Formula One fatalities.

[Gridlock]

FWIW I always understood a lot of Purley's frustration was caused by other drivers assuming it was his car, not that he was asking for help. Horrifying stuff though, and I don't think it's fair to criticise the actions of other drivers. Nobody here knows what it took to be an F1 driver in those days.

[GitanesBlondes]

It's shades of grey...you know, how the world really operates as opposed to your black and white fantasies.

I know that things are not black and white. The difference lies in how far we are willing to go towards black or white.

My personal opinion is that death should not be a necessary ingredient for Motorsports in order to be interesting.
I don't consider this as a boys/mens thing. For me it is a Sport. To make a point: Do we need deaths in Soccer in order to be attractive? Obviously No. why should it be different with F1?
That said, I share your feeling that some (most?) of today's circuits are neutred beyond what's reasonable. Leaving track/making a mistake should have consequences (but not fatal/severe injuries).
On the other hand reducing car safety I don't support at all.

Simple question for you or the rest. Do you have any problem with people racing in historic motorsports? You know...the same cars that were so dangerous years ago.

[ChrisF1]

let's face it, if for some reason a f1 car gets scooped up right onto the tub sideways, the floor of a f1 car can hit a driver in the head the same way maria was hit by that 'truck door'. it would be even worse, because the size of a f1 car could squash a drivers head in the helmet. there might still be some development left in drivers head protection [helmet].

I think it was Alex Wurz and David Coulthard that came pretty close to this at Oz a few years back.

[timbo]

But going back on topic with Formula 1...

Fritz Glatz died in 2002 while driving a vintage 1996 Arrows?

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/FeKH2bNQH3c/hqdefault.jpg

I've always found that a bit peculiar as Formula 1 was supposed to have a lot of safety upgrades due to the double fatalities of Ratzenberger and Senna? Seems weird that someone would die in a mid 90s F1 car in the early 2000s as safety was supposed to be fairly advanced in motorsports in general?

If he was taller than original driver (or had a bulkier body) he might not have been properly sited in car. I often find pics of someone driving hitoric F1 cars with head much higher in the cockpit.

Also the tub might have been modified to accommodate the driver as on that 1999 Ferrari with a famous pictures.

[timbo]

It's shades of grey...you know, how the world really operates as opposed to your black and white fantasies.

I know that things are not black and white. The difference lies in how far we are willing to go towards black or white.

My personal opinion is that death should not be a necessary ingredient for Motorsports in order to be interesting.
I don't consider this as a boys/mens thing. For me it is a Sport. To make a point: Do we need deaths in Soccer in order to be attractive? Obviously No. why should it be different with F1?
That said, I share your feeling that some (most?) of today's circuits are neutred beyond what's reasonable. Leaving track/making a mistake should have consequences (but not fatal/severe injuries).
On the other hand reducing car safety I don't support at all.

Simple question for you or the rest. Do you have any problem with people racing in historic motorsports? You know...the same cars that were so dangerous years ago.

I don't like it. However the drivers don't push the cars to the edge nearly as much and there are much stricter rules for overtaking so the danger is lower.

[Manoah2u]

But going back on topic with Formula 1...

Fritz Glatz died in 2002 while driving a vintage 1996 Arrows?

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/FeKH2bNQH3c/hqdefault.jpg

I've always found that a bit peculiar as Formula 1 was supposed to have a lot of safety upgrades due to the double fatalities of Ratzenberger and Senna? Seems weird that someone would die in a mid 90s F1 car in the early 2000s as safety was supposed to be fairly advanced in motorsports in general?

If he was taller than original driver (or had a bulkier body) he might not have been properly sited in car. I often find pics of someone driving hitoric F1 cars with head much higher in the cockpit.

Also the tub might have been modified to accommodate the driver as on that 1999 Ferrari with a famous pictures.

that's why welding cars in real life is dangerous. these stretched fiero's that want to be another car are deathtraps.

as for the adapted seat position; exactly;




jeremy clarkson in a F1 Lotus [actually gp2-spec prototype car] note the driver position.

compare to normal seating position

[GitanesBlondes]

FWIW I always understood a lot of Purley's frustration was caused by other drivers assuming it was his car, not that he was asking for help. Horrifying stuff though, and I don't think it's fair to criticise the actions of other drivers. Nobody here knows what it took to be an F1 driver in those days.

Outside of him, everyone (drivers and marshals did nothing) to help him with his efforts. The frustration is already evident when he is trying to overturn Williamson's March.

