BBC documentary 'Grand Prix: The Killer Years'

[wedge]

Sunday night (26/3/11) on BBC 4

[D-Type]

Sunday 27th March, BBC 4

20:00 - Plus ca change: Formula One's 60th Anniversary
21:00 - Grand Prix: The Killer Years

The "60th Anniversary" comes from Paul Stewart Productions focusing mainly on the get together at Bahrein last year. Pedantic note: actually 60th anniversary of the World Drivers' Championship but not of Formula 1 which was 3 years earlier as the formula started in 1947.
And "The Killer Years" is from the team who produced the 1955 Le Mans film a year or two ago. Let's hope it is less, shall we say, lurid than the title suggests.

And I nearly forgot: if you're getting up early for the Australian GP don't forget the clocks go forward tonight.

[Mark]

Cheers! Setting the Sky+

[Mark]

BBC 4 now!!

[Sarah]

Good programmes - Thanks for posting a thread about these as I would probably have missed them.

[BTCC2]

The Killer Years one was fantastic.

[Bezza]

Bloody didn't know this was on! Is it repeated or on iPlayer at all???

[ready2rock]

Bloody didn't know this was on! Is it repeated or on iPlayer at all???

Yep they're on there :)

[D-Type]

Yep they're on there :)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zw...Plus_Ca_Change/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zwmh2/Formula_Ones_60th_Anniversary_Plus_Ca_Change/)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00z8...e_Killer_Years/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00z8v18/Grand_Prix_The_Killer_Years/)

[wedge]

Some fantastic footage such as Avus and its 'Wall of Death' banking in full motion glory as I've only seen pictures of Auto Unions.

However, Bandini's charred remains was bloody grim.

[truefan72]

watched it online and it was very powerful and really sad, especially that last segment on Willamson and Purley.
I think the most powerful thing I took away was that back then the public, organizers and teams had a completely different attitude towards death and racing.
But it was simply heartbreaking to see such tragedy and if a couple of those incidents happended today, we might even see the rest of a season abandoned in order to sort things out.

That Purley, Williamson scene was almost unwatchable to me. The man tried his best,nobody would/could help, fellow drivers wouldn't stop despite purley's pleadings, I felt terrible. Just gut wrenching

[Mark]

I knew there were a lot of deaths in those days, but I really had no idea just how many, shocking and rather disturbing! I guess it's true when they say that the past is another country and that kind of death toll would have seen F1 banned in this day and age

[AndyL]

I knew there were a lot of deaths in those days, but I really had no idea just how many, shocking and rather disturbing! I guess it's true when they say that the past is another country and that kind of death toll would have seen F1 banned in this day and age

Compared to today, I think everyone had a very different attitude to death in the years after the war. It took a long time for that mindset to change.

[Mark]

I've heard 'the war' argument before, which makes some sense, but what we don't know is what attitudes were before the two world wars, to know if it was actually the wars that changed peoples perceptions.

[wedge]

Post-war, 'The Right Stuff'; it wasn't just insistent circuit owners but from JYS's autobiography a lot of people felt safety would dilute the sport, armco barriers sanitising the 'Ring, Jenks slagging off JYS in Motorsport magazine for diluting the sport, even Moss also in disagreement today: "for me danger in F1 is like salt is to cooking".

[BDunnell]

I've heard 'the war' argument before, which makes some sense, but what we don't know is what attitudes were before the two world wars, to know if it was actually the wars that changed peoples perceptions.

It is a very interesting topic, this. I think there is a degree of truth to the argument about the war, but it is very hard to measure how far this came into play compared with other factors. There was certainly a general assumption that, sadly, deaths were inevitable in certain activities. One sees plenty of examples of this in aviation. Take the disaster at Farnborough in 1952, when a de Havilland DH110 broke up during a display at the Farnborough show and sections, including one of the engines, went into the crowd. 29 spectators were killed. However, the flying resumed soon afterwards. Today such an occurrence would see the show being halted immediately and, in all probability, a reaction such that air displays might no longer be permitted in the UK, yet that was simply not the case in 1952. People accepted the fact that, in pushing the boundaries, there would be deaths — including, in this case, amongst the public. And not long after a de Havilland Comet airliner had broken up in a tropical storm off India, the Queen Mother and Princess Margaret still flew on such an aircraft on a visit to what was then Rhodesia. Can you imagine that now, let alone the fact that the Comets flew on, and were only grounded after two more airframe break-ups? As I said, attitudes were completely different.

