Massive F2 Crash Eau Rouge
Discussion
skwdenyer said:
You're right, because a historic F3 car would be known to be of lower safety specification, and therefore the driver takes on the inherent risk of death. The TT is a road course, not one actively managed and modified for "safety." Apples and oranges.
So we're clear, I'm not saying it *has* to be modified; I'm saying it *has* to be investigated and change considered as a part of that these days.
Every driver , in every discipline of motor sport (and many other sports ) takes on the risk. F1 and F2 cars are not , and never have been , guaranteed to preserve the life of the driver on track.. So we're clear, I'm not saying it *has* to be modified; I'm saying it *has* to be investigated and change considered as a part of that these days.
Re waivers - many people think you can , under UK law , sign away your(or your estate 's ) rights to recover damages if you are injured by the circuit's (or anybody else's ) negligence . Many organisers get people to sign such forms - or tell spectators they are present at own risk but this is not legally effective - and hasn't been since 1977 .
coppice said:
Every driver , in every discipline of motor sport (and many other sports ) takes on the risk. F1 and F2 cars are not , and never have been , guaranteed to preserve the life of the driver on track..
Re waivers - many people think you can , under UK law , sign away your(or your estate 's ) rights to recover damages if you are injured by the circuit's (or anybody else's ) negligence . Many organisers get people to sign such forms - or tell spectators they are present at own risk but this is not legally effective - and hasn't been since 1977 .
Negligence is a different thing entirely which is why I phrased my post the way I did. A circuit complying fully with the letter and intent of the regulations and performed all works to the requisite standard vs one which has cut corners (no pun intended) are 2 different things. Re waivers - many people think you can , under UK law , sign away your(or your estate 's ) rights to recover damages if you are injured by the circuit's (or anybody else's ) negligence . Many organisers get people to sign such forms - or tell spectators they are present at own risk but this is not legally effective - and hasn't been since 1977 .
usn90 said:
Oh I agree, gravel brings it’s own risks
In this instance though Had gravel already been in place I feel Hubert wouldn’t have died
The main issue is surely space? The distance from track to barrier in Raidillon is probably too small to have a gravel trap be effective at single seater speeds.In this instance though Had gravel already been in place I feel Hubert wouldn’t have died
RobM77 said:
The main issue is surely space? The distance from track to barrier in Raidillon is probably too small to have a gravel trap be effective at single seater speeds.
Well two things,1- Hubert’s car moved from the barriers, wouldn’t have moved like that in gravel
2- correa, had gravel been there I doubt he would have took to the run off, there was a car before Correa who stayed within track limits
red_slr said:
CEO of the circuit has said as it stands the track will not confirm to 2022 regulations for certain races so they are going to have to make some changes.
“No changes to the track itself will be undertaken at Raidillon,” Spa-Francorchamps boss Nathalie Maillet is quoted by F1i.com as having told the Belga press agency.“However, what is certain is that we will install gravel traps. The standards for motorcycles are stricter. So the upgrade for motorcycles will have positive consequences for cars.
shirt said:
Negligence is a different thing entirely which is why I phrased my post the way I did. A circuit complying fully with the letter and intent of the regulations and performed all works to the requisite standard vs one which has cut corners (no pun intended) are 2 different things.
Yes, but what may seem normal and reasonable to a circuit , and its licensors and user organisations , may appear very different when subject to scrutiny of the court usn90 said:
Well two things,
1- Hubert’s car moved from the barriers, wouldn’t have moved like that in gravel
2- correa, had gravel been there I doubt he would have took to the run off, there was a car before Correa who stayed within track limits
So the driver in front either made that decision, or didn't have the extra tenth of reaction time to veer right as Correa did1- Hubert’s car moved from the barriers, wouldn’t have moved like that in gravel
2- correa, had gravel been there I doubt he would have took to the run off, there was a car before Correa who stayed within track limits
He didn't make a concious decision to run off track, it appears he just instinctively went to the right as the accident appeared in front of him. He would still have done that were gravel here instead of hardstanding
freedman said:
So the driver in front either made that decision, or didn't have the extra tenth of reaction time to veer right as Correa did
He didn't make a concious decision to run off track, it appears he just instinctively went to the right as the accident appeared in front of him. He would still have done that were gravel here instead of hardstanding
I’m not convinced he would have, The run off there is used a lot.He didn't make a concious decision to run off track, it appears he just instinctively went to the right as the accident appeared in front of him. He would still have done that were gravel here instead of hardstanding
None of us know if it was instinct or a decision to go off track.
Just to be clear I do not think Correa is at fault
RobM77 said:
usn90 said:
Oh I agree, gravel brings it’s own risks
In this instance though Had gravel already been in place I feel Hubert wouldn’t have died
The main issue is surely space? The distance from track to barrier in Raidillon is probably too small to have a gravel trap be effective at single seater speeds.In this instance though Had gravel already been in place I feel Hubert wouldn’t have died
TobyTR said:
RobM77 said:
usn90 said:
Oh I agree, gravel brings it’s own risks
In this instance though Had gravel already been in place I feel Hubert wouldn’t have died
The main issue is surely space? The distance from track to barrier in Raidillon is probably too small to have a gravel trap be effective at single seater speeds.In this instance though Had gravel already been in place I feel Hubert wouldn’t have died
RobM77 said:
TobyTR said:
RobM77 said:
usn90 said:
Oh I agree, gravel brings it’s own risks
In this instance though Had gravel already been in place I feel Hubert wouldn’t have died
The main issue is surely space? The distance from track to barrier in Raidillon is probably too small to have a gravel trap be effective at single seater speeds.In this instance though Had gravel already been in place I feel Hubert wouldn’t have died
The opposite could be said as well though, the gravel trap may see an out of control car dig in and flip/roll/fly over the barriers that there is.
The barriers can't be moved back without re-profiling the shape of the actual valley there, the tree line beyond radillon is a steep hillside.
If there was a simple solution, it probably would have been done long before now.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff