Seeing that we have a thread running about the Greatest Ever....etc, I thought it would be pertinent to mention a name that I have not seen anyone else mention since I joined TNF last October.
I mean, chaps, who was it set FASTEST practice time at the first practice for the 1956 Italian Grand Prix? (well, according to the book!) and who was it that held Stirling off for half a race at Goodwood when Moss was driving a Maserati 250F while he was in a Connaught?
Well, of course, it was Archie Scott Brown.
I would very much like to get some confirmation of the Monza story and to hear other people's views on a little chap that had the sort of car control most others can only dream about.
What about Archie Scott-Brown...?
Started by
Barry Boor
, Jun 13 2001 06:29
149 replies to this topic
Advertisement
#2
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 13 June 2001 - 06:55
Which book was that Barry? Scott-Brown's entry was refused by the organisers because of his disability. I agree with you about his talents though.
#3
David McKinney
-
- 14,156 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 13 June 2001 - 18:58
If Scott-Brown was at Monza in 1956, the fact wasn't reported in the mags at the time. Strange, seeing the Brit publications were strong promoters of his abilities
#4
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 13 June 2001 - 19:11
Autosport said: "Despite representations by Earl Howe, the race organisers refused to permit Archie Scott-Brown to practice, so leaving the Connaught team without their No. 1 driver."
#5
Don Capps
-
- 5,933 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 13 June 2001 - 19:38
To me Archie is one of those that I think Very Highly Of.... Archie was a Racer. His death at Spa saddened many schoolboys like yours truly -- he was one of the few we mentioned in the same breath with Moss.... THAT should tell you something....
#6
Barry Boor
-
- 11,549 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 13 June 2001 - 20:23
From Robert Edwards' book 'Archie and the Listers', speaking of the Italian organisers, I quote:
"- and it transpired that the Connaught entry had been made on the understanding that the organisers would, in all probability, turn down Archie's entry anyway. They didn't at first, so Archie set off with the Connaught team to Monza.
It started well. In initial practice, Archie set fastest time to achieve pole position ahead of Fangio - this on a circuit which he had never even driven on before, To be fair, nor had many people, as it had been extensively modified. This was a trick he was to repeat at the Nurburgring the next year."
He goes on to describe how one of the organising committee, a medical adviser, who was not present when Archie's entry was accepted determined that Archie would not start. He claims that the British media got onto the story and were far from complimentary about all things Italian; and apparently the Tifosi were none too pleased because they felt that anyone who could lap quicker than Fangio should not be forced out.
Whatever, Archie's name was dropped to the reserve list and he was not allowed to compete. His practice times were declared void.
So, gentlemen, is this all a complete fabrication, or is it fact?
Somebody, somewhere must know the truth.
"- and it transpired that the Connaught entry had been made on the understanding that the organisers would, in all probability, turn down Archie's entry anyway. They didn't at first, so Archie set off with the Connaught team to Monza.
It started well. In initial practice, Archie set fastest time to achieve pole position ahead of Fangio - this on a circuit which he had never even driven on before, To be fair, nor had many people, as it had been extensively modified. This was a trick he was to repeat at the Nurburgring the next year."
He goes on to describe how one of the organising committee, a medical adviser, who was not present when Archie's entry was accepted determined that Archie would not start. He claims that the British media got onto the story and were far from complimentary about all things Italian; and apparently the Tifosi were none too pleased because they felt that anyone who could lap quicker than Fangio should not be forced out.
Whatever, Archie's name was dropped to the reserve list and he was not allowed to compete. His practice times were declared void.
So, gentlemen, is this all a complete fabrication, or is it fact?
Somebody, somewhere must know the truth.
#7
Don Capps
-
- 5,933 posts
- Joined: May 99
Member
Posted 13 June 2001 - 20:34
Tom O'Keefe confirms that Archie was excluded from the Italian meeting. I also tend to believe Robert Edwards is correct since I have recollection of some mention of this incident which I came across while doing research on the Maserati 250F.
#8
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 13 June 2001 - 23:02
Motor Sport said: "Connaught had three cars running with Fairman, Leston and, it was hoped, Scott-Brown, but as the Italian authorities were not prepared to accept Archie's physical disabilities, his place was taken by Flockhart.. "
In the report on first practice, DSJ describes how the Connaughts were in difficulty because Pirelli would only permit the use of 17 inch tyres and Connaught had no suitably aized wheels. Eventually they used Avon tyres but did not produce much in the first practice session.
