28 replies to this topic

[Henri Greuter]

Hi everyone,

I found myself dragged within the discussions about some of Senna's doings in another thread.
Verifying a few things about 1989 (Better be sure if you blame sombody for something....) I found one incident involving Senna I had all but forgotten but reading it over it came back to me again.
It was Estoril '89, the one race he crashed off the track together with Nigel Mansell who, at that time had been blackflagged already.

Autocourse told:

Mansell had ignored the black flag three times already, and he was racing with Senna. Senna seemed not to have seen the black flag either since he did not let Mansell go by. According Autocourse, Senna was then told by the McLaren team management to ignore Mansell but seconds later they crashed off.

Needless to say, one of the many Senna incidents that makes you wonder why he did it....

Does anybody know more about what Ayrton knew at the time, had he seen the black flag andor had McLaren informed him earlier about Mansell's situation already?
Or was it a genuine mess-up by both Senna and McLaren that cost them dearly.

Thanks,

Henri Greuter


PS: I do find this incident very amusing since Autocourse stated both Senna and Mansell told they never saw the black flag. And one race later in Spain, Mansell was banned for ignoring that black flag in Estoril.
But during a practice session that next race at Jerez there was a massive accident involving Gregor Foitek. The session was redflagged, black flags and waived yellows along the track. But guess three times which driver ignored all those flags and sped on. But instead of banned this driver was only fined $20000, because if he had been banned for a race his last chances for the title were over and Prost being champion already.....
And with not banning this certain driver: the stage was set for Suzuka '89....
And all that come of that as aftermath....
(And bear in mind that for a similar event, champion-to-be Villeneuve was indeed punished with a one race ban in '97 by the way...)



HG










Thanks for any answers and/or reactions.

[mikedeering]

Senna stated at the time he didn't see the flag. I've seen in-car footage of the laps prior to the accident - the sun was shining directly into the drivers as they thundered down the main straight. I could barely make out the small black flag on the far right - and:

a) I WAS actually looking for it
b) I wasn't driving an F1 car at high speed
c) I was not dicing for position

McLaren told Senna over the radio according to reports at the time - but for whatever reason did this not occur until he was plunging into turn 1 with Mansell already lining up a pass...

I think Mansell's punishment had more to do with the fact that his actions gifted Prost the title than anything else...

[Henri Greuter]

Thanks Mike,

I just wondered if in any of the many Senna books published and some Senna fans among us might own a reference about this incident was made.

I think you're right that Nigel was banned for influencing the championship.

Henri Greuter

[rallen]

Interesting thread, why did Ferrari not tell Mansell of the black flag? anyone know? Also knowing Senna as I do, at the time did he not make more of it or really have a go at Mansell about it, how did it effect the relationship between the drivers - and indeed to a lesser extent the teams?

[Bruno]

j'ai vu et revu cent fois la course à la tv, sur VHS et à chaque fois je vois le soleil en face dans la rectiligne.
à mon avis ni Senna, ni Mansell n'ont vu le drapeau très haut perché sur l'estrade.
regardez bien la visière du casque de Mansell, elle tombe très bas, et laisse juste la place pour que les yeux vois la piste.
Senna, trop occuper à controler Mansell, et Nigel, trop occuper à attaquer Ayrton, n'ont vus le drapeau.
oui, Rallen
si erreur il y a eu, c'est le Stand Ferrari qui l'a fait, et celui de Mc Laren, qui aurait du dire à Senna de laisser passer


sorry my traduction Google
I've seen a hundred times and seen the race on TV, on VHS and every time I see the sun in front in the straight.
I think either Senna or Mansell have seen the flag high up on the dais.
look closely the visor of Mansell, it falls very low, leaving just enough room for the eyes see the runway.
Senna, too busy controler Mansell, Nigel and too busy attacking Ayrton, have seen the flag.

Yes Rallen
if error there was, the Stand Ferrari did, and that of McLaren, who would have to say to pass Senna

Edited by Bruno, 29 December 2009 - 10:29.

[Louis Mr. F1]

I remember Ron Dennis ran over to the Ferrari pit wall after the accident and asked Cesare Fiorio why for 3 laps (raising up 3 fingers) they didn't inform Mansell that he was disqualified, in return Fiorio gave him back 1 finger, the middle one, it was caught on tape

[Gabrci]

Christopher Hilton's excellent Senna book says that Senna did see the black flag, but wasn't worried about it as he knew it wasn't for him. When Dennis realized that Senna didn't know Mansell was DQd, he told him, but Senna didn't hear it properly and said "repeat". Dennis was in the process of repeating when the accident happened.

