26 replies to this topic

[tonicco]

I just read (at the Grand prix History site - www.ddavid.com) the following about Jochen Rindt:

"His first year at Lotus was marked by a scary accident during the Spanish Grand Prix where his aerofoil collapsed, resulting in a broken jaw and concussion. Luckily he was able to recover quickly, although he had some vision and balance problems for some time afterwards. While recovering from his accident he wrote an open letter to the press calling for a ban on aerofoils. He believed that aerofoils had nothing to do with motor cars besides being dangerous to drivers as well as spectators."

And now my question: where/how can I get a copy of the above referred "open letter"?

[Bernd]

It is reprinted in Michael Olivers excellent book Lotus 49 Story of a Legend.

[Roger Clark]

This is an open letter to all people who are, interested in Formula 1.racing. I want to demonstrate a few points about the aerofoils which at the moment are used on most of the Fl cars, in order to convince the so-called experts that they should be banned.

Basically I have two reasons why I am against them:
1. Wings have nothing to do with a motor car. They are Completely out of place and will never be used on a road-going production car. Please note, I mean wings and not spoilers which are incorporated into the bodywork. You can say they bring colour to racing, and I cannot argue against that; but after all Fl racing is meant to be a serious business and not a hot rod show.
2. Wings are dangerous, first to the driver, secondly to the spectators.

When wings were first introduced to Fl racing at Spa last year they were tiny spoilers at the front and back of the Ferraris and Brabhams. They had very little effect except at high speed when they were working as a sort of stabiliser. This was a very good effect and nobody thought any more about it until Lotus arrived for the French GP at Rouen a month later with the first proper wing. Suddenly everybody got the message about what could be done with the help of the air; but unfortunately nobody directly concerned gave much thought to what could happen if the wings went wrong, and what effect they would have on racing.

First of all, it is very difficult to design a wing which is going to stand up to all the stresses, because who knows how big the forces are. If. you make the wing stronger, it is going to be heavier and therefore produce bigger forces on the construction; you make it lighter and it all goes the opposite way. This is not my wisdom, it all comes from one of the most successful racing car designers. Nevertheless I am sure that after some tiine-and a few more accidents because of wing failure -this problem could be solved.

Now some personal experience gained by racing with the wing:
The wing obviously works via the airflow over it, and this situation changes rapidly if you happen to follow another competitor; he has the full use of the wing and you yourself have to out up with the turbulence created by his car. This could mean that the man in front is actually going slower than you, but you cannot pass him because ' after getting near to him, your wings stop working and you cannot go so quickly. This fact spoils racing to quite a large extent. On the other hand the turbulence can be so great that your car starts behaving very strangely and completely unpredictably.

This, I think, explains Oliver's accident at Rouen last year, and I personally have been in similar trouble very often, but luckily I have always managed so far. You will understand that these two facts stop close racing, which is one of the most exciting things to watch. Therefore it is in the interest of the spectators and the drivers to ban wings.

Let us have a look at the wing if something goes wrong with it. And they do go wrong quite often, but so far nobody has been severely hurt. My accident in the Spanish GP has been the biggest one so far and, through a lot of luck and the safety precautions taken by the Spanish organisers, nothing serious happened. Naturally I will always be grateful to the Automobile Club of Barcelona for lining the circuit with double guardrails and for providing such efficient marshals.

To explain the reason for my accident, I was happily driving round the fastest bend on the track when my wing broke and changed its downthrust into reverse. The back end of my car started flying, and I nearly flew over the double guardrail on the left side of the track. Fortunately I was flying about 10 inches too low and got bounced back into the road. I have got a picture to prove it . Can you imagine what would have happened if the car had flown into the crowd? By next year we will probably have wings big enough to do so, and all the owners of the circuits will have to think about new crowd protection. You can also get lift instead of down-pressure if you spin the car at high enough speed and start going backwards.

Altogether I have come to the conclusion that wings are very dangerous, and should therefore be banned.

Begnins, SWITZERLAND. JOCHEN RINDT.

The point about the difficulty inovertaking a slower driver is interesting.

[Schummy]

Very interesting letter! I can't agreed more with it, and I extend it to current wings: they destroy racing, fights and strategy about passing.

Nowadays passing is not a subtle thing, ussually it is a brutal move or a big fault of the leading driver. I can see more elegant passing in Sportcars and in touring races (of course I will not even mention bike racing!). When two drivers are evently matched, pasing is almost an art; they study the place to do it, build momentum before, etc. In F1 it is virtually impossible... too much aerodinamic dependence.

[Roger Clark]

The thing I find interesting is that everybody bemoans the lack of overtaking in modern racing. Most say this is due to the aerodynamic configuration of the cars and that things could be put right by reducing downforce. Yet how many think this situation has existed for 32 years?

[Chris Bloom]

Originally posted by Roger Clark
This is an open letter to all people who areBegnins,

(Snip,snip,snip)

SWITZERLAND. JOCHEN RINDT.

And no one listened!

Chris

[Bernd]

Not true! The high wings that Rindt was campaigning against were banned after the Spanish incident that he speaks of.

[MacFan]

Originally posted by Roger Clark
The thing I find interesting is that everybody bemoans the lack of overtaking in modern racing. Most say this is due to the aerodynamic configuration of the cars and that things could be put right by reducing downforce. Yet how many think this situation has existed for 32 years?

Having only followed racing for around 20 years, I can't vouch for what racing was like 32 years ago, but it is widely accepted that current racing cars, especially in F1, depend more on aerodynamics for their total cornering grip than at any time in the past. This being so, anything which upsets the aero performance of the car, such as closely following another competitor, will reduce the grip of the following car by a larger percentage than would have happened with the older, less aerodynamically sophisticated cars.

[tonicco]

Thanks to Bernd & Roger Clark for the precious info

I just have one more question - Does anyone knows the date when this letter was written / published? and in which newspapers and/or magazines was it published at?

Thanks in advance,

António

[Vitesse2]

Pruller's biography of Rindt says he returned to Begnins "on the Friday after Barcelona" - that would be May 9th, so the letter would have been written shortly after that. He also says Jochen wrote to "all the principal British motoring magazines" - I'd guess at Motoring News, Autosport, Autocar and Motor for the weeklies and I do know that Motor Sport didn't publish it: it was this letter that prompted Jenks to bet his beard that Rindt would never win a GP.

[Catalina Park]

If one car has a wing it has an advantage,If every car has wings whats the point:)

[Rainer Nyberg]

Today they are vital advertisement space...

It is ironic too that Rindt lost his life in a undriveable wingless Lotus 72.

[Roger Clark]

Originally posted by tonicco
Thanks to Bernd & Roger Clark for the precious info

I just have one more question - Does anyone knows the date when this letter was written / published? and in which newspapers and/or magazines was it published at?

Thanks in advance,

António

The letter appeared in autosport May 23 1969, that is a week after the Monaco Grand Prix. The ban on high wings was imposed after Friday practice, before the letter was published.

[Mike Goodell]

Am I imagining this, or was Dan Gurney once quoted as saying something like: "When wings appeared, all the drivers loved them. We didn't realize that we were ruining racing." This is not the exact quote, just my vague recollection. Can anyone confirm this?

[oldtimer]

Roger, I was one of those who did not welcome the arrival of wings 32 years ago. There were 'Selective Luddites' even in those days.

I used to argue that the elimination of wings would increase braking distances and reduce acceleration, as well as eliminate the dreaded turbulence effects, thus increasing overtaking opportunities. Well, that was before the days of traction control, and though ABS on F1 cars is not here yet, what will be next?

Whatever, I'm sure we have arrived at a situation where the driver is too small a part of the equation. Which is paradoxical, since they seem to really enjoy the 'charge' from the enormous performance of the cars, as per Mike Goodell's post. In the same vein, I seem to remember Jacques Villeneuve being resistant to smaller engines and less performance, even though it looks as though his results suffer from his car negating some of his talent.

Overtaking is not the hallmark of satisfying (not necessarily entertaining) racing, but the reduction of the drivers' role certainly takes from what is left of the sport in my eyes.

[Keir]

Jochen was always the manipulator. Wings didn't suit his driving style, so for him, they were dangerous. Dangerous to his being able to stay at the top, dangerous to his income. Jochen wanted to drive whatever gave him the best chance to win, he would have driven the "Red Baron's" triplane if he could win with it. The letter was just another of Jochen's manuvers and that was one of the things that made him an interesting character. That, and an abundance of driving talent.

[mat1]

Originally posted by Keir
Jochen was always the manipulator. Wings didn't suit his driving style, so for him, they were dangerous. Dangerous to his being able to stay at the top, dangerous to his income.

Were there at the time drivers which advocated the high wings (not just high, but also directly placed on the uprights)?

Whose driving style suited the wings? Stewart?

mat

[Roger Clark]

It's interesting that Ken Tyrell, whose Matra was the only car designed specifically for wings was the only team owner at Monaco who was against the ban. Colin Chapman, whose cars had probably derived the greatest advantage from wings, was not at Monaco on the day the ban was imposed. It's interesting to speculate what might have happened if he had been present and the two leading team owners of the day had combined to oppose the ban.

[Mike Argetsinger]

What an incredibly sweeping and unkind remark by Keir about Jochen Rindt. Jochen was not "always the manipulator' by any means. He was a very fine person and a sportsman of the first order. He was extremely competitive and he did like to get his way - although I believe this to be a characteristic he shared with most of the top people in racing then and now. But this is a very rough characterization by Keir that disappoints and surprises me. Also this notion that wings didn't fit his style of driving - what do you base this on? Because he was capable of driving a car sideways while under control? Yes, he could do this - but he could drive however it was needed to obtain the most from a given car. If you mean to suggest otherwise I think you are way off base. I think his letter speaks for itself and should be taken at face value. He thought wings were unsafe and he thought they spoiled the quality of racing. He felt this deeply enough to make a public statement on the point. He had great self confidence and did not flatter anyone or seek their approval.

