Motorsport is Dangerous
Discussion
Sorry for the apparently pointless topic but felt I should say something about this but did not want to pollute the Henry Surtees thread.
Not picking on anyone in particular, indeed that is not the point of this topic at all, but I have noted a number of comments such as the one below in the Surtees thread:-
When something goes wrong the powers that be always investigate the incident. The more serious the potential (or actual) implications of an incident are the deeper the investigation. Sometimes though something happens which you just can't cater for. There will always be an element of risk involved, heck it's one of the things that draws many in, and as they say 'It's written on the back of the ticket'.
What I am trying to say, although perhaps not as well as I would wish, is that it is a dangerous sport (although far from as dangerous as horse riding) and short of sending everyone round in (fireproof) cotton wool suits in cars limited to 5mph it always will be. Those of us in the firing line from drivers to marshals to media to pit crew all know and accept the risks. We are all affected to a greater or lesser degree when it goes wrong but almost without exception we'll be at the tracks again next week.
Not picking on anyone in particular, indeed that is not the point of this topic at all, but I have noted a number of comments such as the one below in the Surtees thread:-
Well meaning bod said:
Hope various motorsport organisations look into this and see if any safety improvements can be made.
There are a lot of us on this site who have very strong connections with Motorsport, many to the point where there is information we are privy to which we do not disclose on a public forum. As a result we have seen both the very best the sport we live and breath for can offer and on a few occasions the very darkest side.When something goes wrong the powers that be always investigate the incident. The more serious the potential (or actual) implications of an incident are the deeper the investigation. Sometimes though something happens which you just can't cater for. There will always be an element of risk involved, heck it's one of the things that draws many in, and as they say 'It's written on the back of the ticket'.
What I am trying to say, although perhaps not as well as I would wish, is that it is a dangerous sport (although far from as dangerous as horse riding) and short of sending everyone round in (fireproof) cotton wool suits in cars limited to 5mph it always will be. Those of us in the firing line from drivers to marshals to media to pit crew all know and accept the risks. We are all affected to a greater or lesser degree when it goes wrong but almost without exception we'll be at the tracks again next week.
Rude-boy said:
Well meaning bod said:
Hope various motorsport organisations look into this and see if any safety improvements can be made.
When something goes wrong the powers that be always investigate the incident. The more serious the potential (or actual) implications of an incident are the deeper the investigation. Sometimes though something happens which you just can't cater for. There will always be an element of risk involved, heck it's one of the things that draws many in, and as they say 'It's written on the back of the ticket'.If, through pure chance, nobody had ever been hurt in a racing car then I suspect people would still be racing in normal clothes with leather caps and goggles as the only forms of safety equipment and straw bales for safety barriers, because there would be nothing to suggest you would need anything more.
I guess the point here is that, whenever an accident happens, the best we can hope for is to learn from it and try to mitigate against it happening again, rather than trying to think of all the possible outcomes and sanitising the sport to the point where it's no longer exciting on any level.
Totally agree. The only thing to add from my own personal experience is that the accident investigators can only assess what happened in any accident based on the information available to them. Some (high profile) crash investigations have been hampered in the past by either TV footage or parts of cars going mysteriously missing.
For the people saying that the cars could be changed to make them safer, they are as safe as they have ever been before. The only thing that could make single seaters safer is by providing a screen and a roof over the cockpit. This is, of course, defeating the object.
Everything else at the circuits is as good as it has ever been, the Marshalls are as good as ever and the medical teams are some of the best in the world.
Anyone who races or has anything to do with racing knows the dangers.
It is their choice, that they still race.
For the people saying that the cars could be changed to make them safer, they are as safe as they have ever been before. The only thing that could make single seaters safer is by providing a screen and a roof over the cockpit. This is, of course, defeating the object.
Everything else at the circuits is as good as it has ever been, the Marshalls are as good as ever and the medical teams are some of the best in the world.
Anyone who races or has anything to do with racing knows the dangers.
It is their choice, that they still race.
DSM2 said:
Don't see the point in this thread. All I can see is the macho 'we know it's dangerous, that's why we do it' opportunism, again.
