The Hulk's crash .

[Bagwan]

Three things about Nico's crash leave me wondering .

1- Why did the wing seem to give up just as he started to brake ?
Most of the blame seems to lie with the curbing weakening the wing supports , but , why there ?
Are FIs just built too light , as the suspension was strengthened for the race ?

2- Did we see a really close call there ?
Watching it again and again in replay made me shiver at how close he came to missing that row of tires out front that was more mobile and able to absorb impact than the fencing and armco behind it .
In the "race for Jules" , it made me shiver .

3- Why do F1 drivers seem to stomp the brakes in situations like this one ?
The wing completely disintegrated , and was not keeping any of his wheels off the ground . But , despite the wheels being locked and smokingly so , he made no attempt to lift his foot to get any possible steering input .
Would it not be better to try to get some control than to keep your foot crushed to the floor ?
Not long ago I almost crushed a nice little AMG Merc on a suddenly wet road , with a suddenly stopping car ahead , and four wheels locked .
The only way to escape was to lift and steer out of trouble .
Scared the poop out of the Merc driver , as he watched my dance in his rear view mirror , and he didn't really even know how close he came to having a thousand pounds of green coffee beans in his back seat .

I guess the question here is whether it's better to stomp or not to stomp .

[zako85]

1. Let's leave this issue to the real engineers
2. Yes, it was scary
3. Ask the drivers. It does seem weird. Before the ABS was pretty much standard in road cars, the best way way to stop a car in an emergency was to "pump" the brakes, which means braking until the tires nearly lose traction, then release the brake pedal, then push it again. Why didn't he do the same?

[AndyL]

The answer to 1 doesn't need a real engineer - it broke at the end of the straight, where the speed and therefore the aerodynamic load is highest. Sure we don't know why it broke, but that's why it broke there.

Re point 3, I think an F1 car is very different to a road car in this situation, because of the downforce and the loss of it. Steering wouldn't have been much help - without the front wing, he can't steer round the corner. Best case scenario, he hits the barrier further down, extending his distance to impact and scrubbing off some extra speed. Worst case, the car goes sidways and rolls, or hits the barrier side-on where there's less deformable crash structure.

Another point on this: the rear wheels were not locked. If he eased off the brake, he would not be getting maximum retardation from the rear.

I was amazed at Hulk's reactions. In the slo-mo you could see he was on the brake before the front wheels even hit the ground.

[N. Jones]

I thought that he could find a way to slow the car and turn onto the run off instead of straight into the tire barrier; but I've never driven a F1 car so I am no expert at what to do in that situation.

[AAReagles]

...Re point 3,... Steering wouldn't have been much help - without the front wing, he can't steer round the corner. Best case scenario, he hits the barrier further down, extending his distance to impact and scrubbing off some extra speed. Worst case, the car goes sidways and rolls, or hits the barrier side-on where there's less deformable crash structure..

Was wondering about that too, since there's not much else one could do (other than apply brakes) once the front downforce is lost. I figured that at least it was the front wing that failed and not the rear wing - otherwise the outcome might not have been so good.

[Rollo]

I thought that he could find a way to slow the car and turn onto the run off instead of straight into the tire barrier; but I've never driven a F1 car so I am no expert at what to do in that situation.

How?

KE=½mv²

The amount of energy required to pull up a car is more dependent on how fast the car is going (v²) than as a function of how much it weighs.

Even as an F1 driver, he can't fight against the laws of physics.

[Bagwan]

Is locking the tires the most effective way to stop the car ?

Or , is the car slowed more efficiently with the tires rolling , and the brakes within the limits of grip ?

Surely the car sliding on one patch of rubber overheats the area way out of normal operating range as it grinds away the rubber . I suppose , though , the patch , itself , enlarges as a result at the same time .
With it locked , I would think the tendency to bounce would be pronounced as well .

If the wheels were turning with maximum braking force applied , the suspension would still be functioning normally , giving maximum contact for the tires .
And , of course , the best part would be that you might still have options , with steering still available .

Going straight in , instead of trying to make the corner , or at least trying to make the impact a more oblique one , seems a little crazy from this armchair .

[Robinho]

Without the front wing and resulting down force, the tyres would lock very easily, and evidenced by fully locked fronts but not the rears. Much of the braking ability was lost with the front wing so I don't think modulating brake pressure would have helped much.

Sent from my 0PJA10 using Tapatalk

[kfzmeister]

Lol, 200mph and your front wing breaks off and you lose your steering. Turn is coming up incredibly fast and all you can do is react by slamming on your brakes. I would like to see the stats for amount of pressure applied to that pedal. I bet it's through the roof!

[Firstgear]

Steering increases the likelihood of rolling or hitting the barriers sideways. I'd imagine it's better to hit the barriers head-on with the longer crumple zone disapating energy over a longer period of time, than those other two options.