This makes it seem unlikely that he would have set fastest lap even if he did practice. It is possible that the fastest lap happened in unofficial practice before the event itself, but I can find no mention of it.
Robert Edwards' statement that monza had been extensively modified and was new tomost drivers is not wholly true. The modifications he refers to are presumably the addition of the banking which happened the year before.
In the report on first practice, DSJ describes how the Connaughts were in difficulty because Pirelli would only permit the use of 17 inch tyres and Connaught had no suitably aized wheels. Eventually they used Avon tyres but did not produce much in the first practice session.
This makes it seem unlikely that he would have set fastest lap even if he did practice. It is possible that the fastest lap happened in unofficial practice before the event itself, but I can find no mention of it.
Robert Edwards' statement that monza had been extensively modified and was new tomost drivers is not wholly true. The modifications he refers to are presumably the addition of the banking which happened the year before.
#9
Vitesse2
-
- 41,876 posts
- Joined: April 01
Administrator
Posted 13 June 2001 - 23:35
Sheldon shows Archie as an alternative driver for Fairman, but doesn't record a practice time for him.
#10
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 14 June 2001 - 05:11
Originally posted by Vitesse2
Sheldon shows Archie as an alternative driver for Fairman, but doesn't record a practice time for him.
for Flockhart?
#11
cabianca
-
- 712 posts
- Joined: September 00
Member
Posted 14 June 2001 - 05:41
My belief is that the book "Archie and the Listers" has too much hero worship and too little hard analysis. No doubt Archie was very fast. However, I'm not sure he had the mental toughness to really be a great champion. When Masten Gregory ran away from him at the May 58 Silverstone in another Lister, Scott-Brown acted like a spoiled child, seeming unable to believe it had really happened. It's one thing to be over your head at British short circuits, it's something else entirely to be over your head at Spa. In motorcycles, Derek Minter beat even the great Agostini at Brands Hatch. Don't think he could have done that at Spa or the Ring. Archie had been unjustly banned from the venues that separate the men from the boys until Spa, so we'll never really know how good he was.
#12
Vitesse2
-
- 41,876 posts
- Joined: April 01
Administrator
Posted 14 June 2001 - 10:49
OOPS!!
Wrong effing driver - sorry chaps! It was late, I was tired ...
Wrong effing driver - sorry chaps! It was late, I was tired ...
#13
oldtimer
-
- 1,291 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 14 June 2001 - 18:14
Cabianca, welcome, and thank you for that perspective. As you say, we'll never know how good Archie was, but he was a great favourite at the British tracks. He always came to race, and that with flamboyance and style.
I've always wondered if he was one of those who did not give the old Spa circuit due respect...
I've always wondered if he was one of those who did not give the old Spa circuit due respect...
#14
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 14 June 2001 - 19:16
Originally posted by cabianca
When Masten Gregory ran away from him at the May 58 Silverstone in another Lister, Scott-Brown acted like a spoiled child, seeming unable to believe it had really happened.
I'd not heard this; where did you learn it?
#15
Wolf
-
- 7,883 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 14 June 2001 - 20:38
OK, time for me to butt in again with an obvious question... What 'disabilities' are we talking about?
What 'disabilities' are we talking about?
#16
Uncle Davy
-
- 6,010 posts
- Joined: August 99
Member
Posted 14 June 2001 - 20:54
His Guinness GP Who's Who bio refers to "...a partly formed right arm."
Perhaps someone else has more details.
Perhaps someone else has more details.
#18
Vitesse2
-
- 41,876 posts
- Joined: April 01
Administrator
Posted 14 June 2001 - 20:59
Archie had an only partly-formed right arm, quite a disability in a racing driver ...
As an aside, Alan Stacey had an artificial lower right leg.
As an aside, Alan Stacey had an artificial lower right leg.
#19
Barry Boor
-
- 11,549 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 14 June 2001 - 22:13
To set the scene, Archie's mother had German measles whilst carrying the unborn Archie.
May I quote again from the aforementioned book:
"There was no proper right forearm, merely an elementary thumb and palm, which started below the elbow. A similar condition affected both legs, but marginally less badly. Neither leg had a shinbone; only a fibula. Both legs were radically twisted and bowed, and the club-feet were tiny with no discernible toes. The right foot was twisted outwards about 90%, and the left was almost back to front. Only the left arm was normal."