As for motorsport, I assume this documentary (which, living abroad, I have been unable as yet to see) dealt only with Formula One? If one adds in other formulae, not least sportscar racing, then the toll of that time becomes even more appalling. In an interview in MotorSport a while back, Derek Bell remarked upon the number of deaths in motor racing that are today completely forgotten, such as three drivers killed in one Italian Formula 3 race alone. Again, this would now be totally unacceptable.

It is all too easy to apply our modern standards and our modern ways of thinking to this matter, to think 'What were they doing?' A lot of the time, I think this is misguided, not to say irrelevant. Those times were what they were. There was less knowledge regarding vehicle and driver safety than there is now, less knowledge regarding circuit safety than there is now, and, with all due respect to those involved, motor racing was simply less professionally-organised. But, despite this, it still beggars belief that certain events were allowed to happen, because relatively simple measures of which people were well aware could have been taken, and lives would have been saved. The presence of properly-equipped, properly-trained fire services stands out.

[Don Capps]

I've heard 'the war' argument before, which makes some sense, but what we don't know is what attitudes were before the two world wars, to know if it was actually the wars that changed peoples perceptions.

There is bit more to it than that, but suffice it to say that one must keep in mind what L.P. Hartley stated in The Go-Between (London: H. Hamilton, 1953): "The Past is a foreign country. They do things differently there."

[Bezza]

Watched both docs last night.

I thought The Killer Years was a fantastic documentary, and very moving. My girlfriend also enjoyed (if that is the right word for this).

However, the other one was rather dull. Not enough archive footage, too much focus on current drivers and far too may shots of nothing happening.

[I am evil Homer]

If anyone can watch that and then dismiss Jackie Stewart they are frankly an idiot. He made himself unpopular by campaigning for what now seems like common sense - the fact he stood up and made that point over and over until something changed cannot be underestimated.

His quote about attending Courage's and then McLaren's funerals in one week then being told the 'Ring organisers refused to change anything...then the Rindt accident you can tell the anger is still there to this day. Immensly powerful stuff.

The Purley footage I find un-watchable now...left me cold the first time - the body language of anger, the dejection as he realises no one is coming to help is horrific.

[BDunnell]

If anyone can watch that and then dismiss Jackie Stewart they are frankly an idiot. He made himself unpopular by campaigning for what now seems like common sense - the fact he stood up and made that point over and over until something changed cannot be underestimated.

Chris Amon, someone else for whom I have much respect, has been quoted as saying that pretty much every driver of the day agreed with Stewart, but didn't want to be the one to stick their head above the parapet. This brings Stewart's contribution into even sharper focus.

[steveaki13]

The thing that amazes me is not so much the cars and drivers.

After all they couldn't invented saftey measures of today out of thin air in the 50's 60's and 70's, and as I believe said on the programme the drivers said no choice. You race dangerously or not at all. This sadly is the way if was and had to be.

But what does seems strange to me is the things that could be changed there and then.
The crowd and camera men.

They all stood on the edge of the track, but surely after one incident of crowd getting killed by flying cars, thats something you can control and change and yet they still done it.

And I only speak for myself but if there were no fences at silverstone when i went a few years ago. I wouldn't have gone and stood on the edge of the track as metal travelling at 200mph is going to hurt if it hits you and drivers always can make mistakes.

Surely people of the time didn't stand in front of trains thinking "No danger here". They kept clear knowing it wasn't safe so why they didn't move back for there own saftey seems unbelievable.


Very good and insightful program though.

Not so keen on the first one.

[Don Capps]

"Safety" in automobile racing has always been relative. Even after the horrific crash at Le Mans in June 1955 or the de Portago crash during the 1957 Mille Miglia, relatively little was done to remedy or rectify many of the problems related to racing safety. What little effort that was made was more to mitigate any harm to spectators rather than the participants, not that this always worked, witness the von Trips-Clark incident at Monza in September 1961.

Interestingly, it was the United States that took the lead in driver and car safety and not Europe during the Fifties, Sixties, and Seventies. USAC mandated the use of a safety harness rather a seat belt beginning with the 1959 season, as well as a true roll-over bar to be fitted to its cars the same year. In 1965, once again it was USAC mandating the use of fuel tanks designed to reduce the danger of fire. Helmets were not required by the CSI until 1952, although the AAA had long mandated their use prior to that edict.

There is much more, of course, on this topic, but this issue was not tackled effectively in Europe until Jackie Stewart stepped up to take the lead. There were some not so pleasant consequences to the movement Stewart set in motion, many not felt until long after Stewart had retired from driving, but they are overshadowed by the overall result.

