Korean GP 2010 - Yeongam

[feni_remmen]

Hopefully this hasn't already been pointed out (although I imagine it has), but after MW has hit the wall, 1 of 2 possibilities arise. Either his car is damaged beyond repair (therefore not easily controllable) or it is still drivable (and useful for further competition). MW would have been spending the first moments after hitting the wall, evaluating how to regain control. It seems obvious to me that the first thing you would do after the initial impact if try to straighten the car to allow it to follow along the side of the track off the racing line, probably off the brakes. Then turn it around, get going to allow him to score as many points as possible. With 4 other contenders, MW would know it is better to get back into the race rather than take 1 of them out. In any case the car was broken and it is not realistic to think MW had much say in where it was going after it hit the wall. IF, people think he should have used his brakes, wouldn't that mean he'd have ended up where Alonso was (on the racing line) and Rosberg would have made it through the gap? (I don't honestly believe this) I am trying to point out that there are a range of variables, that nobody, include Webber could control after hitting the wall. MW was surely thinking of ways to continue in the race after the initial impact. Even if he had the extra capacity to pick out Alonso to try to take him out, he wasn't driving something controllable! These discussions are tiresome, so have fun!

[Terrible3]

Wow I cant believe we are still talking about Marks crash. It was wet and slippery and Mark was simply caught out. The back end stepped out the car backed its way into the wall. The car just happened to then come back across the track and take out NR. After hitting the wall the car had been damaged to the point where Mark was simply a passenger. The result was simply a racing incident as a result of non ideal conditions. No further inquiry is needed, nor do I see NR asking for any investigations.

[raymondu999]

Ok this may be completely untrue, if so feel free to correct me. When MW got the poweroversteer/loss of traction/whatever you want to call it, it was a right hander, and his tail slid to his left. He turned left to countersteer. Then he hits the wall, and he turns right, and this kind of does a mini-J-turn for him to go back on the track. Couldn't he have kept the steering straight or to the left? Mind you I'm no expert on this so be nice

I'm not condemning anything, but to my amateur knowledge it seems to me that he attempted to return to the track in a J-turn-ish maneuver. If you know what I mean.

[segedunum]

Christ.......

When Webber spun round off the kerb and was facing the wrong way there was no way he was going to stay there. He was trying to let the car drift back to facing in the right direction so he could continue and no he wouldn't give a stuff about being in another driver's path. That's what racing drivers do.

Seriously, there is nothing to this and I'm not Mark Webber's biggest fan.

[ringo]

Sorry if I'm being slow here Lotus7, but who is Ed Zachery?

LOL, it's phonic english for "Exactly".

sounds like north Korean english to me...


Anyways, here's some evidence by Horner that Mark had intended to go back into the track. He was in full control evidently.

After Mark’s impact with the wall, it was clear on the TV and from the data that his car was badly damaged.

“However, the natural and immediate instinct of any competitive driver is not to give up and to keep going.

“In the atrocious conditions, Mark made the snap decision to continue as every driver would in that situation – it’s absurd to suggest that Mark would ever deliberately take out another driver.

So the telemetry does suggest that he wanted to continue. I saw him turn the steering wheel to go back into the track, and i saw the left wheel brake then started to rotate, suggesting mark released the brake; meaning it was not slipping. Mark wanted to come back into the track to either continue or hit something.
Clearly he could not continue, not by making a full 180 in the racing line.

[raymondu999]

actually, the incident somewhat smacked of Sutil smashing Heidfeld in Singapore 09. Not that either was on purpose, mind you.

[aral]

Wow I cant believe we are still talking about Marks crash. It was wet and slippery and Mark was simply caught out. The back end stepped out the car backed its way into the wall. The car just happened to then come back across the track and take out NR. After hitting the wall the car had been damaged to the point where Mark was simply a passenger. The result was simply a racing incident as a result of non ideal conditions. No further inquiry is needed, nor do I see NR asking for any investigations.

