Jackie Stewart F1 legends question (aka is F1 too safe)

[SeijaKessen]

How about this. We leave everyone in the era they grew up in.

Indeed, appreciate the brilliant divers from each generation for being the most talented of their generation. Admire their raw talent and their drive and determination to apply themselves to motorsport as it existed in their era.

Agreed. So equally, there's no point saying that Rommie Peterson would be 2 seconds faster than Lewis Hamilton.

Yeah, Rommie Peterson definitely would not be 2 seconds faster.

Ronnie Peterson on the other hand...

[RB7ate9]

How about this. We leave everyone in the era they grew up in.

Indeed, appreciate the brilliant divers from each generation for being the most talented of their generation. Admire their raw talent and their drive and determination to apply themselves to motorsport as it existed in their era.

*sigh* Fine.

[Stradivarius]

I've got a question Carlos.

Given how many fatalities occur on public roads every single year, does that stop you from driving?

Much less percentage otherwise car transport would be banned altogether.
Having seen so many drivers die, whose careers you followed, is almost like having as much of your relatives die.

33,808 people were killed in fatal crashes in 2009 in the USA.

F1 driver death's during race weekends since 1980?

A whopping 4 in thirty years.

I must admit that I fail to see why fatal accidents and severe injuries are acceptable just because the participants know the risks. Yes, thousands of people die in traffic every day. Actually I believe about 1.2 million lifes are lost in traffic world wide each year. And we are all aware of the risk, right? And we still choose to travel in traffic anyway, don't we? If you think that this indicates that things are fine the way they are, I would like an explanation of why road safety has such a high focus among car producers, not to mention goverments around the world trying to improve the roads in order to allow for safer travel. Shouldn't this be totally unnecessary as long as the risk is sufficiently low so that all of us travel by cars anyway?

Being aware of the risk and all of that, were you happy when Senna died? It is my understanding that most people felt his death was a loss to f1, but everyone was aware of the risk involved. Being aware of the risk, wouldn't it be a problem to you if someone you cared for, or maybe even yourself, died in traffic today? When reading your posts here, I get the impression that as long as one knows the risk, the ones who die in traffic, or formula 1 or NFL, deserves it and there is no problem because they chose to take part in risky activities. So there is no reason to improve the safety. Am I right?

[SeijaKessen]

I was going to reply, till I noticed you flat out lied and started attributing things to myself, that I never actually said.

[Stradivarius]

I was going to reply, till I noticed you flat out lied and started attributing things to myself, that I never actually said.

Excuse me, but I haven't lied about anything. I have actually not made any statement at all (in my previous post). I explained what impression I got from what you have written and I asked you a handfull of questions. I haven't made any claim what so ever about anything you have said. I just presented my interpretation of what you said and asked in the end: "Am I right?" If you feel that I have misunderstood what you said, why don't you try to clearify instead of falsely accusing me of lying?

But of course, I understand that those questions are difficult to answer, so why not just try to blame me and accuse me of lying? That's more comfortable than actually discussing the matter in question, isn't it?

[strad]

Your wrong and in my opinion looking for something to rail on about. I don't think care one whit about safety on the road or track...I think you just want to take the other side.

[Nando]

I must admit that I fail to see why fatal accidents and severe injuries are acceptable just because the participants know the risks. Yes, thousands of people die in traffic every day. Actually I believe about 1.2 million lifes are lost in traffic world wide each year. And we are all aware of the risk, right? And we still choose to travel in traffic anyway, don't we? If you think that this indicates that things are fine the way they are, I would like an explanation of why road safety has such a high focus among car producers, not to mention goverments around the world trying to improve the roads in order to allow for safer travel. Shouldn't this be totally unnecessary as long as the risk is sufficiently low so that all of us travel by cars anyway?

Being aware of the risk and all of that, were you happy when Senna died? It is my understanding that most people felt his death was a loss to f1, but everyone was aware of the risk involved. Being aware of the risk, wouldn't it be a problem to you if someone you cared for, or maybe even yourself, died in traffic today? When reading your posts here, I get the impression that as long as one knows the risk, the ones who die in traffic, or formula 1 or NFL, deserves it and there is no problem because they chose to take part in risky activities. So there is no reason to improve the safety. Am I right?

Right on the money.

[Lycoming]

I'd say a few deaths here and there in F1 isn't so bad.

Do you realize what you're saying?

[SeijaKessen]

I'd say a few deaths here and there in F1 isn't so bad.

Do you realize what you're saying?

Thanks for taking only part of what I said, and then editing it to make it look like something else.

What I said was...

Either way relative to how many people are killed during the course of a year in car accidents in the US, I'd say a few deaths here and there in F1 isn't so bad.

Do you happen to notice the comma in there?

It's all part of one sentence.

