249 replies to this topic

[rosenbergendo]

Just rewatched the race on BBC HD and it is striking how Petrov's wheel came off in his hand. Could the bumps in Senna's accident caused the same thing?

[genespleen]

Just rewatched the race on BBC HD and it is striking how Petrov's wheel came off in his hand. Could the bumps in Senna's accident caused the same thing?

Could have...who knows? Not according to the exhaustive analysis done in the months after Senna's death. Moreover, since Senna's car only bottomed out a few times, the scenario doesn't compare very well with Petrov's--whose car first ploughed into a hillock, then landed very hard after a good attempt at achieving flight.

[rosenbergendo]

Just have never seen this ever before in F-1 after >25 years of watching every race. I always thought the "broken steering column" explanation to be suspect. But........after seeing this it could be possible especially if there was a spot weld repair done prior to the race (Senna's car).

Edited by rosenbergendo, 12 April 2011 - 11:41.

[tallpaul]

When I saw the replay that was the first thing that went through my mind having seen the Senna movie recently the incar footage of Senna's last lap is better quality than ever and the amount of wheel movement is so great that I can't beleive Senna didn't pull into the pits.

Williams admitting that there was 40% stress fractures across it's circumference but when you look at the FW16 chassis and the massive crack down the opposite side of where the wheel struck the side of the car you begin to get an idea of the forces involved when a car hits a concrete wall at 130mph at that shallow angle.

I was positive that it was steering failure that casued Senna's accident, now having seen Petrov's accident I'm not as sure.

Tall Paul

[johnmhinds]

I'm not sure why you're comparing Senna's and Petrov's accidents.
The only connection is a steering wheel failure.

But Senna's was before his accident and Petrov's was after his.
And they aren't even using the same steering design.

The accidents are unrelated, you can't draw any conclusions about Senna's crash from what happened to Petrov.

[pRy]

A few points:

- The steering column modification was made prior to the 1994 season, not prior to Imola.
- At the trial David Coulthard took part in a demonstration of how much the steering column on the 94 Williams moved and illustrated that it did indeed allow for the movement seen in the onboard Senna footage.

[BMW4life]

I don't see how the two incidents are connected. Nothing changes for me, as far as Senna's accident is concerned. The steering column failed. That corner is taken flat out in the rain... how can a little bump cause the car to veer off with all that downforce produced at the speed they're traveling. It went straight off... no twitching, which you would see if someone hits a bump (at any speed). Senna knew the column was broken instantly, hence the minimum steering input... In fact, it appears to me that he may have been trying to "pop" it back into place.

IT was a cover-up by Williams and Bernie, which I have no problem with, unfortunately. The Italian laws have prevented us from having a proper conclusion to this case. But be real... How can anybody believe the low pressure story?

[cilurnum]

The wheel never came off in Senna's hands nor did the steering column fail. If it had you wouldn't have seen him pulling the wheel to the left in in-car footage. That's a myth bandied about by people looking for someone to blame.

The accident was caused by Senna being unable to turn the car left because the car had completely bottomed on the track and was thus being steered by it. This was caused by the ride height of the car being too low and that decision was made by Senna because he wanted the cornering speed. That didn't happen to Damon Hill.

In short, Petrov's accident was nothing like Senna's and actually went some way to dispelling it. Petrov was able to do absolutely nothing to steer the car. When you see Senna he was actually leaning over to the left and pulling on the wheel.

[OfficeLinebacker]

Also, in Petrov's case, wasn't the steering column still complete, lengthwise? Just the bracket that mounts it to the underside of the dash came loose....IIRC

[DevilDare]

IT was a cover-up by Williams and Bernie, which I have no problem with, unfortunately. The Italian laws have prevented us from having a proper conclusion to this case. But be real... How can anybody believe the low pressure story?

I know a person who does...

Trying to explain it to him that its bollocks was literally the most frustrating thing I have done. Ever.