(My words) - Following much difficult and painful surgery, Archie's legs were straightened as much as they could be given the technology of the time, and his feet were virtually removed and replaced the right way around. A doctor managed to find some toes! and this gave Archie a much better sense of balance etc.
To anyone who did not realise how disabled Archie Scott Brown was, the sight of a big Lister Jaguar in a controlled four-wheel drift around Goodwood would be quite beyond the realms of comprehension. I cannot imagine how he did it; and I don't think anyone else really knew either.
Had Archie lived, I maintain he would have become one of the greatest racing drivers ever produced in these islands; and I do not make that statement lightly.
May I quote again from the aforementioned book:
"There was no proper right forearm, merely an elementary thumb and palm, which started below the elbow. A similar condition affected both legs, but marginally less badly. Neither leg had a shinbone; only a fibula. Both legs were radically twisted and bowed, and the club-feet were tiny with no discernible toes. The right foot was twisted outwards about 90%, and the left was almost back to front. Only the left arm was normal."
(My words) - Following much difficult and painful surgery, Archie's legs were straightened as much as they could be given the technology of the time, and his feet were virtually removed and replaced the right way around. A doctor managed to find some toes! and this gave Archie a much better sense of balance etc.
To anyone who did not realise how disabled Archie Scott Brown was, the sight of a big Lister Jaguar in a controlled four-wheel drift around Goodwood would be quite beyond the realms of comprehension. I cannot imagine how he did it; and I don't think anyone else really knew either.
Had Archie lived, I maintain he would have become one of the greatest racing drivers ever produced in these islands; and I do not make that statement lightly.
Advertisement
#20
cabianca
-
- 712 posts
- Joined: September 00
Member
Posted 15 June 2001 - 04:58
Roger Clark,
My statement about Archie's amazement at his thrashing from Masten comes from Archie and the Listers by Robert Edwards, the above-mentioned piece of schoolboy hero worship. I'm sure the business about Monza is merely one exaggeration. Overcoming his handicap(s) was a remarkable achievement. However, using the Lister to win a bunch of British club races (even if some were Internationals) does not a career make. When Walt Hansgen came over to jolly old after Archie was killed, I believe he used a Lister to win three of four (or was it two of three) of the same type of races.
My statement about Archie's amazement at his thrashing from Masten comes from Archie and the Listers by Robert Edwards, the above-mentioned piece of schoolboy hero worship. I'm sure the business about Monza is merely one exaggeration. Overcoming his handicap(s) was a remarkable achievement. However, using the Lister to win a bunch of British club races (even if some were Internationals) does not a career make. When Walt Hansgen came over to jolly old after Archie was killed, I believe he used a Lister to win three of four (or was it two of three) of the same type of races.
#21
David McKinney
-
- 14,156 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 15 June 2001 - 06:20
Cabianca:
You're right about a career needing more than a bunch of UK club races.
So what about his F1 career?
Won his first race
Led the next two
Was second in the next (to S Moss)
That, on top of his Lister drives, and his performances in anything else he turned to, makes him a potential great in my book
You're right about a career needing more than a bunch of UK club races.
So what about his F1 career?
Won his first race
Led the next two
Was second in the next (to S Moss)
That, on top of his Lister drives, and his performances in anything else he turned to, makes him a potential great in my book
#22
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 15 June 2001 - 06:28
Cabianca, There is a big difference between amazement at being beaten so easily and "acting like a small child".
i agree that htere is a big difference between scratching round a British airfield and winning Grands Prix (or there was in those days), but I'm with David McKinney: Scott-Brown did enough to show himself a potential champion. apparantly Fangio described him as a phenomenal pilot , with almost uncanny car-control.
i agree that htere is a big difference between scratching round a British airfield and winning Grands Prix (or there was in those days), but I'm with David McKinney: Scott-Brown did enough to show himself a potential champion. apparantly Fangio described him as a phenomenal pilot , with almost uncanny car-control.
#23
Joe Fan
-
- 5,591 posts
- Joined: December 98
Member
Posted 15 June 2001 - 15:47
I have been told by respected people in the motorsports world that Archie Scott-Brown was an outstanding driver who was considered by many to be the fastest British driver at the time of his death. Yes, he was considered by many to be faster than Stirling Moss or Mike Hawthorn.
