Saving open-wheel racing

Open Wheel racing doesn't need saying. It just needs new management

 

Mexican GP 1964. G. Hill (BRM), the WDC points leader is running 3rd, Bandini (Ferrari) is running 4th and Surtees (Ferrari) is running 5th. Bandini punts G. Hill at the hairpin, spinning him out and knocking him out of the points and giving Surtees the WDC by a single point. Surtees finished 2nd, Bandini 3rd, Hill 11th in the race. Bandini who had been running 2nd slowed on the last lap and let Surtees pass him to finish 2nd.

This is nothing new and it isn't always the other guys who do it.

 

Dude that's racing. Get over it. The drivers in question all know the risks and they signed their name in blood to be out there on track where that stuff can and does take place, yet they're not mad so why are you. Get over it or go watch something safe because that sort of thing won't stop, and every great driver has been there. There's hardly evidence to suggest anything other than hard racing. I've been telling you to end the hate for years, but that's your internal battle you have to continue spending energy and thought fighting. Grudges are a waste and help further nothing, but I'm not your mother.

As Hemingway put it (in so many words), there are only three real sports: open wheel racing, bull fighting, and Rick climbing without a rope. Everything else are just games.

 

Presumably this is about the Hungaroring Schumi-barrichello squeezing bit?

I still don't understand the whinging. Nothing happened. Completely under control. There was an easy 30cm gap. IMO the only people with negative comments are those with an agenda. If Rubens found it too scary, perhaps he should have driven a little slower. For people saying it was too dangerous, might I suggest taking up watching a different sport such as golf.

 

I hadn't seen it, so thanks for posting. However, this was a *very* different scenario;

So, last lap of the race, angry that their man had been caught out, he made a bad radio call to "push him off". Wrong? Absolutely. I don't follow the DTM (maybe I should! ), but don't they "swap paint" all the time?

In any event, I'll say again, it was not a premeditated plan.

Yes, there's been many such shenanigans over the years; maybe Ayrton in Japan is most "infamous", although in that case it was solely his decision.

Both these examples were in "the heat of battle". Unsporting, sure.

But, again the difference in Singapore was it was a premeditated plan for him to crash, at a specific location and on a specific lap. AFAIK such a heinous thing has never happened before, and hopefully never will again. That nobody was hurt, or worse, was pure dumb luck.

The mere thought that they could have even discussed such a thing makes my blood run cold. It's anathema to the entire sport.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Yep & agreed!

As many have said before, if he'd wanted him in the wall, he'd have been in the wall. Nothing more than good, hard racing. Which many of the same folk complaining about it lament has been lost in F1 these days.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Agenda?? Nooooooooooooooo!!

It looked much worse from the camera angle from the front than it really was once you saw the other angles....because from the front you couldn't tell they were past the wall.

 

I guess everybody has his own. And I guess that's cool as long as they're not the section's active moderators or they keep trolling with it.

 

I don't.

Do you have one? What is it?

 

Lasers!

 

By the look of it, that enclosed cockpit will improve aerodynamics, but not save much lives.

You really need a hard chassis structure over and around the head of the driver to protect him, not a flimsy lexan canopy.

In fact, you don't need a closed cockpit to protect the driver's head, but a double roll bar both behind and in front of his helmet. Look how the SCTA has managed to impose them at Bonneville. It may not look pretty, but it does the job. Alternatively, just look how spint cars protect their drivers.

That cockpit on the McLaren looks pretty, but affords as much protection as a chocolate fireguard!

 

But how do you know that?

When people are obsessed by winning at all cost, whatever it takes, they react to circumstances, even without planning.

It seems that the philosophy at AUDI, among managers and drivers is just that .

 

If there is no planning then there can be no premeditation.


Definition of Premeditated:

pre•med•i•tat•ed (prɪˈmɛd ɪˌteɪ tɪd)

adj.
done with willful deliberation; planned in advance.


A reaction to unforeseen circumstances out of the blue will not involve any deliberation or be planned in advance - How can it?, it's a decision made on the spot.

A reaction to circumstances that were foreseen though, can be planned for and can be premeditated.



BACK ON TOPIC

The concept car illustrated in this thread carries the exact same problems that every other one of these closed cockpit concept cars do:

1) The driver is sitting in a greenhouse that in places such as Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, Malaysia, Brazil, Texas etc., etc., would be an absolute nightmare to try and drive in unless the cars are fitted with air-con.

2) In the event of a roll over accident, it makes it nigh on impossible for the driver to extract himself.

3) The canopy will be impossible to keep clear in wet conditions, and if you have a mixture of sunshine and rain then the drivers would have major vision issues.

4) The canopy will collect dirt, oil and debris debris off the other cars creating safety issues for the drivers due to vision problems.

A canopy such as that shown might have helped in an incident such as Massa suffered when the errant spring hit his helmet (by deflecting the springs flight path to a degree), but in an incident such as Jules Bianchi's, it wouldn't really have made much difference as his injuries were not due to a direct external impact to his head, but due to internal impact injuries.

Frankly, a closed canopy would create more issues than it would solve.

 

Indeed; "Premeditated" is what makes that man's heinous actions unique. Moving on;

+1

I believe the FIA Safety Institute arrived at pretty much the same conclusion. Dunno if it's still around, but they released some video of them firing a wheel at a fighter canopy - Worked well.

