271 replies to this topic

[karlth]

"Leading Formula One drivers have opened talks with the FIA to discuss wet weather safety in 2008, Autosport has learned, amid renewed concerns about racing in the rain without the help of traction control. "

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/64505

Coulthard, Button and Massa are the ones who are wimping out but thankfully Mosley is finally doing something right and standing firm on the TC ban for next year.

Perhaps FIA will allow drivers to wear nappies in wet conditions. F1 drivers should be good enough to handle racing in the rain without TC like every other racing driver racing in other series (for pittance) does.

[karlth]

And another thing is that it is particularly funny that the driver who has caused the most serious accidents in the rain(2xSpa 1998) is the one pleading for electronic help.

He should perhaps stay in his motorhome when it drizzles.

[macoran]

I hope they won't allow "nappy stops" when it starts to rain during the races.

Gawd, what a sight!!

[WHITE]

Why don't they hire stunts for the dangerous races ?

[MichaelJP]

Originally posted by karlth
F1 drivers should be good enough to handle racing in the rain without TC like every other racing driver racing in other series (for pittance) does.

Absolutely - and a lot of those drivers in other series do it with far less primary crash resistance and on far more dangerous race tracks!

[karlth]

The funny thing is that racing in the dry is certainly more dangerous as the speeds are so much higher. Racing in the rain is just scarier which is why some of the drivers are wetting themselves.

Et tu Button?

[Lifew12]

Go slower?

[karlth]

Has there actually ever been in a fatality in F1 in the wet? Certainly not since the 70s at least.

Pironi sustained serious injuries in the early 80s in the rain but I don't remember anything else.

[angst]

I thought that DC was an intelligent guy. But when he exclaims that Alonso aquaplaned off "even with TC"....?? What good would TC be if one is aquaplaning?

As Lifew12 says, drive slower. The real danger in the rain is visibility,and I think this garbage from the drivers is, frankly, a joke. They are making themselves look foolish, imo.

It reads like "How are we supposed to control a car when it's wet, without the car doing the majority of the work?"

At least it shows us one thing. Its bullshit to claim that TC has hardly been doing anything, has hardly had any effect.

[as65p]

Originally posted by karlth
Has there actually ever been in a fatality in F1 in the wet? Certainly not since the 70s at least.

Pironi sustained serious injuries in the early 80s in the rain but I don't remember anything else.

More, TC wouldn't have prevented the sort of accident Pironi had. He simply drove into Prost on the straight because he couldn't see through the spray (which was always particulary bad in the forest section of the old Hockenheim).

[Durant]

Everyones lost perspective and gone soft. I hope the powers stay firm and just say who ever doesnt want to run park it. Coulthard is a useless disgrace. Never seen anyone whinge as much as F1 drivers. Bunch of bitches. Its like they dont realize the history of the sport. These days even if you go off your very safe unlike years gone past. So what if Alonso crashed thats part of the sport and he was fine.

[ensign14]

Apparently racing in the wet is a direct analogue of Zanardi's accident at Lausitzring.

I don't see many drivers volunteering to take a pay cut if an element of danger is removed.

[Valvert]

Originally posted by macoran
I hope they won't allow "nappy stops" when it starts to rain during the races.

Gawd, what a sight!!

They already do that. See Le Mans, Nurburgring and Fuji last year when they went part of the race behind the safety car because of the rain.

[WHITE]

Originally posted by ensign14


I don't see many drivers volunteering to take a pay cut if an element of danger is removed.

[quasi C]

F1 is very safe these days, even with an accident like Lewis had in Germany he was back in the car for quali 100% fit the very next day. Kubica was out for, what, 2 weeks? Unfortunately they don't realise that this is part of the entertainment in F1 but I suppose these days, with such high salaries, they've got too much to lose so even the slightest possibility of something going wrong scares most of them shitless.

[bogi]

Modern F1 is full of crybaby pussies.


