1636 replies to this topic

[Risil]

Marussia driver Jules Bianchi suffered a horrific accident in the closing laps of the Japanese Grand Prix today, as he spun off in worsening conditions and collided with a recovery tractor attending to the crashed Sauber of Adrian Sutil.

 

It was very hard to watch the ensuing broadcast as every driver and paddock member pictured became aware of the seriousness of Bianchi's injuries. Bianchi is currently in intensive care and has had his head injuries operated on at Mie General Hospital, near Suzuka.

 

Niki Lauda, who knows as much as anyone about major racing accidents and the appropriate response, has made the pointed comment that although the FIA did no wrong handling the safety car at the start of the race, the safety car should've been deployed for Sutil's accident, and the race ought to have started two hours earlier at 1pm.

 

It was reported in the BBC race broadcast that the promoter resisted attempts both to hold the race in sunny conditions on Saturday, and to bring the race forward to 1pm.

 

Lauda also suggested that the deployment of the recovery tractor should have been handled differently.
 

"But we always have to be aware that motor racing is always dangerous - and this accident today is a coming together of various different things.

 

"One car goes off, the truck comes out and the next car comes off and this was very unfortunate."

 

"Unfortunate". In the circumstances these strike me as strong criticisms from an F1 insider who will be wary about feeding the mainstream media with quotes from an authoritative source.

 

I've tried to be unemotional here and lay out what I see as the relevant facts as clearly as possible. Please be sensitive if/when blaming individuals or implying criminal levels of negligence. This is an internet forum. We can't change the world on here and there's no Racing Comments legal fund. But as someone mentioned in the Bianchi thread, it would be helpful to have a separate thread to discuss Lauda's comments about what exactly went horribly wrong at Suzuka today.

Edited by Risil, 05 October 2014 - 15:44.

[Retrofly]

Motorsport is dangerous.

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, lets just hope we learn some lessons. I don't think trying to blame people, or asking "what if" is helpful.

[alg7_munif]

Was FIA at fault here? I doubt it. A safety car also won't guarantee that any other car won't go off the track in such condition.

There were enough warnings for the drivers to slow down even without a safety car and they normally would slow down accordingly. Slowing down won't guarantee that others won't run off but so does a safety car. Unless you want the race to be stopped each time a car is being extracted out, the drivers should know that they need to lower the risk with their own driving.

[santori]

"The Sutil accident was way off the line and under normal circumstances we would not discuss it as the car was picked up right away. Where you park the car was very close, so from this point of view the decision was right. But in the end, it was wrong."

 

Can you tell me what he actually said, in English?

 

I know he at least said this:

 

"Motor racing is dangerous," he said. "We get used to it when nothing happens and then suddenly we are all surprised."

 

Well, he shouldn't be surprised at something like this. I think he's too old. What was dangerous when he was racing isn't what is dangerous these days. We need people who understand this being in charge of safety, not people who think the most important thing over everything else is to get an F1 car off the track ASAP, even if it means bringing on something 20 times heavier. If a Formula One car hits another stationary Formula One car, that's okay. It wasn't back when he was racing, but it is now. That's not what people need to worry about.

 

I've read that Jacques Laffite has been raising concerns about this sort of thing for years, and wants all circuits to have cranes like those at Monaco.

[Ali_G]

It might have been a good idea to have a safety car out for the Sutil crash, but as you say, hindsight is a great thing. Might be a good idea to revisit current Parc Ferme rules to ensure that drivers if wanted can run a full wet weather setup on a Sunday if needed.

[TomNokoe]

Was there gravel there where he spun off or was it just run off?

Depends how early he spun. There is grass and gravel, but quite a large tarmac strip to a service road.

Sutil's accident gives some perspective. Yes that is Bianchi directly in front. From the images we have, it's sensible to assume Bianchi lost control a tad earlier.

Edited by TomNokoe, 05 October 2014 - 12:04.

[Peat]

I think you're reading too much into an utterance.

[TomNokoe]

[TomNokoe]

For gravel analysis etc ^

[William Hunt]

you don't know that , Sutil said that it was in a very tricky corner with aquaplanning, the car might have traveled slow

[sharo]

Lauda is right.

 

And we know NOTHING as of now. Might have even been a technical issue which even a SC is not able to prevent.

[Gorma]

 Might be a good idea to revisit current Parc Ferme rules to ensure that drivers if wanted can run a full wet weather setup on a Sunday if needed.