But the disadvantages (many you mentioned of course) outweigh the (very rare) advantage. We will *never* see the likes of Phil's spring again for example! [Something similar maybe, but that had to be a 1 in million shot. ]

Cheers,
Ian

 

+1

I second that.

Some of the moves Schumacher made during his career were downright criminal, in my book. I would say the same about Senna. I am surprised they got away with that, and are treated as heroes.

That's why I never had any respect for both of them, regardless of their success; they were "dirty" drivers. You never saw Prost, Hakkinen, Lauda or Damon Hill doing such tricks.

Someone like Maldonado or Grosjean crashes into someone out of lack of skill or over-exhuberence, but the above mentioned were just believing their own hype , thinking they had a god-given right to win at any cost, even by driving someone into the wall.

As for the Piquet/Briatore Singapore incident, it's just a footnote in motor racing, and was executed without endangering anyone's life. The aim was just to provoke a SC intervention; Piquet was told to "park" his car in the wall. No big deal compared with some of the going on in F1.

Just like Dennis and McLaren were harshly punished, Briatore, Symmons and Piquet Jr had to carry the can.

 

A ballistic polycarbonate screen fastened to a carbon hoop in front of the driver would serve the same purpose as a full canopy with exactly none of the downsides. It would also make a poor launching platform for tires and other debris.

 

Couldnt agree more. Agreed on every single point. And I rarely agree with you.

 

Senna was ruthless, and Schumacher followed in his foot steps. It's a shame, because it casts a shadow on their careers. OTOH, maybe without that ruthlessness they wouldn't have achieved what they did. Who knows.

I still think it was up to Hill to avoid 'that' collision, which he easily could have, but the others....not good form IMO.

 

+1

Seems to me the "best of the best" in many sports have that ruthless streak; Us mere mortals may not appreciate or understand it, but you see it at the top level in many sports.

That we're discussing F1 heightens the "stress" some as it can become a true life & death question. Race cars for long enough, particularly at that level, and the "red mist" will descend on occasion.

Is Michael perfect? Was Ayrton perfect? Of course not. They both took liberties in the heat of the moment that, given hindsight, they probably shouldn't have.

But I still come back to what that fat ****er did (along with Symonds) is so far beyond the realm of reasonableness it's unreal. It wasn't a "red mist" moment, it was a cold, calculating attempt at cheating. And putting many lives at risk. It's disgusting. It's so far beyond anything either Michael or Ayrton did it's ridiculous.

"But nobody was hurt".

So the **** what? Ordering a driver to crash, risking his and many others lives on purpose is just beyond my comprehension. That others fail to see that is also beyond my comprehension.

Sure, neither Michael nor Ayrton are/were saints - you can't be at that level - but there's a big difference between that "ruthlessness" and filthy cheating.

That some fail to see that I find astounding. I'm done.

Ian

 

Not so flimsy as you think!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e87HIlOIYFA

Check at 1:10.

 

I agree. Senna and Schumacher were not out and out cheats... "Benneton hidden traction control excepted - if Schumacher knew about it... " ... but Flav and crew did was just a blatent cheat.

 

They always claimed Michael didn't even know it was still there, right? I know Ayrton was convinced it was there, but suspect that was just Ayrton being Ayrton. Beyond that, everyone round the circuit can hear TC kicking in; If they were using it, someone would have noticed.

Indeed. I could almost forgive a "simple" attempt at cheating. "Pushing the envelope" etc. They've all done it on occasion over the years. Part of the game.

But, sitting in the motorhome planning an accident, at a specific location, on a specific lap, is so far out there I can't see how anyone can defend it. There's just too many variables for *any* accident to be "safe". What if there had been someone up his chuff who t-boned him when he bounced off the wall? What if debris had destroyed someone else's race (at best). What if, what if..... Again, that they got away with it will never, ever, make it any way acceptable.

Cheers,
Ian

 

I don't see the problem with Briatore. His job as a manager was putting people in the right place.

Piquet Jr -> Wall

 

You keep on and on exagerating the Singapore incident, and have done so for years.

It was a simple little brush against the wall, endangering NO ONE, perfectly executed by Piquet Jr to call a safety car period, in view to help his team mate's tyre strategy.
It was not a high speed crash, it didn't involve anyone, no member of the public, track service or other drivers were at risk. It wasn't ethical maybe, but pretending it was a major safety breach, nobody buys that! It looked so ordinary that nobody ever suspected it has been stage-managed. It took Piquet to spill the beans for the dubious tactic to be revealed. So, it couldn't have been a major crash; Piquet Jr isn't THAT stupid!

When the plot was uncovered, I remember at the time, a US commentator saying it was small beer, compared to what's going on in NASCAR , when team managers calling a driver to brush the wall to call a safety car period to help a team mate, is common occurence - apparently. The FIA blew everything out of proportion, as they invariaably do, using the incident to eliminate Briatore and sideline Symmonds for years.

 

I am not defending it: I just said it was over-exagerated but people who didn't spot the plot in the first place!

I hope you likewise blame any NASCAR driver who brush the wall on purpose, just to create a safety car period that serves their team mates.

That goes on in US stock car, apparently, and has been for years according to people in the know.