He probably made a mistake by not telling Senna earlier, but later made a good point by saying that even if Mansell hadn't seen the flag, he surely must have known that reversing in the pitlane results in disqualification.

[rallen]

Louis Mr. F1, on Dec 29 2009, 16:46, said:

I remember Ron Dennis ran over to the Ferrari pit wall after the accident and asked Cesare Fiorio why for 3 laps (raising up 3 fingers) they didn't inform Mansell that he was disqualified, in return Fiorio gave him back 1 finger, the middle one, it was caught on tape

That I would love to see!

[rallen]

So what is everyone's view here, could Mansell be expected to see it or is he innocent of the charge of ignoring it?

[D-Type]

Mansell is not an idiot. He knew that reversing in the pit lane was illegal so he should have anticipated a black flag. Admittedly, if he then ignoreg it it is logical that he claimed he hadn't been able to see it.

[Louis Mr. F1]

from a new camera angle, i'm sure most of you've never seen before

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


from this video, you can also find the confrontation between Ron Dennis and Cesare Fiorio, what an exciting race, i miss that so so much.

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

[Bruno]

Louis Mr. F1, on Dec 29 2009, 19:46, said:

I remember Ron Dennis ran over to the Ferrari pit wall after the accident and asked Cesare Fiorio why for 3 laps (raising up 3 fingers) they didn't inform Mansell that he was disqualified, in return Fiorio gave him back 1 finger, the middle one, it was caught on tape

yes, yes just

[Henri Greuter]

rallen, on Dec 29 2009, 21:35, said:

So what is everyone's view here, could Mansell be expected to see it or is he innocent of the charge of ignoring it?

The passage

Gabrci Posted Yesterday, 19:11
Christopher Hilton's excellent Senna book says that Senna did see the black flag,

makes it more complicated for me. I tend to hang on what Autocourse wrote: Thad Senna said he had not seen the flag. And if he had not seen the flag, he was in a better position to see the flag then Mansell. In which case I tend to believe that Nigel had indeed not seen the flag.
If he knew he would be disqualified for using reverse? I doubt it. If he knew it, one must assume he knew that already before he went into reverse in the pittlane.
So I think that this was something he was unaware of before and after the act. Had he known it, he would not have done it to begin with I suppose...



But then comes another thought.

Gabrci Posted Yesterday, 19:11
Christopher Hilton's excellent Senna book says that Senna did see the black flag, but wasn't worried about it as he knew it wasn't for him.

Black flags are only displayed when the car involved comes in sight. As he felt sure that it wasn't for him, then why did he not realize it had to be for Mansell? In which case it was a safe matter to let Mansell go by, knowing that it wouldn't gain him anything and that he would retain his second place anyhow.



And then... other thoughts .....

Mansell claimed he had not seen the black flag, stationary, not waived, vsible only once a lap and in difficult circumstances.
Manesll was banned from a race because of this ignoring the black flag. According Actocourse the collission with Senna was not taken into considereation for this ban. Even worse, the stewarts had only suggested to give Mansell a one race ban because of this and it was Balestre who insisted on this ban being enforced the next race.

In that very same race during practice: Gregor Foitek had a massive crash that called for a red flag. Now, according Autocourse: Senna ignored a number of waved yellow flags, waved black flags and, most crucially, a waved red flag at the finish and kept pushing on at the track.
All he was punished for was that his times up til then were taken away and a fine.

Every so often it is claimed claimed that back in 1989 Balestre favored Prost over Senna that year 1989 and acted accordingly, particularly at Suzuka .
What I thought however was the following:

Mansell banned from a race because of the flag incident, while Senna got away with only a fine and times erased for an incident that I think is rather similar to the one of Mansell. Mansell's one was in a race, but Senna was far more likely to be able to have seen all those flags within a short time.... So that about equals how serious the `crime` is.
Now, had Balestre truly wanted to help Prost, then why didn't he use this opportunity to have Senna being banned for a race as well? Because....

That next race would have been Suzuka....
The one Senna nedded to win at all costs in order to keep his title hopes alive.
But had he indeed been banned from that race, then the 1989 championship had been decided instantly and also, nothing would have happened of the things that eventually did happen at Suzuka in 1989 would have happened. And then he would not have one of the reasons (Suzuka 1989) he used to justify Suzuka 1990.