[GitanesBlondes]

I don't like it. However the drivers don't push the cars to the edge nearly as much and there are much stricter rules for overtaking so the danger is lower.

Ah now we're getting somewhere.

What about MotoGP, TT racing, and so on? Motorcycle racing remains quite dangerous. Does it bother you that the riders are fully exposed to everything? Riders have been killed year after year, but it's part of the sport. Part of motorcycle racing's allure is the risk involved with it, and you know what, it makes for fantastic viewing. Watching guys performing in the Isle of Man TT is one of the most incredible competitions to watch.

I think all this is really about is selective outrage (more of a general statement here timbo, not aimed at you specifically) when it comes to risk and danger in F1. Most of the people running around like headless chickens screaming about how more should always be done are the same ones who think motorsport equals F1. Sure there are mentions of deaths in other race series across the planet, yet somehow people make the standard remarks of what a shame it all is, then move on. Yet something renders many incapable of applying the same level concern they do to F1, for all motor sports.

I think all it ever comes down to is a combination of the personal belief that the drivers of F1 are worth more than any other motorsport driver, and the need by many here to self-identify with the drivers to the point that they think they know them on a personal level (just look at how every driver-specific topic here turns out for a great example). Combine both of those aspects with the talking heads regurgitating the dogmatic message that this was all necessary for F1 to survive, is it no wonder the majority believes in all this?

I've already outlined what a hypocrite Jackie Stewart was and there are those who are STILL trying to make excuses for his lack of stopping for any fellow driver. "Oh he wasn't trained in safety." As if anyone really was back then. But he makes for a great interview in documentaries with his theatrical statements about Jim Clark being hit by "old trees and young trees" alike. That's the sort of soundbite that makes the modern viewer recoil in aghast with the horror of it all! The real shame of it all is that through the selective microscope that's been applied to F1's past, people walk away with this image that it was all death and destruction with nothing good to be had. It's the same general stupidity that has people walking around with the belief that Colin Chapman gave not one iota of a f*ck about any one of his drivers, even though he did care more than people know. But it makes for better show when he is painted as an uncaring person.

Those so-called "bad old days" were filled with some of the most fantastic racing one could ever hope to see, and more technological innovation than anything the modern era could ever hope to see. The drivers also respected one another on the circuit, which is something that became far less seen with the advent of safety due to the drivers now believing they were indestructible.

[GitanesBlondes]

Manoah, 2 things.

1) Maria de Villota's cause of death was marked down as being of natural causes, and there has been no verification to date as to whether her accident contributed to it. It's pointless to speculate till the actual facts come out.

2) Your Jeremy Clarkson example as to the "normal" seating position is pointless as Jeremy is a huge man.

[CMSMJ1]

I get your points GB - you are making hem better than your frustration earlier!

I think the point really is that you are bein gmisconstrued as someone that almost wants to see a terrific accident or a fatality to justify the risks that the guys are taking.

I have raced slow motorbikes at a club level - in the 2 years I could afford it there were at least 2 people killed doing the same thing as me. There was even a young lad who highsided and brain damaged himself and had a long recuperation - his dad was also a racer and bloged about the stress and the recovery process....a couple years later the father was killed in a start line crash.

You cannot stop people putting themselves in danger. You can try to lessen the danger. Acceptable risk is always subjective. F1 is a focus, as we are on F1T 0 but there are guys who won't race Indycars or other series as the support and the level of risk is too high.

Leave F1 to be safe - IMO it should be faster....as fast as it can be, as long as stringent safety standard are set.

Motor bikes, rallying and extreme other stuff (Dakar/Enduro) are all high risk games. You can and will get dead if you choose to play....

[timbo]

What about MotoGP, TT racing, and so on? Motorcycle racing remains quite dangerous. Does it bother you that the riders are fully exposed to everything? Riders have been killed year after year, but it's part of the sport. Part of motorcycle racing's allure is the risk involved with it, and you know what, it makes for fantastic viewing. Watching guys performing in the Isle of Man TT is one of the most incredible competitions to watch.

Riders safety advanced in MotoGP. These days in circuit moto racing fatality comes from unlucky accidents, although traumatism is a concern. Personally I'd ban Isle of Man.

