Jules Bianchi updates

[Xpuffin]

It's pretty obvious to all that the FIA are trying to dodge the bullet regarding the safety standards of the trackside equipment they allow.
It will be outrageous if next years crash kit is unchanged.

[Drumroll]

I don't see why the FIA are trying to "dodge the bullet" perhaps if you read this (link) you would have a better understanding.


http://www.fia.com/news/accident-panel

[Vaud]

Drumroll said:

I don't see why the FIA are trying to "dodge the bullet" perhaps if you read this (link) you would have a better understanding.


http://www.fia.com/news/accident-panel

Quite. F1 is generally happy to make improvements where needed. Ross Brawn and Stefano Domenicalli are not exactly FIA stooges or "yes men"; both have enormous experience in this arena.

[Xpuffin]

When Kimi totalled a section of Armco it was deemed dangerous enough to the other drivers to red flag the race.
Allowing a bloody great hunk of zero crumple metal onto the track in exactly the position that another car may hit suggests the FIA are playing a game of chance.
The FIA know the temperament of a racing driver, to blame Jules is easy but wrong. They need to properly address the issue of vehicle recovery. As for the statement that recovery vehicles don't present an additional hazard, what a load of bks, look at the accident, a skirt would have totally prevented that car from releasing all its energy into the recovery vehicle in an upward motion.

[AndrewEH1]

Moveable cranes that can operate from the other side of the barrier would solve this issue. They must be out there?

[SHutchinson]

AndrewEH1 said:

Moveable cranes that can operate from the other side of the barrier would solve this issue. They must be out there?

How do you attach them to the stricken cars?

[Gazzab]

How do you redesign the perimeter of each track to allow cranes to move to any given accident...Not possible

[Vaud]

Xpuffin said:

a skirt would have totally prevented that car from releasing all its energy into the recovery vehicle in an upward motion.

Really? How big a skirt would you have needed? Is redirecting that energy into vertical motion a great idea - where does the vehicle go then?

From the summary:
11 It is not feasible to mitigate the injuries Bianchi suffered by either enclosing the driver’s cockpit, or fitting skirts to the crane. Neither approach is practical due to the very large forces involved in the accident between a 700kg car striking a 6500kg crane at a speed of 126kph. There is simply insufficient impact structure on a F1 car to absorb the energy of such an impact without either destroying the driver’s survival cell, or generating non-survivable decelerations. It is considered fundamentally wrong to try and make an impact between a racing car and a large and heavy vehicle survivable. It is imperative to prevent a car ever hitting the crane and/or the marshals working near it.

[furtive]

SHutchinson said:

How do you attach them to the stricken cars?

With the big dangly bit on the end.

[Xpuffin]

Vaud said:

Really? How big a skirt would you have needed? Is redirecting that energy into vertical motion a great idea - where does the vehicle go then?

From the summary:
11 It is not feasible to mitigate the injuries Bianchi suffered by either enclosing the driver’s cockpit, or fitting skirts to the crane. Neither approach is practical due to the very large forces involved in the accident between a 700kg car striking a 6500kg crane at a speed of 126kph. There is simply insufficient impact structure on a F1 car to absorb the energy of such an impact without either destroying the driver’s survival cell, or generating non-survivable decelerations. It is considered fundamentally wrong to try and make an impact between a racing car and a large and heavy vehicle survivable. It is imperative to prevent a car ever hitting the crane and/or the marshals working near it.

It was the recovery vehicle which travelled in an upward direction, clear evidence that Jules car slid sufficiently underneath to circumvent all the driver cell protection built into the tub. Revisiting Kimis crash once more, he went in very fast and walked away. I don't agree that using crash barrier tech to surround a recovery vehicle would be ineffective. This is a multi million pound business with some of the best minds in the world involved and they say it's not possible, sorry, it's all excuses.
There's also no mention whatsoever about the fact the race was actually held in the first place, a huge factor in this accident imo

Edited by Xpuffin on Friday 5th December 12:02

[Vaud]

Xpuffin said:

It was the recovery vehicle which travelled in an upward direction, clear evidence that Jules car slid sufficiently underneath to circumvent all the driver cell protection built into the tub. Revisiting Kimis crash once more, he went in very fast and walked away. I don't agree that using crash barrier tech to surround a recovery vehicle would be ineffective. This is a multi million pound business with some of the best minds in the world involved and they say it's not possible, sorry, it's all excuses.

They don't say it's not possible. The point is that even if you wrap a protection around the vehicle, you still have marshalls at massive risk.

[Xpuffin]

Vaud said:

It is considered fundamentally wrong to try and make an impact between a racing car and a large and heavy vehicle survivable.

I disagree totally with this statement, in fact it's the polar opposite of what I would expect all the time they actually use this type of equipment. It's been quoted many a time that if the regulations required the cars to float 12 inches off the Tarmac the designers would make it happen so how come it's not desirable or doable to provide an extra level of protection over and above any other measures implemented.

