
comment by Dru We_Are_Coming_Forest (U1626)
posted 13 minutes ago
The conditions were the mistake with the safety car. This said however the line upto turn 7 is in F1 terms quite steep and the rain had not been falling long enough for the level of water to build up to cause aquaplaning where Bianchi crashed to the best of my knowledge. However from a viability view point alone with that kind of machinery there should have been a safety car.
However this is fundamentally academic as it will not change the fact that a young bright talent will probably never drive again. But sweeping changes is not the answer in this case and that for me is the fact of this matter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i thought both sutil and JB did aquaplane dru --
comment by TUX (U5315)
posted 6 minutes ago
I used to race bikes (1000cc) in the 90's. I've ridden in all kinds of conditions and crashed far too many times to tell a stranger. Sunday was not 'treacherous' but 'difficult'.
You mention a dry track. Had the track been dry and a similar event happened it would have been at a far greater speed (broken suspension/missing wing/haywire elecs!) then what bud?
I'm real pleased for the safety improvements throughout but Motorsport is and always will be dangerous. Period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
hear what you are saying tux and of course you are right motor racing is dangerous --
but there comes a time when driver safety has to be paramount and commonsense has to be the order of the day and to have a 4 ton crane trackside with no safety car on track on a very treacherous surface is playing russian roulette with driver and marshal safety --
Driver safety is paramount hence the development of the 'carbon cocoon', run off areas and safety in general.
A few years ago a very good friend was out for a drink. She left the table to 'powder her nose', tripped over a chair and fell on a table. She landed on a tall glass that severed the main artery in her left arm. 5mins later she as gone. Sally bled to death despite our best efforts.
Things happen in life that you can never 'allow for' so stop trying bud.
All the best to Bianchi
comment by TUX (U5315)
posted 2 minutes ago
Driver safety is paramount hence the development of the 'carbon cocoon', run off areas and safety in general.
A few years ago a very good friend was out for a drink. She left the table to 'powder her nose', tripped over a chair and fell on a table. She landed on a tall glass that severed the main artery in her left arm. 5mins later she as gone. Sally bled to death despite our best efforts.
Things happen in life that you can never 'allow for' so stop trying bud.
All the best to Bianchi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
here what you are saying tux but i cant agree with you mate -- i just find it impossible to be that blas'e where driver and marshal safety are concerned --
Blas'e or real?
It seems you can't tell the difference.
And thanks for your thoughts about Sally. Kinda sums you up.N nite
comment by TUX (U5315)
posted 14 minutes ago
Blas'e or real?
It seems you can't tell the difference.
And thanks for your thoughts about Sally. Kinda sums you up.N nite
----------------------------------------------------------------------
come on now tux -- nobody in there right mind ever wants to see a repeat of what happened to JB to any other driver --
There has been no official statement of aquaplaning in either of the accidents, loss of grip yes but full aquaplaning to my knowledge has not yet been mentioned.
It's just a word people will use to sensationalise these things. To be fair as tragic as the situation is this happens in motorsport all the time just not as often as in the very high profile world of F1.
Everyone's playing the blame game here and that is counter-productive. In racing as in every job, there are risks and all you can do is reduce them to as low as reasonably possible.
Thankfully Jules is alive and I hope he recovers from the incident but a lot of people are playing the blame game without having all the facts.
Sorry Martial you are right Sutil does use the term aquaplaning the only reason I rasied it was that is a term often used by the media to sensationalise these situations. Also a number of drivers stated that there was very little standing water.
That said it doesn't take a huge amount to lose grip especially with wets or intermediates as the additional height reduces the ground effect of the downforce these cars rely on.