From what I've understood there is no "full wet weather setup". The tyres have bigger diameter so there is no there is no need to increase the ride height and the cars are running maximum downforce anyway.

[RubalSher]

It might have been a good idea to have a safety car out for the Sutil crash, but as you say, hindsight is a great thing. Might be a good idea to revisit current Parc Ferme rules to ensure that drivers if wanted can run a full wet weather setup on a Sunday if needed.

 

I have heard time and again and even Toto Wolff said just before the race that the difference between the two setups is very minimal these days. Is it really gonna make that huge a difference?

[sharo]

Bloody stupid thing to say. You have no idea what happened.

Right. Neither you, nor me, nor even at the FIA.

Might have even been a technical issue which even a SC is not able to prevent.

[TomNokoe]

Freak accident. Rain got worse at precisely the wrong time. Bianchi went off at precisely the wrong place and hit the crane at precisely the wrong angle. Sutil was the first real off of the race under racing conditions, there wasn't overwhelming evidence to suggest the track was dangerous.

[sharo]

I have heard time and again and even Toto Wolff said just before the race that the difference between the two setups is very minimal these days. Is it really gonna make that huge a difference?

Probably because of the Park Ferme rules the designers tried to overcome the problem within the allowed changes. Which not necessarily solves the problem resulting in a dedicated wet race setup.

[ANF]

Foresight would have brought out the safety car. I'm not the only one who has seen an accident like this coming.

[Ali_G]

I have heard time and again and even Toto Wolff said just before the race that the difference between the two setups is very minimal these days. Is it really gonna make that huge a difference?

From what I've understood there is no "full wet weather setup". The tyres have bigger diameter so there is no there is no need to increase the ride height and the cars are running maximum downforce anyway.

I'm not sure if the ride height adjustment when going on wet tyres is as much as they want. Remember that while the tyres might increase ride height, not facets of the suspension can be changed at all. Increase ride height in the past would also have come in conjunction with softening the suspension and dampers.

Tyres must also come into question. Considering this is a spec tyre series, why aren't Pirelli producing tyres with wider and deeper grooves. It is the tyre compound which is the main divider between inters and wets. Give them a set tyre patern with the ability to move more water than at present.

[Crafty]

I thought that ride height on the Mercs & Red Bulls was noticeably higher as they left the pits for the start of the race (Ted on Sky was stood right at pit exit watching them do their bite point adjustments)

[Ali_G]

I thought that ride height on the Mercs & Red Bulls was noticeably higher as they left the pits for the start of the race (Ted on Sky was stood right at pit exit watching them do their bite point adjustments)

I think Red Bull ran with a full wet weather setup for qual so that makes sense. You could see the extra downforce they were carrying by the way Ricciardo went around the outside of both Williams thorugh the ss.

Edited by Ali_G, 05 October 2014 - 12:24.

[Disgrace]

Perhaps a less conventional suggestion, but given the billions extracted from F1 by CVC and the amounts that will no doubt go to custom Learjets and yachts, I wonder how much it is to ask to put some money towards custom extraction vehicles designed to prevent any repeat occurrence.

[sharo]

Here. They just got lucky there. After 0:25

Edited by sharo, 05 October 2014 - 12:30.

[Ali_G]

Perhaps a less conventional suggestion, but given the billions extracted from F1 by CVC and the amounts that will no doubt go to custom Learjets and yachts, I wonder how much it is to ask to put some money towards custom extraction vehicles designed to prevent any repeat occurrence.

Full course yellows for crashes on the outside of corners in wet conditions is probably the easiest solution to what happened.

Cockpit head protection could rear its head again. Was certainly the flavour of the month after Massa's spring incident in Hungary.

[Risil]

Freak accident. Rain got worse at precisely the wrong time. Bianchi went off at precisely the wrong place and hit the crane at precisely the wrong angle. Sutil was the first real off of the race under racing conditions, there wasn't overwhelming evidence to suggest the track was dangerous.

 

The presence of the crane to remove Sutil's car is an admission that someone might spin off at the same place at hit the Sauber.

 

If it was a freak accident that someone should crash at the same place as Sutil, why bring out the tractor at all?

[bonjon1979a]

I just watched the driver tracker and simply to report the facts.

