Does a driver have to die!

[Adam43]

Originally posted by JAG
The Le Mans cars performance has remained stable since 1999, they are not being slowed as such just kept at the same level.

F1 used to do this, but the recent tire war and manufactuers battles have meant the improvements have exceeded the restrictions. This year the reduced wing elements were supposed to peg speeds to 2003 levels. Other developments have meant cars are going 3-4 seconds quicker.

To a certain extent neither series pegs each cars each year. Le Mans has stayed relatively more stable because the pace of development is less. Its been the same car ahead for the last four years. There are decent changes coming through at the moment and these have been questioned by the drivers for making the cars slower.

F1 cars have been getting quicker and quickly getting quicker. However I don't think that because they are 2s (or whatever) quicker now than at some point in the past means they are now unsafe. Where is the line and why has it been magically crossed? Has the huge increases in crash tests not been enough in the last few years?

I don't see the situation as being irresponsible at the moment.

Safety is important. Of course. However it is a case of acceptable risks. It seems acceptable at the moment, there isn't outrage about racing these cars. Although there is a general discussion about it and cars will be pegged back in the not too distant future.

Which is a decent point. Isn't Max pushing through rules to peg the cars back. Is it a problem that this looks like it'll be 2006 not a week on Tuesday?

Are these cars too unsafe at the moment? No IMHO.
Are there moves afoot to reduce speeds? Yes.
Has Ralf's accident made a difference to this? No.
Should it? No. IMHO.

[Knowlesy]

Recently a guy was killed in a Renault Clio race in Britain. The corner speeds are much lower in that category.

It is not the corner speeds that kill, it is the level of safety the cars provide....F1 is unsurpassed in that sense and I see no problem at all.

Unfortunately, someone escapes a major shunt today with minor bruising and a few aches and mass hysteria kicks off with one or two people, which is a shame.

[Dan Fielden]

If you look at what sort of Genre this sort of entertainment comes under "RACING", this is what people will do. F1 is the PINACLE of motorsport and the fastest track cars compete in it, the teams hire the worlds best racing drivers to drive these cars and these drivers are more than capable of coping with these speeds. Today Martin was saying that D.C and K.R. could not wait to get the new MP4 19B as this one was TOO SLOW.
I feel that it would be very hard to kill yourself whilst racing an f1 car. Take Spa 2001 Burti had a 185mph crash at the Blancemont corner and was in hospital for 2 days and the front end of the car was not even creased, sure the wings and wheels were gone but his body was protected. And Button in Monaco in 03. 130mph sideways shunt and he wanted to race the day after.

I rest my case

[Adam43]

Originally posted by JAG
Its not because of Ralfs accident.

Really, this thread was going to be started anyway?

Worth discussing, obviously, but as I have said this thread has been tainted by the starting time/reason which has stopped us sitting back and looking at it objectively,

[Inigo Montoya]

F1 is the safest its been in years. Why all the fuss?

[freud]

Originally posted by JAG
freud, you could have far, far better racing, with very quick cars, that would also corner slower, and therefore be safer, if the 2006 regs were adopted.

Question is how much slower had Ralf taken that corner before his accident with the 'new' regs... 20 KPH slower.. 30 KPH slower?? Would that had made a difference.. NO! If he had a head-on collision at 200 KPH at that corner, it would've been even more dangerous.

Again you can never really make this sport immune to accidents. They will happen, sadly. Danger is a part of this sport. Some drivers are more brave then others and some fans appreciate their brevity though some dont like them as well. Some drivers just have unfortunate accidents. That has always been the case.

[dretceterini]

I don't see much difference between hitting a wall at 170 and at 190...

[Dan Fielden]

Does anyone??

[eatapc]

This thread is hysterical nonsense and should be put out of its misery.

Everyone cares about driver safety -- which is why F1 cars and tracks have never been safer.

The one safety issue worth discussing is the quality of the track personnel -- marshals, stewards and medical teams -- a huge variable that shouldn't be tolerated at this level.

[JAG]

Its all relative. Apparently you are something like 50% more likely to be killed by a car if it hits you at 35mph, rather than 30mph.

Personally I have never heard a driver call for cars to be slowed down, until this year in F1. Again it is all relative. Even in 2006 they will still be quicker than in the 80s and early 90s.