[nol]

What was speculated was that Williams had shortened Senna's steering column (at his request) and the joint failed. But nobody knows if it failed before or after the accident. Petrov's steering rack failed after he landed on it, not his steering column, if you watch the race footage you will see Petrov walking away with the steering wheel in hand, steering column still attached to it

[tallpaul]

The wheel never came off in Senna's hands nor did the steering column fail. If it had you wouldn't have seen him pulling the wheel to the left in in-car footage. That's a myth bandied about by people looking for someone to blame.

The accident was caused by Senna being unable to turn the car left because the car had completely bottomed on the track and was thus being steered by it. This was caused by the ride height of the car being too low and that decision was made by Senna because he wanted the cornering speed. That didn't happen to Damon Hill.

In short, Petrov's accident was nothing like Senna's and actually went some way to dispelling it. Petrov was able to do absolutely nothing to steer the car. When you see Senna he was actually leaning over to the left and pulling on the wheel.

Do you not think the 40%(which Williams admitted to) stress fractures contributed to Senna leaving the road?

And Coulthard should be ashamed of hinself for partaking in that video, nobody manhandles a steering colum like that and even then it doesn't move as much as Senna's did.

If the ride height was too low how did Senna set the third fastest lap of the race on lap six?

Also if you look at Senna's accident in Mexico 91 he's using the steering until he hits the wall backwards, when he went off at Tamburello he was just a passenger.

Anyone how has ever experienced steering failure in a Formula A 100c kart or racing car will now the felling and how the kart/car just straightens and goes off.



Just for the record I was never a huge Senna fan, Alesi and Mansell were my favorites but the world was a different place after 1st May 1994

[Ross Stonefeld]

Was it confirmed, properly, that the steering failed before the accident in Senna's case? I always felt it was terminal(for lack of a better word) understeer due to the high speed bumps.

[nol]

Was it confirmed, properly, that the steering failed before the accident in Senna's case? I always felt it was terminal(for lack of a better word) understeer due to the high speed bumps.

No it wasn't (confirmed it failed before the accident)

[schtix]

woohooo a Senna crash thread!

We already solved this. HE WAS SHOT.

[tallpaul]

woohooo a Senna crash thread!

We already solved this. HE WAS SHOT.

Watch the Senna movie and see his mother grieve over his coffin and you might think twice about making such a stupid commment and putting a smiley face in your post.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Oh boo hoo.

[schtix]

Watch the Senna movie and see his mother grieve over his coffin and you might think twice about making such a stupid commment and putting a smiley face in your post.

Yet raking over and over it again and again and presenting ludicrous theories as fact is prefectly acceptable.

[Reinmuster]

Senna's death caused by chain of events that happen on the track. On cold tyres, the car suddenly bottom-out towards Tamburello corner, causing him losing downforce and strongly under-steered off track and hit the wall.

The rest is history.

Petrov accident caused by marbles on the track I believe.

[tallpaul]

Yet raking over and over it again and again and presenting ludicrous theories as fact is prefectly acceptable.

Well at least I show some respect for the dead.

Now that the film has come out I think it's perfectly understandable to see people disucssing it.

Maybe true F1 fans who were completely were shocked that day and still saddened by it's events to this day feel the need to understand what happened.

Don't try to justify your childish comments with comparisons to a true F1 fan trying to understand the loss of it's greatest driver.

And where do you get ludicrous theories from? Williams admitted that there was stress fractures and every driver stated that you would only go off at Tamburello if there was a problem with the car.

[wewantourdarbyback]

And where do you get ludicrous theories from? Williams admitted that there was stress fractures and every driver stated that you would only go off at Tamburello if there was a problem with the car.

I put money on you not being able to back that up. No evidence has been brought up that the steering wheel came off, but analysis has determined that the car could well have bottomed out and caused the horrendous understeer, or, as Damon Hill once said, drivers make mistakes.

