Tragic new from Le Mans
Discussion
XJ Flyer said:
No one is saying reduce speeds in fact I'm saying the opposite.It's actually the rule makers who've reduced the speeds over the years by putting in chicanes on the Mulsanne and imposing continuous ridiculous engine capacity limit and restritor regs.Especially in the GT classes where the shortfall can't be made up in cornering speeds because of lack of downforce.The only thing I'm saying is that doing that in this case just might have created more dangers,in regards to drivers being pressured into trying to compensate for all that by increasing corner entry speeds,to maintain lap times.Keeping cars on the circuit isn't health and safety bulls
t.Whereas the possibility that drivers might be trying to go faster than the limits of the circuit through corners,to make up for the lost time on the straights caused by engine power reductions and too short straights,certainly would be.
If you give them less power the drivers will still go through every corner pretty much on the limit (and no doubt sometimes over it). t.Whereas the possibility that drivers might be trying to go faster than the limits of the circuit through corners,to make up for the lost time on the straights caused by engine power reductions and too short straights,certainly would be. I'm guessing you think they should ban Caterhams from racing too? They aren't that powerful but they corner pretty quickly and don't have much in the way of downforce
Steve R7 said:
I was not blaming the organizers, sorry if it came across this way but while all motorsport is dangerous and I was lucky enough to race bikes for 12yrs in BSS,BSB and some WSB rounds, as a rider I always had the attitude to `learn and improve` as did the team and this should be the attitude of the organizers as well.I was always backing any rider/team effort to improve track safety to the organizers.
Yes everyone knows the risks and freak accidents happen but the main thing is, something positive will come out of this tragic accident or any accident, whether it is extra safety improvments to the car structure,track side alterations/run off/safer barrier structures but you must always look to `learn and improve`.
Steve, for me you have it spot on,,,and I'm sure lessons will be learned, you can bet there will be a major review following this tragic/freak accident. As part of that review, I think we all agree that tyres along 'that' barrier would probably have saved Allans life and will be installed there next year. Yes everyone knows the risks and freak accidents happen but the main thing is, something positive will come out of this tragic accident or any accident, whether it is extra safety improvments to the car structure,track side alterations/run off/safer barrier structures but you must always look to `learn and improve`.
George29 said:
If you give them less power the drivers will still go through every corner pretty much on the limit (and no doubt sometimes over it).
I'm guessing you think they should ban Caterhams from racing too? They aren't that powerful but they corner pretty quickly and don't have much in the way of downforce
I'm guessing you meant if drivers are given 'more' power,which is what I actually said,they'll still sometimes try to go through corners too close to,or over,the limit for the corners in terms of entry speeds. I'm guessing you think they should ban Caterhams from racing too? They aren't that powerful but they corner pretty quickly and don't have much in the way of downforce
As for Caterham racing yes the idea of slow cars making lap times that are all about cornering speeds aren't the type of racing that interests me which is why I've always,until recently,preferred GT racing and the Le Mans event.But each to their own.
However the problem is when those with that mindset then try to apply 'their' type of preferred racing to GT cars at Le Mans which 'should be' all about straight line speed with cornering,as Ive said,on the basis of slow in fast out and the bigger engine with more power that a car has the better it will be at that type of racing.Just as on the road fast relatively powerful cars being driven like a Caterham can be a lethal mixture and for me at least I'm fed up of seeing the results at Le Mans recently of that type of thinking in the form of ridiculous amounts of corner and kerb cutting and race stoppages caused by cars going off or ( much ) worse if/when those offs cause casualties.
XJ Flyer said:
I'm guessing you meant if drivers are given 'more' power,which is what I actually said,they'll still sometimes try to go through corners too close to,or over,the limit for the corners in terms of entry speeds.
If they aren't going through the corners at the limit then they aren't doing their job. Power is irrelevant, the only difference is that they will be going faster down the straights. They still will be going through the corners as fast as they can. The only way that will change is with much more downforce, and then we would end up with dull racing like in F1.
XJ Flyer said:
As for Caterham racing yes the idea of slow cars making lap times that are all about cornering speeds aren't the type of racing that interests me which is why I've always,until recently,preferred GT racing and the Le Mans event.But each to their own.
You do realise that in every circuit based motorsport the times are made up by the cornering speeds? Sounds like you might enjoy nascar more, they go fast in a straight line 
One theory is, the posts for barriers weren't secure enough and they were having to replace
them as well on several occasions. What I do know is, the terrain around the circuit is very
sandy so the posts would have to be fixed very deeply to withstand all those impacts.
The other thing I know, where Allan went off, there are trees just behind the barriers so if those posts
did give way as he went in sideways (because that's where the damage was) he would have gone into the
trees. Of course this is all speculation and I can only assume it will all come out in the inquest. That said, what ever happened it's incredibly sad for all of us, sincere condolences to his family.....
RIP Allan.
them as well on several occasions. What I do know is, the terrain around the circuit is very
sandy so the posts would have to be fixed very deeply to withstand all those impacts.
The other thing I know, where Allan went off, there are trees just behind the barriers so if those posts
did give way as he went in sideways (because that's where the damage was) he would have gone into the
trees. Of course this is all speculation and I can only assume it will all come out in the inquest. That said, what ever happened it's incredibly sad for all of us, sincere condolences to his family.....
RIP Allan.
XJ - I've got to be honest, I'm struggling to get what you want out of this. If your beef is that cars are using more than the width of the road to gain an exit speed advantage, then that's got nothing to do with power available or drivers, as both will be at max output. It is purely to do with track layout. If the circuit designers/organisers are concerned that this is a safety factor, then they should either erect a barrier/high kerb closer to the track limit to prevent over-running and hence gaining an advantage, or if thats not possible, they should penalise drivers who consistently have 4 wheels over the white line.
Bincenzo said:
XJ - I've got to be honest, I'm struggling to get what you want out of this. If your beef is that cars are using more than the width of the road to gain an exit speed advantage, then that's got nothing to do with power available or drivers, as both will be at max output. It is purely to do with track layout. If the circuit designers/organisers are concerned that this is a safety factor, then they should either erect a barrier/high kerb closer to the track limit to prevent over-running and hence gaining an advantage, or if thats not possible, they should penalise drivers who consistently have 4 wheels over the white line.
I thought you do get a time penalty for exceeding the limits of the track if you cross the white line with all 4 wheels? You do in touring cars anyway.George29 said:
Bincenzo said:
XJ - I've got to be honest, I'm struggling to get what you want out of this. If your beef is that cars are using more than the width of the road to gain an exit speed advantage, then that's got nothing to do with power available or drivers, as both will be at max output. It is purely to do with track layout. If the circuit designers/organisers are concerned that this is a safety factor, then they should either erect a barrier/high kerb closer to the track limit to prevent over-running and hence gaining an advantage, or if thats not possible, they should penalise drivers who consistently have 4 wheels over the white line.
I thought you do get a time penalty for exceeding the limits of the track if you cross the white line with all 4 wheels? You do in touring cars anyway.Bincenzo said:
Certainly do. or should do at any rate. It was more to make the point that cutting corners/going wide has bugger all to do with power available.
I fully agree, that's the point I was trying to make. All the extra power does is make the cars go faster down the straights. Anyone can go fast in a straight line, corner speed is what makes racing good imo 
Bincenzo said:
George29 said:
Bincenzo said:
XJ - I've got to be honest, I'm struggling to get what you want out of this. If your beef is that cars are using more than the width of the road to gain an exit speed advantage, then that's got nothing to do with power available or drivers, as both will be at max output. It is purely to do with track layout. If the circuit designers/organisers are concerned that this is a safety factor, then they should either erect a barrier/high kerb closer to the track limit to prevent over-running and hence gaining an advantage, or if thats not possible, they should penalise drivers who consistently have 4 wheels over the white line.
I thought you do get a time penalty for exceeding the limits of the track if you cross the white line with all 4 wheels? You do in touring cars anyway.It's the nature of competition, each driver will take what ever minor advantage they can gain.
George29 said:
XJ Flyer said:
I'm guessing you meant if drivers are given 'more' power,which is what I actually said,they'll still sometimes try to go through corners too close to,or over,the limit for the corners in terms of entry speeds.