TBH, not many have mentioned grass. Grass is ferociously slippy and does nothing to halt speed. Tracks should be surrounded by gravel, for variouos reasons, but the 2 most important for me, its good for halting speed, and it punishes poor drivers who use run off areas as track
comment by BWFCCLEGG (U7583)
posted 4 minutes ago
TBH, not many have mentioned grass. Grass is ferociously slippy and does nothing to halt speed. Tracks should be surrounded by gravel, for variouos reasons, but the 2 most important for me, its good for halting speed, and it punishes poor drivers who use run off areas as track
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another great idea. I talked about having cranes behind the barriers with the right booms to lift beached cars as well.
Not sure Seb would like the gravel idea though
They'd need really long booms to reach into some of those gravel traps. The problem with gravel is it can cause cars to flip, when it digs in at high speed.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
does le professeur have a point ?
Page 1 of 1
posted on 7/10/14
After hearing Prost's comments after his sons actions during the first Formula E race as one of the posts underneath referred to does have significant relevance.
However under the circumstances the safety car should have been deployed that is a given in my opinion however after Prost Jr actions he is hardly in the position to claim the rights and wrongs of racing.
posted on 7/10/14
It was an unfortunate happening of circumstances, that is all.
You will never stop 'freak incidents' happening IN ANY WALK OF LIFE let alone motorsport so move on before we all need a safety car just to get out of bed in the f'kn morning!
posted on 7/10/14
If there was mist across the track, Alain didn't want to race. Watch Senna getting close to him, driving a Toleman at Monaco.
posted on 7/10/14
comment by TUX (U5315)
posted 3 minutes ago
It was an unfortunate happening of circumstances, that is all.
You will never stop 'freak incidents' happening IN ANY WALK OF LIFE let alone motorsport so move on before we all need a safety car just to get out of bed in the f'kn morning!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
there are certain circumstances where a safety car is a must tux , for me i just think there was fundamental error in not having a safety car on track when there was standing water around and heavy machinery trackside -
fully agree on a dry track it was arguably ok
-------- but with standing water on track and a 4 ton lump of metal a few yards away ??
posted on 7/10/14
The conditions were the mistake with the safety car. This said however the line upto turn 7 is in F1 terms quite steep and the rain had not been falling long enough for the level of water to build up to cause aquaplaning where Bianchi crashed to the best of my knowledge. However from a viability view point alone with that kind of machinery there should have been a safety car.
However this is fundamentally academic as it will not change the fact that a young bright talent will probably never drive again. But sweeping changes is not the answer in this case and that for me is the fact of this matter.
posted on 7/10/14
" However this is fundamentally academic as it will not change the fact that a young bright talent will probably never drive again. But sweeping changes is not the answer in this case and that for me is the fact of this matter".
He lost it, it happens that's why they get mega dollars. FACT.
posted on 7/10/14
I used to race bikes (1000cc) in the 90's. I've ridden in all kinds of conditions and crashed far too many times to tell a stranger. Sunday was not 'treacherous' but 'difficult'.
You mention a dry track. Had the track been dry and a similar event happened it would have been at a far greater speed (broken suspension/missing wing/haywire elecs!) then what bud?
I'm real pleased for the safety improvements throughout but Motorsport is and always will be dangerous. Period.
posted on 7/10/14
comment by Dru We_Are_Coming_Forest (U1626)
posted 13 minutes ago
The conditions were the mistake with the safety car. This said however the line upto turn 7 is in F1 terms quite steep and the rain had not been falling long enough for the level of water to build up to cause aquaplaning where Bianchi crashed to the best of my knowledge. However from a viability view point alone with that kind of machinery there should have been a safety car.
However this is fundamentally academic as it will not change the fact that a young bright talent will probably never drive again. But sweeping changes is not the answer in this case and that for me is the fact of this matter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i thought both sutil and JB did aquaplane dru --
posted on 7/10/14
comment by TUX (U5315)
posted 6 minutes ago
I used to race bikes (1000cc) in the 90's. I've ridden in all kinds of conditions and crashed far too many times to tell a stranger. Sunday was not 'treacherous' but 'difficult'.
