Should f1 run coupes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Its also been stated that Dan Wheldon may have died whether he had a canopy on his car or not due to the sheer force of the impact. The roll hoop of his car which is tested under many tonnes, was ripped off the car.

---

Why do you willfully ignore what I've actually said? Show me where I've said "Dan's life would have been saved by a canopy"??????

Fact is I DID NOT SAY THAT! I said that Dan's life could have been saved if the wheels of the car in front were enclosed. If you have to resort to lies to make my argument out to be wrong.............

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Seeing as you continue to correlate the death of Dan Wheldon to similar risks in F1, I'd put forward now the notion that dangerous tracks (Imola being a good example) be dropped, rather than knee jerk changes to mitigate miniscule risks (such as the Massa incident) which, incidentally, has led to a change in helmet design.

F1 safety is not standing still, and no-one on here, except for yourself, is suggesting it should.

To the point about enclosing the motorcyclist - how else could you prevent a reoccurance of Simoncelli's accident? And that is exactly the point that has been made, inter alia, about Massa's accident and - although not F1 - Surtees accident.

Freak accidents, one that led to a loss of life, one that did not.

Wheldon's accident owed more to the track, number of cars and the speeds involved.

---

How am I suggesting that F1 safety standing still? Oh wait you're just trolling again innit? :wave:

The fact is that these accidents need not happen again, the racing will be no less ferocious and close if drivers don't need to worry about something coming off another car and hitting them in the head or hitting the car in front and being sent flying into the air/fence/wall/ground/whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Fact of the matter is that Jackie Stewart agrees that interlocking wheels in this day and age are an issue.

---

If F1 were to cease to be an open-wheel formula, watch driving standards deteriorate and touring car-style contact become the order of the day when cars are engaged in a close battle. Remove one potential danger and another one is created in its place. Mark my words, it would happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I didn't quote you and my post wasn't in direct response to anything you have said..... CALM DOWN.

See Wilko's post above mine.

---

So? You're bringing up oranges when we're talking about apples. Oh crap, I just said apple, this must be an Anti-Apple post! :rotflmao:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

How am I suggesting that F1 safety standing still? Oh wait you're just trolling again innit? :wave:

---

You seem to have joined the club (other members Bolton Midnight and Bob Riebe) whose response to someone disagreeing with you is to accuse them of trolling. Excellent company to keep. In my view, there is nothing remotely approaching trolling in what SGWilko posted on this occasion, whether one agrees with it or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Sometimes it takes someone looking from the outside to see the problems. How many of the drivers in IndyCar refused to race in Las Vegas on a track which wasn't all that safe at the speeds they were doing with so many cars tightly bunched together? Drivers by necessity have to disregard the danger, be it acceptable risk or as we saw in Las Vegas the other week, rather unacceptable risk. That's why they're F1 drivers and we're not.

---

There are other reasons. It's not all to do with their ability to cope with risk and danger, surely?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

You seem to have joined the club (other members Bolton Midnight and Bob Riebe) whose response to someone disagreeing with you is to accuse them of trolling. Excellent company to keep. In my view, there is nothing remotely approaching trolling in what SGWilko posted on this occasion, whether one agrees with it or not.

---

Oh come on Ben, he is saying that I suggest that safety in F1 should stand still and not advance even though the sole purpose of this thread is the advancement of safety in F1? I'm sure you can see that this is not the case.

It's obvious that what he said is completely untrue and it is so obviously untrue that the only reasonable conclusion is that he is trolling. If he wants to come out and apologise or clarify his position then fine, I'm a forgiving person. But surely you must admit that what he's saying is completely untrue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

There are other reasons. It's not all to do with their ability to cope with risk and danger, surely?

---

Perhaps I should have said "that's one of the many reasons why they're F1 drivers and we're not".....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Oh come on Ben, he is saying that I suggest that safety in F1 should stand still and not advance even though the sole purpose of this thread is the advancement of safety in F1? I'm sure you can see that this is not the case.

It's obvious that what he said is completely untrue and it is so obviously untrue that the only reasonable conclusion is that he is trolling. If he wants to come out and apologise or clarify his position then fine, I'm a forgiving person. But surely you must admit that what he's saying is completely untrue.

---

No, on this occasion I don't. Time to cease the posturing.

Maybe I should add that the quality of debate on the IndyCar forums on this very topic — even involving some members with whom I, for one, normally disagree vehemently on other subjects — is a damn sight higher than is to be found in this thread.