Hey, I'm currently reading "Cosworth DFV, the inside story of F1's greatest engine" - If you either remember back then, or have any interest in F1 history, it's a great read. Anyway, with all the constant "F1's boring, there's no overtaking anymore, blah blah comments I'd like to share a (slightly edited for brevity) extract from an open letter Jochen Rindt wrote in the early days of winged cars. It isn't dated, but it's from around 1968/69: "The more things change, the more they stay the same......" Had to share, Cheers, Ian
He was a cool guy... I think it's a Lauda bio that includes a pic of Jochen in his winter fur coat....
Thanks Ian good point raised back then, and still we have the same problem. I have loads of F1 history books to read just need a long holiday to read them.
Of course, it was Rindt's crash at Montjuich in 1969, along with his teammate Graham Hill's, that resulted in the end of high wings.....
Indeed. Seems all we've done in the almost 50 years (!) since is made the situation he discusses worse...... Cheers, Ian
And yet if i'm not mistaken one of the things that contributed to his death was the lack of rear wing on his lotus, when the brakes failed, he simply could not control the car....
Wing or no wing was not the issue, really. The right half-shaft to the inboard front brakes snapped and the car swerved to the left hitting the armco. One contributing factor was Rindt's refusal to wear crotch belts. He submarined under the lap belt with it cutting his neck. He also suffered badly broken legs as a result of sliding so far down the chassis. The front of the chassis was ripped open having been torn away by impacting and partially going under the armco. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
It was also in the ''1'' documentary IIRC. Funny...with the new rules we're getting even more downforce. Clowns.
I was watching YouTube clips of Senna v Alesi in Phoenix (following Pedro's post yesterday) and, not ironically, they were talking about the lack of passing and close racing back then also. I think that is just the reality we are living with (modern cars with advanced aero= difficult racing in close quarters)
+1 There has *never* been an era in sticky-out wheel racing when passing was "easy" as with the taxicabs! It just "frustrates" me to hear the constant whining (not you! ) about it's all **** when a guy who knew a little about it said the same almost *fifty* (*50!) years back! Aero certainly wasn't "advanced" in his era.... It is what it is.... Merc will go down in the books as the dominant team of the mid-2K's and someone else *will* take over the mantle. Cheers, Ian
Rumor has it that Rindt had a large displacement package in his pants and found it quite uncomfortable to use his crotch belts. Crotch belts in formula cars with a recumbent driving position are admittedly uncomfortable but only lethal when not used. Keith
I'm pretty sure they remain a *long* way below where they were a few years back though Bas..... And even earlier; I recall PK'snr in a skirted Brabham "ground effects" car going thru Stowe (?) so fast it beggared belief!.... Even at the time, we agreed that if a skirt had stuck up he wouldn't have stopped until reaching the school. "Advanced aero"? Cheers, Ian
i think the 82 cars where the most physically demanding off all times....and some of the most dangerous ones
There are 2 issues here, that shouldn't be confused: first the cause of the accident, and then the cause of Rindt's injuries. The Lotus was instable under braking in any case. Chapman's solution to increase top speed was to remove completly the rear wing after the 1st practise at Monza. Both drivers objected to this measure, but were rebuked by Chapman. John Miles was particularly spooked by the experience. There was no concrete evidence to prove that the right-hand half-shaft had snapped under breaking, causing the car to veer to the left, although it was found broked during the investigation. Like most of the front of the car, several components receive extensuve damage from the accident, and maybe were not the cause of it. Rindt's refusal to wear the crotch strap caused his neck injury when the car hit the armco and spun violenty like a top. According to Stewart, one of his feet was almost completly severed and both legs crushed. This probably brought the state of shock that caused his death. Apart from getting him out of the car to place him in the ambulance, Rindt didn't receive the initial medical attention that reduces the effects of the state of shock that kills many people who suffer trauma.
I read David Tremayne's biography of Jochen Rindt some time ago, so I cannot say with full confidence. All I remember is that both Rindt and Miles ran with the wings first, and then then Chapman had them removed. Miles scared himself silly, and wouldn't continue. In a typical bully manner, Chapman admonished him for it. Rindt had also reported that the car was very twitchy without the wing, but was sent again. In that sense you could say that he "accepted" to run without it. He was leading the WDC, so the temptation must have been to strong, maybe? The relation between Rindt and Chapman had already soured after Jochen wrote an open letter complaining about how fragile the Lotus were; Chapman was working with very little margin of safety in the calculation of components to keep the weight down. Rindt's manager, a certain Bernie Ecclestone, had advised him: "I you want to stay alive, drive a Brabham but if you want to be World Champion, take a Lotus". That was quite prophetic. A few years later, Bernie bought Brabham, and as team owner never tolerated anything that wasn't structurally sound. Miles refused to go out on the track and later was sick learning of Rindt's accident. So Chapman sacked him and that was the end of his F1 career. Nina Rindt said that Jochen was put under to run without wing; in her comments, she made veiled accusations against Chapman.
No wonder so many people dislike Chapman....there where to many deaths related with failures on his cars....
Remember that other teams besides Lotus decided to do without wings at Monza, not only in 1970, but in 1971 (before the chicanes). I think Chapman figured that the wedge shape of the car would already provide more downforce than the other, more conventionally-shaped cars. The relative fragility of Lotus cars was a well-known fact. If a structural failure was responsible for Rindt's crash, it may have also been responsible for Clark's in 1968; the reason for that one is still debated today. Chapman's opinion seemed to be that the ideal race car was one that completely fell apart as it crossed the finish line - in first place!