Massa is known for his rain fobia, but what is with Coulthard?

[Certified Half-Wit]

I feel a bit caught between the two arguments here:

1 - F1 drivers know what it is like to drive the car in given conditions, and their opinion should carry considerable weight accordingly.

2 - F1 races happen in the wet sometimes, and they did do before the introduction of TC, so - considering the cars now offer more protection than they ever have previously - it seems counter-intuitive to fear wet racing now when it must have been considerably more dangerous in the pre-TC past.

That said, scenes at this year's Nurburgring, and at Brazil a few years ago (even WITH TC) of cars spinning across the grass and only just missing cranes, which conveniently have their body at "decapitation height" has made uncomfortable viewing. There should be more coordination between the FIA and circuits to ensure cranes are not inside the safety barriers unless there is a safety car or it is a location that cannot be reached by a car going of circuit.

It seems to me if we can get that elementary detail sorted wet racing without TC should give us nothing to fear, the drivers a scary, but not outrageously dangerous, race....and will help sort some of the men from the boys on the track.

Here's to a wet 2008!

[wingwalker]

Erm.. Coulthard seems to be go over the top with safety and is not the first time.. i recall Monza 2006 and he said something how incredibly dangerous it is without pavement runoffs, he even mentioned some kind of protest (anyone recall any details?). On the same broadcast i saw interview with Kubica, driving his 3rd race and F1 and he was totally backbedaling when reporter mentioned that protest, he said something along the lines that yeah, pavement run off would help, but c'mon, this is motorsport. In the past drivers were just fine driving in wet without TC in far less stable cars, there is no reason why it should become a problem now. And, as someone mentioned, where was the last time we saw a dangerous accident in the wet? At worst, lots of drivers will spin, and possibly spin out. Big deal.

[OssieFan]

Originally posted by Certified Half-Wit
I feel a bit caught between the two arguments here:

1 - F1 drivers know what it is like to drive the car in given conditions, and their opinion should carry considerable weight accordingly.

2 - F1 races happen in the wet sometimes, and they did do before the introduction of TC, so - considering the cars now offer more protection than they ever have previously - it seems counter-intuitive to fear wet racing now when it must have been considerably more dangerous in the pre-TC past.

That said, scenes at this year's Nurburgring, and at Brazil a few years ago (even WITH TC) of cars spinning across the grass and only just missing cranes, which conveniently have their body at "decapitation height" has made uncomfortable viewing. There should be more coordination between the FIA and circuits to ensure cranes are not inside the safety barriers unless there is a safety car or it is a location that cannot be reached by a car going of circuit.

It seems to me if we can get that elementary detail sorted wet racing without TC should give us nothing to fear, the drivers a scary, but not outrageously dangerous, race....and will help sort some of the men from the boys on the track.

Here's to a wet 2008!

+1

It seems like people are just upset because these drivers don't fit the image they want. Also, the title is misleading , F1 drivers haven't said 'F1 racing' is dangerous, they've only raised concerns that no TC may make things more dangerous.

They are right, it will make things more dangerous. It's natural for concerns to be raised and certainly it's only natural that people will question that as F1 is seen as a danger sport with people risking their lives. However, it's no excuse to put down drivers and modern F1 because you don't like it.

[Ben]

With large tyres and large flat underwings modern race cars can be very dangerous in the wet because aquaplaning is so easy. For this reason the deployment of a safety car is the right approach - as at Le Mans or Fuji last year. No amount of driver skill or TC can control an aquaplaning car.

I like TC from an engineering perspective and have no problem with it from a sporting perspective because I understand that it doesn't fundamentally alter the ranking of drivers. It didn't happen last time it was banned and it won't this year.

Having said that if it's banned you should just get on with it. The idea of having TC just in the wet is pathetic. DC should take a look at the footage of Stewart winning at Nurburgring in '68 feel ashamed and become a fulltime hotel manager.