As if Frank and Patrick haven't been through enough over the years idiots with none of the facts continue to make baseless accusations.

[tallpaul]

I put money on you not being able to back that up. No evidence has been brought up that the steering wheel came off, but analysis has determined that the car could well have bottomed out and caused the horrendous understeer, or, as Damon Hill once said, drivers make mistakes.

As if Frank and Patrick haven't been through enough over the years idiots with none of the facts continue to make baseless accusations.

Damon Hill as an employee of Williams was hardly going to blame the car. Prost states in the Senna movie that is was clearly a problem with the car along with Alboreto and many other drivers.

And I can appreciate that Head and Williams have been through a lot as I have always been a fan of Williams but I resent the tag of being called an "idiot making baseless accusations".

I'm not accusing Williams of anything the court has already done that I'm merely discussing something that I still can't beleive happened.

[BMW4life]

Senna's death caused by chain of events that happen on the track. On cold tyres, the car suddenly bottom-out towards Tamburello corner, causing him losing downforce and strongly under-steered off track and hit the wall.

Incredible!! The car went straight off the track, at a high speed corner that's taken flat out even in the wet. With that much downforce there is no way bottoming out is going to cause a car to veer straight off course. Something clearly broke.

Cold tyres? That fatal lap was the second trip around after the restart, more than enough time to get heat back into the tyres. I also think it's a great opportunity to point out that tyres weren't nearly as temperature sensitive as they are today. Witness schumacher on dry tyres fending off hill on wets and outbraking him at a wet Spa, just one year later. Look at Timo glock struggling to get the power down going down the straight in Brazil, 2008.

[Haribo]

I was waiting for this thread. How did it take so long to appear!

[BMW4life]

I know a person who does...

Trying to explain it to him that its bollocks was literally the most frustrating thing I have done. Ever.

I can imagine .

[tallpaul]

Incredible!! The car went straight off the track, at a high speed corner that's taken flat out even in the wet. With that much downforce there is no way bottoming out is going to cause a car to veer straight off course. Something clearly broke.

Cold tyres? That fatal lap was the second trip around after the restart, more than enough time to get heat back into the tyres. I also think it's a great opportunity to point out that tyres weren't nearly as temperature sensitive as they are today. Witness schumacher on dry tyres fending off hill on wets and outbraking him at a wet Spa, just one year later. Look at Timo glock struggling to get the power down going down the straight in Brazil, 2008.

At last! Someone talking sense.

[Andrew Hope]

It would almost be uplifting to talk about the death of a driver other than Senna for once, just for a change.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Incredible!! The car went straight off the track, at a high speed corner that's taken flat out even in the wet. With that much downforce there is no way bottoming out is going to cause a car to veer straight off course. Something clearly broke.

You can crash there in the dry. Wasn't Hill hesitant to take it flat out in qualifying?

[rosenbergendo]

The theory that low tyre pressure caused the crash was defeated in court when Stefano Stefanini, head of Bologna's traffic accident unit, testified that Senna, with a heavier car than Michael Schumacher and Damon Hill, recorded a time of 1.24.887 on the sixth lap, Senna's only lap at race speed and the third fastest lap of the race. Michele Alboreto and other drivers of the era claimed that given Senna's lap time, his tyres would have been at race temperature by the 7th lap and could not have been a factor in the crash.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Well recall they had a safety car period.

But the strongest argument against it not being a tire pressure issue is that he went through the corner fine on the previous lap immediately after the safety car.

[pRy]

Schumacher and Hill on the subject:

I saw that his car was already touching quite a lot at the back on the lap before, the car was very nervous in this corner, and he nearly lost it. On the next lap he did lose it. The car touched with the rear skids, went a bit sideways, and he just lost it.