I think all this is really about is selective outrage (more of a general statement here timbo, not aimed at you specifically) when it comes to risk and danger in F1. Most of the people running around like headless chickens screaming about how more should always be done are the same ones who think motorsport equals F1. Sure there are mentions of deaths in other race series across the planet, yet somehow people make the standard remarks of what a shame it all is, then move on. Yet something renders many incapable of applying the same level concern they do to F1, for all motor sports.

I'm concerned with any fatality.

I think all it ever comes down to is a combination of the personal belief that the drivers of F1 are worth more than any other motorsport driver, and the need by many here to self-identify with the drivers to the point that they think they know them on a personal level (just look at how every driver-specific topic here turns out for a great example). Combine both of those aspects with the talking heads regurgitating the dogmatic message that this was all necessary for F1 to survive, is it no wonder the majority believes in all this?

Not sure where you're aiming that. I think most people here were distressed when Weldon and Simonsen died greatly.

I've already outlined what a hypocrite Jackie Stewart was and there are those who are STILL trying to make excuses for his lack of stopping for any fellow driver.

He might be a hypocrite but he publicized safety problems. This is important too.

Those so-called "bad old days" were filled with some of the most fantastic racing one could ever hope to see, and more technological innovation than anything the modern era could ever hope to see.

I've seen plenty of fantastic racing in recent years too, it is a question of taste. And why you mention technological advances in this context I don't know.

The drivers also respected one another on the circuit, which is something that became far less seen with the advent of safety due to the drivers now believing they were indestructible.

Yes, this is a problem indeed.

[strad]

I really think this thread should be closed as it's always the same. A bunch of name calling by those who think we should all be packed in cotton versus those who think life is an adventure that should be enjoyed to the max.
I can only suppose most of you think that to fly in one of those "Rocky the Flying Squirrel" suits are crazy and that they should be outlawed...If I wasn't so old and lacking in the required arm strength, I'd do it today.

[GitanesBlondes]

I really think this thread should be closed as it's always the same. A bunch of name calling by those who think we should all be packed in cotton versus those who think life is an adventure that should be enjoyed to the max.
I can only suppose most of you think that to fly in one of those "Rocky the Flying Squirrel" suits are crazy and that they should be outlawed...If I wasn't so old and lacking in the required arm strength, I'd do it today.

I agree strad.

Those whose personal sensibilities are offended think they need to take up the mantle to save everyone from themselves.

I have said it multiple times in this topic, and some still cannot comprehend the idea of informed risk. So long as everyone is informed of the dangers that something may pose, if they still go ahead with it, it is on them at that point.

Look at Michael Schumacher who was injured in a skiing accident. These guys live for risk and they know what comes of it. As soon as 2012 ended, Schumacher was back racing motorcycles. Who can forget the legendary exploits of Gilles Villeneuve who used to play a game with Jody Scheckter when they would leave Maranello. Whoever could go a further distance without lifting off the throttle of the Ferrari they were in would win...that was on public roads...so people shouldn't kid themselves about the need for thrill these guys desire.

[timbo]

I can only suppose most of you think that to fly in one of those "Rocky the Flying Squirrel" suits are crazy and that they should be outlawed...If I wasn't so old and lacking in the required arm strength, I'd do it today.

I think they are reasonably safe. Wiki reports 6 fatalities over some 50 years (though worryingly three this year, but it might be just the case of "when it rains it pours") and the number of jumpers is considerable.

[strad]

If you go wayyyy back, they said if you went faster than 60 mph you'd die. Aren't you glad some one had the courage to defy the safe route and go faster?
Would you have not had people willing to risk all to get us here?
Would you hold these drivers, test pilots, astronauts etc. from the past, as hero's if they had not faced death?
@gilgen...Just how the hell old are you?
I'm 65 followed since 1961..guess I would have been 12 or 13,,if you were following F1 since it's inception one would guess you would have been 12 or 13 in 1950...thus in your mid 70s? So I have to ask ; After maturing in the fifties, how can you have the attitude you do?
I can understand kids who have been brainwashed about safety and think nothing of wearing a helmet when riding their bike, but an older gentleman whom one might think had lived thru enough to understand, there is no safety.
As has been brought up, there are wrecks where you just know the driver has died and he pops out unscathed, and others that appear as harmless as a minor fender bender on the road, only to have the driver die. If you believe as I do, then you understand that when he wants you, you're gone, but if he doesn't you'll walk away.
Now you can alter that to deal with luck if you believe differently, but the fact is, you cannot be safe from death ever. All you can do is live to the fullest whilst you are alive.