Ben

[angst]

Originally posted by Ben
With large tyres and large flat underwings modern race cars can be very dangerous in the wet because aquaplaning is so easy. For this reason the deployment of a safety car is the right approach - as at Le Mans or Fuji last year. No amount of driver skill or TC can control an aquaplaning car.

Exactly my point. DC complains that cars were aquaplaning even with TC. TC isn't going to make the blindest bit of difference to aquaplaning, which is when all grip is gone anyway, the wheels effectively floating on the surface of the water. So his whole whinge seems utterly misplaced. TC or no TC - makes no difference.

Originally posted by Ben
I like TC from an engineering perspective and have no problem with it from a sporting perspective because I understand that it doesn't fundamentally alter the ranking of drivers. It didn't happen last time it was banned and it won't this year.

Maybe not in terms of speed, but consistency? Looking after tyres etc. I'd argue, as well, that overtaking is a factor of errors, and the fewer errors that can be made the fewer opportunities.

Originally posted by Ben
Having said that if it's banned you should just get on with it. The idea of having TC just in the wet is pathetic. DC should take a look at the footage of Stewart winning at Nurburgring in '68 feel ashamed and become a fulltime hotel manager.

Ben

[Group B]

Originally posted by OssieFan


+1

It seems like people are just upset because these drivers don't fit the image they want. Also, the title is misleading , F1 drivers haven't said 'F1 racing' is dangerous, they've only raised concerns that no TC may make things more dangerous.

They are right, it will make things more dangerous. It's natural for concerns to be raised and certainly it's only natural that people will question that as F1 is seen as a danger sport with people risking their lives. However, it's no excuse to put down drivers and modern F1 because you don't like it.

Frankly, I suspect that comuting everyday on a busy motorway is more dangerous than modern F1. It was a danger sport many years ago, but you'd have to try damn hard to kill yourself with modern cars and circuits.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by Certified Half-Wit
I feel a bit caught between the two arguments here:

1 - F1 drivers know what it is like to drive the car in given conditions, and their opinion should carry considerable weight accordingly.

2 - F1 races happen in the wet sometimes, and they did do before the introduction of TC, so - considering the cars now offer more protection than they ever have previously - it seems counter-intuitive to fear wet racing now when it must have been considerably more dangerous in the pre-TC past.

That said, scenes at this year's Nurburgring, and at Brazil a few years ago (even WITH TC) of cars spinning across the grass and only just missing cranes, which conveniently have their body at "decapitation height" has made uncomfortable viewing. There should be more coordination between the FIA and circuits to ensure cranes are not inside the safety barriers unless there is a safety car or it is a location that cannot be reached by a car going of circuit.

It seems to me if we can get that elementary detail sorted wet racing without TC should give us nothing to fear, the drivers a scary, but not outrageously dangerous, race....and will help sort some of the men from the boys on the track.

Here's to a wet 2008!

+2

Some of the crazed hyperbole suggests people have not actually read the comments.

Last year we had safety car rules changed because it was recognised by the rule makers that a five car length gap with a lot of spray is madness. A 10 length gap is far more manageable in those sorts of conditions. Comments made at the time revolved around the fact that the stewards don't have to deal with the conditions and therefore don't fully understand what is happening down on the track, in the cockpits etc.

It seems to me that what DC proposes is a full and frank discussion during which the stewards will be made to understand exactly what it is like to drive in those conditions and give the organisers a better understanding of what constitutes a red flag situation and what is a safety car situation.

How is that not just a simple and sensible discussion to have?

[Hacklerf]

What a load of bollocks huh, F1 is dangerous.. this has never changed

[S�bastien]

Originally posted by Buttoneer
It seems to me that what DC proposes is a full and frank discussion during which the stewards will be made to understand exactly what it is like to drive in those conditions and give the organisers a better understanding of what constitutes a red flag situation and what is a safety car situation.

How is that not just a simple and sensible discussion to have?