No less a statement of the obvious than the 'well meaning bod' comments used to try to give some substance to the thread.
What's the point?
i think its more a case of "we know the risks, do as much as we can to mitigate them, but can not remove them completely.....and still do it" i dont think its particularly macho its just a high profile accident with a famoud name attached to it. the media will be all over it and ROSPA et al will use it as a carte blanche to try and ban motorsportsNo less a statement of the obvious than the 'well meaning bod' comments used to try to give some substance to the thread.
What's the point?
The fact that it's happened so early in the life of F2 will pose questions for sure, but realistically they could have another 10,000 races and nothing like this would ever happen again.
As I understand it the cars are built to F1 2005 standards with numerous elements from current F1 (including tethers and elements of crash protection), considering these are slower than F1 and GP2 cars they are, on paper, probably the safest open-wheeled open cockpit cars in existence.
As I understand it the cars are built to F1 2005 standards with numerous elements from current F1 (including tethers and elements of crash protection), considering these are slower than F1 and GP2 cars they are, on paper, probably the safest open-wheeled open cockpit cars in existence.
As a well-meaning bod who posted in the other thread, I'll cut and paste what I said:
Make wheel tethers better. Someone knowledgeable might come along and say that's virtually impossible if the tether mounting is ripped off with the wheel, but when they're highlighted as a safety feature (as they are in F2 cars) then you'd hope they'd work to prevent tragedies like this. Flying wheels have caused deaths before in open-wheeled racing (eg in Monza F1 in 2000, after the tether requirement came in) and they will continue to do so until someone figures out how to prevent them parting company with the car. Doing so won't 'soften up' the sport
Make wheel tethers better. Someone knowledgeable might come along and say that's virtually impossible if the tether mounting is ripped off with the wheel, but when they're highlighted as a safety feature (as they are in F2 cars) then you'd hope they'd work to prevent tragedies like this. Flying wheels have caused deaths before in open-wheeled racing (eg in Monza F1 in 2000, after the tether requirement came in) and they will continue to do so until someone figures out how to prevent them parting company with the car. Doing so won't 'soften up' the sport
I'm not sure it's going to be possible to ensure that a wheel never comes detatched and still make a fast car. The forces involved are huge. But I do agree that as always any serious accident should be looked at. And if an improvement can be made with little or no impact on the racing then lets make sure we do it. It's not as safe as it is because we stuck our heads in the sand (i'm looking at you horse riders there).
Sad but it is true that part of the allure of motorsport is the danger, why else would anyone ride a superbike or a car without a roof and rollcage. the accident was a one off, wheel tethers might have helped but how many things can you cater for? It was a freak accident and may never be repeated in 10 or twenty years. Those in charge will investigate and decide the outcome or changes in due course
malaccamax said:
As a well-meaning bod who posted in the other thread, I'll cut and paste what I said:
Make wheel tethers better. Someone knowledgeable might come along and say that's virtually impossible if the tether mounting is ripped off with the wheel, but when they're highlighted as a safety feature (as they are in F2 cars) then you'd hope they'd work to prevent tragedies like this. Flying wheels have caused deaths before in open-wheeled racing (eg in Monza F1 in 2000, after the tether requirement came in) and they will continue to do so until someone figures out how to prevent them parting company with the car. Doing so won't 'soften up' the sport
Can you point to an incident wher another driver has been killed in similar circumstances?Make wheel tethers better. Someone knowledgeable might come along and say that's virtually impossible if the tether mounting is ripped off with the wheel, but when they're highlighted as a safety feature (as they are in F2 cars) then you'd hope they'd work to prevent tragedies like this. Flying wheels have caused deaths before in open-wheeled racing (eg in Monza F1 in 2000, after the tether requirement came in) and they will continue to do so until someone figures out how to prevent them parting company with the car. Doing so won't 'soften up' the sport
I can only recall Markus Hottinger, and that was back in 1980
yes thats 2 too many but they were both freak accidents, you cant engineer danger out of the sport, its simply not possible
malaccamax said:
As a well-meaning bod who posted in the other thread, I'll cut and paste what I said:
Make wheel tethers better. Someone knowledgeable might come along and say that's virtually impossible if the tether mounting is ripped off with the wheel, but when they're highlighted as a safety feature (as they are in F2 cars) then you'd hope they'd work to prevent tragedies like this. Flying wheels have caused deaths before in open-wheeled racing (eg in Monza F1 in 2000, after the tether requirement came in) and they will continue to do so until someone figures out how to prevent them parting company with the car. Doing so won't 'soften up' the sport
The tethers are rated and integrated with the design of the car. If they are any stronger they are liable to rip the mounting and a chunk of the monocoque off with the wheel. This will mean that the cockpit's structural integrity will be compromised, which in a second impact situation would not be good.Make wheel tethers better. Someone knowledgeable might come along and say that's virtually impossible if the tether mounting is ripped off with the wheel, but when they're highlighted as a safety feature (as they are in F2 cars) then you'd hope they'd work to prevent tragedies like this. Flying wheels have caused deaths before in open-wheeled racing (eg in Monza F1 in 2000, after the tether requirement came in) and they will continue to do so until someone figures out how to prevent them parting company with the car. Doing so won't 'soften up' the sport
The wheel tether in the Clarke/Surtees F2 accident in one way or another failed, whether it was the tether or the mountings which failed is still an unknown. However, it disapated a lot of the energy from Clarkes initial impact. Imagine the wheel speed if there had been no tether to break.
This accident was such a freak accident because of the angle of the tyre barrier at the side of the track and the way that the tyre went across the track at almost 90 degrees. As has been said before, an inch or two to the left or right, a couple of tenths sooner or later and it never would have happened.
stifler said:
For the people saying that the cars could be changed to make them safer, they are as safe as they have ever been before. The only thing that could make single seaters safer is by providing a screen and a roof over the cockpit. This is, of course, defeating the object.
Everything else at the circuits is as good as it has ever been, the Marshalls are as good as ever and the medical teams are some of the best in the world.
Anyone who races or has anything to do with racing knows the dangers.
It is their choice, that they still race.
I'm really torn by your post if I'm being honest. Part of me agrees with you, part of me is struggling with a counter comment along the lines of "so far....", as in, they're as safe as they have ever been so far, or the marshalls are as good as ever so far.Everything else at the circuits is as good as it has ever been, the Marshalls are as good as ever and the medical teams are some of the best in the world.
Anyone who races or has anything to do with racing knows the dangers.
It is their choice, that they still race.
By that I mean that things will improve as we learn from the past. So, while the cars are as safe as they have ever been, that's not to say that they're as safe as they could possibly ever be, because they're not.
Similarly, the marshalls are marvellous now, but they will learn new things, get better equipment, etc. which will mean that, in time, they'll be able to do a better job than they can do today.
None of this is a bad thing, it's just the constant evolution of the sport and safety.
Nobody wants to see people hurt or killed, but accidents will continue to happen because something unexpected or unpredictable will occur and a whole sequence of events will unravel. And when it does, we'll learn from it. Not over-react and ban something, but learn how to reduce the chances of it happening again.
Perhaps what we really want is to see the biggest crash you could imagine where the driver walks away and all the marshalls have to do is sweep up some bits of car - we can then feel more comfortable that the sport which entertains us isn't one we have to feel guilty about watching in case someone gets hurt.
spaximus said:
Sad but it is true that part of the allure of motorsport is the danger, why else would anyone ride a superbike or a car without a roof and rollcage. the accident was a one off, wheel tethers might have helped but how many things can you cater for? It was a freak accident and may never be repeated in 10 or twenty years. Those in charge will investigate and decide the outcome or changes in due course
I'm pretty sure that even more people would be involved in motorsport if the risk wasn't there so for most I imagine, the danger isn't that alluring. I don't ride a bike so I can't say for sure why superbike riders ride them, I expect it's mainly to do with the performance and the feeling of connectedness that cars in most cases cannot provide. There's also very little that can be done to improve safety on a bike. Interestingly some riders feel safer on bikes, they don't like the idea of being trapped in a car for example.The reason drivers drive single seaters without roofs is very simple, it's because it is in the regulations. Regarding roll cages, again I believe it's a regulation issue, single seaters have a roll hoop and many race series require cars to have some form of roll protection. I very much doubt many drivers specifically look for a 'more dangerous' race series to enter simply for the extra thrill.
This brings up a point that I have been thinking about. Do open cockpits from their current design perspective really have to remain so vulnerable? There was an accident in F1 relatively recently where a car very narrowly missed another driver's head (Coulthard?) as it passed over the top of the front of the cockpit. (I seem to remember it was a Red Bull?) Also in the event of an open cockpit car impacting a barrier head-on at a certain height whilst inverted the consequences could be horrific. Kubica's accident could have been a whole lot worse if the car rolled against the barrier in a different way.
The provision of a top-fuel dragster style roll cage, designed in such a way to not overly impede the driver's view, lightened and aerodynamically optimised to F1 standards could perhaps be an answer.
Why do the regulations specify open cockpits anyway? Is it simply tradition? Is it worth the risks to uphold the tradition? I personally think that if single seaters developed closed cockpits it wouldn't lessen my enjoyment of the sport. They wouldn't be any slower, in fact they'd probably be faster). Spectators would see less for sure but for some years it's been difficult to see drivers 'working at the wheel'.
I'm not suggesting the sport be 'sanitised' or the cars slowed, open wheels despite their dangers should obviously remain for a variety of reasons. But the issue of cockpit protection in my opinion deserves some more thought. F1 cars and other single seaters are so safe in many ways, the cockpit is the only remaining weak area that I can see, and I don't think the reasons for it to stay that way justify the risks.
The incident on Sunday as you say was a freak accident, but it made me realise how vulnerable that area of the car really is.
Ultimately however, it is up to the drivers since they are the ones taking the risks.
Nick M said:
By that I mean that things will improve as we learn from the past. So, while the cars are as safe as they have ever been, that's not to say that they're as safe as they could possibly ever be, because they're not.
Similarly, the marshalls are marvellous now, but they will learn new things, get better equipment, etc. which will mean that, in time, they'll be able to do a better job than they can do today.
None of this is a bad thing, it's just the constant evolution of the sport and safety.
Nobody wants to see people hurt or killed, but accidents will continue to happen because something unexpected or unpredictable will occur and a whole sequence of events will unravel. And when it does, we'll learn from it. Not over-react and ban something, but learn how to reduce the chances of it happening again.
Perhaps what we really want is to see the biggest crash you could imagine where the driver walks away and all the marshalls have to do is sweep up some bits of car - we can then feel more comfortable that the sport which entertains us isn't one we have to feel guilty about watching in case someone gets hurt.
agree totally, the safety standards of both cars and tracks are continually evolving and this particular incident wont change that or provoke knee jerk reactions. We all train hard just incase the preverbial hits the fan and we all hope that all we have to do is a bit of sweeping up. ask any marshal and he/she will say the biggest fear is a driver that is not talking to you, i know it is mine, on sunday that marshal had everyone's worst nightmare, driver unconcious, engine revving away. He kept his cool and putting personal fears to one side isolated the electrics and got on the radio for rescue, that is the proof of the training and experience. Similarly, the marshalls are marvellous now, but they will learn new things, get better equipment, etc. which will mean that, in time, they'll be able to do a better job than they can do today.
None of this is a bad thing, it's just the constant evolution of the sport and safety.
Nobody wants to see people hurt or killed, but accidents will continue to happen because something unexpected or unpredictable will occur and a whole sequence of events will unravel. And when it does, we'll learn from it. Not over-react and ban something, but learn how to reduce the chances of it happening again.
Perhaps what we really want is to see the biggest crash you could imagine where the driver walks away and all the marshalls have to do is sweep up some bits of car - we can then feel more comfortable that the sport which entertains us isn't one we have to feel guilty about watching in case someone gets hurt.
I would be lying if i said today hadnt affected me a bit even though i am hundreds of miles away, it does make you think, it wont stop me going trackside and grafting away. as long as the drivers talk to me (or even swear i am happy as then they are breathing
SlipStream77 said:
spaximus said:
Sad but it is true that part of the allure of motorsport is the danger, why else would anyone ride a superbike or a car without a roof and rollcage. the accident was a one off, wheel tethers might have helped but how many things can you cater for? It was a freak accident and may never be repeated in 10 or twenty years. Those in charge will investigate and decide the outcome or changes in due course
I'm pretty sure that even more people would be involved in motorsport if the risk wasn't there so for most I imagine, the danger isn't that alluring. I don't ride a bike so I can't say for sure why superbike riders ride them, I expect it's mainly to do with the performance and the feeling of connectedness that cars in most cases cannot provide. There's also very little that can be done to improve safety on a bike. Interestingly some riders feel safer on bikes, they don't like the idea of being trapped in a car for example.The reason drivers drive single seaters without roofs is very simple, it's because it is in the regulations. Regarding roll cages, again I believe it's a regulation issue, single seaters have a roll hoop and many race series require cars to have some form of roll protection. I very much doubt many drivers specifically look for a 'more dangerous' race series to enter simply for the extra thrill.
This brings up a point that I have been thinking about. Do open cockpits from their current design perspective really have to remain so vulnerable? There was an accident in F1 relatively recently where a car very narrowly missed another driver's head (Coulthard?) as it passed over the top of the front of the cockpit. (I seem to remember it was a Red Bull?) Also in the event of an open cockpit car impacting a barrier head-on at a certain height whilst inverted the consequences could be horrific. Kubica's accident could have been a whole lot worse if the car rolled against the barrier in a different way.
The provision of a top-fuel dragster style roll cage, designed in such a way to not overly impede the driver's view, lightened and aerodynamically optimised to F1 standards could perhaps be an answer.
Why do the regulations specify open cockpits anyway? Is it simply tradition? Is it worth the risks to uphold the tradition? I personally think that if single seaters developed closed cockpits it wouldn't lessen my enjoyment of the sport. They wouldn't be any slower, in fact they'd probably be faster). Spectators would see less for sure but for some years it's been difficult to see drivers 'working at the wheel'.
I'm not suggesting the sport be 'sanitised' or the cars slowed, open wheels despite their dangers should obviously remain for a variety of reasons. But the issue of cockpit protection in my opinion deserves some more thought. F1 cars and other single seaters are so safe in many ways, the cockpit is the only remaining weak area that I can see, and I don't think the reasons for it to stay that way justify the risks.
The incident on Sunday as you say was a freak accident, but it made me realise how vulnerable that area of the car really is.
Ultimately however, it is up to the drivers since they are the ones taking the risks.
Whatever the loss of life is tragic however it happens
I don't think the answer to the open cockpit situation is to cage it over like a dragster. This would just restrict the drivers peripheral vision and cause accidents. Drag racers only have to go in a straight line, so peripheral vision is not an issue.
Could anything be done with Helmet design? Sort of like the step forward that the HANS device was? From the reports so far, it seems that the helmet bore the whole force and it failed (eerily similar to Senna's accident). Just a thought, not an accusation.
Could anything be done with Helmet design? Sort of like the step forward that the HANS device was? From the reports so far, it seems that the helmet bore the whole force and it failed (eerily similar to Senna's accident). Just a thought, not an accusation.
spaximus said:
SlipStream77 said:
spaximus said:
Sad but it is true that part of the allure of motorsport is the danger, why else would anyone ride a superbike or a car without a roof and rollcage. the accident was a one off, wheel tethers might have helped but how many things can you cater for? It was a freak accident and may never be repeated in 10 or twenty years. Those in charge will investigate and decide the outcome or changes in due course
I'm pretty sure that even more people would be involved in motorsport if the risk wasn't there so for most I imagine, the danger isn't that alluring. I don't ride a bike so I can't say for sure why superbike riders ride them, I expect it's mainly to do with the performance and the feeling of connectedness that cars in most cases cannot provide. There's also very little that can be done to improve safety on a bike. Interestingly some riders feel safer on bikes, they don't like the idea of being trapped in a car for example.The reason drivers drive single seaters without roofs is very simple, it's because it is in the regulations. Regarding roll cages, again I believe it's a regulation issue, single seaters have a roll hoop and many race series require cars to have some form of roll protection. I very much doubt many drivers specifically look for a 'more dangerous' race series to enter simply for the extra thrill.
This brings up a point that I have been thinking about. Do open cockpits from their current design perspective really have to remain so vulnerable? There was an accident in F1 relatively recently where a car very narrowly missed another driver's head (Coulthard?) as it passed over the top of the front of the cockpit. (I seem to remember it was a Red Bull?) Also in the event of an open cockpit car impacting a barrier head-on at a certain height whilst inverted the consequences could be horrific. Kubica's accident could have been a whole lot worse if the car rolled against the barrier in a different way.
The provision of a top-fuel dragster style roll cage, designed in such a way to not overly impede the driver's view, lightened and aerodynamically optimised to F1 standards could perhaps be an answer.
Why do the regulations specify open cockpits anyway? Is it simply tradition? Is it worth the risks to uphold the tradition? I personally think that if single seaters developed closed cockpits it wouldn't lessen my enjoyment of the sport. They wouldn't be any slower, in fact they'd probably be faster). Spectators would see less for sure but for some years it's been difficult to see drivers 'working at the wheel'.
I'm not suggesting the sport be 'sanitised' or the cars slowed, open wheels despite their dangers should obviously remain for a variety of reasons. But the issue of cockpit protection in my opinion deserves some more thought. F1 cars and other single seaters are so safe in many ways, the cockpit is the only remaining weak area that I can see, and I don't think the reasons for it to stay that way justify the risks.
The incident on Sunday as you say was a freak accident, but it made me realise how vulnerable that area of the car really is.
Ultimately however, it is up to the drivers since they are the ones taking the risks.
Whatever the loss of life is tragic however it happens
I used to do trackdays in my Westfield and the roll bar was a single hoop. I then saw the consequences of someone who had rolled their car with the same hoop and it got flattened, so I replaced it with a stronger braced version. Later on I saw the results of someone crashing a Caterham and the side impact damage (fortunately to the passenger side) so I invested in a full cage for the car.
All of these were born out of an awareness of the consequences of what might go wrong, but they didn't detract from my enjoyment of the car on track. If anything, I felt able to push harder because I felt safer.
stifler said:
I don't think the answer to the open cockpit situation is to cage it over like a dragster. This would just restrict the drivers peripheral vision and cause accidents. Drag racers only have to go in a straight line, so peripheral vision is not an issue.
Could anything be done with Helmet design? Sort of like the step forward that the HANS device was? From the reports so far, it seems that the helmet bore the whole force and it failed (eerily similar to Senna's accident). Just a thought, not an accusation.
Without wishing to get too detailed, I understood that Senna's accident was more to do with pointy bits of metal piercing the helmet than a wheel bouncing off his head.Could anything be done with Helmet design? Sort of like the step forward that the HANS device was? From the reports so far, it seems that the helmet bore the whole force and it failed (eerily similar to Senna's accident). Just a thought, not an accusation.
Agree that a dragster cockpit is too restrictive (part of the reason for their shape is also because they want to protect the driver if the engine grenades), but perhaps there's a compromise to be found between slightly higher cockpit side to limit the impact of flying objects or cars going over the top of other cars.
marshal_alan said:
agree totally, the safety standards of both cars and tracks are continually evolving and this particular incident wont change that or provoke knee jerk reactions. We all train hard just incase the preverbial hits the fan and we all hope that all we have to do is a bit of sweeping up. ask any marshal and he/she will say the biggest fear is a driver that is not talking to you, i know it is mine, on sunday that marshal had everyone's worst nightmare, driver unconcious, engine revving away. He kept his cool and putting personal fears to one side isolated the electrics and got on the radio for rescue, that is the proof of the training and experience.
I would be lying if i said today hadnt affected me a bit even though i am hundreds of miles away, it does make you think, it wont stop me going trackside and grafting away. as long as the drivers talk to me (or even swear i am happy as then they are breathing
At the risk of sounding a bit glib or cliched, particularly since I don't compete in motorsport, thank you. And thanks to *ALL* marshals. I would be lying if i said today hadnt affected me a bit even though i am hundreds of miles away, it does make you think, it wont stop me going trackside and grafting away. as long as the drivers talk to me (or even swear i am happy as then they are breathing
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff