Well, when F1 starts allowing formula fords on the F1 grid, then we might have a comparable situation to set up the speed differentials involved in the accident to which you refer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Printable View
Well, when F1 starts allowing formula fords on the F1 grid, then we might have a comparable situation to set up the speed differentials involved in the accident to which you refer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I'm not talking about the cause of the incident, simply the way the car survived a massive shunt. Anyone who thinks that F1 will continue on without fatalities is delusional....Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I see what you're saying. But there were two bad incidents in the last couple of years which involved things hitting drivers in the head. Surtees and Massa of course. Now there's nothing to stop either of those accidents happening in F1 and IMHO this is no different to the change from having no seatbelts to having seatbelts or aluminium fuel tanks to the safer ones we have today.Quote:
Originally Posted by GridGirl
i simply don't get what is so bad about the car below or the Caparo T1. The F1 genes are still very much apparent, but you have lessened the risk of wheel to wheel accidents and the risk of Surtees/Massa style incidents. But then I guess as usual someone has to die in F1 for it to want to be safer.....
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....type-front.jpg
I can somewhat see the point of enclosed cockpits, however I don't really see the point of completely enclosing the wheels. Look at the McNish accident, the wheels went into the crowd just as easily as they would have done with F1.
But that's imaterial. The point of enclosing the wheels in F1 is to stop 1 wheel hitting another and sending one of the cars flying. You only need look at the Webber v Kovalainen incident to see how bad wheel on wheel contact can be. Whilst I realise that having his front wing knocked off was part of the problem, it was the wheel on wheel contact that sent the car flying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Well, Kubica survived an equally terrifying shunt in Canada, and Rubens crash in '94 was, to say the least, miraculous that he survived.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I know that, but would you honestly go as far as to say F1 is 100% safe?Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Walking out of my house and down my street isn't 100% safe. Statistically, flying in a jet propelled cocoon filled with highly flammable kerosene is safer than crossing the street....Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
The point is that F1 is immeasurably safer than 10/20 etc years ago, and they are constantly looking to improve the safety for this kind of open wheel racing.
I simply don't see why there need to be open wheels? Of course that's the way it was in the past by the goat argument then applies. Tell me why F1 needs open wheels other than the fact that this is how it's always been?Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Why are people so desperate for it to stay open wheel?