Jump to content


Photo

GPDA to request changes to Barcelona


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 thiscocks

thiscocks
  • Member

  • 918 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 11:34

I can't beleive They are now altering the barriers where Kovalainen went off. Is this going to happen every time any one crashes? F1 simply wont be happy unless every track is a totally flat featureless airfield (much like barhain) with miles and miles of tarmac run-off, which punishes no one for mistakes, is dull to drive (which most drivers think of barhin), and even duller to watch.

Maybe Im getting ahead of myself, but it just makes me feel quite sad when tracks are altered after accidents (yes even Imola). It just says that no one can accept any danger in F1, which I think should be a part of it. It doesnt help when you have the red bull 'milk and water' drivers crying to the organisers whenever they see a crash. It really is pathetic. I mean Kovalainen didnt even get injured and Mark Webber (who otherwise I like) is getting in on the act about moving the barriers. On this basis I still can't understand why spa is still in the calendar(still ofcourse I am more than glad it is) and relatively unchanged since it was built. How many crashes have we seen at eau rouge, and nothing is changed? Seems to be one rule for one track and another set of rules for others.

In todays F1 cars you would rarely see injury even if we had the Nordschleife every other round of the calendar, so to just sanitise every track is needless. It really is getting to the point where I think soon every track will be like barain, and that seriously worries me.

Am I getting worked up over nothing or do others think the same?

Tim

Advertisement

#2 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 30 April 2008 - 11:47

I don't have a problem with extending run off areas if they don't make changes to good corners, which I don't think their going to do. When challenging corners get affected, then I feel shame for the sport, but if driver safety is improved even more with extending run off areas but not changing the track itself, then I'm okay with it.

I DO AGREE, mistakes should be punished, but driver mistake is one thing, and they do lose time when they go off, but crashes sometimes are merchanical-not of the drivers making, in that respect, there is always some danger there, I would never count out another freak accident in the future.

When you get comfortable with safety, you feel your safe, drivers will still need to go for the maximum, they'll punish themselfs in other ways trying.

I loved formula one of the past, the old tracks, but those times are gone, what we got now is a different f1, but still f1, what another sport you going to watch?

I think the main problem over the past years, the rules have made the cars outgrow the tracks, too higher cornering speeds due to aero, next year with merchanical grip increased with slick tyres, it will make some of the tracks we think are not too exciting, perhaps exciting again, the cars are largely the prloblem, even the pre- revised Imola track suffered from changes from the cars grip, overtaking wasn't natural there.

Danger and F1, I would love the old f1 back, but lets see how the changes in the car next year improve things, the tracks just need some help from the f1 rules itself I say. The sport has changed so much since 1997, the last slick tyre season, it would be quite interesting to go back to slick tyres next year, it was about time, f1 is it';s own enemy with its changes back and forth.

#3 Gecko

Gecko
  • Member

  • 800 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 11:48

Originally posted by thiscocks
How many crashes have we seen at eau rouge, and nothing is changed?


Err ... basically the whole area around the combination of corners in now covered in tarmac. Besides, what Webber suggested had nothing to do with changing the track layout at all, just the location of barriers. Surely that has absolutely nothing to do with racing itself?

#4 F575 GTC

F575 GTC
  • Member

  • 920 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 12:12

Extending the run-offs, fair play that's not strictly a problem as long as the corners themselves are kept intact like what Gecko says; the problem with this accident was that it was a one-off. Something either went wrong with the tyre or something burst it, that could have happened at any point on the track; as it turns out it was at turn 9 and Heikki unfortunatly hit the barriers at speed. Not entirely sure that that one accident requires the run-off to be altered though.

#5 thiscocks

thiscocks
  • Member

  • 918 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 12:37

Originally posted by SeanValen
I don't have a problem with extending run off areas if they don't make changes to good corners, which I don't think their going to do. When challenging corners get affected, then I feel shame for the sport, but if driver safety is improved even more with extending run off areas but not changing the track itself, then I'm okay with it.

I DO AGREE, mistakes should be punished, but driver mistake is one thing, and they do lose time when they go off, but crashes sometimes are merchanical-not of the drivers making, in that respect, there is always some danger there, I would never count out another freak accident in the future.

When you get comfortable with safety, you feel your safe, drivers will still need to go for the maximum, they'll punish themselfs in other ways trying.

I loved formula one of the past, the old tracks, but those times are gone, what we got now is a different f1, but still f1, what another sport you going to watch?