I am convinced that he made a mistake, but many people will never believe that he could. Why not? He made many mistakes in his career. I have listened to and read endless theories about why, or how, he could have crashed on such a 'simple' corner like Tamburello. No-one other than Ayrton Senna and I know what it was like to drive that car, through that corner, in that race, on that day, on cold tyres. He was identified with pushing to the limit and beyond. It was not the fault of anyone else that he kept his foot flat when he could have lifted.

[Amphicar]

The Italian authorities (eventually) concluded that Ayrton Senna's fatal crash at Imola in 1994 was due to the steering column on his Williams breaking, causing him to veer off the track. At Senna's own request the column had been lengthened. This was done by cutting the column, inserting a piece of tubing and welding it back together with reinforcing plates.

The Williams team was charged with manslaughter and the legal proceedings lasted many years. Patrick Head was eventually found guilty by the Italian Court of Appeal in April 2007, some 13 years after the accident: "It has been determined that the accident was caused by a steering column failure. This failure was caused by badly designed and badly executed modifications."

I make no comment on whether this is the true explanation - but it is the official verdict.

[Crafty]

Sennas accident was in a totally different era, the cars were actually pretty horrible to drive due to the removal of all electronic systems - back to basics.. the teams and drivers hadn't quite got their heads around the cars at that time, witness Senna spinning off in his home race, exhausted from hustling the car around the track for hours.

What is clear is that the engineering work to modify the column was not of the quality you'd expect from the engineering department of an F1 team. Why they didn't just make a new column shaft will never be known I guess.. it wouldn't be particularly expensive or difficult to do.

To my mind I don't think the column caused the accident - I think it bottomed out and punted him off and the column either broke on impact or shortly before when the car was travelling over the grass etc between the track and the wall.

As with all accidents there was no single cause
1) Wall very close to the track - Senna and Berger had inspected the track earlier that year, they were worried about the wall and agreed it should be moved back. Senna then took a look behind the wall and found a stream/small river behind it - he told Berger it would be impossible to move the wall back and the issue wasn't taken any further

2) Horrendously slow safety car. The safety car that day was an Opel Vectra A Turbo (Vauxhall Cavalier Turbo to the UKers). a 2 litre turbocharged engine producing 204bhp mated to a 4x4 drivetrain they were a fairly impressive road vehicle at the time, but way, way too slow to allow F1 cars to keep tyre and brake temperatures up. I know, I owned a modified one and drove many standard ones. The concept of a safety car was fairly new at that time and I don't think the use of the safety car had really been reviewed.

3) Suspension disintegration. Had wheel tethers been in use at that time its quite likely that much of the energy of the impact would of been contained, thus parts may not of hit Senna, or if they did had much less momentum and thus doing less damage.

4) Steering Column. The amount of flex in the steering system must of reduced its efficiency, its possible that if Senna did lose control of the car he may of been able to gain some amount of control back if the flex wasn't reducing the efficiency of the system. If the flex witnessed is due to the modification or not is difficult to say - from the evidence that Williams gave in the trial the answer would be no.


As someone above said Petrovs accident was caused by slamming into the ground from the height of about 3 feet and god knows what speed. I suspect that the whole tub flexed massively and simply sheared the bolts holding the bracket on. It would be interesting to know how much of that car will be replaced for China - I wouldn't be surpised to hear that the entire thing is a write off and they are building up a new car for China.

[tallpaul]

Sennas accident was in a totally different era, the cars were actually pretty horrible to drive due to the removal of all electronic systems - back to basics.. the teams and drivers hadn't quite got their heads around the cars at that time, witness Senna spinning off in his home race, exhausted from hustling the car around the track for hours.

What is clear is that the engineering work to modify the column was not of the quality you'd expect from the engineering department of an F1 team. Why they didn't just make a new column shaft will never be known I guess.. it wouldn't be particularly expensive or difficult to do.

To my mind I don't think the column caused the accident - I think it bottomed out and punted him off and the column either broke on impact or shortly before when the car was travelling over the grass etc between the track and the wall.

As with all accidents there was no single cause
1) Wall very close to the track - Senna and Berger had inspected the track earlier that year, they were worried about the wall and agreed it should be moved back. Senna then took a look behind the wall and found a stream/small river behind it - he told Berger it would be impossible to move the wall back and the issue wasn't taken any further

2) Horrendously slow safety car. The safety car that day was an Opel Vectra A Turbo (Vauxhall Cavalier Turbo to the UKers). a 2 litre turbocharged engine producing 204bhp mated to a 4x4 drivetrain they were a fairly impressive road vehicle at the time, but way, way too slow to allow F1 cars to keep tyre and brake temperatures up. I know, I owned a modified one and drove many standard ones. The concept of a safety car was fairly new at that time and I don't think the use of the safety car had really been reviewed.

3) Suspension disintegration. Had wheel tethers been in use at that time its quite likely that much of the energy of the impact would of been contained, thus parts may not of hit Senna, or if they did had much less momentum and thus doing less damage.

4) Steering Column. The amount of flex in the steering system must of reduced its efficiency, its possible that if Senna did lose control of the car he may of been able to gain some amount of control back if the flex wasn't reducing the efficiency of the system. If the flex witnessed is due to the modification or not is difficult to say - from the evidence that Williams gave in the trial the answer would be no.


As someone above said Petrovs accident was caused by slamming into the ground from the height of about 3 feet and god knows what speed. I suspect that the whole tub flexed massively and simply sheared the bolts holding the bracket on. It would be interesting to know how much of that car will be replaced for China - I wouldn't be surpised to hear that the entire thing is a write off and they are building up a new car for China.

Although I am convinced it was steering failure I must commend your detailed analysis and rational thought.

[as65p]

Schumacher and Hill on the subject:

.... The car touched with the rear skids, went a bit sideways, and he just lost it.

Sure. Losing rear downforce in a fast lefthander makes the car turn right. That's why we're seeing cars leave the track at a similar trajectories all the time. Simples. It's the same law of physic that makes water flow only upwards.

[Andy865]

Sure. Losing rear downforce in a fast lefthander makes the car turn right. That's why we're seeing cars leave the track at a similar trajectories all the time. Simples. It's the same law of physic that makes water flow only upwards.

It's called oversteer.

And if your in Australia, water does flow up. Most annoying when flushing the loo.

[nol]

Sure. Losing rear downforce in a fast lefthander makes the car turn right. That's why we're seeing cars leave the track at a similar trajectories all the time. Simples. It's the same law of physic that makes water flow only upwards.

There's actually a pretty convincing (if a bit elaborate) explanation put forward during the Williams trial of how a car bottoming out would effectively "lift" the front tyres, causing massive understeer and an accident like Senna suffered. Don't forget back then cars had flat (not stepped) floors so it's theoretically possible for the thing to just skid on the floor (like a giant sled in a sense) and leave the driver powerless to react.

And I m not saying I subscribe to this theory, just that there can be a convincing explanation for it that doesn't require for water to flow upwards.

Edited by nol, 12 April 2011 - 20:34.

[as65p]

It's called oversteer.

And if your in Australia, water does flow up. Most annoying when flushing the loo.

So that

... losing rear downforce in a fast lefthander makes the car turn right...

is really oversteer to australians? Okay....

[as65p]

There's actually a pretty convincing (if a bit elaborate) explanation put forward during the Williams trial of how a car bottoming out would effectively "lift" the front tyres, causing massive understeer and an accident like Senna suffered. Don't forget back then cars had flat (not stepped) floors so it's theoretically possible for the thing to just skid on the floor (like a giant sled in a sense) and leave the driver powerless to react.

And I m not saying I subscribe to this theory, just that there can be a convincing explanation for it that doesn't require for water to flow upwards.

Sure. As I said, that's why we are seeing cars suddenly turning against the direction of a corner all the time, right?

[Andy865]

So that

... losing rear downforce in a fast lefthander makes the car turn right...

is really oversteer to australians? Okay....

