Massive F2 Crash Eau Rouge

[The Wookie]

I know it’s probably not going to happen but it would be nice if we could let the dust settle before we start the debate about what, if anything, can be learnt from this.

There will be a lot of sadness in the community, I know I certainly don’t feel like debating it just yet.

[MondeoMan1981]

Absolutely tragic what happened yesterday.

In terms of safety it's showing how far Motorsport has come that we are now focussing on the second phase of accidents, but there is still more that can be done.

[usn90]

One aspect they could look it is the circumstances he was hit.

Correa appeared to be gunning it on the run off area, whereas there was another car not involved in the equation who stayed on track and appeared to lift.

I know at those speeds and especially over the blind crest you don’t have much, if any time to analyse but maybe there could be an electronic safety feature where once the car leaves the track a certain amount of power is deducted, would be a good track limits deterrent aswell

Edited by usn90 on Sunday 1st September 13:35

[freedman]

red_slr said:

Yes and yes, but I think its time.

No, it isn't

Tragic accident, but you don't destroy one of the greatest segments of track in the world as a result

For some perspective, yesterday was the first fatality at Spa for 6 years

It was also the first 4 wheel fatality at Eau Rouge/Radillion for 29 years

Edited by freedman on Sunday 1st September 15:00

[skwdenyer]

freedman said:

red_slr said:

Yes and yes, but I think its time.

No, it isn't

Tragic accident, but you don't destroy one of the greatest segments of track in the world as a result

It is not inherently impossible to change the outside of the corner to prevent a car bouncing back on track. That would keep the risk of crashing (tricky corner) whilst removing the now apparent risk of death by secondary impact.

[Muzzer79]

freedman said:

red_slr said:

Yes and yes, but I think its time.

No, it isn't

Tragic accident, but you don't destroy one of the greatest segments of track in the world as a result

For some perspective, yesterday was the first fatality at Spa for 6 years

It was also the first 4 wheel fatality at Eau Rouge/Radillion for 29 years

Edited by freedman on Sunday 1st September 15:00

I agree

The sport is sanitised enough (see The Halo)

It’s an awful thing to happen but drivers know the risks and when you’re driving at these speeds, this close together, you have to accept that circumstances can conspire sometimes to have something awful happen.

[usn90]

His car didn’t bounce back on the track, he was hit off track

[Rumblestripe]

Muzzer79 said:

freedman said:

red_slr said:

Yes and yes, but I think its time.

No, it isn't

Tragic accident, but you don't destroy one of the greatest segments of track in the world as a result

For some perspective, yesterday was the first fatality at Spa for 6 years

It was also the first 4 wheel fatality at Eau Rouge/Radillion for 29 years

Edited by freedman on Sunday 1st September 15:00

I agree

The sport is sanitised enough (see The Halo)

It’s an awful thing to happen but drivers know the risks and when you’re driving at these speeds, this close together, you have to accept that circumstances can conspire sometimes to have something awful happen.

Sorry but if that logic had been applied when Jackie Stewart was campaigning to make the sport safer we would still be losing a driver a year in F1. That doesn't mean that we stop racing or necessarily alter that particular corner, just that we examine the incident and discuss ways of mitigating against a repeat of the circumstances that conspired to take this young man's life.

If that means we look at ways to stop cars rebounding across the track or that we look at methods to strengthen the driver's safety cell then why not? Yet you must be careful not to mitigate one risk but increase the dangers from another.

There will always be an element of risk involved in motorsport yet trying to make it safer should remain a matter of course.

[skwdenyer]

usn90 said:

His car didn’t bounce back on the track, he was hit off track

He hit the right hand side:



He then came back out of the barrier and was hit at the side (which we don’t need to see I’m sure).

If he’d stayed in the barrier then everything would have been very different.

[usn90]

I’ve got a still on his position just before contact, he was on the run off still, granted his car wasn’t right up against the barrier still but it was not within track limits therefore there shouldn’t be cars going full pelt

[RDMcG]

I do think that we need to let the review complete and understand what can be learned. I agree completely that we do not want to drastically alter the character of Spa and Radillon/Eau Rouge until it is unrecognizable. Hopefully there will be other options. A very sad event.

[Muzzer79]

Rumblestripe said:

Muzzer79 said:

freedman said:

red_slr said:

Yes and yes, but I think its time.

No, it isn't

Tragic accident, but you don't destroy one of the greatest segments of track in the world as a result

For some perspective, yesterday was the first fatality at Spa for 6 years

It was also the first 4 wheel fatality at Eau Rouge/Radillion for 29 years

Edited by freedman on Sunday 1st September 15:00

I agree

The sport is sanitised enough (see The Halo)

It’s an awful thing to happen but drivers know the risks and when you’re driving at these speeds, this close together, you have to accept that circumstances can conspire sometimes to have something awful happen.

Sorry but if that logic had been applied when Jackie Stewart was campaigning to make the sport safer we would still be losing a driver a year in F1. That doesn't mean that we stop racing or necessarily alter that particular corner, just that we examine the incident and discuss ways of mitigating against a repeat of the circumstances that conspired to take this young man's life.

If that means we look at ways to stop cars rebounding across the track or that we look at methods to strengthen the driver's safety cell then why not? Yet you must be careful not to mitigate one risk but increase the dangers from another.

There will always be an element of risk involved in motorsport yet trying to make it safer should remain a matter of course.

I agree with the concept of an investigation. To ignore this incident would be foolish.

I disagree with a knee jerk reaction to change Spa or Eau Rouge itself.

My point was that you will never sanitise the sport to the point where it’s impossible to have a fatality unless you remove the fundamentals of motorsport itself.

[usn90]

To me the best option would be to widen the run off area hugely, wont be as easy as slowing the cars up eau rouge but that would just ruin the best corner spectacle of formula one

[shirt]

MondeoMan1981 said:

Absolutely tragic what happened yesterday.

In terms of safety it's showing how far Motorsport has come that we are now focussing on the second phase of accidents, but there is still more that can be done.

agree on both points. formula cars just aren't designed for double impact of that magnitude.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

usn90 said:

I’ve got a still on his position just before contact, he was on the run off still, granted his car wasn’t right up against the barrier still but it was not within track limits therefore there shouldn’t be cars going full pelt

Just my opinion but, the (as far as I'm aware) accepted protocol at Eau Rouge/Radillon is if you get it wrong you keep your foot in and use the run off. It's when you back off mid complex it gets very dangerous as the car usually loses control over the compression/elevation/direction change during a lift.

I've driven XXXs of laps of Spa but only in track days, not racing so freely admit my way may not be the racer's way.

[DanielSan]

Bradgate said:

Realistically, motorsport has a choice of two practical options following this awful crash.

1, Stop racing at the historic circuits, eg Spa, Suzuka, Monaco which all drivers and fans of the sport love, but which cannot be modified in such a way that they would meet the highest level of safety regulations for new tracks designed today. This, of course, is what happened at the Nordschleife following Lauda’s near-fatal crash in 1976.

2, Accept that continuing to race at these tracks involves a significantly increased amount of risk, and that they can never be completely sanitised.

How are some of the new circuits ant better though? What's stopping a car bouncing off a concrete wall in Russia/Singapore, even a couple of sections in Austin and coming back across the track to be ploughed into by a car further down the field in exactly the same way? The type of crash that happened this weekend can happen anywhere and will happen, this weekend has had that unfortunate set of circumstances all coming together in that 'perfect' 1 in a million way that results in the worst possible outcome.

Fortunately these incidents are now a very very rare occurrence and the cars will continue to get safer. But racing will never be risk free by it's very nature.

[sgtBerbatov]

So with the side impact tests that the FIA do on the monocoques, do they not test for speeds of 180mph? Or is it that the monocoque is good for one big shunt, then if it gets hit again it just crumbles?

Didn't see the race live, but the first thing I saw was a still image of Hubert in the car. Words fail me really.

[Eric Mc]

Lentilist said:

usn90 said:

To me the best option would be to widen the run off area hugely, wont be as easy as slowing the cars up eau rouge but that would just ruin the best corner spectacle of formula one

I guess the potential problem with lots of runoff is does it invite more abuses of track limits? Are drivers less likely to slow down when caught up in an incident if they think they can just keep their foot in it and scurry round it, and does that then negate the whole point of the exercise?

The ironic thing about this accident is that it took place at a section of the Spa circuit that has been heavilly modified over the years to improve its safety.

[airbusA346]

usn90 said:

To me the best option would be to widen the run off area hugely, wont be as easy as slowing the cars up eau rouge but that would just ruin the best corner spectacle of formula one

As far as I am aware, there is a big drop the other side of the tyres (at pit exit), which has stopped them extending the run off any further in the past.

[skwdenyer]

DanielSan said:

How are some of the new circuits ant better though? What's stopping a car bouncing off a concrete wall in Russia/Singapore, even a couple of sections in Austin and coming back across the track to be ploughed into by a car further down the field in exactly the same way? The type of crash that happened this weekend can happen anywhere and will happen, this weekend has had that unfortunate set of circumstances all coming together in that 'perfect' 1 in a million way that results in the worst possible outcome.

Fortunately these incidents are now a very very rare occurrence and the cars will continue to get safer. But racing will never be risk free by it's very nature.

Re other circuits, where else do drivers come over a blind crested turn flat out without masses of run off? I’m not sure I can think of any.

I wonder if F1 downforce would allow avoiding action even when light over crest? Those F2 cara looked like they had little or no scope for major additional directional change.

There’s also the question of whether Halo meant what little reaction time might previously have existed was wiped out by loss of visibility.