You mention a dry track. Had the track been dry and a similar event happened it would have been at a far greater speed (broken suspension/missing wing/haywire elecs!) then what bud?
I'm real pleased for the safety improvements throughout but Motorsport is and always will be dangerous. Period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
hear what you are saying tux and of course you are right motor racing is dangerous --
but there comes a time when driver safety has to be paramount and commonsense has to be the order of the day and to have a 4 ton crane trackside with no safety car on track on a very treacherous surface is playing russian roulette with driver and marshal safety --
posted on 7/10/14
Driver safety is paramount hence the development of the 'carbon cocoon', run off areas and safety in general.
A few years ago a very good friend was out for a drink. She left the table to 'powder her nose', tripped over a chair and fell on a table. She landed on a tall glass that severed the main artery in her left arm. 5mins later she as gone. Sally bled to death despite our best efforts.
Things happen in life that you can never 'allow for' so stop trying bud.
All the best to Bianchi
posted on 7/10/14
comment by TUX (U5315)
posted 2 minutes ago
Driver safety is paramount hence the development of the 'carbon cocoon', run off areas and safety in general.
A few years ago a very good friend was out for a drink. She left the table to 'powder her nose', tripped over a chair and fell on a table. She landed on a tall glass that severed the main artery in her left arm. 5mins later she as gone. Sally bled to death despite our best efforts.
Things happen in life that you can never 'allow for' so stop trying bud.
All the best to Bianchi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
here what you are saying tux but i cant agree with you mate -- i just find it impossible to be that blas'e where driver and marshal safety are concerned --
posted on 7/10/14
Blas'e or real?
It seems you can't tell the difference.
And thanks for your thoughts about Sally. Kinda sums you up.N nite
posted on 7/10/14
comment by TUX (U5315)
posted 14 minutes ago
Blas'e or real?
It seems you can't tell the difference.
And thanks for your thoughts about Sally. Kinda sums you up.N nite
----------------------------------------------------------------------
come on now tux -- nobody in there right mind ever wants to see a repeat of what happened to JB to any other driver --
posted on 8/10/14
There has been no official statement of aquaplaning in either of the accidents, loss of grip yes but full aquaplaning to my knowledge has not yet been mentioned.
It's just a word people will use to sensationalise these things. To be fair as tragic as the situation is this happens in motorsport all the time just not as often as in the very high profile world of F1.
posted on 8/10/14
Everyone's playing the blame game here and that is counter-productive. In racing as in every job, there are risks and all you can do is reduce them to as low as reasonably possible.
Thankfully Jules is alive and I hope he recovers from the incident but a lot of people are playing the blame game without having all the facts.
posted on 8/10/14
Sorry Martial you are right Sutil does use the term aquaplaning the only reason I rasied it was that is a term often used by the media to sensationalise these situations. Also a number of drivers stated that there was very little standing water.
That said it doesn't take a huge amount to lose grip especially with wets or intermediates as the additional height reduces the ground effect of the downforce these cars rely on.
posted on 8/10/14
TBH, not many have mentioned grass. Grass is ferociously slippy and does nothing to halt speed. Tracks should be surrounded by gravel, for variouos reasons, but the 2 most important for me, its good for halting speed, and it punishes poor drivers who use run off areas as track
posted on 8/10/14
comment by BWFCCLEGG (U7583)
posted 4 minutes ago
TBH, not many have mentioned grass. Grass is ferociously slippy and does nothing to halt speed. Tracks should be surrounded by gravel, for variouos reasons, but the 2 most important for me, its good for halting speed, and it punishes poor drivers who use run off areas as track
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Another great idea. I talked about having cranes behind the barriers with the right booms to lift beached cars as well.
Not sure Seb would like the gravel idea though
posted on 9/10/14
They'd need really long booms to reach into some of those gravel traps. The problem with gravel is it can cause cars to flip, when it digs in at high speed.
Page 1 of 1