None of the drivers seem to be lifting off significantly for the double waved yellows. Rosberg certainly did and Hamilton to a lesser extent but the others barely lifted. Without wishing to apportion blame but bianchi along with pretty much every other driver was accelerating through Dunlop. This continued to be the behaviour of drivers even after Jules accident. Chiltern came through after bianchi at exactly the same speed is team mate was going when he crashed.

Very few drivers out there looked like they were showing the double yellows the respect they deserve. Let's leave it at that. All the info is there to look at on the f1 app.

[RubalSher]

The presence of the crane to remove Sutil's car is an admission that someone might spin off at the same place at hit the Sauber.

 

If it was a freak accident that someone should crash at the same place as Sutil, why bring out the tractor at all?

 

It was a freak accident because the crane would have been out only for 1-2 laps. Leaving Sutil's car out there for the rest of the race multiplies the chances of a freak accident by that many laps.

[LeClerc]

The presence of the crane to remove Sutil's car is an admission that someone might spin off at the same place at hit the Sauber.

 

 

Yes, that is why they remove it. Under double waved yellows, so that nobody comes flying into the scene and kills a corner worker !!

 

It's not the JCB or the procedures around it, that is the problem. It's the drivers lack of respect for the guys who risk life and limb to ensure safe racing.

[Petroltorque]

It's the FIA's approach to risk management. I have looked on agog for over 20 years as I watched tractors operate within the circuit confines under waved double yellows. Face it today their luck ran out. Someone in another post made a very erudite comment( apologies for forgetting his moniker) that the Race Control should adopt the Lemons approach where one has a safe zone applied between corners X and Y of the accident. Limit the car speed to the pit lane speed. After all it's excessive speed for the conditions that's the problem.

[Risil]

Adrian Sutil, who's the best authority we have on crashing at Dunlop in the closing laps of today's Grand Prix, appears to be putting blame on race control's decision to continue racing into the darkness. Another element of the crash which has been brought up as a safety concern again and again.

 

 

"It was quite difficult. In the end we got more rain and it was dark, so visibility was getting less and less and this corner was a tricky one the whole way through," Sutil said.

 

"In the end, when it got dark, you couldn't see where the wet patches were and that is why I lost the car and it really surprised me.

 

"It [Bianchi's crash] was the same as what happened to me - he had aquaplaning but just one lap later."

 

Alexander Wurz, as the Grand Prix Drivers Association's new permanent chairman, has a lot of work to do.

Edited by Risil, 05 October 2014 - 12:55.

[Risil]

Yes, that is why they remove it. Under double waved yellows, so that nobody comes flying into the scene and kills a corner worker !!

 

It's not the JCB or the procedures around it, that is the problem. It's the drivers lack of respect for the guys who risk life and limb to ensure safe racing.

 

Yes, F1 drivers as a collective share some of the blame. But if one driver doesn't slow down, gains an advantage and isn't punished, what are the rest of them supposed to do? Take him behind the garages and beat him up?

Edited by Risil, 05 October 2014 - 13:02.

[Arska]

Another close call, Brundle at Suzuka 1994, in the same corner as Bianchi today - well actually a marshal got hit there.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=2YsMAfYtF4o

[Peat]

Another close call, Brundle at Suzuka 1994, in the same corner as Bianchi today - well actually a marshal got hit there.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=2YsMAfYtF4o

 

Brundle was talking about it on Sky's broadcast at the very moment Bianchi went in.

I imagine he's feeling a great deal of sadness/anger right now,

[LeClerc]

Yes, F1 drivers as a collective share some of the blame. But if one driver doesn't slow down, gains an advantage and isn't punished, what are they supposed to do? Take him behind the garages and beat him up?

 

This is F1, can't be that hard to set a speed limit for double yellow, and then hand out race-bans to whoever didn't get the memo.

[Risil]

Brundle was talking about it on Sky's broadcast at the very moment Bianchi went in.

I imagine he's feeling a great deal of sadness/anger right now,

 

It's hard to maintain the argument that it was simply a freak accident or bad luck when the "voice of F1" was wondering aloud about a car hitting the rescue tractor at the exact moment it happened.

Edited by Risil, 05 October 2014 - 13:04.

[SlickMick]

Not moving the race forward to avoid bad weather did not cause this incident. Pressuring (moaning on forums) CW to complain that Safety Cars should not stay out till the track is ready for Inters did not cause this incident. Aquaplaning under double yellows on a worsening surface did not cause this incident. Double yellows as opposed to a SC when a car goes into gravel did not cause this incident.