As far as the incident about Masten beating Archie at Silverstone, I think he was upset but I don't remember reading that he acted like a child. As far as the book Archie and the Listers, I haven't read all of it but what I have read, seemed to be good reading to me. I also think Robert Edwards should be given credit for getting his info about Masten Gregory correct. He addresses the speculation that Masten was at fault for Archie's death as well as the drug user allegations about Masten that are totally untrue. Robert states in his book that these drug user allegations were probably speculation that surrounded his early death and would have been libelous if he were still alive. So
from my perspective. I give him credit for being the person who finally wrote this incredible man's story after thiry+ years.
As far as the incident about Masten beating Archie at Silverstone, I think he was upset but I don't remember reading that he acted like a child. As far as the book Archie and the Listers, I haven't read all of it but what I have read, seemed to be good reading to me. I also think Robert Edwards should be given credit for getting his info about Masten Gregory correct. He addresses the speculation that Masten was at fault for Archie's death as well as the drug user allegations about Masten that are totally untrue. Robert states in his book that these drug user allegations were probably speculation that surrounded his early death and would have been libelous if he were still alive. So
from my perspective. I give him credit for being the person who finally wrote this incredible man's story after thiry+ years.
#24
cabianca
-
- 712 posts
- Joined: September 00
Member
Posted 15 June 2001 - 16:11
David and Archie Fans,
His "formula 1 career" consisted of 6 races and 1 Formula Libre event. All wins came at Brands Hatch (harken back to my Derek Minter comment). Some of these could be considered club races although one has to say the emergence of British drivers was such that there was sometimes exceptional competition. In 56 he had a 2nd at Silverstone, which I concede was a GP circuit. However, he was lapped by Moss and those next in the results lists were Titterington, Bob Gerard and Hernano de Silva Ramos! I also concede that in 58, his Connought was overmatched at Goodwood (6th) and Aintree (4th). Leading Moss is one thing, beating him when he had a healthy car is something else. Still, I don't think Archie goes into the Pantheon of motorsport. Not enough evidence and not around long enough to run against full fields of works drivers on classic courses. Another of the great "what ifs" of motor racing.
His "formula 1 career" consisted of 6 races and 1 Formula Libre event. All wins came at Brands Hatch (harken back to my Derek Minter comment). Some of these could be considered club races although one has to say the emergence of British drivers was such that there was sometimes exceptional competition. In 56 he had a 2nd at Silverstone, which I concede was a GP circuit. However, he was lapped by Moss and those next in the results lists were Titterington, Bob Gerard and Hernano de Silva Ramos! I also concede that in 58, his Connought was overmatched at Goodwood (6th) and Aintree (4th). Leading Moss is one thing, beating him when he had a healthy car is something else. Still, I don't think Archie goes into the Pantheon of motorsport. Not enough evidence and not around long enough to run against full fields of works drivers on classic courses. Another of the great "what ifs" of motor racing.
#25
David McKinney
-
- 14,156 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 15 June 2001 - 21:25
Archie Scott-Brown actually started twelve races in F1 cars - three libre events and nine F1. Yes, some of them were pretty minor affairs and, yes, he wasn’t always racing against the best.
But if I’d qualified between Moss and Hawthorn for my first F1 race (Goodwood 1956) and on pole ahead of them both for my second (Aintree same year) I’d be pretty pleased with myself.
And all this from a man who first stepped into an F1 car after racing nothing more potent than 2-litre sportscars.
I agree he doesn’t make it into the “all-time greats” list, but the point surely is - as you also say - “what if?” What if he’d been allowed to race in more than two or three Continental events? There’s no doubt -in my mind at least - that he would have had works F1 and WSC contracts for 1957, if not before, and there would be no argument about his abilities.
That’s my opinion, Others are entitled to theirs:)
But if I’d qualified between Moss and Hawthorn for my first F1 race (Goodwood 1956) and on pole ahead of them both for my second (Aintree same year) I’d be pretty pleased with myself.
And all this from a man who first stepped into an F1 car after racing nothing more potent than 2-litre sportscars.
I agree he doesn’t make it into the “all-time greats” list, but the point surely is - as you also say - “what if?” What if he’d been allowed to race in more than two or three Continental events? There’s no doubt -in my mind at least - that he would have had works F1 and WSC contracts for 1957, if not before, and there would be no argument about his abilities.