Jackie Stewart, whether one agreed with him or not, demonstrated the courage of his convictions both on and off the track. Reading some of the contemporary remarks made by Denis Jenkinson, who certainly did not agree with Stewart, which seemed to be "cheap shots" at the time, and the modern reader probably reading those same remarks today probably being somewhat aghast at Jenkinson's venomous, often spiteful words directed at Stewart.

I will not mention that on the Saturday practice session at Spa-Francorchamps in 1960, we were able to find a place where we could be within just a few meters of the track, with nary a haybale or barrier anywhere close to stop anything, much less a wayward car. And, yes, this was the session where Moss had the rear wheel depart his Lotus 18 resulting in an almighty shunt that could have easily killed him. I think that it was Mike Taylor who also crashed his Lotus at almost the same time on another part of the circuit. We managed to get that close to the track after the Moss incident, everyone in the area being distracted by the crash. Then, during the race, both Chris Bristow and Alan Stacey, who I "interviewed" at Zandvoort, the previous GP race, were killed.

Different times.

[BDunnell]

There were some not so pleasant consequences to the movement Stewart set in motion, many not felt until long after Stewart had retired from driving, but they are overshadowed by the overall result.

I am imagining here that you mean the manner in which increasing safety measures have led to the crowd feeling increasingly detached from the action and emasculated circuits to an unnecessary degree, or am I wrong?


Reading some of the contemporary remarks made by Denis Jenkinson, who certainly did not agree with Stewart, which seemed to be "cheap shots" at the time, and the modern reader probably reading those same remarks today probably being somewhat aghast at Jenkinson's venomous, often spiteful words directed at Stewart.

Not the only comments made by Jenkinson that lead me on re-reading them to consider the extent of the reverence accorded him as a writer to be open to question.

[AndyL]

They all stood on the edge of the track, but surely after one incident of crowd getting killed by flying cars, thats something you can control and change and yet they still done it.

And I only speak for myself but if there were no fences at silverstone when i went a few years ago. I wouldn't have gone and stood on the edge of the track as metal travelling at 200mph is going to hurt if it hits you and drivers always can make mistakes.

They still do it, though of course not in F1 or other circuit racing. You can still spectate at the edge of the track in rallying and motorcycle road racing. I can tell you that getting a view from a position like this (http://www.squit.co.uk/photo/mgp06/lightweight/48_28.html) or this (http://www.squit.co.uk/photo/mgp10/junior/95.html) gives you a very different experience to sitting in the grandstands at Silverstone.

[BDunnell]

They still do it, though of course not in F1 or other circuit racing. You can still spectate at the edge of the track in rallying and motorcycle road racing. I can tell you that getting a view from a position like this (http://www.squit.co.uk/photo/mgp06/lightweight/48_28.html) or this (http://www.squit.co.uk/photo/mgp10/junior/95.html) gives you a very different experience to sitting in the grandstands at Silverstone.

And you're not too far away at the Goodwood Revival, separated from the track by a low wooden fence. But there is no doubt that the spectating experience there is exhilarating.

[Don Capps]

I am imagining here that you mean the manner in which increasing safety measures have led to the crowd feeling increasingly detached from the action and emasculated circuits to an unnecessary degree, or am I wrong?

You are partially correct, the other being that drivers no longer seem to associate actions on the track with consequences, "Bumper" Senna da Silva and "Thumper" Schumacher being but two of the more noteworthy examples.



Not the only comments made by Jenkinson that lead me on re-reading them to consider the extent of the reverence accorded him as a writer to be open to question.

DSJ was, well, DSJ.

That is, was, and has been the thnking about Jenkinson for what seems to be forever. Jenkinson was both quite opinionated about many topics and very out-spoken. He came to represent the Purist or Enthusiast view of motor racing to a great many people, which is still true today to a large extent. Jenkinson did, on occasion, take a great disliking to someone and made no effort to hide it. Likewise, there were those he adored and they were capable of no wrong (Senna da Silva).

Having said that, Jenkinson did capture the Zeitgeist of that era quite well, his comments often being akin to having an "ants in amber" quality, almost perfectly capturing the thinking of the time on various topics. On the other hand, he could be quite adamant about certain issues and not be swayed by facts or other inconveniences. Personally, my few dealings with him were greeted by a certain coolness at first -- it turned out that he was not necessarily enthralled with "schoolboys" nor children for that matter -- that eventually gave way to at least a polite acceptance. Needless to say, I thought the word of him, along with with Henry N. Manney III, of course. Two very fascinating people.

However, Jenkinson was first and foremost an automotive writer and not necessarily an automotive historian, which many have come to regard him. He had no use for the "other side" of motor racing, that is, the "politics" and all the other things that make the sport go round. If one reads his columns and race reports, especially at selected times when "politics" were in play, that absence is readily noted. True, there will be the occasional nudge-wink-wink sort of thing, but rarely does he -- or Motor Sport for that matter -- provide much of the in-depth coverage of the happenings behind the scene that are part and parcel a critical part of what is needed for the historian who must follow the writer.