Exactly how I read it

but maybe it's much easier to call drivers sissies that should STFU than to see DC's comments (except for the TC one) for what they actually are; an attempt to clarify matters/procedures in case of a (very) wet race that would benefit drivers, organisers and eventually the public too.

[former champ]

Bunch of bitches. To be honest, I didn't expect such comments from the likes of Coulthard and nor did I from Massa.

[angst]

Originally posted by Buttoneer

+2

Some of the crazed hyperbole suggests people have not actually read the comments.

Last year we had safety car rules changed because it was recognised by the rule makers that a five car length gap with a lot of spray is madness. A 10 length gap is far more manageable in those sorts of conditions. Comments made at the time revolved around the fact that the stewards don't have to deal with the conditions and therefore don't fully understand what is happening down on the track, in the cockpits etc.

It seems to me that what DC proposes is a full and frank discussion during which the stewards will be made to understand exactly what it is like to drive in those conditions and give the organisers a better understanding of what constitutes a red flag situation and what is a safety car situation.

How is that not just a simple and sensible discussion to have?

You talk of hyperbole, yet it was DC who brings into the equation the spectre of Zanardi's accident - a high speed accident on an oval. DC is not suggesting what you claim here, he is suggesting that the loss of TC will lead to more aquaplaning, which is fundamentally a ridiculous suggestion.

[Gemini]

Very dissapointing to read quoted drivers opinions like that... Is it me changing into real old fart or is it the world changing for worse ?

[Arion]

Didn't DC say Mika quit F1 because he got scared not long ago on the ITV website? may he should do the same.

On the other hand, Tiger Woods make more money than any F1 driver, and golf is not dangerous at all. Drivers' salary has nothing to do with the risk it involves, they're making heaps of money because F1 is a rich sport, it's entirely determined by the amount of money the sport can attract.

And I'm all for drivers safety and their rights to negotiate with FIA on safety issues. I was digusted when Max threatened to cancel the superlicenses of drivers who refuse to back down on track safety.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by Arion
On the other hand, Tiger Woods make more money than any F1 driver, and golf is not dangerous at all.

Tell that to Johnny White or Lee Trevino...

Originally posted by Arion
Drivers' salary has nothing to do with the risk it involves, they're making heaps of money because F1 is a rich sport, it's entirely determined by the amount of money the sport can attract.

True. And one of the elements that attracts the money is the danger. Hence circus performers get paid more if there's no safety net.

[Dragonfly]

Every F1 driver moaning about safety should be put as a passenger in a WRC car for a couple of stages. And if after that he still thinks F1 is so much dangerous, he should retire.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by angst


You talk of hyperbole, yet it was DC who brings into the equation the spectre of Zanardi's accident - a high speed accident on an oval. DC is not suggesting what you claim here, he is suggesting that the loss of TC will lead to more aquaplaning, which is fundamentally a ridiculous suggestion.

DC has a right to employ hyperbole because he has had to deal with the risks and the consequences. All this talk of him wearing nappies, being a 'disgrace' or a 'pussy' all from people who drive their F1 cars using a six-way controller with built in vibration effects for when you go over kerbs.

But quite apart from that;

"I'm very relaxed about how Charlie operates. He may have made some difficult decisions – but he's only reacting on the information he's had. He doesn't have the spray we have – when you're flat out at 180mph you see simply nothing.

"But I'm confident Charlie will do the right thing based on us helping and advising him – and that's why we've started a dialogue now rather than trying to react afterwards."

Seems pretty sane stuff to me, unlike some of the opinions here.

[eoin]

Originally posted by angst


You talk of hyperbole, yet it was DC who brings into the equation the spectre of Zanardi's accident - a high speed accident on an oval. DC is not suggesting what you claim here, he is suggesting that the loss of TC will lead to more aquaplaning, which is fundamentally a ridiculous suggestion.

I believe what DC is saying is that we will see a lot more cars in the walls due to the change, not that it will cause more aquaplaning. The current cars are suppose to be more difficult to drive that the ones before Spain '01 as there was years of development gone into improving the "drivability" of the engine.

[Arion]

Originally posted by ensign14

Tell that to Johnny White or Lee Trevino...

Who are they? What happened to them? died in a golf match?

Originally posted by ensign14
True. And one of the elements that attracts the money is the danger. Hence circus performers get paid more if there's no safety net. [/B]

I don't think audience enjoy watching horrific crashes and fatal accidents live on TV, it's quite unacceptable actaully. Nor do sponsors wish to be associated with things like that.
Circus performers get paid more because they draw in bigger audience, it's not quite the same with F1. Races won't become more exciting just because it's less safe.

[Lifew12]

Originally posted by Arion


Races won't become more exciting just because it's less safe.

But we're are hoping that, with the removal of TC, races will become more exciting thanks to the very fact that it will make the cars 'less safe'.

[S�bastien]

Originally posted by Lifew12


But we're are hoping that, with the removal of TC, races will become more exciting thanks to the very fact that it will make the cars 'less safe'.

Bollocks, TC on a racing car has nothing to do with safety and everything with speed.

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by karlth
And another thing is that it is particularly funny that the driver who has caused the most serious accidents in the rain(2xSpa 1998) is the one pleading for electronic help.

He should perhaps stay in his motorhome when it drizzles.

Just for the record - DC was tagged from behind by Irvine ( he admits so in his autobiography). Personaly i'm not sure about this one. DC also mentions about the F1 engines nowadays being very peaky so maybe that combined with reduction in downforce will make it impossible. Both DC and JB have proved to be very good in the rain as both have a very smooth driving style, so why would they comment on it if they would have something to gain?
This board has too many armchair experts like Karlth that shout their mouth off. For me the drivers are the only ones that have all the knowlege to comment. For sure Mosely doesn't!

[Dalton007]

We need Bernie! "Get in the ****ing car."

[ensign14]

Originally posted by Arion
I don't think audience enjoy watching horrific crashes and fatal accidents live on TV, it's quite unacceptable actaully.

The vast majority don't. They want to see death defied.

[karlth]

Originally posted by SirSaltire
This board has too many armchair experts like Karlth that shout their mouth off.

That I have driven open wheel single seaters in the rain(have you?) has nothing to do with my opinion.

Coulthard is moaning about the TC ban when they he should be applauding it. And the funny thing is that he moaned also about the introduction of TC in 2001. Perhaps he should make his mind up if he wants to be taken seriously.

[superbobik]

Words by a true racing driver:

http://www.formula1....008/1/7212.html

[karlth]

Originally posted by superbobik
Words by a true racing driver:

http://www.formula1....008/1/7212.html

Interesting as Heidfeld hasn't been very positive so far.

Personally I liked Rosberg's comments the best: http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/61900

He is quite detailed in his analysis.

[Buttoneer]

Originally posted by karlth


He is quite detailed in his analysis.

Especially this bit;

"I was going through the chicane (in the test) and I hit the throttle because I forgot that traction control was off. I was in first gear, and it spun me round quicker than I was able to think. I was facing the other way and I was like, 'Whoa!' In the wet it would be incredibly difficult."

[undersquare]

I think they need to keep up the pressure on safety, there's too much self-congratulation about it at the moment. The recovery vehicles, as Certified said, are a nightmare accident waiting to happen, and Kubica's car being launched into the air as soon as it left the track, and then finding a bit of barrier at quite an obtuse angle to the track, was no good either.

But I don't see the link between TC and a wet race.

On the TC front I can imagine a start-line stall at the front of the grid being very bad, much more worth looking at.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Buttoneer

Especially this bit;

As it should be.

[Lifew12]

Regards the 'In the wet it would be incredibly difficult' comment - it's meant to be incredibly difficult.