If they aren't going through the corners at the limit then they aren't doing their job. Power is irrelevant, the only difference is that they will be going faster down the straights. They still will be going through the corners as fast as they can. The only way that will change is with much more downforce, and then we would end up with dull racing like in F1.
XJ Flyer said:
As for Caterham racing yes the idea of slow cars making lap times that are all about cornering speeds aren't the type of racing that interests me which is why I've always,until recently,preferred GT racing and the Le Mans event.But each to their own.
You do realise that in every circuit based motorsport the times are made up by the cornering speeds? Sounds like you might enjoy nascar more, they go fast in a straight line The fact is the limit is the limit in regards to entry speeds and the edge of circuit markings are the edge of the circuit markings and those limits and markings don't change just because the car is underpowered and therefore compromised in regards to exit and straight line speeds.In which case,as I've said,a more powerful car would be able to exit the corner at higher speed assuming that both cars are entering the same corner at the same speed. That speed being governed by the limits of the circuit and those limits effectively being a constant in the case of GT cars like the Corvette and the Aston.
The issue of downforce doesn't apply in that class it mainly applies in the case of the LMP cars which also seem to be following the formula of higher cornering speeds to maintain lap speeds using high downforce levels to do it.Many of the track 'alterations' over recent years being a part of that retrograde change in thinking.As opposed to Group C cars and before which were,just as should be the case with the GT classes and as should be the case at Le Mans,more orientated to making fast lap times through high straight line speeds on the Mulsanne,while many of the bends at Le Mans were fast open sweepers more suited to cars with less downforce.However the relevant thing in all cases,as I've said,is that Le Mans,should be,all about straight line speed and high corner exit speeds on ythe basis that the fastest most powerful car wins.It shouldn't be about trying to turn Sportscar and GT racing into another form of F1 in the form of which driver is prepared to enter a corner the fastest.
XJ Flyer said:
The laws of physics say that a car with a bigger engine and more power,especially as I'm saying in the case of using an unrestricted 7 litre V12,will provide a higher exit speed and accelerate to a higher straight line speed than a smaller less powerful engine will.
It won't have higher exit speed if it cannot carry the speed through the corner. Look at a 250cc Moto3 bike vs a 1000cc MotoGP bike. The Moto3 will have much faster corner exit than the GP bike due to the speed it can carry through the corner, but it will get destroyed on the straight. But who wants to see cars just going fast in a straight line... that's dull, anyone can go fast in a straight line, the skill comes from the cornering.
George29 said:
XJ Flyer said:
The laws of physics say that a car with a bigger engine and more power,especially as I'm saying in the case of using an unrestricted 7 litre V12,will provide a higher exit speed and accelerate to a higher straight line speed than a smaller less powerful engine will.
It won't have higher exit speed if it cannot carry the speed through the corner. Look at a 250cc Moto3 bike vs a 1000cc MotoGP bike. The Moto3 will have much faster corner exit than the GP bike due to the speed it can carry through the corner, but it will get destroyed on the straight. But who wants to see cars just going fast in a straight line... that's dull, anyone can go fast in a straight line, the skill comes from the cornering.
In the case of GT cars the weight issue is around the same except in the case of when the rule makers add handicap ballast for whatever obscure abitrary reasons.Usually as in most cases at Le Mans to manufacture a result which they want to see.Rather than just allowing the laws of natural selection to take their course in the form of allowing the teams to just run whatever they choose to make for the job without artificial limits.In this case that would obviously be the Aston One 77 v the Corvette LS7 in unrestricted form with the Mulsanne as it was before the chicanes were put in.
As for Le Mans race fans wanting to see the race turned into F1 type driver racing circus based on which driver is prepared to enter corners fastest.As opposed to what it was before the recent,and not so recent,track 'alterations' and ridiculous engine capacity and power output limits,in being a race based on the idea of massive exit and straight line speeds.Certainly not in my case at least.Especially if,as I'm thinking might have been the problem in this case,the present situation, of trying to turn Le Mans into a limited formula F1 driver racing series,as opposed to a challenge of just which car is best,is causing drivers to exceed the limits of the circuit in terms of corner entry speeds when the race should just be all about which car can accelerate out of a corner and run down the Mulsanne,in it's pre chicane form,the fastest.