Having first begun reading DSJ well over a half century ago, I find that I often still have mixed thoughts about some of his writings, even after all these years. Yet, I still have no hesitation to place him high on the list of Scribes.

[D-Type]

On the question of safety, those in the UK may be interested to know that David Tremayne's The science of safety is currently being remaindered at "The Works" for £1.99. They are also selling quite a few others from Haynes back catalogue.

[ArrowsFA1]

This question of increasing safety standards leading to a decline in driving standards is an interesting one.

We've gone from drivers knowing that if they stepped into a racing car there was a chance they would be killed, to the likes of Mike Conway (Indy) and Robert Kubica (Canada) not only surviving horrendous accidents but coming back to race again.

[Mark]

There are, of course, several incidents in recent years which we could point to and say that they would certainly have resulted in the death of the driver had they taken place a few decades earlier.

Massa's injury at the Hungaroring springs to mind, hit on the head by a heavy flying object, had helmet technology not been as good as it is, no doubt he would have been killed instantly.

The collective memory these days suggests that the last person to die in an F1 event was Aryton Senna in 1994. But of course a track marshal was killed in 2001 during the Australian Grand Prix. Just because it wasn't a driver doesn't make the death any less significant or important. But that was 10 years ago now, am I right in thinking there have been no fatalities since then?

[BDunnell]

This question of increasing safety standards leading to a decline in driving standards is an interesting one.

And, again, it's impossible to ascertain the extent to which increasing safety is to blame for that decline in driving standards. One might also say that the increased fiscal importance to all concerned of winning the championship is at least as big a factor.

[BDunnell]

The collective memory these days suggests that the last person to die in an F1 event was Aryton Senna in 1994. But of course a track marshal was killed in 2001 during the Australian Grand Prix.

And don't forget that a marshal was killed during the 2000 Italian GP.

[MrJan]

Just watched this on iplayer and found it far more moving than I was expecting. That last segment actually brought tears to my eyes, something that I can't remember happening to me since I was a kid.

Life seemed so cheap, almost worthless. It also rammed home the importance of Jackie Stewart. I've always known that he's done a lot for safety, right up to modern day, but I did t realise what a lone voice he was.

[BDunnell]

Just watched this on iplayer and found it far more moving than I was expecting. That last segment actually brought tears to my eyes, something that I can't remember happening to me since I was a kid.

Life seemed so cheap, almost worthless. It also rammed home the importance of Jackie Stewart. I've always known that he's done a lot for safety, right up to modern day, but I did t realise what a lone voice he was.

I watched some of it on YouTube earlier (couldn't see the second half). I was most impressed with the range of interviewees — not often will you see the likes of Tony Brooks, Len Terry, Jackie Oliver, Jacky Ickx and Nina Rindt on a TV documentary alongside some of the better-known names. And their contributions were all most worthwhile. The only things that grated slightly in the first half for me were the occasionally poor pronunciations of foreign words by the narrator, and the use of the phrase 'Grand Prix' on its own when 'Grand Prix racing' was clearly what was meant, rather as 'rally' is used nowadays instead of 'rallying'. But I'm nitpicking.

As for Stewart, remember that this is the man described by Max Mosley as a 'certified halfwit'. Jackie Stewart was the man who did more than any other individual to make motor racing a less perilous activity. Max Mosley was once arrested for threatening behaviour while supporting his father at a fascist rally in the 1960s.

[ArrowsFA1]

I finally got around to watching this last night and thought it did well to put across the dangers that existed, and the efforts of those, particularly Sir Jackie, to do something about reducing those dangers. It didn't highlight anything new for me, but it should be essential viewing for those who have come to the sport within the last 20yrs.

It is extraordinary to see what was deemed "acceptable", but these were different times. We only have the levels of safety now, not because the sport simply could not continue as it was but because someone stood up and did something about it in the face of considerable opposition.

It was bad enough to get a sense of the anger that is still there over the loss of Jim Clark; how senseless it was. But perhaps most heartbreaking of all was to see David Purley's efforts to save Roger Williamson at Zandvoort, particularly as the circuit had been rebuilt and the latest safety features added. It was thought to be "safe".

[Mark]

It was bad enough to get a sense of the anger that is still there over the loss of Jim Clark; how senseless it was. But perhaps most heartbreaking of all was to see David Purley's efforts to save Roger Williamson at Zandvoort, particularly as the circuit had been rebuilt and the latest safety features added. It was thought to be "safe".