What caused it was an orange 10 ton steel brick that was brought inside the fence.

First clip - I'm sure everybody was dreading an SC when Sutil went into the barrier, I was, but I really thought we'd get away with it. Next clip - a slow lumbering metal brick going straight to the scene of a waiting accident. At that moment clearly needed a safety car as I didn't even find myself moaning that the end of the race was about to be ruined.

But it didn't immediately come, instead double yellows until shortly after Bianchi's crash.

FIA and teams have done a tremendous job on the safety side of things so no one should jump too quickly to throw CW under the bus. But I don't think we need state of the art carbon fibre octopus cranes, if we need to bring such vehicles inside the fence then deploy the safety car first.          

[RubalSher]

It's the FIA's approach to risk management. I have looked on agog for over 20 years as I watched tractors operate within the circuit confines under waved double yellows. Face it today their luck ran out. Someone in another post made a very erudite comment( apologies for forgetting his moniker) that the Race Control should adopt the Lemons approach where one has a safe zone applied between corners X and Y of the accident. Limit the car speed to the pit lane speed. After all it's excessive speed for the conditions that's the problem.

 

The argument against is that the tyre temps and brake temps would fall drastically and be a bigger cause for concern (and potential accidents) as soon as they resume racing outside the zone.

[santori]

Perhaps a less conventional suggestion, but given the billions extracted from F1 by CVC and the amounts that will no doubt go to custom Learjets and yachts, I wonder how much it is to ask to put some money towards custom extraction vehicles designed to prevent any repeat occurrence.

 

 Apparently Jacques Lafitte has, for some time, been warning about having recovery vehicles trundling about and wants circuits to look at the way Monaco handles things.

[LeClerc]

The argument against is that the tyre temps and brake temps would fall drastically and be a bigger cause for concern (and potential accidents) as soon as they resume racing outside the zone.

 

LOL, then pray tell me, how do they manage to have pitstops?

[HoldenRT]

It's easy to lay blame after the fact.  The idea is avoid these things ahead of time.  It saves the overreacting.

 

On the one hand, they were too conservative (in many ways and I agree with Lauda that the race should have started earlier, even if just for the fact that there would have been more daylight).  And on the other hand, too risky.  The biggest factors here were not lifting enough through the waved yellows and sheer bad luck, combined with no SC using the truck/crane in a dangerous place.  All events had to come together.  It's ironic to have such a situation while at the same time they were too conservative.  In the early laps the track was ready for inters and no one spun off.  But at the end, there was a big risk.  Hard to believe the same two things could happen in the same race weekend.  People can use this crash as justification to be even more conservative in the future, and if they do that's a shame.

 

Other than this freak accident it was a good race today, and it was safe.  Up until that point.  Motor sport is dangerous and we should feel lucky that this doesn't happen more often.  Hopefully Bianci can recover and be ok.  Very sad that he has such serious injuries.

[HP]

Yep it's unfortunate, but having Lauda just declare that IMO isn't enough.

 

There should be a thorough investigation of the events around this accident by an independent body of experts, that also can put out suggestions on how to improve things so that there is less of a likelihood of such an outcome. I'm sure at some point the FIA will come out with phrases like that from their PR departemment, but it would be better to have it come from an independent source.

[santori]

http://www.toilef1.c...iste-c-est.html

 

Olivier Panis and Jacques Laffite talking.

 

Panis: 'Cranes on the track, it's appalling. It's some years that we've talked about this... We always have to wait for something serious to happen before we do something.'

 

Laffite: 'I'd like to emphasise the cause: this recovery vehicle without any protection. It would be good if someone would start listening to what we're saying. We've been saying it for a long time.'

 

(My bad translations)

Edited by santori, 05 October 2014 - 13:19.

[RubalSher]

LOL, then pray tell me, how do they manage to have pitstops?

 

They change tyres at a pit stop and even then their brakes & tyres take a lap to come to full racing speed. Slowing them down during a lap would necessitate all drivers to have cold tyres n brakes for a good portion of the lap (if not a whole lap) and eventually they would be going from lap to lap only to warm the brakes n tyres until the waved yellows clear off. This too has a potential for disaster in my opinion.