I know, it takes a lot of thinking, reasoning, comparing,
Like: Were the incidents equally serious errors? (Alan Henry stated in the Autocourse Top 10 that year that if Mansell blotted his record because that black flag, then Senna's reputation was hurt just as much because of his mishap at Jerez)
Did Balestre overreact on Mansell's accident but not on Senna's? Or did he punish Mansell as should have been done but did he `save Senna` in order to keep the championship alive?

I can't help it but to me these are a number of interesting thoughts and theories with a lot of but and ifs and 'what could have beens'
And good for a very heated discussion between the pro & Con Senna and prost fans.
But also, in case it could be dealt with in an objective manner, an interesting subject to discuss...


Henri

[Aloisioitaly]

Henri Greuter, on Dec 30 2009, 13:22, said:

Mansell claimed he had not seen the black flag, stationary, not waived, vsible only once a lap and in difficult circumstances.
Manesll was banned from a race because of this ignoring the black flag. According Actocourse the collission with Senna was not taken into considereation for this ban. Even worse, the stewarts had only suggested to give Mansell a one race ban because of this and it was Balestre who insisted on this ban being enforced the next race.

In that very same race during practice: Gregor Foitek had a massive crash that called for a red flag. Now, according Autocourse: Senna ignored a number of waved yellow flags, waved black flags and, most crucially, a waved red flag at the finish and kept pushing on at the track.
All he was punished for was that his times up til then were taken away and a fine.

Every so often it is claimed claimed that back in 1989 Balestre favored Prost over Senna that year 1989 and acted accordingly, particularly at Suzuka .
What I thought however was the following:

Mansell banned from a race because of the flag incident, while Senna got away with only a fine and times erased for an incident that I think is rather similar to the one of Mansell. Mansell's one was in a race, but Senna was far more likely to be able to have seen all those flags within a short time.... So that about equals how serious the `crime` is.
Now, had Balestre truly wanted to help Prost, then why didn't he use this opportunity to have Senna being banned for a race as well?

You are totally right pal. How many times in his Formula One career was Senna sanctioned for that kind of thing? Never. Just think about Hungary 90, when he grabbed an unhoped-for 2nd place: Senna felt he could intimidate his way through and caused a collision that ended Nannini race. Besides, he knew he'd get a free pass from Federation anyway...

[rallen]

Louis Mr. F1, on Dec 30 2009, 01:35, said:

from a new camera angle, i'm sure most of you've never seen before

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


from this video, you can also find the confrontation between Ron Dennis and Cesare Fiorio, what an exciting race, i miss that so so much.

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

You are right, that was a great new camera angle, it makes you wonder what stuff is still out there yet to be seen!

As for the second one, that is a great review clip, where is that from? was it the official FIA season review film or from somewhere else? can anyone help?

[rallen]

Henri Greuter, on Dec 30 2009, 12:22, said:

I can't help it but to me these are a number of interesting thoughts and theories with a lot of but and ifs and 'what could have beens'
And good for a very heated discussion between the pro & Con Senna and prost fans.
But also, in case it could be dealt with in an objective manner, an interesting subject to discuss...


Henri

Henri, this was a great post, really made me think too. Life is fascinating isn't it, I love thinking of 'what if's' unfortunately a lot of people don't like them and you get slapped down for expressing them here! If Mansell had not taken Senna off and come in the pits the next lap to pull out, I wonder if the points Senna gained here would have made him less likely to do that manoeuvre on Prost?

[rallen]

Incidentally, what does everyone make of the actual accident - say Mansell wasn't black flagged do you think it was a fair overtaking manoeuvre or does the blame fall on one of the drivers?

[Henri Greuter]

rallen, on Dec 30 2009, 15:37, said:

Henri, this was a great post, really made me think too. Life is fascinating isn't it, I love thinking of 'what if's' unfortunately a lot of people don't like them and you get slapped down for expressing them here! If Mansell had not taken Senna off and come in the pits the next lap to pull out, I wonder if the points Senna gained here would have made him less likely to do that manoeuvre on Prost?

I must admit, this is a point that hasn't crossed my mind yet.

You do prove my feeling that Estoril (and Jerez practice....) is a matter to think about and could bring so many buts and ifs even more with that thought.
Even the do's and don'ts of Balestre during these races become a topic and food for discussion

As for what would have happenend at Suzuka had Senna not collided, Senna had to make up a tremendous point difference while Prost had alread dropped 5 points! So in order to extend his point total Prost had to win to make major gains. Thirds and fourths didn't help him that much anymore
I am affraid that Suzuka was unavoidable, Senna had to go for broken even if he had finished second in Estoril and Prost third the point gap he had to close up on was still massive.