The circuit itself probably was, but the cars weren't and the response procedures certainly weren't!

[I am evil Homer]

Oh god yes the Nina Rindt section....when she says "his trophy is over there..." and pointing across the lounge, very moving. The quality and depth of the interviewees definitely made the programme.

[BDunnell]

The circuit itself probably was, but the cars weren't and the response procedures certainly weren't!

If I remember rightly, years later Williams did a demonstration run at Zandvoort — I think Ralf Schumacher was driving. The car blew up and a small fire started. The marshals wouldn't go anywhere near. Plus ça change, perhaps.

[Dave B]

I finally got around to watching this last night and thought it did well to put across the dangers that existed, and the efforts of those, particularly Sir Jackie, to do something about reducing those dangers. It didn't highlight anything new for me, but it should be essential viewing for those who have come to the sport within the last 20yrs.
I too watched it last night (for some unfathomable reason we watched Pissing About on Ice while it orginally aired on Sunday). I was aware of most of the incidents featured but I'd never actually seen the graphic details. It was truly shocking television, and perhaps there's an argument that it shouldn't have contained such strong material, but personally I feel it was not only justified but necessary in order to adequately show just how gruesome the sport could be.



It was bad enough to get a sense of the anger that is still there over the loss of Jim Clark; how senseless it was. But perhaps most heartbreaking of all was to see David Purley's efforts to save Roger Williamson at Zandvoort, particularly as the circuit had been rebuilt and the latest safety features added. It was thought to be "safe".
That was indeed heartbreaking. You could almost sense the exact moment Purley realised that his battle had been lost, and sense his anguish. It beggars belief that cars thundered by while a human being burned to death just inches away. It's impossible to imagine what went through his head during those agonising minutes.

My one criticism of the programme is that it seemed to end rather abruptly on the note that finally a season passed without a fatality. It failed to address the improvements in safety which took place over the following years, but I guess that fell outside its remit. That's a minor gripe with what was in every other respect a fascinating hour of television.

[markabilly]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zw...Plus_Ca_Change/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zwmh2/Formula_Ones_60th_Anniversary_Plus_Ca_Change/)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00z8...e_Killer_Years/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00z8v18/Grand_Prix_The_Killer_Years/)
It is blocked cause i am in the wrong country!!!

Had no luck with youtube either.

Dam!!!!


What is interesting for me, is that the discovery channel [not speed] in the usa often shows a number of such events and programs, usually from the BBC and I hope they will pick this one up as well.
Isle of mann races in HD from the BBC, were STUNNING LAST year!!!

Speed (formerly speedvision) when it was Speedvision in its early days showed about every form of racing there was, with many a repeat. Even amatuer sports car racing from the SCCA and AMA races, all very regularly shown. Great channel it was, but now it shows (1) f1 race and qing(usually only once); (2) Motogp and some support races and (3) world superbikes and much nascar, but the reality mechanic shows, tow truck family, pink slips, alaska trucking reality show, bareit auction now dominate even over nascar.......oh well

anyway my comments below are based on my own experiences during the sixties.......

[Mark]

Indeed -
In 1976 A season finally passed without a death at the track

Which kind of gives the impression that it was all over, problem solved.

Even if we ignore testing accidents there were to be deaths in 1977, 1978, 1982 and 1994.

It's now 17 years since that fateful weekend in May 1994, can we now say that the spectre of death in Grand Prix racing has finally been put behind us? I guess we can't ever be that complacent.

[Dave B]

It's now 17 years since that fateful weekend in May 1994, can we now say that the spectre of death in Grand Prix racing has finally been put behind us? I guess we can't ever be that complacent.
There have been all manner of accidents which but for the grace of your preferred deity could have been fatal, and many incidents in other formulae which have been fatal. The sport should never, ever allow itself to rest on its laurels.

[MrJan]

Indeed -

Which kind of gives the impression that it was all over, problem solved.

Even if we ignore testing accidents there were to be deaths in 1977, 1978, 1982 and 1994.

It's now 17 years since that fateful weekend in May 1994, can we now say that the spectre of death in Grand Prix racing has finally been put behind us? I guess we can't ever be that complacent.

We certainly can't. Massa's crash, Webber's flip and whoever it was that lost both front wheels are all terrifying reminders of how dangerous the sport is. It wouldn't have taken much of a difference for any of those to become fatalities. Safety in motorsport is always developing, even at the lowest level, and the safety equipment for a 30 second hillclimb is now more stringent than you needed for an F1 race in the lates 60s/early 70s. It's still altering though, 2 seasons ago you didn't have to wear gloves of any kind, now you need fireproof gloves. All of it, IMO, is worthwhile and even if the costs sometimes make us wince I'll always remember what I was told when I bought my helmet "you've only got one head".