I fully agree. There seem to be a lot of "experts" who know how to control a car after a crash. But until they have been put in the same position as Mark, how on earth can they know what he was trying to do?

[marcush.]

maybe sutils friendly fire towards Heidfeld is a good analogy here .Both were really cackhanded activities on a racetrack....I would expect things like that to happen on a motocross mudfield ...but as we see some drivers carry their brains in their left foot
at times when the race is definitly over.An impact of that size is not sustainable for a F1 car .finito.

[andartop]

First thing to remember is that these things actually happen very quickly. These guys are superhuman, but time still passes pretty damn fast under such circumstances.

The other thing is that Mark Webber is a very experienced driver. He has had a bad injury in the past, and I'm sure he knows all about pain, risking your career and your life. Mark Webber knows what happened to drivers like Alex Zanardi. He was around when Felipe Massa had his freak accident last year.

To suggest that a professional driver like Mark Webber would try to take another driver out in such a manner I find of very bad taste to say the least. I don't mind a bunch of armchair "experts" like us discussing this on a "geeky" internet forum. But someone like Gerhard Berger should know better than that and just keep it shut. If I was Mark Webber I would even consider taking legal action against Mr Berger.

[ringo]

After surviving that crash in Valencia, Mark knows first hand how sturdy his cockpit is. He'll take a whack for the championship.
As i said in previous threads, this isn't the last we've seen of webber crashing into someone.


repeat quoute.

Webber was a fool not to use his brakes. He will make the same mistake again, but this time with another driver.

We may not know how, we may not know when, but he'll do it again!

[kalinka]

Just that he didn't do it intentionally, doesn't mean that he was doing it right ! It just means that he made a bad judgement of his situation, and made a bad decision. We don't know how other drivers would react in same situation, but MW had a quite long history of misjudgements, so that's why I think people are a bit more suspicious about him. Beside, I'm not a MW fan either.

[xpensive]

After surviving that crash in Valencia, Mark knows first hand how sturdy his cockpit is. He'll take a whack for the championship.
As i said in previous threads, this isn't the last we've seen of webber crashing into someone.


repeat quoute.

Webber was a fool not to use his brakes. He will make the same mistake again, but this time with another driver.

We may not know how, we may not know when, but he'll do it again!

But we know this much. For all of you that still misses the previous one, F1T has found itself a new troll; meet ringo.

[ringo]

Trolling is relative; trolls simply have creative opinions that some may disagree with. When these opinions come to fruition; the troll is within his rights to rehash them.
But nah, I'm not trolling, i'm telling it how i saw it. I don't think Berger was trolling either. I was actually surprised he was thinking what some of us were.

The trend is Webber doesn't like to lose out and he'll do irrational things in the moment; usually involving decisions on braking safely or not to brake, and continue dangerously.

[univex]

But we know this much. For all of you that still misses the previous one, F1T has found itself a new troll; meet ringo.

Nah, Ringo is harmless compared to previous. He's ok, and there will always be an argument for that case, I think it is idiotic, though I am Australian.
At least this post won't be bombarded with insane counter arguments and offensive PMs.

[Terrible3]

Please everyone note that in the crash mark took his lands off the wheel, no sense in braking your fingers right? Anyways on impact the wheel turned full lock right when the front left wheel made contact with the wall. At this point had Mark done nothing the car would have tried to back right up across the track leading to an accident. Mark grabs the wheel after the impact just and the car starts to roll back and tries to turn hard left. The idea here being that if the wheel is turned left the car will back into the wall rather than the track. In the video you can clearly see that as he attempts to turn left after the impact that he can not complete this action since clearly something is broken ( steering link or rack I am no expert) since you can see the wheel suddenly stop mid input. At this point Mark is unable to prevent the car from rolling onto the track since the steering is broken. He is simply a passenger and the car is going cross the track regardless of Marks input. This in the end leads to a crash. If Mark wanted to take someone out he would have held full lock right the whole time in an attempt to back the car out across the racing line. Its not often I defend Mark, but in this instance he has done no wrong.