I hope that if people picking up on it, that we wll be able to continue the discussion with arguements and facts and in a decent manner.
But it will be difficult. I know about myself that I can go beyond the red line too with the subject Senna, I can't deny that.


henri

[Louis Mr. F1]

I think Senna would still have pulled the same move on Prost @ Suzuka, he would not settle for a 2nd place, not in 1989.

as for the collision between Senna and Mansell @ Estoril, i'd say the blame is 60 / 40 against Senna, Senna always close the door on his opponents, leaving them with no room to back out. Mansell was half to 3/4 of car length alongside the McLaren, so Senna should've at least left some room for the Ferrari on the inside line.

Mansell tasted this in the 86 Brazilian GP, they repeated the exact same manouver again in 89 Portugese race, except this time both went off.

Edited by Louis Mr. F1, 30 December 2009 - 16:41.

[Kingsleyrob]

Yes some great footage in those Youtube clips, thanks for posting Louis.

I never thought I'd get misty eyed about 1989 - looks like the cars could get very close and Gerhard even refers to slipstreaming.

Talking about misty eyed it does look as if Senna might have had a dose of the "red mist" with that crucial turn in manoeuvre.

I was there that day - it was great to witness Martini lead in the Minardi albeit briefly. I told my girlfriend at the time that we were witnessing history but I think her mind was on getting back to the beaches of Vilamoura on the Algarve where we were holidaying.

And so we did, but not after I filled our hired petrol Ford Fiesta up to the brim with diesel on the first motorway services on our long journey back. It stuttered to a halt leaving the "pit lane" but that's another story...

Rob

[Louis Mr. F1]

rallen, on Dec 30 2009, 19:37, said:

Henri, this was a great post, really made me think too. Life is fascinating isn't it, I love thinking of 'what if's' unfortunately a lot of people don't like them and you get slapped down for expressing them here! If Mansell had not taken Senna off and come in the pits the next lap to pull out, I wonder if the points Senna gained here would have made him less likely to do that manoeuvre on Prost?

I like thinking about "what if" scenarios too, but most of the time i didn't get a response, i'd even sent my question to Nigel Roebuck in his online column a few years ago but without anything back.

My 'what if' question is, if Honda honoured their contract with Williams in 1988, and Piquet remained on board, Honda would've powered all 4 top drivers of the time

Williams - Piquet & Mansell vs. McLaren - Prost & Senna, which team would've produced a faster car and which driver would've come out on top at the end of the 88 season?

on one hand I don't want to hi-jack this thread, but I'd also like to get some responses as to what other people think about the above.

[Louis Mr. F1]

rallen, on Dec 30 2009, 19:33, said:

You are right, that was a great new camera angle, it makes you wonder what stuff is still out there yet to be seen!

As for the second one, that is a great review clip, where is that from? was it the official FIA season review film or from somewhere else? can anyone help?

I always wanted to find out if there's any private video that may have captured the incident (who else) between Senna and Mansell at the 1992 Montreal GP.

as for the second video I put up, that is a direct clip from the official 1989 year end review tape FOCA/FIA put out, it's a great tape with lots of interviews and onboard cameras, it was 180 minutes in total (2 tapes)

[Louis Mr. F1]

As for the 1989 season, have this crossed your mind that Senna managed to have a collision with the 3 other top drivers of the time?

Berger @ Rio, Mansell @ Estoril, Prost @ Suzuka, Senna then completed the Grand Slam with a collision himself @ Adelaide into the back of Brundle's car.

It was a lousy season for the Brazilian.

[Henri Greuter]

Louis Mr. F1, on Dec 30 2009, 18:02, said:

I like thinking about "what if" scenarios too, but most of the time i didn't get a response, i'd even sent my question to Nigel Roebuck in his online column a few years ago but without anything back.

My 'what if' question is, if Honda honoured their contract with Williams in 1988, and Piquet remained on board, Honda would've powered all 4 top drivers of the time

Williams - Piquet & Mansell vs. McLaren - Prost & Senna, which team would've produced a faster car and which driver would've come out on top at the end of the 88 season?

on one hand I don't want to hi-jack this thread, but I'd also like to get some responses as to what other people think about the above.

Louis Mr. F1

This was a very unlikely scenario to begin with because in 1987 the situation between Mansell and Piquet was comparable with what happened at McLaren since late '88 on.
No way that Piquet was to stay within a team that he wasn't the undisputed #1 for.

But let's assume it happened: then there is one major question to answer: Was Williams aware of the fact that Honda reduced the height of their engines with the use of a smaller flywheel? To make maximum benefit of this develpment the team that used the Honda's had to built a new, three shaft gearbox like McLaren did. Lotus howeever didn't and as a result they hat to tilt their engine-gearbox assemby which reduced all the advantages the entire car could have had because of this lower engine.

The question for me is, had Willimas such a threeshaft gearbox in development as well or not? If not, then I think that a 1988 FW12-Honda would hava had a hard time as well against the MP4/4. Likely less hard as Lotus had but still....
That gearbox was pretty mcuh the key component within the MP4/4 that made it such a devastating success: it enabled to maximise the potential of the engine within an entire package.

Henri

[rallen]

Henri Greuter, on Dec 31 2009, 08:49, said:

But let's assume it happened: then there is one major question to answer: Was Williams aware of the fact that Honda reduced the height of their engines with the use of a smaller flywheel? To make maximum benefit of this develpment the team that used the Honda's had to built a new, three shaft gearbox like McLaren did. Lotus howeever didn't and as a result they hat to tilt their engine-gearbox assemby which reduced all the advantages the entire car could have had because of this lower engine.

The question for me is, had Willimas such a threeshaft gearbox in development as well or not? If not, then I think that a 1988 FW12-Honda would hava had a hard time as well against the MP4/4. Likely less hard as Lotus had but still....
That gearbox was pretty mcuh the key component within the MP4/4 that made it such a devastating success: it enabled to maximise the potential of the engine within an entire package.

Henri

Thats very interesting, I had often wondered why Lotus was so poor that season with that engine! perhaps I should start a general 'What if' thread? where we can all discuss various what if's without it bothering other members and not worry about going off topic.

[Michael Ferner]

rallen, on Dec 30 2009, 15:39, said:

Incidentally, what does everyone make of the actual accident - say Mansell wasn't black flagged do you think it was a fair overtaking manoeuvre or does the blame fall on one of the drivers?

It was a bit of an impossible move on Mansell's part, but Senna closed the door and as such he has to shoulder responsibility. In theory, it's meant to intimidate rival drivers if you ALWAYS close the door, like Senna did, so he probably thought it well worth the risks involved, but IF you do this, you take yer chances... especially with someone like Mansell!

[Henri Greuter]

Michael Ferner, on Jan 2 2010, 10:49, said:

It was a bit of an impossible move on Mansell's part, but Senna closed the door and as such he has to shoulder responsibility. In theory, it's meant to intimidate rival drivers if you ALWAYS close the door, like Senna did, so he probably thought it well worth the risks involved, but IF you do this, you take yer chances... especially with someone like Mansell!

The Autocourse 89/90 has a picture of the contact fragmenst of seconds after in took place. Senna's right rear wheel is bend by then alread so that seems to suggest that Mansell's front wheels were at the level of Senna's rear wheel.


Henri

[rallen]

Michael Ferner, on Jan 2 2010, 09:49, said:

It was a bit of an impossible move on Mansell's part, but Senna closed the door and as such he has to shoulder responsibility. In theory, it's meant to intimidate rival drivers if you ALWAYS close the door, like Senna did, so he probably thought it well worth the risks involved, but IF you do this, you take yer chances... especially with someone like Mansell!

It is exactly the same overtaking manoeuvre Senna would have done that Mansell did, no question. As an interesting aside, did this change the way Senna approached Mansell on the track? did he realise he could not be intimidated so was more circumspect when overtaking or closing the door or did he never change his style?

[Der Pate]

Senna had crashes with the three main-contenders for the championship in 1989...Prost, Mansell and Berger...

Senna was famous to be very consequent in his overtaking-manouevres...most of the other drivers tend to give him the room, just to avoid of crashing out...

After reading another thread I´m pretty certain, that Senna fell into the trap of Prost at Suzuka...about the Mansell-incident I don´t know too much...I was celebrating that day, because it was the first Berger-win after his fire-accident at the Tamburello...

But I still remember the words of Berger after his Senna-crash in the first race of the season...he said, that if he had given Senna that corner, he would have to quit racing, because he would never have the possibility to win against Senna in the future...