People who selectively take part of a sentence, and then try to present it as the entire sentence are usually the people who are dishonest. Good job, that's something to be proud of.

[Just_a_fan]

Comparing road deaths with F1 deaths is ridiculous. F1 is a tightly controlled series in which the competitors have to demonstrate a high level of skill (and usually relevant experience) and in which the cars and environment are strictly controlled to maximise safety. The drivers understand that their participation is a privilege.

The public highway is exactly the opposite - those using it are often unskilled and sometimes unqualified. The environment is usually, at best, a basic one, and usually is lacking in any form of safety feature. Most users feel a "right" to be there.

Then there are the numbers. F1 is limited to 20-24 drivers. The roads contain many millions of users, some of whom are inherently incompetent, some of whom have inflicted incompetence upon themselves (DUI). Nearly all of the users would be of a risk profile that would disqualify them from F1.

Indeed, to even suggest that comparing US road deaths and F1 deaths is a suitable metric of acceptable safety levels is, at best, disingenuous and at worst is just plain idiotic.

[jdlive]

I've been to F1 in real life several times and it always looks way too slow, especially in flat out sections, it looks like they are driving in slow motion. Television makes it appear a lot faster than it really is.

I made this video today, this is 300 KPH through Eau Rouge, but it looks painfully slow, not like something that I myself couldn't do or wouldn't dare to do. They could easily go 50% faster. This year I've asked some of the people around me and they were all surprised they went so slow in reality as well.

Watch the video in full screen because the tiny screens do the same thing television does, making it look faster than it really is.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6tZXRE3ky0[/youtube]

Please Bernie and everyone involved, go for much safer tracks and let these cars go a lot faster!

[Nando]

Why is this thread even open?

And why has someone change the thread-name to something completely different the what was originally asked for.
For all you who don´t know, i simply asked what corner was called "masta"

Instead it´s become a thread for people who actually would appreciate the sport more had people died in it.

I'd say a few deaths here and there in F1 isn't so bad.

Doesn´t matter what context this is in, your an idiot for saying it in every single way.

I don´t want to be the creator of a thread that´s been morphed to something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

[RB7ate9]

I've been to F1 in real life several times and it always looks way too slow, especially in flat out sections, it looks like they are driving in slow motion. Television makes it appear a lot faster than it really is.

I made this video today, this is 300 KPH through Eau Rouge, but it looks painfully slow, not like something that I myself couldn't do or wouldn't dare to do. They could easily go 50% faster. This year I've asked some of the people around me and they were all surprised they went so slow in reality as well.

Watch the video in full screen because the tiny screens do the same thing television does, making it look faster than it really is.

Please Bernie and everyone involved, go for much safer tracks and let these cars go a lot faster!

I think there may be some cognitive dissonance between what you are "seeing" through Eau Rouge and what is happening. The fact that it is a curve rather than a straight, your ability to rotate your head at a rate much slower than the car's speed, and the ability to track its motion from the straight through the top of Eau Rouge is causing your mind to "race faster than reality" compared to TV.

The same thing happens even when seeing clips from the Reno Air Races. 300 - 400 mph WWII-era planes screaming past you doesn't seem as exciting when you are tracking them from left to right across a mile or two of track as oppose to simply staring forward and have them blitz through your sight-line.

I do want the cars to be allowed to go faster, pushing the real limits of technology and skill on more and more challenging tracks, but one's perception as a spectator should not hinder the fact that the cars are still going very VERY fast.

[RB7ate9]

Why is this thread even open?

And why has someone change the thread-name to something completely different the what was originally asked for.
For all you who don´t know, i simply asked what corner was called "masta"

Instead it´s become a thread for people who that actually would appreciate the sport more had people died in it.

I'd say a few deaths here and there in F1 isn't so bad.

Doesn´t matter what context this is in, your an idiot for saying it in every single way.

I don´t want to be the creator of a thread that´s been morphed to something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

I believe it happened at around:

Just think...Dan Gurney's Eagle hit 196MPH during the 1967 Belgian Grand Prix.

A track for men, like the Longford-track in Launceston Tasmania, with two railway-crossings and a wooden bridge!

I still love Dan Gurney's quote when certain drivers were trying to protest the "dangerous" speeds at the 1967 Le Mans;

"So you think it's dangerous, perhaps you're driving too fast?"

Folks started getting nostalgic for the old Spa/Nurburgring days and, naturally, someone brought up supposed difference between now and then, for better or worse. Once the mods changed to the title to add (aka is F1 too safe), the floodgates were washed open.

Sorry folks hijacked your thread. I am guilty of contributing to it. You found your answer though, right?

[Nando]

Yes i did, at post 3 or something.

then it turned into a discussion about modern F1 drivers being pussies while the rest of the world doing dare-devil stuff like Isle of Man, Basejumping, etc.
And that it would be awesome to get some kills in F1.