RE: Nurburgring speed limits to be lifted

[nickfrog]

StottyEvo said:

I've never been to the track but I can think of a couple areas on the track that could do with larger run off areas, after watching hundreds of cars smash into the same barriers on youtube vids...

A couple ? I would say 90% of it have next to no run offs. And that's what makes it such a special place.

I strongly recommend you go there, it's just brilliant and addictive. Even to just look at !

[Debaser]

Flugplatz is the double right hander after the crest, and has its name because of a nearby airfield.

[Kawasicki]

RLK500 said:

I like the challenge but don't really want to have the circuit determine if I am going to spear off the road due to random bumps.

The circuit doesn't determine anything.


The plus side of all this is that we should be able to rush into the double right hander after the bumps much faster without any worries, so we'll be way quicker over the crest before Schwedenkreuz too.

Hang on a minute....

[nickfrog]

[Debaser]

Kawasicki said:

The circuit doesn't determine anything.


The plus side of all this is that we should be able to rush into the double right hander after the bumps much faster without any worries, so we'll be way quicker over the crest before Schwedenkreuz too.

Hang on a minute....

[dinkel]

GroundEffect said:

Debaser said:

I completely disagree. Why does the track need to be made safer?

Ask the family of the deceased spectator from this year and the many, many more from the past.

Maybe wait for another Senna to die?

[StottyEvo]

nickfrog said:

StottyEvo said:

I've never been to the track but I can think of a couple areas on the track that could do with larger run off areas, after watching hundreds of cars smash into the same barriers on youtube vids...

A couple ? I would say 90% of it have next to no run offs. And that's what makes it such a special place.

I strongly recommend you go there, it's just brilliant and addictive. Even to just look at !

I struggle to stay on British tracks I think I'll pass for now.

I know the track has very little run off but cars don't seem to wipe out on lots of the corners, that awfully cambered up hill right hander seems to stand out as needing more run off.

[krallicious]

StottyEvo said:

I know the track has very little run off but cars don't seem to wipe out on lots of the corners, that awfully cambered up hill right hander seems to stand out as needing more run off.

That's because people take the wrong line. It's a late turn in with a slight off camber apex. Brünnchen really is not that difficult a corner although there does seem to be evidence that proves the opposite!

[KaraK]

My experience of the Ring is relatively limited - I've done a handful of driving laps and maybe a couple of dozen as a passenger and the lack of run-off etc certainly does focus the mind somewhat which I can admit is part of the appeal. That said though I'm not against making it safer - there is definitely room to do that without taking away what makes it what it is. And given the amount of people who die or are seriously injured there year after year it can only be a good thing right?

[DonkeyApple]

Debaser said:

Keeping spectators out of harm's way is a good idea, but changing the track itself to make it safer is insane.

If it's too dangerous for you, don't go.

But arguably removing those bumps won't mKe it safer but push the risk 100 yards down the track? It's not removing a risk but moving the risk isn't it?

[Debaser]

DonkeyApple said:

Debaser said:

Keeping spectators out of harm's way is a good idea, but changing the track itself to make it safer is insane.

If it's too dangerous for you, don't go.

But arguably removing those bumps won't mKe it safer but push the risk 100 yards down the track? It's not removing a risk but moving the risk isn't it?

I haven't seen the details of which bumps they want to smooth but you're probably right.

My issue is that I link the danger of the ring with the challenge of driving there. If you remove all the risk you've neutered the challenge.

To the poster above, if another Senna wishes to do something risky and potentially life threatening, he should be allowed to.

[GroundEffect]

Debaser said:

Keeping spectators out of harm's way is a good idea, but changing the track itself to make it safer is insane.

If it's too dangerous for you, don't go.

If this opinion had stood for the last 50 years, we'd still be seeing 1950s/1960s levels of racing deaths. Are you advocating that?

[Kawasicki]

GroundEffect said:

Debaser said:

Keeping spectators out of harm's way is a good idea, but changing the track itself to make it safer is insane.

If it's too dangerous for you, don't go.

If this opinion had stood for the last 50 years, we'd still be seeing 1950s/1960s levels of racing deaths. Are you advocating that?

The only reason the Nurburgring (and the Isle of Man for that matter) stand out is that they're both relics of earlier (less risk averse) times.

That's why I love them both. Want to kill yourself?....step this way.

[DonkeyApple]

Debaser said:

DonkeyApple said:

Debaser said:

Keeping spectators out of harm's way is a good idea, but changing the track itself to make it safer is insane.

If it's too dangerous for you, don't go.

But arguably removing those bumps won't mKe it safer but push the risk 100 yards down the track? It's not removing a risk but moving the risk isn't it?

I haven't seen the details of which bumps they want to smooth but you're probably right.

My issue is that I link the danger of the ring with the challenge of driving there. If you remove all the risk you've neutered the challenge.

To the poster above, if another Senna wishes to do something risky and potentially life threatening, he should be allowed to.

The danger stems from the layout really. I would have thought that the better the road surface the faster cars can then travel and so the danger isn't reduced just changed?

[Strawman]

Kawasicki said:

The only reason the Nurburgring (and the Isle of Man for that matter) stand out is that they're both relics of earlier (less risk averse) times.

That's why I love them both. Want to kill yourself?....step this way.

But the people who own the circuit want to hold races there, the ticket appeal of speed limited races is less than the unlimited speed versions. It's alright saying 'This is the way it should be' but unless you are willing to fund a similar type circuit it's just hot air.

[RDMcG]

Will be back there in three weeks and am happy to run on the last of the old circuit, as next time it will be different . No harm in that.

[iloveboost]

Batfink said:

Two things: Normal road cars are getting faster and
A couple of bumps does not make a good racetrack.

No-one will miss those bumps in reality.
The corner is a known crash spot so I think its a great idea that spectator safety is being considered and improvements are to be made to make it suited for modern vehicles.

All the high speed cornering and braking zones where the tyres almost (or do) come off the ground seem to be the dodgiest areas. The risk and reward for those areas is high, and some pay the price. It's amazing really that the riskiest undulations weren't reduced years ago, as safer race tracks have had to make safety alterations.