I think the main problem over the past years, the rules have made the cars outgrow the tracks, too higher cornering speeds due to aero, next year with merchanical grip increased with slick tyres, it will make some of the tracks we think are not too exciting, perhaps exciting again, the cars are largely the prloblem, even the pre- revised Imola track suffered from changes from the cars grip, overtaking wasn't natural there.

Danger and F1, I would love the old f1 back, but lets see how the changes in the car next year improve things, the tracks just need some help from the f1 rules itself I say. The sport has changed so much since 1997, the last slick tyre season, it would be quite interesting to go back to slick tyres next year, it was about time, f1 is it';s own enemy with its changes back and forth.



I agree mate. Lets hope the new rules will make for more spectacle and make the odd easy corner more challenging...

#6 thiscocks

thiscocks
  • Member

  • 918 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 12:39

Originally posted by Gecko


Err ... basically the whole area around the combination of corners in now covered in tarmac. Besides, what Webber suggested had nothing to do with changing the track layout at all, just the location of barriers. Surely that has absolutely nothing to do with racing itself?


Yes forgot about the tarmac crap they put on. Im aware Webber was on about changing the barriers, this doesn't stop him (amoung others) from looking like a do-gooder nancy boy (in my view) !

#7 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,817 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 12:48

They can have all the run off in the world, it does't matter as long as the track itself is actually good enough.

#8 thiscocks

thiscocks
  • Member

  • 918 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 12:54

But its just so dull when they make big error and never get punished, and just drive back onto the track. Why not sand traps anymore... :confused:

#9 Kooper

Kooper
  • Member

  • 2,189 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 30 April 2008 - 13:07

Originally posted by thiscocks


Yes forgot about the tarmac crap they put on. Im aware Webber was on about changing the barriers, this doesn't stop him (amoung others) from looking like a do-gooder nancy boy (in my view) !


How long ago was this the view many had of Jackie Stewart? Who the hell needs armco, trees and ditches were good enough for Fangio!

Webber is correct imo that the run-off on entry needs pushing back. It doesn't affect the challenge of the corner, only gives drivers more of a safety margin.

#10 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,817 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 13:10

Originally posted by thiscocks
But its just so dull when they make big error and never get punished, and just drive back onto the track. Why not sand traps anymore... :confused:



Because, as Frank Williams pointed lut some years ago, it's just ridiculous to see those million dolar cars stuck in the sand and unable to race.


Anyhow, being punished for going off isn't the same as smacking head on to the barrier and getting stuck under it.

Like I've suggested in my other threads, there should be no kerbs whatsoever on corner exits, the tracks are already wide enough, especially on the newest tracks. Besides the track there should be a ten feet wide strip of grass and only then the tarmac run off. The grass will discourage anyone from trying to gain time going off the track, as opposed to the ultra wide, forgiving and low kerbs we have nowadays. And then there should be the tarmac after the grass because it's no use having a DNF every single time a pilot puts a foot wrong, F1 cars are too sensible and even a change in the wind can catch someone unprepared.


On older tracks like Barcelona and at the corner Kovalainen crashed, they should get rid of the tyre barriers and have some of those soft walls instead.

#11 Digitaldrug

Digitaldrug
  • Member

  • 287 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 30 April 2008 - 13:15

Originally posted by Gecko


Err ... basically the whole area around the combination of corners in now covered in tarmac. Besides, what Webber suggested had nothing to do with changing the track layout at all, just the location of barriers. Surely that has absolutely nothing to do with racing itself?


It has a lot to do with the nature of the sport because the danger element has always been part of the sport and always should be. If you make every track like an airfield and no penaltys for mistakes then cheapens the sport, and its not like any gets injured anymore so the drivers are jusr cry babys. They basically dont want to hit anything anymore. Every track is slowly getting ruined and soon there will be no walls, grass or gravel anywhere to be seen. Just synthetic tracks for todays whining gutless drivers. Heikki went head long into a wall at the worst possible part of spain , has no injures and they are still crying for changes. Pathetic.

#12 Digitaldrug

Digitaldrug
  • Member

  • 287 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 30 April 2008 - 13:17

Originally posted by Kooper


How long ago was this the view many had of Jackie Stewart? Who the hell needs armco, trees and ditches were good enough for Fangio!
.


In Jackies day drivers were getting killed every few weeks. These days they dont even injuries and yet they still cry and whinge. The GPA is the worst thing to have happened to the sport, it gives the drivers a platform to just whinge and screw up the sport.