[markabilly]

You are partially correct, the other being that drivers no longer seem to associate actions on the track with consequences, "Bumper" Senna da Silva and "Thumper" Schumacher being but two of the more noteworthy examples.





.




That is true, but other factors are the effects of all the wings, data collection, et al. No longer does the driver need to anthing but drive consistently and provide some decent feedback on what he feels the car is doing. The engineers do all the rest.
In the old days, high speed corners required the most delicate touch and feel for the car and the road. Incredible concentration.


There are, of course, several incidents in recent years which we could point to and say that they would certainly have resulted in the death of the driver had they taken place a few decades earlier.

Massa's injury at the Hungaroring springs to mind, hit on the head by a heavy flying object, had helmet technology not been as good as it is, no doubt he would have been killed instantly.

?



I thought it showed that in many respects, safety in F1 is still lagging.
The response time was horrible. I remeber sitting at Indy after Ralf had his enormous shunt, and I was amazed at how slow and long it took for the safety team to make their way over the accident scene, while and ambulance and safety crew stood by, who was not permitted to respond......until ole doc figured out that they needed their help to get him out of the car .



This question of increasing safety standards leading to a decline in driving standards is an interesting one.

.

Bobby Rahal's comments about driving a 1964 BRM were quite intersting (from another show about the Siverstone Classi races). His first thought was the absence of g-forces made it easier to drive the car but the amount of concentration, the need to use the fingers to give proper feel from the steering, the shifting and footwork, the lack of increased downforce from faster speed replaced by the lack of traction and requirment that the driver pay close attention, he found to be far tougher than he imagined.....in other words, the higher physical part of driving the modern race car with wings was replaced by the higher mental aspect.......

I also remember the same comment from Mario Andretti , when asked about skill and driving the winged wonders, who said driving a car at Indy in 1966, took far more skill to make it fast through the corners rather than the skill to be driving the "go cart" Formula One winged wonders (said it around the time after his F1 last race at Monza in a ferrari)

And forget not that those cars were truly open wheel and the front wheels were not protected by the wings. One touch of the wheels between two cars was all it took---which is what happened at Monza in the Von Trips-Clark crash

I also remember being in Colorado in 1968 (an Indy road race at a track whose name has totally escaped me for several years--help please, but I do remember Johncock won the race after gurney had dominated early on) and asking AJ Foyt about the absence of any covers for the wheels, and he said because the cars are all about driving skill and not technology

[BDunnell]

It is blocked cause i am in the wrong country!!!

Had no luck with youtube either.

Try here for part 1 — it should then be easy to find the other parts from there. However, whether 3 and 4 will be available to you in the USA I don't know. They are blocked for me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy7gmd8XXAA



What is interesting for me, is that the discovery channel [not speed] in the usa often shows a number of such events and programs, usually from the BBC and I hope they will pick this one up as well.

This reminds me that one of the other interesting aspects of the programme for me is the fact that the live BBC coverage of the 1966 Belgian GP, with commentary by Raymond Baxter, still exists. Excerpts are used in the documentary. This is the first time I have seen anything of the BBC's live footage of Grands Prix dating from earlier than the 1967 Italian GP (the end of which has often been repeated, sometimes with dubbed-over commentary by Murray Walker, for some reason). I would love to see that Spa race coverage in full.

[BDunnell]

It's now 17 years since that fateful weekend in May 1994, can we now say that the spectre of death in Grand Prix racing has finally been put behind us? I guess we can't ever be that complacent.

No, we can't. There will be fatalities again, I'm quite sure. The risk can never, ever, be eliminated completely. Sadly, to express this view causes some to feel that one wishes to see injuries or deaths, which is absolutely not the case.

[markabilly]

No, we can't. There will be fatalities again, I'm quite sure. The risk can never, ever, be eliminated completely. Sadly, to express this view causes some to feel that one wishes to see injuries or deaths, which is absolutely not the case.

thanks for the link.

As to wrecks, there are some that do--esp. at NASCAR races. Hard to understand the attraction for those races unless you go in person as the sound and thunder, as well as sheer speed, is overwhelming to the senses. They also have lots of massive wrecks, and if you are in the stands or infield, the reaction of a number of fans.....well........

My dad was heavy into motorcycles all his life, and rode until he was 84. So i began racing on scrambles bikes (a form of motorcross back then without all the jumps and whoopdedos)
But neither he nor I had any interest in car racing until we saw Grand Prix at the old three panel cineramascopte theater. WOW, I remeber it as better than the IMAX, and talk about being hooked. We went back six or seven times, and even got the record album and played it over and over again. So we just had to go see these racers.


Access???? in the sixties it was absolutely GREAT. Close to the track and even better, one could wander the pits.

Today's lack of access has also "distanced" the drivers....

Went to the Waktins Glen GP in 1967. Showed up for race day and messed up as far as getting into the pits. Did get to stand next to Mr. Clark for a few moments.

Having wised up, we went to the 1967 Riverside Can Am race, arriving on Thursday morning with full pit access. With this access to the pits, I talked (or annoyed) drivers and mechanics. The list of folks I saw and talked with included movie stars and actors like Paul Newman, Steve mcQueen, and one of the Smothers Brothers........(which one I can not remember--old age creeping up again, but it was the one with dark hair and moustache). Much to the total disgust of my mother, I did not get any of their autographs but i got all the important people: All of the drivers racing there!!

The drivers were like a who's who, with only folks like Clark and Graham Hill missing. Gurney, Mclaren, Andretti, Donohue, Surtees, Posey, Parnelli Jones, Peter Revson, Jim Hall, Chris Amon.....unfortunately only a short time later, Revson, McLaren, Clark, and Donohue would be dead, along with jerry Titus, who drove what i thought was the best looking car there, the Shelby King Cobra

When Bandini died, that was someone who I had only seen on TV.

When McLaren, Revson, Titus and Donohue died racing, they were people who I had somewhat come to know as real live flesh and blood heroes of mine. It hit real hard to hear about them.

The last great access for me to any major race event, was the Superbike series at Seca. They used cargo containers as the garages turned on their sides.....you could watch up close while the mechanics worked on the bikes and the riders cam in from the track.....

when Troy Bayliss came into the pits, he was inside one of those containers and was taking off his leathers. As he got down to his undies, some women about 25 to 40 years of age started getting all excited and saying things like take it all off, those undies are all hot and sweaty....I mean real serious like.......suddenly one of the female people who I thought was a worker inside the container, gave them a death ray stare that immediately silenced them.

He turned his back and then stripped down to his bare buttocks while the stare from the woman continued. Not one woman said anything and they did not even look at him.....looking completely the other way!

Go the Seca motogp, expecting the same type of access with my $100 pit pass. hahaa!!!They had rebuilt the pits to make it "modern" and you could not get close to anything as far as motogp was concerned. Indeed, they cleared the pits 45 minutes before practice or racing started

With that type of access denied, no wonder all the "stars" appear so distant

[markabilly]

another link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry4R_Zj3tnk&NR=1

hard to watch.

somewhere else i saw photos of hill picking up the pieces of clark's car.

[Don Capps]

Perhaps, due to having been around at the time and then present at many races in Europe and America from the Fifties through the early Eighties, I always find the reactions of those who have been following racing only during recent years to this sort of thing more than somewhat fascinating. Just as I have very serious problems working up much empathy with those interested in the modern forms of motor racing, likewise, this is also the case for those of today regarding the racing scene as it once was. I often find that attempting to describe the Zeitgeist of past eras akin to trying to get someone who has been blind all their life to know how the color orange looks to the rest of us.

I have not had the time to watch the program in question, but I will make an attempt to do so this weekend.

[markabilly]

what I found compelling was not the story itself per se, but the interviews with people who were there, doing the driving, the mechanic who worked on jimmy's car before it crashed.....

Yeah, i know there was this "right stuff attitude", and people were just not that concerned about drivers getting killed, but it struck me far differently when I had been with them for just a few minutes as distinguished from somebody like Bandini or Senna who I never had that contact with....

It is very different from war and those activities, because you prepare yourself for it quickly or go crazy.

But as jackie Stewart said, this was not a war, it was just a sporting activity put on for the benefit of the public.

[Don Capps]

Lest it be overlooked, keep in mind that there many who were very vocal regarding the deaths and injuries that occurred in automobile racing. Although the loudest protests were over the deaths and injuries to spectators, justifiably so, that each season resulted in the deaths of more than a few drivers did not go with comment. To a very large extent, the problem lay within the racing community itself -- the organizing clubs and promoters along with the various sanctioning bodies were very the blame for the hesitancy in embracing the sort of safety measures that John Fitch (who was campaigning for circuit and road safety in the US for years), Jackie Stewart, Jo Bonnier, and others (Emerson Fittipaldi, for instance) were advocating.

The racing community has a wonderful tendency to rationalize things, so beware of the bull**** lines are so often trotted out such as that people were used to death due to the war and other such rationalizations, ad nauseam, that keep appearing. It was cheaper to have the "inconvenience" of a few driver deaths than spend the money to make things safer, as in genuinely safer. The level of denial and the ability to rationalize the irrational within the racing community and its fans is almost breath-taking in its scope.

The real wonder is that the death rate was not what legend often supposes it was, although it was certainly bad enough. It was, indeed, a "cruel sport," often bordering on the edge of lunacy. However, the contemporary voices against the sport were and continue to be largely ignored.

Scott-Brown, "Mary" (Jean-Marie Brussin), Musso, Collins, Lewis-Evans, Hawthorn, Behra, Bueb, Schell, Stacey, Bristow: These are some the drivers I met who died or were killed during a race I was at just during the 1958-1960 period -- to include Hawthorn dying in a road accident. There are many more than these, of course, such as Ascari, von Trips, Clark, McLaren, &tc. (not to mention Le Mans 1955), from other years.

This was not an easy sport to like and enjoy at times....

[Don Capps]

Well, certainly not the documentary that I would have made, but then again I am not a journalist but rather a historian. It is easy to be rather critical of such a production, but it does contain more than a few grains of truth which makes it worthwhile.

A pretty stupid sport if you think about it rationally....

[BDunnell]

The racing community has a wonderful tendency to rationalize things, so beware of the bull**** lines are so often trotted out such as that people were used to death due to the war and other such rationalizations, ad nauseam, that keep appearing.

But, leaving racing aside, is it not true that people were psychologically more used to death in that period as a result of the war, and that since then we have become less inured to it?

[steveaki13]

No, we can't. There will be fatalities again, I'm quite sure. The risk can never, ever, be eliminated completely. Sadly, to express this view causes some to feel that one wishes to see injuries or deaths, which is absolutely not the case.

Unfortunatley I agree. If F1 continues for years then Im afraid we will almost certainly see another fatal crash at some point. As many have pointed out recent crashes we have had could have easily led to fatalities. We have seen F1 saftey at its best, but one day an accident will come along, a bit like Senna's. (An accident where you thought he should be okay, and yet some slight positioning or bit a debris caused a fatality where others have survived).

It'll be a sad day, but as in other forms of motorsport it will always be on the cards.

[BDunnell]

It'll be a sad day, but as in other forms of motorsport it will always be on the cards.

Well, as in other activities in life, it will always be on the cards.

[markabilly]

Lest it be overlooked, keep in mind that there many who were very vocal regarding the deaths and injuries that occurred in automobile racing. Although the loudest protests were over the deaths and injuries to spectators, justifiably so, that each season resulted in the deaths of more than a few drivers did not go with comment. To a very large extent, the problem lay within the racing community itself -- the organizing clubs and promoters along with the various sanctioning bodies were very the blame for the hesitancy in embracing the sort of safety measures that John Fitch (who was campaigning for circuit and road safety in the US for years), Jackie Stewart, Jo Bonnier, and others (Emerson Fittipaldi, for instance) were advocating.

The racing community has a wonderful tendency to rationalize things, so beware of the bull**** lines are so often trotted out such as that people were used to death due to the war and other such rationalizations, ad nauseam, that keep appearing. It was cheaper to have the "inconvenience" of a few driver deaths than spend the money to make things safer, as in genuinely safer. The level of denial and the ability to rationalize the irrational within the racing community and its fans is almost breath-taking in its scope.



....

Still hear it today. He died (or got hurt) doing what he loved. The Massa accident, those words were frequently heard about what happened

When I went road racing on my old motorbike, at the same time these deaths were happenning, it was at the old Green valley raceway. I wore a helmet (or a half-helmet to be exact)
tennis shoes, blue jeans and a t-shirt. Wore leather gloves because I though it looked cool. Fell a number of times but never landed where I would leave some skin on the pavement like a number of guys did. Though having witnessed it, I continued to race. Finally someone broke their jaw, and another died from chest injuries, so they started requiring better helmets and leather jackets. However, blue jeans were still ok.

So it was upsetting to hear about the deaths of my heros and scary to see the accidents of my fellow racers, yet I continued to race, mostly because when you are young (15 to 30 years of age), you know inside that you are immortal, if you got the "right stuff".

So what really made the difference was when sponsors got upset about the guys they were spending money on were getting killed, the driver boycotts that cancelled races, before safety really meant something. But leave it to the racers??

haha, as to that. The one point of the show (atleast on the excerpts I saw on utube) was never properly made: despite all his out spoken, legitimate concerns about the safety, Jackie Stewart continued to appear at the races (except those that were cancelled) and drove fast enough to win, repeatedly.