[Vaud]

Xpuffin said:

Vaud said:

It is considered fundamentally wrong to try and make an impact between a racing car and a large and heavy vehicle survivable.

I disagree totally with this statement, in fact it's the polar opposite of what I would expect all the time they actually use this type of equipment. It's been quoted many a time that if the regulations required the cars to float 12 inches off the Tarmac the designers would make it happen so how come it's not desirable or doable to provide an extra level of protection over and above any other measures implemented.

So write to the FIA. I think there point is that you can only go so far in creating a protection for an open wheeled, open cockpit vehicle.

[24lemons]

Xpuffin said:

Vaud said:

It is considered fundamentally wrong to try and make an impact between a racing car and a large and heavy vehicle survivable.

I disagree totally with this statement, in fact it's the polar opposite of what I would expect all the time they actually use this type of equipment. It's been quoted many a time that if the regulations required the cars to float 12 inches off the Tarmac the designers would make it happen so how come it's not desirable or doable to provide an extra level of protection over and above any other measures implemented.

I think the point is that the car should have never had the opportunity to hit the tractor in the first place. Had the driver heeded the yellow flags then he should have remained on track.

Of course there are plenty of other scenarios (mechanical failure for example) which could cause a car to lose control before a yellow flag zone resulting in impact with a tractor. While its easy to say that this was a freak accident caused by the actions of Mr Bianchi, It's rather short sighted to dismiss the likelihood of another similar accident occurring through no fault of the driver.

As I understand though, the recovery vehicles used at each race are provided by the individual circuit. This would make it very difficult to introduce any form of standard protection unless the FIA mandated a standard vehicle or provided their own as happens in Indycars.

[Munter]

Xpuffin said:

a skirt would have totally prevented that car from releasing all its energy into the recovery vehicle in an upward motion.

True. Because with a solid skirt the vehicle would have got stuck entering the gravel trap and never have got to the point where Jules hit it.

No gravel trap = lower recovery vehicles = safer

[Inertiatic]

Munter said:

Xpuffin said:

a skirt would have totally prevented that car from releasing all its energy into the recovery vehicle in an upward motion.

True. Because with a solid skirt the vehicle would have got stuck entering the gravel trap and never have got to the point where Jules hit it.

And mowed down a few marshalls in the process?

I'm sorry, that is bks. The recovery vehicle is a red herring.

I feel terribly sad for Bianchi, but it was his decision to keep his foot in under double waved yellows knowing there would be recovery vehicles and marshalls trackside. If the FIA are at fault its in allowing drivers to take piss with their speed under yellow flags. None of them were in a position to slow down and stop.

[Xpuffin]

24lemons said:

I think the point is that the car should have never had the opportunity to hit the tractor in the first place. Had the driver heeded the yellow flags then he should have remained on track.

Of course there are plenty of other scenarios (mechanical failure for example) which could cause a car to lose control before a yellow flag zone resulting in impact with a tractor. While its easy to say that this was a freak accident caused by the actions of Mr Bianchi, It's rather short sighted to dismiss the likelihood of another similar accident occurring through no fault of the driver.

As I understand though, the recovery vehicles used at each race are provided by the individual circuit. This would make it very difficult to introduce any form of standard protection unless the FIA mandated a standard vehicle or provided their own as happens in Indycars.

The FIA is the controlling body, it should be responsible for what equipment is allowed on track.
Right now it's construction equipment from the local hire shop.
The whole issue of car recovery needs addressing, with the cooperation of the teams a vehicle needs to be designed capable of removing a car from the identified high risk areas of a track without Marshall assistance.
Said vehicles should comply to the regulations regarding crash barrier protection, should move with the show if necessary and operated by trained individuals.
There has already been one fatality this year as a direct result of inappropriate equipment use.

[Xpuffin]

Inertiatic said:

I'm sorry, that is bks. The recovery vehicle is a red herring.

Para 9 states that Jules hit his head on the UNDERSIDE of the plant. (Thus negating the driver cell altogether)
How is allowing a vehicle anywhere near a racetrack with that capability ever going to end well.

[andburg]

I thing any recover vehicle should remain outside the confines of the barriers, if anyting a safer way to wihc the vehicles needs developing such that marshalls are not require to steady it once it is lifted, this could easily be engineered using mutiple attachment points rather than the single point under the airbox

[thetrash]

Xpuffin said:

Para 9 states that Jules hit his head on the UNDERSIDE of the plant. (Thus negating the driver cell altogether)
How is allowing a vehicle anywhere near a racetrack with that capability ever going to end well.

The answer is to slow the cars enough to stop the collision in the first place.

If the JCB/CAT had a solid skirt to prevent a car from going underneath it, it just transfers the impact to a different part of the car. In the Bianchi case he hit the vehicle squareish in the side and probably would have faired worse than he already had.