YES! hit the nail on the head mate. everyone knows we're upside down. Now wheres my 4X?

But seriously, wasn't one of the theories of the accident that the car over-steered right, and he caught the slide so quickly that as the car gripped up again he had it pointing at the wall and thats how it went right? there is a much better vid of this somewhere.




Hamilton did exactly the same thing in Hockenheim FP1 last year. as the car grips up again its being steered into the wall.

[ensign14]

The Italian authorities (eventually) concluded that Ayrton Senna's fatal crash at Imola in 1994 was due to the steering column on his Williams breaking, causing him to veer off the track. At Senna's own request the column had been lengthened. This was done by cutting the column, inserting a piece of tubing and welding it back together with reinforcing plates.

The Williams team was charged with manslaughter and the legal proceedings lasted many years. Patrick Head was eventually found guilty by the Italian Court of Appeal in April 2007, some 13 years after the accident: "It has been determined that the accident was caused by a steering column failure. This failure was caused by badly designed and badly executed modifications."

I make no comment on whether this is the true explanation - but it is the official verdict.

I'll make some comment then - the verdict, being one from an Italian court, is worth a little bit less than the thing I flushed a couple of hours ago. Lawyers know that if they have a very, very dodgy case the best tactic is to sue in Italy. By the time the Italian court works out what's going on the other side will have been begging for settlement.

We will never know the truth behind the Senna accident because of the intellectual poverty and inherent somnolescence of the Italian legal system. We can however surmise that there's little chance the circuit authorities would ever be found liable when there are convenient foreigners to blame. We also know Berger went off there a few years before. We know that a show car had slowed the field down and we know there were uncleared debris on track. All of these may have contributed in some way. I tend to consider the grounding theory most likely, sort of like Brabham's Oporto accident where the car got jammed on a line he could not get out of, but unless Bernie ever releases those last few seconds of film we won't know whichever theory works.

[BullHead]

Do you think those last few seconds are in existance still, since that day?
BTW not a bad thread everyone, considering what it could have easily been... some decent posting chaps.

[as65p]

But seriously, wasn't one of the theories of the accident that the car over-steered right, and he caught the slide so quickly that as the car gripped up again he had it pointing at the wall and thats how it went right? there is a much better vid of this somewhere.


Hamilton did exactly the same thing in Hockenheim FP1 last year. as the car grips up again its being steered into the wall.

You think the two videos show 'exactly the same' car behaviour?

I give up...

[as65p]

We also know Berger went off there a few years before.

You remember why Berger went off in 1989? That's right, car failure (front wing). Happened quite a few metres earlier BTW, Berger couldn't even turn into the corner and simply went straight

[hihynynhhf]

It is well documented that Senna's accident was due to the failure of the steering column. At the time, there was talk of an ingenious, secret power steering system being the cause of the clear steering failure, however, from looking at the camera footage, the results of the court cases, and telemetry from the car, the loss of steering ability was due to a severing of the steering column. An explanation of why it was a steering failure, and not terminal understeer or bottoming of the car that caused the accident can be found here:



<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.c...ed/1NjSIZfG5rk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

At 4:11 onwards.

To answer the question, did what happened to Petrov happen to Senna? The element of the bump breaking the steering column is true to an extent. In Senna's case, the column had already been weakened, and was not sufficient for the task, due to some modifications shortly before race day. The bumps were shown clearly to be a contributary factor on the final run through Tamburello. Could they have weakened the modified steering column to the point of breakage over the course of Sunday warm up, and the race? You could speculate, but it is not for certain. With Petrov's crash, he ran wide on the marbles, consequently hitting the bumps. In Senna's case, his racing line was near perfect, running wide and onto the marbles, hitting some stray bumps was not the case. The bumps were on the racing line, as detailed and explained in the above video.

