Spa is going to look significantly different this year!

[JordanMugen]

I wonder if the people who don't like run-off areas

I'm much rather drive my own car around Paul Ricard or Circuit of the Americas, but much rather watch cars racing at Monaco, Adelaide, Zandvoort, Mount Panorama or Suzuka.

Paul Ricard really takes the idea of a racetrack being some lines painted on a giant parking lot way too far IMO.

After all racing drivers inherently have the ability to switch off the part of their brain responsible for fear, that's part of their basic skillset. Us mere mortals are shocked that anyone would want to drive full throttle around a piece of road as tight as Mount Panorama or the Nordschleife etc!

It's quite 'shocking' how small a lot of traditional racetracks are in real life. But a racing driver has no problem to go out there and go flat out.

I think people also forget when a driver could out brake himself, when trying an overtake for example, only to end up beached in a gravel trap. Race over. Is that what people want to return to?

What do you mean return?

A lot of Grade 1 circuits like Suzuka or Hungary (or indeed Imola where we are about to go and race) still have mainly gravel traps and only partial tarmac runoffs. It is not a question of taking the tarmac runoff areas out, as they have never been put in in the first place!

Even Melbourne where F1 just raced is a slightly older circuit which predominantly uses gravel traps, including the one that Carlos Sainz got stuck in on the second lap. Similarly Sergio Perez got stuck in a gravel trap in the 2021 Emilia Romagna Grand Prix at Imola circuit.

Suzuka is quite narrow between the barriers indeed, perhaps it wouldn't get Grade 1 status if it was a brand new track, but I am glad that it has Grade 1 status.

By all means rectify corners that are excessively dangerous, but racing at Paul Ricard type circuits 20 times a season would be going too far.

[Mandrake]

I challenge any of you to race around Spa (in real life) in anything faster than a MX-5 and let me know how that goes.

They also weren’t exactly respectful or fair.

I've done that last year. My fastest lap was a 2:51. First time ever with that car on a track and the first time Spa for me, only knew it from the simulator before.

It was absolutely fabulous, I think this year if I go again I will miss the paved runoff as any mistake would be more damaging now to my car. Gravel is nasty. Also I once went a teeny tiny bit wide at blanchimont at 190kph, the way you get shaken on the curbs is insane, and then there is only little runoff up to the wall outside.

But for F1 and GT racing I like the changes they applied. They do not have to care about rock chips etc. and tbh the way the track limits were abused in recent years was just mental....

[mzso]

Drivers should be punished for driving over the limit.

It's like someone has never heard of Antoine Hubert.

Hubert's accident had precious little to do with Eau Rouge/Radillon...
He just went into the back of someone who slowed down for an accident.
Also the accident only happened, because driver habitually drive in the run-off area. If it was (punishing) gravel there the accident never would have happened like that.

[adrianjordan]

Drivers should be punished for driving over the limit.

It's like someone has never heard of Antoine Hubert.

Hubert's accident had precious little to do with Eau Rouge/Radillon...
He just went into the back of someone who slowed down for an accident.
Also the accident only happened, because driver habitually drive in the run-off area. If it was (punishing) gravel there the accident never would have happened like that.

I think you're thinking of a different accident or driver. Hubert's accident was a high speed t-bone.

He had been thrown back onto the circuit where Correa collided with him

[mzso]

I think you're thinking of a different accident or driver. Hubert's accident was a high speed t-bone.

He had been thrown back onto the circuit where Correa collided with him

No I'm not. He was way past Radillon when he ran into someone's back (outside of track limits) and he went into the tire-wall to the right, bounced back a bit, then someone else hit him in the side, also outside track limits.
The drivers used the run-off as a highway.
So you're wrong, he didn't get back onto the track. Only the main collision - which knocked his half of the wreck into the end of the tire-wall, which in turn bounced him back on the track - got him back on the track again, when he was effectively dead already.

[adrianjordan]

Right, so he was bounced back onto the track where the fatal collision occurred so moving the barriers back and changing the angle of them reduces the risk of this happening.

Anything that reduces the risk of an accident is a good thing.

Policing of track limits is a separate issue entirely and should not mean they don't take steps to make circuits safer.

[vorticism]

Why were the gravel traps removed?

[Mandrake]

Where?

[vorticism]

After Radillion. The prev posts were re: gravel vs. tarmac runoffs.

[mzso]

Right, so he was bounced back onto the track where the fatal collision occurred so moving the barriers back and changing the angle of them reduces the risk of this happening.

Anything that reduces the risk of an accident is a good thing.

Policing of track limits is a separate issue entirely and should not mean they don't take steps to make circuits safer.

Still no. The fatal collision happened off the track.
And it still has no relevance to radillion, because it happened after.

[mzso]

After Radillion. The prev posts were re: gravel vs. tarmac runoffs.

I saw that as well. If it remains asphalt these changes will be useless.

[SiLo]

You'd think they could have it gravel for F1, and then tarmac for what ever else they need. Or even if its large sheets of some composite, grippy material that is removed and replaced with gravel for certain weekends. I feel like a car rolling over is less dangerous than one being bounced back into the path of other cars doing 170mph

[vorticism]

After Radillion. The prev posts were re: gravel vs. tarmac runoffs.

I saw that as well. If it remains asphalt these changes will be useless.

It's just interesting to know the history. If gravel was removed without altering the barriers at the same time, well, that was a mistake apparently.

[koolway]

You'd think they could have it gravel for F1, and then tarmac for what ever else they need. Or even if its large sheets of some composite, grippy material that is removed and replaced with gravel for certain weekends. I feel like a car rolling over is less dangerous than one being bounced back into the path of other cars doing 170mph

How would you fill the min. 25cm left by the gravel removal ?
whether it's gravel or a "solid" run off, it must be leveled with the adjacent track, otherwise it will be a launch platform to the sky, or induce some roll-overs. So when you make a choice, you cannot switch easily.

[SiLo]

You'd think they could have it gravel for F1, and then tarmac for what ever else they need. Or even if its large sheets of some composite, grippy material that is removed and replaced with gravel for certain weekends. I feel like a car rolling over is less dangerous than one being bounced back into the path of other cars doing 170mph

How would you fill the min. 25cm left by the gravel removal ?
whether it's gravel or a "solid" run off, it must be leveled with the adjacent track, otherwise it will be a launch platform to the sky, or induce some roll-overs. So when you make a choice, you cannot switch easily.

Large composite plates that are just screwed into the ground that are 25cm thick. I feel like having more modularity to race tracks would really benefit them in being able to host multiple types of races. I don't mean Paul Ricard in terms of track layout, although some extras like are being added in Austria would be useful.