[TomNokoe]

If I was to propose changes, it would be the aforementioned modifications to recovery vehicles, perhaps also to the cars themselves, although I think they already do. Also there needs to be progression of double yellow zones. Brighter lights, more stringent rules and slower speeds.

[sharo]

They change tyres at a pit stop and even then their brakes & tyres take a lap to come to full racing speed. Slowing them down during a lap would necessitate all drivers to have cold tyres n brakes for a good portion of the lap (if not a whole lap) and eventually they would be going from lap to lap only to warm the brakes n tyres until the waved yellows clear off. This too has a potential for disaster in my opinion.

If I got it right it's not driving the whole lap slowly but only the double yellow zone from corner X to Y.

[muramasa]

Not moving the race forward to avoid bad weather did not cause this incident. Pressuring (moaning on forums) CW to complain that Safety Cars should not stay out till the track is ready for Inters did not cause this incident. Aquaplaning under double yellows on a worsening surface did not cause this incident. Double yellows as opposed to a SC when a car goes into gravel did not cause this incident.
What caused it was an orange 10 ton steel brick that was brought inside the fence.
First clip - I'm sure everybody was dreading an SC when Sutil went into the barrier, I was, but I really thought we'd get away with it. Next clip - a slow lumbering metal brick going straight to the scene of a waiting accident. At that moment clearly needed a safety car as I didn't even find myself moaning that the end of the race was about to be ruined.
But it didn't immediately come, instead double yellows until shortly after Bianchi's crash.
FIA and teams have done a tremendous job on the safety side of things so no one should jump too quickly to throw CW under the bus. But I don't think we need state of the art carbon fibre octopus cranes, if we need to bring such vehicles inside the fence then deploy the safety car first.

Exactly.
It takes time and resources to develop and/or invest in renewing new equipment and implementing those improvements and modifications, so for shorter term, only one rule can make it a lot safer and save everyone; marshalls and vehicles do not enter the track unless SC. Of course sometimes you have to make swift response to attend driver, esp when fire is involved. So organizer need to monitor everything closely and be able to make quick reaction. Plus refined communication structure and training for marshals is essential.

[HP]

They change tyres at a pit stop and even then their brakes & tyres take a lap to come to full racing speed. Slowing them down during a lap would necessitate all drivers to have cold tyres n brakes for a good portion of the lap (if not a whole lap) and eventually they would be going from lap to lap only to warm the brakes n tyres until the waved yellows clear off. This too has a potential for disaster in my opinion.

Yet pitstops are a must in some form, because of .... ?

 

To be fair having tires to last the entire race has not worked either.

[RubalSher]

Yet pitstops are a must in some form, because of .... ?

 

To be fair having tires to last the entire race has not worked either.

 

You only need to stop once during a race. Going through waved yellows could take many laps and increases the chances of brakes n tyre problems by a lot.

[Risil]

You only need to stop once during a race. Going through waved yellows could take many laps and increases the chances of brakes n tyre problems by a lot.

 

Sports prototypes manage slow zones at Le Mans for a whole 24 hours, and their performance isn't much different from F1. It's ridiculous to say that it would be dangerous for F1 cars not to drive on the limit at every point on every lap.

Edited by Risil, 05 October 2014 - 13:39.

[HP]

Exactly.
It takes time and resources to develop and/or invest in renewing new equipment and implementing those improvements and modifications, so for shorter term, only one rule can make it a lot safer and save everyone; marshalls and vehicles do not enter the track unless SC. Of course sometimes you have to make swift response to attend driver, esp when fire is involved. So organizer need to monitor everything closely and be able to make quick reaction. Plus refined communication structure and training for marshals is essential.

The money factor has been behind most of the decisions being made.

 

The rule no trucks, marshalls on the track unless a SC car is out makes good sense however. Except of course for minor debris.

[RubalSher]

Question: Do cars slow down to a speed limit only for double yellows or any kind of yellow? Single yellow flags are frequent and unless you can ensure that all drivers go through a certain speed limit for an equal number of laps, one driver may end up gaining 5-10 seconds on another (in just 1 lap) coz the other driver had to drive at a speed limit because of yellows at a certain part of the track whereas by the time another driver arrived there, the yellows had cleared.

 

I am not in for any knee jerk reactions because of what happened today. The sport is already micro managed to a large extent and the chances of unfortunate accidents like today can never be eliminated in motorsport.