#13 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,210 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 30 April 2008 - 13:20

Originally posted by thiscocks
But its just so dull when they make big error and never get punished, and just drive back onto the track. Why not sand traps anymore... :confused:

Sand traps are useless from a safety point when its wet. Plus in the past we've seen accidents where a car for some reason got airborne, after entering a sand trap. For Burti at Spa, IIRC there was not much deceleration noticeable, because it was wet before the race. The grass obviously didn't stop, but the gravel didn't either.

There is never the perfect solution though, as all types of safety have their pros and cons.

As for extending the run off per drivers request. I understand it, however the barriers did their job perfectly. Being further away does help in decreasing speeds however. So as long it''s a well thought out request, and not a knee-jerk reaction, it's probably OK. Again, Burti's crash was in all aspects worse than Heikki's. No HANS, going of about 240 km/h, the cars not having the same crash requirements, shorter distance to the wall,. Now I'm not suggesting to go backwards, but that they consider changes carefully.

#14 glorius&victorius

glorius&victorius
  • Member

  • 4,327 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 30 April 2008 - 13:43

They should make that corner into a banked corner, taken flatout! Without any run-off, just a simple 2 meter thick concrete wall.

That will give zem more of ze punishment!

#15 hajolyn

hajolyn
  • New Member

  • 30 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 30 April 2008 - 14:01

Originally posted by Atreiu



Because, as Frank Williams pointed lut some years ago, it's just ridiculous to see those million dolar cars stuck in the sand and unable to race.


Anyhow, being punished for going off isn't the same as smacking head on to the barrier and getting stuck under it.

Like I've suggested in my other threads, there should be no kerbs whatsoever on corner exits, the tracks are already wide enough, especially on the newest tracks. Besides the track there should be a ten feet wide strip of grass and only then the tarmac run off. The grass will discourage anyone from trying to gain time going off the track, as opposed to the ultra wide, forgiving and low kerbs we have nowadays. And then there should be the tarmac after the grass because it's no use having a DNF every single time a pilot puts a foot wrong, F1 cars are too sensible and even a change in the wind can catch someone unprepared.


On older tracks like Barcelona and at the corner Kovalainen crashed, they should get rid of the tyre barriers and have some of those soft walls instead.


I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks F1 tracks shouldn't have kerbs around them, people always talk about trying to reduce cornering speeds, but surely instead of messing around with the cars, removing the kerbs would instantly make all the corners slower as they would become in effect tighter.

#16 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 14:02

IMO the change they need to make is to the barrier itself. Today's photo shows Heikki's car has gone under the tyrewall and lifted it....

Posted Image

They need generally a thicker, softer design of barrier that slows the car at an acceptable g even if it hasn't lost much speed over the runoff (which seems to happen quite often). Old tyres and belt are probably too stiff, I think, as someone has said, and often seem to separate and lose the integrity of a tyre "wall".

Also it needs to start well below the runoff surface so cars can't underrun it.

#17 thiscocks

thiscocks
  • Member

  • 918 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 14:08

Originally posted by Digitaldrug


It has a lot to do with the nature of the sport because the danger element has always been part of the sport and always should be. If you make every track like an airfield and no penaltys for mistakes then cheapens the sport, and its not like any gets injured anymore so the drivers are jusr cry babys. They basically dont want to hit anything anymore. Every track is slowly getting ruined and soon there will be no walls, grass or gravel anywhere to be seen. Just synthetic tracks for todays whining gutless drivers. Heikki went head long into a wall at the worst possible part of spain , has no injures and they are still crying for changes. Pathetic.


:up:

#18 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 15:37

Originally posted by Digitaldrug


It has a lot to do with the nature of the sport because the danger element has always been part of the sport and always should be. If you make every track like an airfield and no penaltys for mistakes then cheapens the sport, and its not like any gets injured anymore so the drivers are jusr cry babys. They basically dont want to hit anything anymore. Every track is slowly getting ruined and soon there will be no walls, grass or gravel anywhere to be seen. Just synthetic tracks for todays whining gutless drivers. Heikki went head long into a wall at the worst possible part of spain , has no injures and they are still crying for changes. Pathetic.


If you had had any involvement with accident injuries you wouldn't feel like this.

#19 alfa1

alfa1
  • Member

  • 1,772 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 30 April 2008 - 16:03

Originally posted by HP
As for extending the run off per drivers request. I understand it, however the barriers did their job perfectly.



No they didnt work perfectly. They lifted up and the car burrowed underneath.
My only change would be to see that they are unable to do this, and otherwise leave the corner as it is.