That’s my opinion, Others are entitled to theirs:)
#26
Barry Boor
-
- 11,549 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 16 June 2001 - 07:28
It's a pity that more members haven't contributed to this thread, but then I suppose only a few of us are actually old enough to know much about ASB.
David, I agree with you entirely regarding Archie's potential. Aren't 'what if' a frustrating couple of words................?
David, I agree with you entirely regarding Archie's potential. Aren't 'what if' a frustrating couple of words................?
#27
Gil Bouffard
-
- 597 posts
- Joined: August 00
Member
Posted 16 June 2001 - 18:18
Hey Guys!
It wasn't until two articles in MOTORSPORT and the book on Archie that I came to fully appreciate how "handicapped," Archie really was.
Consider the Thalidamide babies of the fifties! Had some of these young people known of Archie's strength in overcoming these difficulties, I believe that they would have one hell of a role model to look to.
While he may not qualify as a hero and a great in the common perception of a champion. He does qualify as a hero who overcame great physical differences to become known as an international sports figure and (like it or not) motorsports legend.
Unlike Clay Reggazoni, who was a healthy person handicapped by an unfortunate accident. Archie never had the opportunity to experience a "normal life."
Had Archie done the "normal," thing and been wheelchair bound or tucked away in a dark room somewhere, many of us would not hold him in the esteem we do.
Hit a chord there, didn't you?
Gil Bouffard
It wasn't until two articles in MOTORSPORT and the book on Archie that I came to fully appreciate how "handicapped," Archie really was.
Consider the Thalidamide babies of the fifties! Had some of these young people known of Archie's strength in overcoming these difficulties, I believe that they would have one hell of a role model to look to.
While he may not qualify as a hero and a great in the common perception of a champion. He does qualify as a hero who overcame great physical differences to become known as an international sports figure and (like it or not) motorsports legend.
Unlike Clay Reggazoni, who was a healthy person handicapped by an unfortunate accident. Archie never had the opportunity to experience a "normal life."
Had Archie done the "normal," thing and been wheelchair bound or tucked away in a dark room somewhere, many of us would not hold him in the esteem we do.
Hit a chord there, didn't you?
Gil Bouffard
#28
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 16 June 2001 - 23:32
This diagram, prepared by Archie Scott-Brown shows his line and angle of drift at Goodwood. You begin to see what we are missing today and why he was so popular with the race going public.
#29
oldtimer
-
- 1,291 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 17 June 2001 - 04:49
Thanks Roger. A lovely reminder of why some of us enjoyed the 'skating on rubber' days.
It was on the exit of Lavant that he drifted a couple of feet wider than usual and Moss caught him on the straight.
It was on the exit of Lavant that he drifted a couple of feet wider than usual and Moss caught him on the straight.
#30
David McKinney
-
- 14,156 posts
- Joined: November 00
Member
Posted 17 June 2001 - 05:54
I know what you mean by "what we are missing today", Oldie. Which is one of the appeals of historic racing, especially at Goodwood. Some of the better drivers get pretty close to Archie's slip angles - it's worth the trip just to watch them driving "proper" cars they way they were driven in their heyday
#31
oldtimer
-
- 1,291 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 18 June 2001 - 04:02
Roger's posting jogged another memory. In 'Jenks' little annual, the Motor Sport Racing Car Review, 1958 (for the 1957 season), he reported that 'the phenomenon of British circuits, Archie Scott-Brown', was invited to Bourne to try one of the BRMs before the British GP at Aintree.
Jenks goes on:
'Until this point, everyone who drove the cars said they were alright so long as you did not let the back wheels get too far out of line with the front ones; in other words, you could not slide the corners with the power turned on. Scott-Brown shook everyone by lapping the Folkingham aerodrome with the car almost continually at 45 degrees to the direction of travel in one direction or the other. Admittingly he lost it once and spun round, but as with all cars he drives, he could not find anything to complain about and was suitably impressed by the performance.'
Jenks then goes on to make some comments on the 'give a dog a bad name' theme, and reported that: 'Although Scott-Brown was quite happy to race the car, he was got at by various friends and talked out of the idea.'
A pity. Maybe us Brits would have had more than a Vanwall story to tell.
