Jules Bianchi's family suing over his death

[blueg33]

I am inclined to think that the FIA carry some liability for letting drivers get away without properly slowing for yellows. I don't think they can be held responsible for the weather or the timing, F1 would be dull if races were only ever held in the dry. Ultimately though, IMO the bulk of the liability lies with the driver for not slowing, but FIA certainly contributed by letting drivers think its ok not to slow.

Its terrible when anyone dies or is badly hurt in motorsport, but I cant see how it can be competitive at the highest level and completely safe at the same time.




Can't help myself so apologies in advance

Brundle
Abdicate (advocate means something different)
Principal

[anonymous-user]

Did the reasons for Hartstein's sacking ever become public knowledge?

[Vaud]

blueg33 said:

Its terrible when anyone dies or is badly hurt in motorsport, but I cant see how it can be competitive at the highest level and completely safe at the same time.

It never can be - but why did it take such a serious incident to change safety and procedures - or were the FIA negligent?

We can't remove all risk, but major safety changes only seem to happen reactively, which if you take a step back, seems wrong?

[blueg33]

Vaud said:

blueg33 said:

Its terrible when anyone dies or is badly hurt in motorsport, but I cant see how it can be competitive at the highest level and completely safe at the same time.

It never can be - but why did it take such a serious incident to change safety and procedures - or were the FIA negligent?

We can't remove all risk, but major safety changes only seem to happen reactively, which if you take a step back, seems wrong?

Indeed, but sometimes its hard to envision every possible risk, or if you take a risk management approach and balance likelihood and severity, ie most likely and most severe are addressed first, least likely and least severe last, everything else is on a scale in between.

If you look back to motorsport history could the exact circumstances of some of the most serious accidents have been predicted without the benefit of hindsight? I am sure many could, but some probably not.

[Vaud]

blueg33 said:

If you look back to motorsport history could the exact circumstances of some of the most serious accidents have been predicted without the benefit of hindsight? I am sure many could, but some probably not.

I think with a different approach to safety, many could have been. Even in the 1990s we knew enough about injuries to say that drivers were too exposed in the cockpit for lateral injuries but I think everyone had got complacent. HANS was not rocket science but still needed driving through as a change.

Pat Symonds is a better authority than me and I recall him saying that the teams and drivers had got too powerful in influencing safety decisions.

[teletubby]

ERIKM400 said:

Just gonna leave this here:

https://formerf1doc.wordpress.com/

Some interesting comments from a man more knowledgeable in these matters than all of us together.

But with an axe to grind with the FIA...

[rscott]

teletubby said:

ERIKM400 said:

Just gonna leave this here:

https://formerf1doc.wordpress.com/

Some interesting comments from a man more knowledgeable in these matters than all of us together.

But with an axe to grind with the FIA...

I think he's put that axe away now though. if you just consider the provably true statements he's made about F1 medical care, it does seem to highlight some major issues. Eg, lack of helicopter on that day, the relevant experience of the senior medical officers of FIA,

[Petrus1983]

Bianchi messed up, and unfortunately when you mess up at that level the consequences can be very severe, as has been found out. I really do sympathise with his father, but can't help feel it would have been better to work with the FIA in his memory rather than go down this route.

[Gary C]

rscott said:

teletubby said:

ERIKM400 said:

Just gonna leave this here:

https://formerf1doc.wordpress.com/

Some interesting comments from a man more knowledgeable in these matters than all of us together.

But with an axe to grind with the FIA...

I think he's put that axe away now though. if you just consider the provably true statements he's made about F1 medical care, it does seem to highlight some major issues. Eg, lack of helicopter on that day, the relevant experience of the senior medical officers of FIA,

Looks like he's got it out for some more sharpening to me !

I doubt legal action will really get anywhere, but I do think FIA should do more to protect the marshals, they are often in positions of danger and dont get the rewards the drivers do. The irony is, if the tractor had not been there, it might have been a marshal that was injured or killed.

[Z3MCJez]

Jules death was set in 2003 when Fernando crashed into Webbers wreckage and suffered no consequences. Imagine if he'd been banned for a year. Do we think that yellow flags would have continued to be ignored?

To address a point made earlier, in normal conditions if you slow to 98% you are so within yourself that you could never crash. But in the rain - it's so different. Aquaplaning can bite at any time - especially on old tyres. If the FIA are to blame, it's that they tolerated 1% speed reductions in the dry (and worse, in the wet). But ultimately Jules, a hero of mine for that Monaco result alone, binned it under yellow flags. It's tragic but it's his fault.

FormerF1doctor makes a different point - that a series of cock ups cost Jules his life. To be honest, he may have a point there.

Nothing that hasn't really been said before. As you were ...

Jez

[swisstoni]

Given the money available to F1, I don't see why they don't have their own state of the art facility travelling with them.
Yes it would be a tremendous waste of money most weeks, but doesn't usually bother them.

[Chrisgr31]

If this was the UK wouldnt the courts determine that there were various factors to blame in the death and reduce the compensation to reflect the percentage of blame attached to the deceased?

I am fairly sure that the predicted weather was well known about and there were suggestions that the race could be held at a different time, ultimately not done due to TV scheduling, the weather meant the helicopter wasnt flying (although were the TV ones flying?), the recovery vehicle was on track etc.

Do we have the speed details for all drivers through that bit of the circuit?

[Logie]

swisstoni said:

Given the money available to F1, I don't see why they don't have their own state of the art facility travelling with them.
Yes it would be a tremendous waste of money most weeks, but doesn't usually bother them.

I was just thinking this myself, why dont they have some sort of tramua centre on track at all times.

[hairyben]

blueg33 said:

I am inclined to think that the FIA carry some liability for letting drivers get away without properly slowing for yellows. I don't think they can be held responsible for the weather or the timing, F1 would be dull if races were only ever held in the dry. Ultimately though, IMO the bulk of the liability lies with the driver for not slowing, but FIA certainly contributed by letting drivers think its ok not to slow.

Its terrible when anyone dies or is badly hurt in motorsport, but I cant see how it can be competitive at the highest level and completely safe at the same time.

The fia have often been far more ponderous and reluctant to come off the fence on safety issues than their spiel would have you believe. Yes the yellow flag abuse has been a farce for too long and *something* was probably inevitable, but if that driver had walked away instead the sensible heads would probably all be predominately chastising him (the fia's role to police better is only in question because of the outcome of the accident) which is why this leaves a rather bad taste in my mouth.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

Petrus1983 said:

Bianchi messed up, and unfortunately when you mess up at that level the consequences can be very severe, as has been found out. I really do sympathise with his father, but can't help feel it would have been better to work with the FIA in his memory rather than go down this route.

agreed

[Vaud]

Logie said:

swisstoni said:

Given the money available to F1, I don't see why they don't have their own state of the art facility travelling with them.
Yes it would be a tremendous waste of money most weeks, but doesn't usually bother them.

I was just thinking this myself, why dont they have some sort of tramua centre on track at all times.

I'm not a medical expert.

But I think you would need too many specialists, and to much kit to even get close to a hospital. As you see with road side injuries, it's best to stabilise a patient and then get them quickly to a centre with the most specialists and equipment possible.

[rdjohn]

Z3MCJez said:

Jules death was set in 2003 when Fernando crashed into Webbers wreckage and suffered no consequences. Imagine if he'd been banned for a year. Do we think that yellow flags would have continued to be ignored?

To address a point made earlier, in normal conditions if you slow to 98% you are so within yourself that you could never crash. But in the rain - it's so different. Aquaplaning can bite at any time - especially on old tyres. If the FIA are to blame, it's that they tolerated 1% speed reductions in the dry (and worse, in the wet). But ultimately Jules, a hero of mine for that Monaco result alone, binned it under yellow flags. It's tragic but it's his fault.

FormerF1doctor makes a different point - that a series of cock ups cost Jules his life. To be honest, he may have a point there.

Nothing that hasn't really been said before. As you were ...

Jez

When a car is aquaplaning, the driver becomes a passenger. The double waved yellows offers a little mitigation for the FIA but I believe any court case will concentrate on risk assessment done before the race and custom and practice of volunteer marshals during events working under instruction of the race director.

The key issue to be decided is - was the death avoidable? As I posted earlier.

Why hold the race during typhoon season? -a very big one for Bernie to answer.

Why was VSC not specified before? The technology has been arround for a long time. F1/FIA should at the cutting edge of track and race safety measures. Knowing that drivers get away with slowing to 99% is damming against the FIA Sporting Regulations.

Why was a 3-tonne lift vehicle deployed? For me this is the hardest issue to comprehend. When a 700kg vehicle collides with another 700kg vehicle the crash structures are designed to deal with the forces involved. When a 700kg vehicle collides with a 3000kg vehicle, there can only ever be one loser. It is simple physics.

A competent person making a competent risk assessment should perhaps define the following procedure for this race.
A typhoon was forecast for race day.
In the event that a car aquaplanes, then the race should be immediately red-flagged as there is a high probability that a second vehicle will lose control.
Do not deploy any marshals onto the circuit. Only advise the driver of the errant car when it is safer to leave the protected cockpit of his car.
Do not deploy heavy vehicles onto the circuit.
If conditions improve restart the race behind the safety car.

VSC was a hindsight knee-jerk reaction to the accident, the FIA should constantly be looking at how race technology can save lives. Ironic given Todts position as a UN road safety ambassador.

[blueg33]

Vaud said:

Logie said:

swisstoni said:

Given the money available to F1, I don't see why they don't have their own state of the art facility travelling with them.
Yes it would be a tremendous waste of money most weeks, but doesn't usually bother them.

I was just thinking this myself, why dont they have some sort of tramua centre on track at all times.

I'm not a medical expert.

But I think you would need too many specialists, and to much kit to even get close to a hospital. As you see with road side injuries, it's best to stabilise a patient and then get them quickly to a centre with the most specialists and equipment possible.

The military have fully equipped mobile hospitals that fit in a transport aircraft. Can't be hard for F1 to do that.

[Vaud]

blueg33 said:

The military have fully equipped mobile hospitals that fit in a transport aircraft. Can't be hard for F1 to do that.

But that isn't apples with apples. They are emergency triage and battlefield injuries, not for complex neurological injuries. They follow the same process and fly people home once stabilised.

[Vaud]

And to add... don't surgeons need to be qualified in that country in order to carry out procedures? How would a surgeon be qualified to operate on a civilian in any country that F1 visited?

Hence triage and then to local specialist?