2014 FORMULA 1 JAPANESE GRAND PRIX - RACE ***SPOILERS***

I beg to differ - They did a few laps to clear a lot of the water, then as we know, switched to inters. Lewis, at least, was whining that they should go racing though, so fair comment!

And at least you have the courage of your convictions! I know you've often noted your 'dislike' of how much time it stays out for. Good for you!

Cheers,
Ian

 

Yep. The Monday morning QB's are out in force.

Aircon; I can't find it, would you mind posting that Hockenheim (?) video again where they're all falling off and there's 4 tractors/back hoes picking them up. Without, as in *hundreds* of other cases, any incidents.....

Ian

 

As did I but it was the right move.

The intensity of the rain itself wasn't the only reason that they should have started earlier.
It was just too dark at the end of the race. While it wasn't wet enough to go beyond inters it caused the race to run later than it would have and made the late stages darker than normal.

 

That one I'll concede!.....

I suspect one change we'll see for the future may well be a defined light level below which they can't continue. A simple light meter, as they use in cricket (!), displayed to all, would cover it.

Ian

 

There are always competing interests as to how and when a race is held. I just hope that no one of them outweighs the others.

 

It's not easy being green.

 

Call Warwick. Beyond that I guess you are the voice of reason about racing in typhons lol!
I dont consider Warwick a Monday morning QB on F1 issues.
Your opinon about this counts as much as mine does. Not more. Equal to about the amount of salt I pour on my eggs occasionally. None of what I feel is based on hindsight. Active, not retired members of this sport considered/asked for the race to be moved forward. Warwick is 100% correct and you are completely off your sofa LOL!

Sutil on camera after the race while commenting on the accident said the race should have been moved up. Monday and all I guess right??? Running in rain is fine. They do it. Not a typhoon. Again call Warwick surely you can set him straight about the Fchat rules on Monday Morning commentary since the rest of us are not intelligent enough to form an opinion unless its after the race.
I may not have posted about the typhoon but I can assure you I was thinking to myself - surely they will alter the schedule, its a typhoon and wow, maybe we might see a race cancelled etc. I continued to check the press actually thinking I would not be surprised to see an alteration of the schedule.

 

Sure. No argument from me there. All any of us, including him, are doing is expressing our opinions.

But it wasn't a typhoon at the time. It was pretty gentle rain that allowed them to run inters, not even full wets were required. Again, they've run in much, much worse conditions than that with no ill effects.

Ian

 

...
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Was it me who posted that? I've already forgotten....lol.

Sorry.

That was a pretty amazing video.

 

Or cue the drivers that excel in the rain.

I don't care what comes out of his mouth.. JS made the sport safer not him, and Mosley called him a lunatic..

 

uhhh, YES. If there is a car on the track that is in a position that is deemed unsafe, how much safer is it to put an object twenty or more times its mass alongside it during racing conditions? Either the organizers should come up with cranes similar to what is used at Monaco or other places where they can boom up without being on the track, or they need to come up with another solution. I understand your point but don't agree with the amount of occasions you feel heavy recovery vehicles have been involved - unless you are going back to 1950

 

A couple points that haven't been mentioned (IIRC)...

1. Typhoon / hurricane type rain is not the same as the more common rain. Typhoon / hurricane always comes in bands... periodic heavy rain bands with periods of light and no rain. While the majority of the race was run in light rain conditions,... IMHO F1 got lucky. F1 got lucky by hitting a period of relative calm... but sudden heavy rain is very dangerous. This was predictable likely to happen during the race, turning a drivable track into an undrivable one in seconds. I think the race should have been started sooner.

2. Another reason to up the start time: Spectators need to get home... the race ended with the storm about to get much worse,... and at dark. Could they have made it more dangerous for the fans?

3. It is NOT uncommon for multiple cars to crash in the same spot during sudden rain. This happens commonly when rain begins and cars are on slicks. Same principle would apply for cars on inters, when full wets suddenly become required. This makes having removal equip and workers exposed more dangerous than in dry conditions.

 

I see what you mean but if they can not agree on a decision in advance they must not complain afterwards...
Same with the teams: remember a few years ago they have threaten to make a series on their own and then they can not even cooperate when it comes to safety...If they leave the decision to the promoters and TV then again they can not complain afterwards, it is their own fault.
And as everyone says this is because of TV and prime time: I guess that is the risk of the TV stations when doing a live report. If the rain would have been stronger in the beginning of the race and it would not have been even possible to start the race behind the safety car then the TV stations would have had the same problem (no race at prime time). I guess that is what insurance companies are there for.

 

Not disagreeing. It is what it is.

Changing the start time in today's world of live TV is unthinkable. And as far as the drivers are concerned: My feeling is the GPDA has never been weaker. Partly because of the money involved, partly because they had a very good safety record.

Some risks can never be excluded. We could have easily lost some other drivers in previous years and accidents and by the sheer luck it didn't happen. There will always remain a "Restrisiko". Without it, less people would be interested (not trying to be cynical here).

 

As far as i understand there was no typhoon. There was a risk of a typhoon hitting the area the night after the race. What the race experienced was not a typhoon.

What?

There I agree with you fully.

 

So Dickie Bird comes out of retirement ?

 

Dickie! What a stud!

Wasn't he also one of the few your lot never had a problem with?

Have you read his 'autobiography'? A great read IMO, no matter where your roots lie.

Cheers,
Ian

 

We don't trust anyone !!!

We're the best and other country's umps were just crooks, jealous of our ability

Our cricket captain holds more power than our prime minister .... whoever that is

Dan may shift that allegiance

 

*Awesome* post. Thanks man! Genuinely made me LOL!

Have to agree with you re Smiley Boy too.... A future Aussie PM, after he retires maybe?.....

Cheers,
Ian

 

Exactly. Depending on where the injuries are in the brain depends on whether autonomic functions have been affected. This is why the ability to breathe on one's own without artificial ventilation is of such interest as a general marker to those of us without access to the brain scans.

I'm afraid I never did much looking into DMT so I honestly don't have any more than vague knowledge of it: dimethyltryptamine, found in plants, also made in very small quantities in the brain for some unknown reason, and has notable affinities for serotonin and dopamine receptors. Embarrassingly, you'd probably find a Wikipedia page more informative than me on DMT. Having said that, I'm not sure there's much utility for psychedelics in treating brain injury at this early stage. Generally, you will want to restore blood flow (of affected), reduce energy use by brain cells, reduce inflammation, and compensate for any uncontrollable swelling (i.e. opening the skull tob provide expansion room). Cells that run out of energy and die release their neurotransmitters (e.g. glutamate) when their membranes break down and this can cause nearby cells to get overstimulated to the point where they run out of energy, die themselves, and the process carries on like a wave of death through the brain... it's called excitotoxicity. With that in mind, I really don't think simulating receptors in the recently injured brain, and thus putting additional energy demands on cells, is a good idea.

My direct involvement in looking at drug effects was in looking at phencyclidine (aka PCP, angel dust, hog) in the brain, specifically it's effects upon monosminergic transporters (reuptake mechanisms for serotonin, dopamine, and noradrenaline) and I compared this to schizophrenia.

The reason I know a fair amount about traumatic brain injury and stroke is because the laboratory I did my PhD in had a strong specialisation for this area across much of the group. I sat through lots of formal seminars, participated in laboratory meetings, had casual lunchroom chats, and peripherally assisted with research in that area.

All the best,
Andrew.