And sebastian:

"Bollocks, TC on a racing car has nothing to do with safety and everything with speed."

I think you miss the point. Drivers are saying, as this thread attests to, that the lack of TC will make things less safe in the wet.

[stevvy1986]

Originally posted by Ben
With large tyres and large flat underwings modern race cars can be very dangerous in the wet because aquaplaning is so easy. For this reason the deployment of a safety car is the right approach - as at Le Mans or Fuji last year. No amount of driver skill or TC can control an aquaplaning car.

I like TC from an engineering perspective and have no problem with it from a sporting perspective because I understand that it doesn't fundamentally alter the ranking of drivers. It didn't happen last time it was banned and it won't this year.

Having said that if it's banned you should just get on with it. The idea of having TC just in the wet is pathetic. DC should take a look at the footage of Stewart winning at Nurburgring in '68 feel ashamed and become a fulltime hotel manager.

Ben

Le Mans last year,the first safety car (early in the race due to the rain) id say was maybe going a bit OTT(i was there and think they brought the safety car out a bit too soon,it wasnt overly bad) although certainly the rain in the last 2hrs or so of the race without doubt warranted the safety car being out as basically some parts of the track (including Mulsanne Corner where i was) were practically flooded. 2001 the safety car also came out after about 15mins due to what can only be described as an absolute torrential downpour-maybe not quite as bad as the last 2hrs of the 2007 race but even so-though to be fair it had to come out because part of the track was blocked by about 5 cars which had shunted in the rain and had blocked it so they had 2 reasons really)

[Rinehart]

Mosley’s comments have slipped under the radar, but I'd noticed that his wet weather racing theory that “it's dangerous in the sense that you're likely to go off but you're less likely to hurt yourself because the speeds will be lower” holds absolutely no scientific merit whatsoever. Seriously, a man who does nothing more than publicly guess, where safety is at stake, really isn’t fit to head the FIA. The reason I say this is that I had previously believed the progress regarding safety has until now been the FIA’s one bright spot. Now it seems, its all been largely fluked…

For example, at the end of the Hangar straight at Silverstone, yes, the top speed would be a touch lower than in the dry, but the IMPACT speed in the barrier would likely be HIGHER since the speed-scrubbing potential of a skid off would be a lot less on a wet surface. Secondly, aquaplaning off at the end of a straight in the wet would be a higher speed than skidding off a slower corner in the dry. So what, does he know where these accidents are going to happen then? Thirdly, ‘your less likely to hurt yourself’ is not an estimate that can be, in any way, shape or form connected to speed, for it is the type of accident and the characteristics of it that are important, where injury is concerned. E.g., Coulthard tripping over Wurz car in Melbourne was very close to being a far more serious accident with potential for injury than Kubicas in Canada, despite happening at about one fifth of the speed.

And despite the statistics to the contrary (which is obviously more of a reflection of the fact that there have been hardly any wet races) which do not show that wet races are more dangerous, it is precisely the freak characteristics of wet racing, eg aquaplaning and unseen cranes, that make it dangerous, not the speed.

Mosley, retire you twunt.

[F1Champion]

All they have to do is get used to driving a little slower and more carefully. Previous eras have done it, even the turbo era drivers that had to control 900-1000hp with an on/off switch .

These are multimillion dollar drivers, they'll drive whatever the conditions. Driving slower down a straight and braking alot earlier than normal in the wet should ensure they'll be able to drive in the wet. Then it will be down to the driver that is willing to drive the fastest and brake the latest.

What should be allowed is far more flexibility than what is given under the correct parc ferme rules. In 01/02 the teams were free to alter the setup and ride height however much they like and were given them a little warmup time to test it out. At least that might go some way to prevent aquaplaning.

[S�bastien]

Originally posted by Rinehart
Mosley’s comments have slipped under the radar, ...................really isn’t fit to head the FIA. .....................Mosley, retire you twunt.

how predictable