Nobody doubts the cars have the very best safety standards, the problem is F1 cornering speeds in partucualr are now reaching the point were, if you go off, it won't matter how strong the car is, the shear size of the impact will seriously injure, if not kill a driver.

Someone mentioned Spa 2001 earlier. The cars today are around 5 seconds a lap faster than then, with the time gained through improved cornering speed due to tire development etc.

It doesn't sound alot, but 5 seconds adds up to a huge increase in the force of an accident if a crash occurs.

[Adam43]

but why is it that this last 5s drop in lap time not acceptable, but the 5s before that was? Where is the line, I'm intrigued why it at these speeds and how 'these kinds of accidents' have shown us this?

Off topic: The 35 and 30 mph advert is about being hit by a car, as you say, not being killed in the car. It takes into account reaction time, which basically means you are more likely to be actually hit let alone hit faster.

[JAG]

I take your point, but Imola 94 showed there is a line that the cars cross were they become dangerous.

Drivers, commentators, engineers etc. have all commented on the speed increaes in recent years (on top of cars that where already super quick).

Why did the IRL switch from 3.5l to 3l engines this year, why do NASCAR have restrictors on the Superspeedways, why do the ACO fit restrictors to the Le Mans cars, why do the FIA limit WRC cars to 350BHP and are about to introduce control tires to cut tarmac cornering speeds?

There is heaps of research into what the body can take in terns of impact, and the FIA have taken this into account when they have taken measures to reduce cornering speeds over the years.

However in recent years, the influence of the manufactuers have prevented the FIA making the types of changes they want to, with the FIA being threatened with breakaways if they so dare as change the regs.

[Dan Fielden]

Originally posted by JAG
Someone mentioned Spa 2001 earlier. The cars today are around 5 seconds a lap faster than then,

I'm afraid that you are wrong J.A.G. as the improvements in time have been just over a second. The biggest increase of time gained is 2 seconds a lap at Monte Carlo due to the changes such as the straight run into La Rascasse and the removal of the barriers at Saint Devote and Piscine or swimming pool call it what you will, the cars are also alot stronger than in 01 so... .

[pirenzo]

"the guy's fine"

[Adam43]

Originally posted by JAG
However in recent years, the influence of the manufactuers have prevented the FIA making the types of changes they want to, with the FIA being threatened with breakaways if they so dare as change the regs.

And it looks like Audis (and other pre-2004 machinery) will get a break in terms of their car so that it can continue to run competitively in ALMS next year (aero and plank rules). So its not just evil old F1.

Also, yes all those other series are reducing speeds. And so is F1. However the hows and whys are specific in all. And I'd say in LM they have gone too far in terms of engines restrictions.

[Dan Fielden]

F1 tyres have groves to reduce cornering speed.

[Adam43]

Almost off topic IMHO but since 2001, I would guess the lap time increase is more like 5s than 1s.

[Dan Fielden]

Sorry my mistake

[JAG]

Pole

Monaco 2000 - 1.19.475
Monaco 2004 - 1.13.985

Catalunya 2000 - 1.20.974
Catalunya 2004 - 1.15.022

Silverstone 2000 - 1.25.703
Silverstone testing 2004 - 1.17.xxx

Montreal 2000 - 1.18.439
Montreal 2004 - 1.12,275

I could go on........

[Dan Fielden]

yep ure right J.A.G i do apologise but i struggle to see why you worry to the extent you do abut formula 1 racing. It is as safe as it has ever been

[JAG]

Lets just agree to disagree about the safety of the F1 cars

[Dani Filth]

i don't see how constructors block the slowing of the cars . it's not like anyobody's gonna noticed on track .. they are trying to do things .. and those will be done .. but they can't rush it ..

[Dan Fielden]

I agree wiv J.A.G. Ralph is o.k f1 is safe but accidents can and will happen J.A.G. shall we agree to disagree and i'll stick you on my Buddys list

[JAG]

Originally posted by Dan Fielden
I agree wiv J.A.G. Ralph is o.k f1 is safe but accidents can and will happen J.A.G. shall we agree to disagree and i'll stick you on my Buddys list

[Kartracer88f]

Thanks for the welcome knowsley...this thread finally inspired me to take 10 seconds and register. lol