Jenks goes on:
'Until this point, everyone who drove the cars said they were alright so long as you did not let the back wheels get too far out of line with the front ones; in other words, you could not slide the corners with the power turned on. Scott-Brown shook everyone by lapping the Folkingham aerodrome with the car almost continually at 45 degrees to the direction of travel in one direction or the other. Admittingly he lost it once and spun round, but as with all cars he drives, he could not find anything to complain about and was suitably impressed by the performance.'
Jenks then goes on to make some comments on the 'give a dog a bad name' theme, and reported that: 'Although Scott-Brown was quite happy to race the car, he was got at by various friends and talked out of the idea.'
A pity. Maybe us Brits would have had more than a Vanwall story to tell.
#32
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 18 June 2001 - 05:39
One of those friends was Stirling Moss, who said "saw the advert in the paper did you?"
#33
William Hunt
-
- 11,082 posts
- Joined: July 01
Member
Posted 10 September 2001 - 12:37
PS : It seems like Archie Scott-Brown is actually not forgotten , many people have (surprisingly) voted for him in my Ambitious Grand Prix survey.
He is currently in an excellent 15th position with 34 points, just behind Price Birabongse but ahead of famous drivers like Olivier Gendebien, Piero Taruffi , Stuart Lewis-Evans or Robert Manzon. This could still change off course , since the survey isn't finished yet.
He is currently in an excellent 15th position with 34 points, just behind Price Birabongse but ahead of famous drivers like Olivier Gendebien, Piero Taruffi , Stuart Lewis-Evans or Robert Manzon. This could still change off course , since the survey isn't finished yet.
#34
William Hunt
-
- 11,082 posts
- Joined: July 01
Member
Posted 10 September 2001 - 12:40
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Barry Boor
[B]Seeing that we have a thread running about the Greatest Ever....etc, I thought it would be pertinent to mention a name that I have not seen anyone else mention since I joined TNF last October."
Which thread are U refering to ? Did someone else also do a survey ?
[B]Seeing that we have a thread running about the Greatest Ever....etc, I thought it would be pertinent to mention a name that I have not seen anyone else mention since I joined TNF last October."
Which thread are U refering to ? Did someone else also do a survey ?
#36
Barry Lake
-
- 2,169 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 01:04
Originally posted by Barry Boor
It's a pity that more members haven't contributed to this thread, but then I suppose only a few of us are actually old enough to know much about ASB.
Barry (B)
I am old enough to have followed Archie Scott-Brown's career 'live' - if you call waiting three months for Motor Sport to float from England to Australia 'live".
There's not a lot I can add to yours and David McKinney's information and appraisals. But I remember what was written in much the same way as you two do.
One thing Archie had in his favour, considering his disabilities, was that the cars of that time were steered very much by throttle control rather than by physical strength of the arms.
When I began racing I soon discovered that the harder the car seemed to be working (oversteer), the physically easier it was foir the driver. The cars that were physically difficult to drive were those that, from the sidelines, looked like they were running on rails (understeer).
At the time, I knew his legs also were deformed, though had no idea they were as bad as described above. How he had sufficient feel and dexterity in his right foot and ankle to have the throttle control he obviously had is (now) beyond me.
I remember that I always had concern, as the authorities seem to have done (if we give them credit for thinking about their actions) that, while he could control a car as long as it was under control, he always would have been at a great disadvantage in a sudden loss of control situation.
And I felt at the time of his death that something along these lines must have occurred at Spa - that is, that the car did something suddenly, with which his one good arm just couldn't cope.
Yes, I think he could potentially have become a great GP driver, but the odds of his meeting the fate he did always would have been high.
If you consider his disabilities and his achievements, however, he already was great, way beyond what most 'normal' drivers ever could achieve.
An interesting point brought up here was that of his potential as a role model to thalidomide victims. Perhaps someone should have thought to have promoted him in that area. Perhaps, too, there was potential for greater sales of the book about him, had someone thought to promote it to the appropriate people.
#37
Wolf
-
- 7,883 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 01:17
Barry, I hate to disagree, but the sort of feat he has done should not be inspiring only for thalidomide victims, but moreso for people without disabilities. This is our world that we have fashioned to our liking and needs, largely without regard for disabled who are more needy in that respect. And that sort of change of heart is not easily achievable, without letting 'normal' people see what obstacles are there for disabled persons (many a time imposed on them by 'us').