Now, to explain Senna's accident and the role of the Tamburello tarmac strips, first you have to watch, and listen carefully to the following onboard video. It may take three times to observe it correctyly:



<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.c...ed/5CPwnIER5gU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

At 12 seconds on the dot, you will hear a slight 'tuc' sound emanating from the car. That is the sound of the steering column failing, breaking in two. The second tarmac strip jolts the steering assembly again. The third strip causes a strange movement, which Senna reacts to by correcting the angle, this is when the column severes partially, held together by a small thread of metal. The telemitry shows the steering pressure peaking at 12 seconds, then hitting its second highest point as the car goes over the 2nd strip of tarmac, followed by its third highest at the third strip. Senna reacts like only he could, by placing firm tension through the column, and forcing the steering to the left. He manages this twice, as shown in the telmitry, before the steering column severes completely, allowing the car to plow in a straight line. Look at this onboard to illustrate what I am saying:

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

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.c...ed/55XbHyrYcoE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

You should take note of the STGACT [psd] in white font, top middle of the screen.

Another interpretation of the telemetry can be found here, which makes for an interesting read:



<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.c...ed/K9tT6lhbmEA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

For those of you in doubt of the explanation I have given you, please take note of the fact that in 2007, a court decision upheld the reason for Senna's crash to be breakage of the steering column, holding Patrick Head (I think) accountable. No other court proceedings have followed. In fact, you can find that information at http://www.ayrton-se...iles/start.html and http://en.wikipedia....of_Ayrton_Senna

Edit: How do you embed a youtube video on here?

Edited by hihynynhhf, 12 April 2011 - 21:22.

[pRy]

Another interpretation of the telemetry can be found here, which makes for an interesting read:

Reads like a complete fantasy to me. At one point they suggest the steering wheel and column flew over Senna's left shoulder and was resting on his side pod before Senna grabbed it and pulled it back into the cock pit?! I was expecting at least some form of video showing all the things they were talking about but there is none. So I'm assuming it's just their own personal theory with no evidence to back it up.

[Andy865]

You think the two videos show 'exactly the same' car behaviour?

I give up...

No, i did not.

I said Hamilton, which i was using as an example, had the exact same steering input as what the senna video theorized, and you can see that both cars lose grip, are corrected, then gain grip again when they're being steered right, and thus go right, as can be seen in both vids. Different conditions yes, similar outcomes if the senna video is to be believed (which it is not, by me anyways).

Im not saying thats what caused the accident, im simply throwing a theory out there with an example to back it up. Condescension and eye-rolling a productive discussion does not make friend.

But arguing semantics isnt really my thing, so never mind.

Edited by Andy865, 12 April 2011 - 21:59.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Sure. As I said, that's why we are seeing cars suddenly turning against the direction of a corner all the time, right?

It didn't turn away from the corner, it departed the track on a tangent of it's original line. Which is what happens almost everytime if you lose control of a car when understeering. Wet or dry.

[Madras]

Didn't Damon Hill say that in his opinion Senna made a mistake and went over a bump that the drivers tried to avoid?

Edited by Madras, 12 April 2011 - 21:58.

[hihynynhhf]

Reads like a complete fantasy to me. At one point they suggest the steering wheel and column flew over Senna's left shoulder and was resting on his side pod before Senna grabbed it and pulled it back into the cock pit?! I was expecting at least some form of video showing all the things they were talking about but there is none. So I'm assuming it's just their own personal theory with no evidence to back it up.

Yeah, part of it is a bit, well, inaccurate, but the telemetry does correspond with the bumps, at least. I am not sure where he found the telemetry that says the rear wheels locked up violently, following Senna's final use of the clutch, pushing the car down and the wheel towards the cockpit. That part is questionable, but intereseting nonetheless. However, the detail of the steering failure itself is valid and entirely reaonable, as demonstrated with two judges deciding that the accident was caused by steering failure...

Edited by hihynynhhf, 12 April 2011 - 22:05.