Advertisement

#20 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 16:08

I think the safety thing has a lot to do with cleaning up the image of the sport for commercial reasons. No sponsor wants to be involved in a sport where the participants are killed when things go wrong. It´s bad for business. Moving the hard stuff further away from the track side in order to give a wayward driver or rider more room in order to slow, makes perfect sense.
What amazes me however, is the lack of foresight these guys have. Why does an accident have to happen before they identify the problem areas. Surely they could employ someone with the necessary experience, and a dash of foresight, who could sort it out beforehand. All it needs is a bit of imagination.

#21 kNt

kNt
  • Member

  • 1,694 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 30 April 2008 - 16:11

I don't quite get the GPDA, Heikki get's the worst possible accident at that corner (except for maybe flipping etc.) and is unhurt, possible injuries could only have been a broken leg or arm. And then they want to change the corner to get more run-off? Why?

That's like if they'd try to get faster around the track by each time driving a little bit slower in corners they did not miss.

#22 secessionman

secessionman
  • Member

  • 171 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 16:24

If you doubled the run off at Turn 9 you probably wouldn't change anything. Heiki barely deccelerated after leaving the tarmac.

I'll tell you what while we're at it, let's increase the run off at St.Devote. :lol:

#23 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,666 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 17:14

the tyres will harden/brittle up after awhile too.

imo they need to strengthen the nose of the car up abit, thicken up the sides (less chance of a zinardi acciedent then), and someone suggested rear tow hook...


if you want to see a bunch of guys with a lack of imagination race, then goto Ireland
;)

#24 tidytracks

tidytracks
  • Member

  • 1,569 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 30 April 2008 - 17:34

I think the biggest thing for the drivers to think about at the GPDA meeting, is the angle of barriers compared to the line of the track. Where Kovalainen ran off, the wall was facing the driver, such that with minimal decelleration, he just ploughed straight in - head on.

If the wall had been angled, the car might have bounced or been spun around, taking a lot of the force of the impact out as the different impact structures hit the wall.

Then though you have a situation like Kubica's accident where the car hits the wall, rebounds and flips.

What's the answer?

The short answer is that there is no answer. Motorsport by its very nature is dangerous. Thankfully we live in an age where the drivers are safer than they have ever been, but this is still an ultimately dangerous sport. No matter how hard people try to improve safety, be it through extended and improved run off, barriers or car safety, the ultimate fact remains that in the event of an accident the human body is being put through forces it should not normally experience.

Whether its 230kph to 0 in 0.5 seconds, or a massive barrell rolling shunt which wipes off the force as the car lurches over itself, breaking apart... the human body inside that car is still experiencing abnormal forces.

To that end, while I applaud the GPDA's stance, we must all be aware that ultimately most of this all plays down to luck and circumstance.

Just look at Viso last year in GP2. If his car had landed an inch further forward, it would have been his head which had taken the impact. As it was, it was the monocoque which took the impact, as Ernesto's visor scraped down the wall... The monocoque did its job and difused the force from around Ernesto. yes it split, but it did its job.

As Jackman said at the time, the importance of car safety is not what is left of the car, but of the driver.

#25 Rob G

Rob G
  • Member

  • 10,889 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 30 April 2008 - 17:35

Originally posted by undersquare
Also it needs to start well below the runoff surface so cars can't underrun it.

Care would have to be taken to make sure that the barrier gives evenly above and below the runoff surface so that the barrier doesn't suddenly become a ramp that launches the car into the grandstands.

#26 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,817 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 17:45

Originally posted by pingu666
(...)if you want to see a bunch of guys with a lack of imagination race, then goto Ireland
;)


:eek: That seems so like 30 years ago or more.
:up:

#27 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 18:10

Originally posted by pingu666
if you want to see a bunch of guys with a lack of imagination race, then goto Ireland
;)


Yeah, no sissy boys amoungst that lot. :clap:

#28 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 18:20

Originally posted by Rob G

Care would have to be taken to make sure that the barrier gives evenly above and below the runoff surface so that the barrier doesn't suddenly become a ramp that launches the car into the grandstands.


Yes, absolutely, not in a ditch but so that the base can move backwards :up: . It all needs some proper development and testing. There has been some experimentation with filling the inside of the tyres so they crush more consistently, IIRC, but I haven't seen any conclusions.

#29 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,666 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 30 April 2008 - 18:22

spectator safety is also amazing

http://www.youtube.c...feature=related

hoping i can goto a couple of events this year, if ive got the money, need to get me passport done too :