62 replies to this topic

[BRG]

If Suzuka were to be deemed too dangerous (and it won't be of course) then Monaco, Singapore  Montreal and Melbourne would have to go as well.  All those concrete walls!  Far too dangerous.  As for Monza and Spa......

Edited by BRG, 21 July 2015 - 16:34.

[Fisico54]

I think Suzuka will be fine, the main thing we'll lose is racing in the rain. It's already vastly limited to an extent hardly ever do we see more than inters used but I fear it will be further curtailed.
With the current talk of making f1 look more difficult it's a backward step as there isn't much more impressive than the cars emerging from a wall of spray + extreme wet conditions (or red flag as they are now) have helped so many drivers break through

[superden]

If they restrict wet racing any further than they already do, it's time to pack up and go home.

[BRG]

If they restrict wet racing any further than they already do, it's time to pack up and go home.

Indeed,  It was apparently OK to let that bunch of rock apes that form the 2015 F3 grid to race at Norisring recently in torrential conditions that would have made fish start looking for an umbrella, but the F1 circus can't race in light drizzle.  The pineapple pinnacle of the sport, they call it...

[DS27]

Suzuka is fine - leave it be.

[Talisman]

If they restrict wet racing any further than they already do, it's time to pack up and go home.

Indeed. So wet that most of the cars were still on inters with the usual no hopers being the only ones to gamble on wet tyres....

[Tsarwash]

What was wrong with gravel traps again ? 

[PayasYouRace]

What was wrong with gravel traps again ? 

 

They slow cars less effectively than tarmac and can cause rolling.

[BRG]

They slow cars less effectively than tarmac and can cause rolling.

As opposed to tarmac where you can aquaplane off at undiminished speed into a tractor?  Everything has positives and negatives.  Catchfencing was very effective at stopping cars, but then the driver could be trapped, or hit by one of the supporting stakes.  Straw bales work quite well at absorbing speed, but also burn very well.

 

The real reason why gravel traps were replaced was because of the disruption to the show if a car got beached and had to be removed.  

[Tsarwash]

As you say it's difficult. In the dry tarmac might be good, but in the wet, I'm pretty sure I'd want a gravel trap to slow me down. Big magnets is the only thing I can think of that would work in both wet and dry. 

[Kristian]

When a car is shorn of wheels, tarmac is next to useless. And if your car has no wheels, you're already in a big accident (e.g. Raikkonen at T1 at Hockenheim in 2005 - the accident would have been far less severe if the gravel had been there).

 

Or if you're flipping. 

 

Here are two very similar crashes: the first is unfortunately fatal, so a warning before you watch it, but its Campos at Magny Cours and he has a flip - sadly the wall hit his head and he died, but the car almost comes to a fairly quick stop in the gravel after: https://www.youtube....h?v=QaEGd6bEOeI. Then Mark Webber at Valencia's accident is almost identical, but he goes into the wall at a frightening speed - it looked worse than the flip: 

 

And in the wet,tarmac is next to useless. And again there are more chances of big accidents in the wet. 

 

Surely safety features should be catered to stopping big accidents being worse rather than meaning small mistakes and spins go unpunished? By all means make the gravel runoffs huge - and put tecpro barriers at the other end - and pretty much nobody will hit a wall. And also nobody will cheat in races. 

[ExFlagMan]

As you say it's difficult. In the dry tarmac might be good, but in the wet, I'm pretty sure I'd want a gravel trap to slow me down. Big magnets is the only thing I can think of that would work in both wet and dry.

Not sure there is much ferrous metal on an F1 car these days....

[Talisman]

As opposed to tarmac where you can aquaplane off at undiminished speed into a tractor? Everything has positives and negatives. Catchfencing was very effective at stopping cars, but then the driver could be trapped, or hit by one of the supporting stakes. Straw bales work quite well at absorbing speed, but also burn very well.

The real reason why gravel traps were replaced was because of the disruption to the show if a car got beached and had to be removed.

Isn't gravel also not the best for motorbikes as it flips them up into the air rather than slowing them down? I thought that was the main reason they were being replaced by Tarmac runoffs.