As for decision to not let him run in continental races, I would like to disagree, but, alack, am really in no position to pass competent judgement on the matter...
As for decision to not let him run in continental races, I would like to disagree, but, alack, am really in no position to pass competent judgement on the matter...
#38
oldtimer
-
- 1,291 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 19:30
Barry, I would like to respond to your concern about Archie Scott-Brown's ability to deal with the unexpected. I remember seeing Archie's Connaught have a brake grab on entry to the brick walled chicane at Goodwood. The car was pulled off-line. Archie's response was instantaneous, and the car was put back online for a normal entry into the chicane. I remember thinking at the time, "That's why some people can drive F1 cars".
This happened during practice at the 1957 Easter Goodwood meeting.
This happened during practice at the 1957 Easter Goodwood meeting.
#39
Barry Boor
-
- 11,549 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 20:22
It's really good to see the Archie thread pop up again.
To anyone who has not bought the Stirling Moss biography, yet, there is a wonderful double page picture in there from Goodwood 1956. It shows Archie in the Connaught leading Stirling's 250F and Mike Hawthorn in the BRM in close company.
I presume it to be fairly early in the race because Mike is still in touch, but you can see quite a way behind Mike and there is no-one else in sight.
Who else was in that race?
To anyone who has not bought the Stirling Moss biography, yet, there is a wonderful double page picture in there from Goodwood 1956. It shows Archie in the Connaught leading Stirling's 250F and Mike Hawthorn in the BRM in close company.
I presume it to be fairly early in the race because Mike is still in touch, but you can see quite a way behind Mike and there is no-one else in sight.
Who else was in that race?
Advertisement
#40
Wolf
-
- 7,883 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 21:09
Barry-
Fastest Lap: Stirling Moss (Maserati 250F), 1:30.2, 95.79mph
Pole Position: Stirling Moss, 1:32.0
Results:
1 Stirling Moss (Maserati 250F '2522') 48m50.4, 94.35mph
2 Roy Salvadori (Maserati 250F '2507') 49m53.6
3 Les Leston (Connaught B-Type 'B1') 50m25.8
4 Bob Gerard (Connaught B-Type 'B7') 31 laps
5 Reg Parnell (Connaught B-Type 'B4') 31 laps
6 Robert Manzon (Gordini T32 '0041') 30 laps
7 Luigi Rosier (Maserati 250F) 30 laps
8 Elie Bayol (Gordini T32) 30 laps
Did Not Finish:
Archie ScottBrown (Connaught B) 17 Engine
Mike Hawthorn (Maserati 250F) 23 Accident
Tony Brooks (BRM P25) 9 Accident
Ken Wharton (Vanwall) 1 mechanical problem
BTW, this is just cut-and-paste job.
Fastest Lap: Stirling Moss (Maserati 250F), 1:30.2, 95.79mph
Pole Position: Stirling Moss, 1:32.0
Results:
1 Stirling Moss (Maserati 250F '2522') 48m50.4, 94.35mph
2 Roy Salvadori (Maserati 250F '2507') 49m53.6
3 Les Leston (Connaught B-Type 'B1') 50m25.8
4 Bob Gerard (Connaught B-Type 'B7') 31 laps
5 Reg Parnell (Connaught B-Type 'B4') 31 laps
6 Robert Manzon (Gordini T32 '0041') 30 laps
7 Luigi Rosier (Maserati 250F) 30 laps
8 Elie Bayol (Gordini T32) 30 laps
Did Not Finish:
Archie ScottBrown (Connaught B) 17 Engine
Mike Hawthorn (Maserati 250F) 23 Accident
Tony Brooks (BRM P25) 9 Accident
Ken Wharton (Vanwall) 1 mechanical problem
BTW, this is just cut-and-paste job.
#41
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 21:14
Hawthorn was in a BRM, Wharton in a Ferrari.
#42
Wolf
-
- 7,883 posts
- Joined: June 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 21:20
Thanx, Roger- I'll notify the owner of the site from which I've ripped off data.;)
#43
Barry Boor
-
- 11,549 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 21:24
Thanks, Wolf.
I never realised Gordini made more than one type 32; and what a lot of Connaughts.
Also, isn't it odd how happily a 12 car field was accepted back then? Nowadays I feel short-changed with 22 F1 cars instead of 26!