For those who think that motor racing should be all about the fastest possible cornering speeds verging on the line between close to the limit or going off the circuit,not straight line speeds then the Le Mans race obviously isn't,or at least shouldn't,be the type of race for them.The fact that the ACO seem to have taken the opposite view seems baffling,to me.
Just back from Le Mans and after the race a few of us went to drive round the open parts of track.
We came across the part of track this unfortunate incident happened. The skid marks were still present showing the path the car took into the barriers. A quick look behind the barriers shows a gap of only 6 inches before you have large mature tree trunks. You can see damage to the tree, but otherwise intact. If the barriers were further from the trees, the barriers could possibly have absorbed more of the impact of such an accident,
Very sad incident
We came across the part of track this unfortunate incident happened. The skid marks were still present showing the path the car took into the barriers. A quick look behind the barriers shows a gap of only 6 inches before you have large mature tree trunks. You can see damage to the tree, but otherwise intact. If the barriers were further from the trees, the barriers could possibly have absorbed more of the impact of such an accident,
Very sad incident
DJWuk said:
Just back from Le Mans and after the race a few of us went to drive round the open parts of track.
We came across the part of track this unfortunate incident happened. The skid marks were still present showing the path the car took into the barriers. A quick look behind the barriers shows a gap of only 6 inches before you have large mature tree trunks. You can see damage to the tree, but otherwise intact. If the barriers were further from the trees, the barriers could possibly have absorbed more of the impact of such an accident,
Very sad incident
Just returned myself from LM. What you say makes perfect sense having driven the circuit in the Saturday morning Centenary parade. Very sad to see Allan and the other 14 drivers on Friday night at the reception full of life and expectation for the race and for him to die on Saturday afternoon in what looked like a crash that should have been survivable if there had been better traction on the blue painted track border and tyre wall/ run off protection on the circuit. . Condolences to Allan's family and my thoughts very much with his team mates within AMR also. How to sum up such a weekend? A wonderful event marred by a tragic and sobering accident, follwed by a dignified , determined and respectful response on and off track. RIP Allan and thankyou AMR.We came across the part of track this unfortunate incident happened. The skid marks were still present showing the path the car took into the barriers. A quick look behind the barriers shows a gap of only 6 inches before you have large mature tree trunks. You can see damage to the tree, but otherwise intact. If the barriers were further from the trees, the barriers could possibly have absorbed more of the impact of such an accident,
Very sad incident
DJWuk said:
...We came across the part of track this unfortunate incident happened. The skid marks were still present showing the path the car took into the barriers. A quick look behind the barriers shows a gap of only 6 inches before you have large mature tree trunks. You can see damage to the tree, but otherwise intact. If the barriers were further from the trees, the barriers could possibly have absorbed more of the impact of such an accident,
Anyone know if there is a standardised Risk Assessment approach to these Race Courses? Would it have shown that a 6" gap between a crash barrier and a tree with less 'give' in it than a 12" concrete wall was insufficient room to absorb so much energy? Were the posts for the barrier buried in sand, as has been mentioned elsewhere?I agree that drivers accept risks when they step inside their cars but does this absolve the Course from its Duty of Care to them ??
Jockman said:
DJWuk said:
...We came across the part of track this unfortunate incident happened. The skid marks were still present showing the path the car took into the barriers. A quick look behind the barriers shows a gap of only 6 inches before you have large mature tree trunks. You can see damage to the tree, but otherwise intact. If the barriers were further from the trees, the barriers could possibly have absorbed more of the impact of such an accident,
Anyone know if there is a standardised Risk Assessment approach to these Race Courses? Would it have shown that a 6" gap between a crash barrier and a tree with less 'give' in it than a 12" concrete wall was insufficient room to absorb so much energy? Were the posts for the barrier buried in sand, as has been mentioned elsewhere?I agree that drivers accept risks when they step inside their cars but does this absolve the Course from its Duty of Care to them ??
I do hope the A C O are fully transparent with their investigation, and more importantly, learn the lessons of this tragic event.
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff