13yr old killed in F50

[silentbrown]

sjc said:

silentbrown said:

sjc said:

Sad sad story.
The lack of either of them wearing a seat belt makes me think originally that he wasn’t intending to do anything remotely silly, but ....

Presumably you still wear a seat belt even when you're not intending to do anything remotely silly?

I’ve no idea what relevance anything I would do has to do with it.

Badly phrased, sorry. My point was that belts are worn because of the unexpected, not because of the driver's intentions.

[Rich_W]

silentbrown said:

sjc said:

silentbrown said:

sjc said:

Sad sad story.
The lack of either of them wearing a seat belt makes me think originally that he wasn’t intending to do anything remotely silly, but ....

Presumably you still wear a seat belt even when you're not intending to do anything remotely silly?

I’ve no idea what relevance anything I would do has to do with it.

Badly phrased, sorry. My point was that belts are worn because of the unexpected, not because of the driver's intentions.

Indeed. Whilst I didn't often take kids in my faster cars (previously) I always made sure they were fully belted up and then drove pretty sedately.


Boring I know, but I ain't risking someone's kids!

[sjc]

Rich_W said:

silentbrown said:

sjc said:

silentbrown said:

sjc said:

Sad sad story.
The lack of either of them wearing a seat belt makes me think originally that he wasn’t intending to do anything remotely silly, but ....

Presumably you still wear a seat belt even when you're not intending to do anything remotely silly?

I’ve no idea what relevance anything I would do has to do with it.

Badly phrased, sorry. My point was that belts are worn because of the unexpected, not because of the driver's intentions.

Indeed. Whilst I didn't often take kids in my faster cars (previously) I always made sure they were fully belted up and then drove pretty sedately.


Boring I know, but I ain't risking someone's kids!

While I’m sure everyone is absolutely perfect on here,maybe ... just maybe, the bloke had no intention of doing anything remotely dangerous down a narrow ( private ?) road when he got in the car.
Whatever happened after that may have changed the whole scenario..... terribly.

[Rich_W]

sjc said:

While I’m sure everyone is absolutely perfect on here,maybe ... just maybe, the bloke had no intention of doing anything remotely dangerous down a narrow ( private ?) road when he got in the car.
Whatever happened after that may have changed the whole scenario..... terribly.

Far from perfect. But kids (and I have none of my own, nor ever likely to) are just a little bit too precious for me to be risking. I've had cars get away from me when only me on board. And it just highlights how easily I can get it wrong.

Maybe on a charity ride day at Dunsfold or something, but even then it's still something I'm wary of. how many crashes were immediately after the driver said "Watch this" Even the great Richard Burns crashed showing off to his GF!

If an adult wanted to experience the car I'd be more inclined. But similarly, if a passenger asked me to slow down. I'd do that instantly too!

[SydneyBridge]

I guess someone in court has to answer the question
Might he have survived if he had worn a seatbelt?

[TooMany2cvs]

SydneyBridge said:

I guess someone in court has to answer the question
Might he have survived if he had worn a seatbelt?

Almost certainly.

And for kids of that age, the belt is legally the driver's responsibility when it comes to tickets.

[JJ England]

It doesn't make sense that he would be giving it beans on that track.
The lad would be ecstatic just to sit in it or go slowly?
Cobden knew the track well enough not to boot a 1.2 million pound F50 on it.
If he was going to boot the car surely he would have taken it on the road and put on belts?

Totally feasible he was just going take the car for a short drive after using a lot of clutch.
Seems like a nice guy whose willingness to make a young lad's day went horribly wrong.
Sad story all round.

[E24man]

For the sake of obeying the seat belt rule that lad would in all probability be here today.

Regardless of what his intentions were, what he actually did, any imagined fault with the car, he did not obey the Highway code and the Laws of the Land and as a result he caused the boy to die.

[TTmonkey]

Someone said that there was speed bumps before the start of the track, anyone know if this is true? And if so, they also said he'd have to use a lift system to get over them....? Does a car of this age have a speed bump lift system, does anyone know?


Is there any scope that maybe. if there is a speed bump, he's forgotten about it, taken it at too much speed, this has caused him to lose control. pehaps foot slipped off clutch or something, and accident has occurred...?

[kiethton]

TTmonkey said:

Someone said that there was speed bumps before the start of the track, anyone know if this is true? And if so, they also said he'd have to use a lift system to get over them....? Does a car of this age have a speed bump lift system, does anyone know?


Is there any scope that maybe. if there is a speed bump, he's forgotten about it, taken it at too much speed, this has caused him to lose control. pehaps foot slipped off clutch or something, and accident has occurred...?

The article linked seems to say that after coming around the corner/rise he would have been near stationary owing to the lift system going up/down implying a bit of a bump but then accelerated in second gear - it also implies that there were a couple of small puddles between where he would have started accelerating and where he crashed - fair chance that the Ferrari tyres aren't as good in the rain a most given likely tread pattern, width and rising revs/torque being deployed at the time.

Even in my exige with a fraction of the torque on R888's I can see how hitting a puddle or 2 can cause an issue, especially without traction control etc.

[FurtiveFreddy]

kiethton said:

TTmonkey said:

Someone said that there was speed bumps before the start of the track, anyone know if this is true? And if so, they also said he'd have to use a lift system to get over them....? Does a car of this age have a speed bump lift system, does anyone know?


Is there any scope that maybe. if there is a speed bump, he's forgotten about it, taken it at too much speed, this has caused him to lose control. pehaps foot slipped off clutch or something, and accident has occurred...?

The article linked seems to say that after coming around the corner/rise he would have been near stationary owing to the lift system going up/down implying a bit of a bump but then accelerated in second gear - it also implies that there were a couple of small puddles between where he would have started accelerating and where he crashed - fair chance that the Ferrari tyres aren't as good in the rain a most given likely tread pattern, width and rising revs/torque being deployed at the time.

Even in my exige with a fraction of the torque on R888's I can see how hitting a puddle or 2 can cause an issue, especially without traction control etc.

The section of road over the bridge near the corner is higher (from memory) than the rest of the road, so if you go over it at anything more than 10mph it's unsettling, hence he used the lift system to get over it.

I think you've picked up the mention of puddles from the report on the car being driven at Bruntingthorpe earlier that day. AFAIK there was report of water on the road where the crash took place.

Could he have been stationary when using the lift system then set off in 2nd gear by mistake, gave it more throttle than needed if in 1st and was then taken by surprise when the power suddenly came in?

Edited by FurtiveFreddy on Monday 26th February 11:55

[JJ England]

That is it. The puddles were at Bruntingthorpe earlier in the day, surface water in the test-track that made white smoke in the Evo video. The weather was fine and it was dry on the concrete track back at the later in the evening.

The F50 was fitted with lifting gear, but not all are. He used the lifting gear approaching the bridge on the bend, and then lowered it while the car was moving slowly. After he had lowered it again he put his foot on the pedal and it then shot off.

[hairykrishna]

JJ England said:

It doesn't make sense that he would be giving it beans on that track.
The lad would be ecstatic just to sit in it or go slowly?
Cobden knew the track well enough not to boot a 1.2 million pound F50 on it.
If he was going to boot the car surely he would have taken it on the road and put on belts?

Totally feasible he was just going take the car for a short drive after using a lot of clutch.
Seems like a nice guy whose willingness to make a young lad's day went horribly wrong.
Sad story all round.

Also feasible that he gave a quick squirt for a second or two so the kid could feel the acceleration and it went wrong fast.

[kiethton]

Ah I apologise, looks like I mis-read

[JJ England]

hairykrishna said:

Also feasible that he gave a quick squirt for a second or two so the kid could feel the acceleration and it went wrong fast.

Having been along that track. I doubt it.
If it was someone that had never driven a Ferrari, maybe.
If they had not driven along that single concrete access road before, maybe.
It is not somewhere you would give a car a quick squirt.

[agtlaw]

Follow the progress of the trial here:
http://xhibit.justice.gov.uk/winchester.htm

[TTmonkey]

agtlaw said:

Follow the progress of the trial here:
http://xhibit.justice.gov.uk/winchester.htm

Legal submissions by the defendant, then case adjourned until later.


Bet the defendants been on PH, read this thread, realised he's not got a chance of defending this with the 'gremlins did it guvnor' defence and is about to change his plea.


Or he just asked if he could go to lunch now...

[Gameface]

JJ England said:

Having been along that track. I doubt it.
If it was someone that had never driven a Ferrari, maybe.
If they had not driven along that single concrete access road before, maybe.
It is not somewhere you would give a car a quick squirt.

So you think it was a car fault as he's saying in court?

[JJ England]

TTmonkey said:

Legal submissions by the defendant, then case adjourned until later.


Bet the defendants been on PH, read this thread, realised he's not got a chance of defending this with the 'gremlins did it guvnor' defence and is about to change his plea.


Or he just asked if he could go to lunch now...

You are right. They do always go to lunch at around that time.

I don't think it is gremlins, just mid 90s ferrari engines that are tempermental. But like someone said it isn't even about the engine, it is all about seatbelts not being worn.

[JJ England]

Gameface said:

So you think it was a car fault as he's saying in court?

Yes. I do.
What a jury will make of it I do not know.