I never realised Gordini made more than one type 32; and what a lot of Connaughts.
Also, isn't it odd how happily a 12 car field was accepted back then? Nowadays I feel short-changed with 22 F1 cars instead of 26!
#44
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 21:33
I didn't notice before; Bayol was in a T16.
#45
Vitesse2
-
- 41,876 posts
- Joined: April 01
Administrator
Posted 12 September 2001 - 21:34
Originally posted by Barry Boor
Thanks, Wolf.
I never realised Gordini made more than one type 32;
Does that mean you've got to build another slot car Barry?
Sheldon says Bayol was in a T16 though ... the second T32, 0042, doesn't appear till Monaco, when 0041 was a T-car
#46
Barry Boor
-
- 11,549 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 12 September 2001 - 21:43
It could do, Wolf, it could do. Thanks for the thought.
However, that series has reached 32 cars, with 3 type 16's and 1 - 32. I think I'll stick at that.
However, that series has reached 32 cars, with 3 type 16's and 1 - 32. I think I'll stick at that.
#47
Barry Lake
-
- 2,169 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 16 September 2001 - 12:23
Originally posted by oldtimer
Barry, I would like to respond to your concern about Archie Scott-Brown's ability to deal with the unexpected. I remember seeing Archie's Connaught have a brake grab on entry to the brick walled chicane at Goodwood. The car was pulled off-line. Archie's response was instantaneous, and the car was put back online for a normal entry into the chicane. I remember thinking at the time, "That's why some people can drive F1 cars".
This happened during practice at the 1957 Easter Goodwood meeting.
Oldtimer
I wasn't in any way doubting Scott-Brown's ability or reactions (nor the strength in his good arm for that matter). I was thinking more along the lines of a situation that needed a couple of grabs at the wheel to correct, then another couple to get it back straight again. It did happen with those older cars - with lower-geared steering than is the norm today.
By the way, you can't imagine how good it feels to be able to call someone "oldtimer"!
#48
Joe Fan
-
- 5,591 posts
- Joined: December 98
Member
Posted 04 October 2001 - 07:14
With all the talk that Archie was just a wringer on the British circuits, I thought I would point this out. Archie was at the Nurburging for the 1000 KM race in 1957, as a promise from a race organizer for his 1956 Italian GP snub. This was Archie's first time at the 'Ring. There were three Ecurie Ecosse D-Type Jaguars entered for the race along with a Murkett owned D-Type that Archie and Henry Taylor would co-drive. The Ecurie Ecosse Jags were driven by usual suspects: Flockhart/Fairman, Bueb/Lawrence and Sanderson/Steed.
Well, guess who posted the fastest time of all the Jaguar drivers? The circuit rookie: Archie Scott Brown. Fangio accepted an invitation to drive the Bueb/Lawrence Ecurie Ecosse D-Type during practice and the Master wasn't able to better the rookie's time. Even though this was a different car, I think most would agree that an Ecurie Ecosse D-type should have been a better piece of machinery than the privately owned D-Type that Archie drove.
Unfortunately, Archie wasn't able to compete in the race because Taylor took the first stint in the car (because they used a Le Mans-type start and he was a faster sprinter than Archie) where he proceeded to crash the car out after 4 laps.
Well, guess who posted the fastest time of all the Jaguar drivers? The circuit rookie: Archie Scott Brown. Fangio accepted an invitation to drive the Bueb/Lawrence Ecurie Ecosse D-Type during practice and the Master wasn't able to better the rookie's time. Even though this was a different car, I think most would agree that an Ecurie Ecosse D-type should have been a better piece of machinery than the privately owned D-Type that Archie drove.
Unfortunately, Archie wasn't able to compete in the race because Taylor took the first stint in the car (because they used a Le Mans-type start and he was a faster sprinter than Archie) where he proceeded to crash the car out after 4 laps.
#49
oldtimer
-
- 1,291 posts
- Joined: October 00
Member
Posted 04 October 2001 - 23:07
Joe, you have me puzzled. If Henry Taylor's qualifying lap was faster than Archie's, how is that Archie "posted the fastest time of all the Jaguar drivers"?
#50
Roger Clark
-
- 7,509 posts
- Joined: February 00
Member
Posted 04 October 2001 - 23:13
I think Joe means he could run faster.
