Formula One fatalities.

[GitanesBlondes]

Here is a real picture taken at Goodwood in 1970 xpensive....

[xpensive]

What in the world did he hit then?

[timbo]

Umm, so what point is raised in this thread?

[GitanesBlondes]

What in the world did he hit then?

The marshal post towards the top of the picture. I believe Goodwood removed that entire structure after his accident which is why the McLaren video had him hitting a similar thing. But it's not a perfectly accurate representation of what Goodwood looked like in 1970.

[xpensive]

I was about to mention Lorenzo Bandini at the 1967 Monaco, but I wont, anyone can google it at their leisure.

But Mark Donohue's wreck in 1975 after a tire failure in MrM's March 751 stays in my memory forever,

[GitanesBlondes]

Sometimes I think it was a bit cruel that Mark Donohue was still conscious after the accident giving the illusion everything was fine.

[humble sabot]

that's awfully brutal about Donohue.
How's this for modern f1-specific relevance: the noses from last year, at least to my eye looked far more dangerous than a bouncing tyre should one have found its way into another car. The perfect height to skip the side impact device and hit a driver square in the side of the head. All complaints about aesthetics aside i think it was a foolish direction to go with regulation and i think everyone is safer now that those are last year's noses.

[Hail22]

Curious but nearly after a day this thread has been up an article appears from the bleacher report:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1888 ... popularity

Makes you wonder if our discussions / freely offered information is being "taken" for possible financial gain, what do you think of this? coincidence?

[GitanesBlondes]

Curious but nearly after a day this thread has been up an article appears from the bleacher report:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1888 ... popularity

Makes you wonder if our discussions / freely offered information is being "taken" for possible financial gain, what do you think of this? coincidence?

Bleacher Report has never been known for their originality in content, or even being a worthwhile sports media site.

I want to say it's nothing more than a pure coincidence, but there's no way to know for certain either way.

I do agree with his premise (which is nothing new) that F1 is missing danger. It added an altogether different dynamic to the whole thing when that endless tarmac runoff was nothing but armco and gravel traps. Car integrity is far beyond what it was years ago, and the strengthening of the front impact areas has been a godsend to driver safety. Still, a little danger here and there when guys are on the limit makes for a unique spectator sport.

[GitanesBlondes]

Circuit Zolder, May 8, 1982. Gilles Villeneuve plows into the back of Jochen Mass's March coming up on the Terlamenbocht Corner and is launched into the air. When the 126C2 finally lands 100 yards later, the sheer force of the impact rips Villeneuve from the cockpit and sends him flying into the catch fencing on the other side of the track.

It was totally down to driver error, but illustrates the dangers when a car runs into the back of another at high speeds. Mark Webber suffered a similar accident at Valencia years later as many remember, but the structural integrity of the modern car was such that a replay of Gilles fatal accident would not happen.

[xDama]

Sorry for the off-topic, but I just wanted to let xpensive and the rest of the contributors know that I think it's a great idea to discuss this aspect of F1. Through the years I've always had the impression a lot of people tend to 'ignore' or 'avoid' certain fatalities and how it/what has happened.

It's a grim and delicate subject, but it's a part of F1. And I'm probably one of the few who really want to understand what happend at certain events.

[xpensive]

Thanks xDama, a nice change from the bashing we got earlier.

Only five weeks after Villeneuve's death above, Ricardo Paletti slammed his Osella into the back of Didier Pironi's stalled Ferrari 126 at the start of the 1982 Canadian GP at Montreal;

Due to the force of the severe impact, Paletti sustained heavy chest injuries and was lying unconscious in his car, wedged against the steering wheel. Didier Pironi and Sid Watkins, the FIA's head doctor, were on the scene to stabilise and assist Paletti. As Watkins climbed over the wreckage of the Osella, the petrol from the fuel tank ignited, enveloping the car in a wall of fire. When the fire was finally put out, the injured Paletti was without a pulse. It took the rescue workers 25 minutes to cut him out safely from his wrecked car, as the sparks caused by the cutting equipment threatened to re-ignite the petrol on the track. He was flown by a medical helicopter to the Royal Victoria Hospital, where he died soon after arriving.

[ChrisF1]

I don't want to be seen as bashing, but what exactly is the aim of this thread? We aren't discussing anything, it's merely cut and paste articles of what happened many years ago.

No discussion of what was learnt or what has improved.

Most of us know these deaths inside out, so what are we trying to learn/discuss?

[GitanesBlondes]

John Barnard did more for the cause of safety in F1 than any designer ever did with the carbon fiber monocoque in 1981 when he designed the MP4/1.

It's what allowed John Watson to walk away with no problem from his Monza shunt - the first true test of the carbon fiber monocoque.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPMZK9i13Xs[/youtube]

[xpensive]

It was the beginning of a new age, though very few understood it at the time.

Nigel Roebuck after the 1981 British GP, which Watson won in John's MP4-1;

"Imagine the McLaren chassis with Ferrari's engine."

The 1982 Ferrari 126, which killed Gilles and ended Pironi's F1 career, was still an Aluminium-tub.