[Keir]

Mike,
If you read the post for what it's worth, I wasn't being unkind. I liked Rindt, he was a sportsman, but I wouldn't go as far as to say he was a nice guy. Rindt, in 1970, told teammate John Miles that Miles was the kind of driver that would benefit if he used very large rear view mirrors!! BTW, Rindt's tongue was not in his cheek, he was completly serious.
As for the letter being taken at face value, Jochen never did anything for nothing. he was definitely trying to manipulate the system to his advantage. he wrote a similar letter to Colin Chapman in '69 about Colin making his cars stronger.
Now, some might think that I'm being unkind again, but Rindt never apologized for his behavior and I won't for stating the simple facts.
When the "wing ban coup" failed, Rindt took it like a gentleman and kept quiet and kept racing.
In terms of "driving style", all the top drivers could drive without wings and all but Rindt liked them. What disturbed Jochen was that with wings, some of the "lesser drivers'" were up among the top boys.
Jochen was the naughty school boy, who grew to be a Champion, you either loved him or hated him. For my part, I liked the guy, but I won't sugar coat who he was, he certainly didn't!

[leegle]

Nobody who saw him at Warwick Farm in 1969 would doubt his skills with a car with high wings. He dominated practice in the dry and went so much faster than all of those who had been there before that he was the talk of the town for many years. Then he simply ran away from them all when it rained on race day! :yawn: But the week before that the wing had collapsed totally on Graham Hill's Lotus.

[Mike Argetsinger]

Keir, I'll take this one step further with you because of the respect I have for you (hell, how can you not respect a guy who lists motor racing, Track&Field, and women as his main interests - although now that I think about it how did you get women down in 3rd place? - plus we've got a birthday just four days apart - plus you make some of the most entertaining posts that have ever graced TNF and that is not even to mention the famous Amon thread which leaves me speechless - I'm with you all the way in your admiration and respect for Chris).

But I must comment on your most recent post. First of all - Jochen Rindt was a nice guy. And secondly he did many things "for nothing." He was actually quite generous and thoughtful. The Chapman letter you cite does not convince me of your point. Sounds like a reasonable thing to ask for - Jochen wasn't the only person who thought Chapman's cars could be stronger. The John Miles case is something else and I have no first hand insight in to the incident. It does sound though like Jochen was very - and probably unnnecessarily - unkind in this instance. I'm not saying it was the only time he ever behaved poorly. But on the few occasions I saw this side of the man come out I also saw real remorse on his part after the fact. He wasn't at heart a mean or unkind person.

So I'm thinking we aren't really far apart in our view on this (although on my list it's women first, motor racing 2nd and track and field - well maybe 5th - just after hot fudge sundaes and Bob Dylan).

Reasonable people can disagree!

[Joe Fan]

Wow! Jochen Rindt has just climbed several notches in mind of greatest drivers. This guy had a lot of gonads by complaining pubically about the use of wings. I have a huge dislike for wings as I believe they take away some of the skill of the driver, so I agree with Jochen. Too bad a wingless car is what killed him.

[Catalina Park]

Too bad he was so worried about his gonads that he didn't use the crutch straps on his harness!

[Keir]

Mike, this could turn out to be the mutual admiration society. Your connection to Watkins Glen will always hold you high in my estimation. And as I have said before, I hate wings and always have. My take on Jochen was that he was a crafty individual in all walks of life, he just couldn't turn it off or find some humor in it like Stewart. I don't believe that he was ever mean spirited, but he was very short with people he didn't find important. John Miles being one of those people.
Again, I must profess my admiration for Jochen, I genuinely liked the guy for everything he was - a true character!!
In re-reading my post, I do come accross as someone who didn't like Jochen Rindt, but truly, he was such a complex person that describing him in short terms sometimes leaves the whole process undone.
Obviously, you are a true Rindt fan. He did, after all, win his first F1 race at the "hallowed Glen". And thanks for expanding the subject matter, we see the same guy two different ways. I guess that's what makes this forum so interesting.

As far as Motor Racing, Track & Field and Young Women are concerned, I do have to flipflop the order every once and a while.
Isn't that what life is all about??

In closing, I saw this at Watkins Glen in 1970.


RINDT LIVES

A better statement was never made!

[eldridge]

I ound this letter from Rindt to chapman....

i don't know if it has been posted before.

Private letter

Interesting insight into his frame of mind?

[Patrick Fletcher]

If you are interested have a look at the photo in post# 42
http://www.theroarin...on-Part-1/page3