2014 Japanese Grand Prix - Suzuka

[nismo]

There is 2 sides to this and I think some people are forgetting about it. The incident vs the environment.

Lets say the first SUT incident happened while sunny, warm, not a cloud in the sky and perfect conditions.... We would have never seen a SC while the crane went to retrieve SUT's Sauber. IF BIA were to hit the crane during perfect conditions, the blame would have been mechanical failure, driver error, act of god, etc..... the blame on the FIA wouldn't be there or not nearly so scrutinized

Now that we have a completely different environment, I think the FIA needs to adjust what deems a SC under what conditions and stick to it. I hate how they almost evaluate the situation then decide, not just do it.

If ideal conditions (sunny, no cloud, etc..) and a crane has to retrieve a car w/ marshals.. Double Yellows and call it a day (unless something outstanding happens)

If unideal conditions (rain, impaired visions, clouds, etc...) and a crane has to go retrieve a car w/ marshals.. SC every time. Its just common sense safety for everyone and anything.

[Moose]

As I said several pages ago - the major issue is simple – the circuit really needs acres of tarmac run off area. If there had been only 100m extra tarmac, we would be talking about a 20-30mph impact, or even, a successful avoidance.

Really, people here should see this very simply - this is why the FIA is trarmacing over gravel traps.

[Sevach]

Did Bianchi beat him massively in pace?

More than 1s per lap on average, 39s ahead on the lap before the accident.

[Daliracing]

Just something i was thinking about but would a higher nose have made a difference on impact?

[SectorOne]

No. A lower speed would though.

[Blanchimont]

Just something i was thinking about but would a higher nose have made a difference on impact?

I don't think so. Compare these two images i found on the autosport forum.

http://autosprint.corrieredellosport.it ... /10/01.jpg
http://i.gyazo.com/b54e500b0ade6a0bec322d831dbf3d2c.png

[Daliracing]

Just something i was thinking about but would a higher nose have made a difference on impact?

I don't think so. Compare these two images i found on the autosport forum.

http://autosprint.corrieredellosport.it ... /10/01.jpg
http://i.gyazo.com/b54e500b0ade6a0bec322d831dbf3d2c.png

Is the piece on the nose of the steeringwheel? It looks like it

[NathanOlder]

It looks like he was going pretty much in a straight line. And it seems there's a break in the barrier. What would have happened if there were no heavy equipment there? With that speed, would he have gone straight on into where the spectators are standing? I'm just puzzled why there's no barrier there.

There is no chance of going through the gap in the racing direction. The only reason he was nearly through the gap was that he bounced off the tractor. From the race track travelling in the correct direction, you shouldnt be able to see that gap.

[xDama]

Members of the community who are connected to members of the FIA, FoM and sponsors need to fully realise / understand how important it is for this incident to be heavily scruitinised and that there was a genuine requirement for the Safety car or red flag to be called after Sutils accident which may / may not have preventend Jules Bianchi' accident.

There was absolutely no need for a red flag for Sutils crash, nor a safety car. Sutil's crash was pretty minor and the car, nor the crane removing the car were in an position where it would hinder, nor endanger, anyone.

I beg to differ...

For me it's simple: rain and slippery conditions, with a car AND an exterior vehicle on track on the outside of a fast and tricky corner. If this doesn't call for a SC, then what does? The problem with the SC these days is it takes ages for a SC to get back in the pits. If the SC-procedure would allow a 3-lap intervention, this would have been a SC without a doubt.

20 years ago, they made exactly the same mistake in Suzuka. You'd expect they would've learned from their mistakes...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd-nSWjdpHI

[Miguel]

OK, I really don't have the desire to watch the video, especially since it's been discussed in detail, but I have one question. Is the footage amateur, or is it FOM footage? Given that both the BBC and Sky seem to offer different views, it doesn't seem unlikely that official FOM footage has leaked to the 'net.

From another front, I'm only slightly relieved to see Bianchi's picture without a helmet and without obvious signs of external trauma and bleeding. However, when deceleration is so fast, lethal injuries may happen even without blunt impact. Now let's cross our fingers and hope for the best.

[SectorOne]

OK, I really don't have the desire to watch the video, especially since it's been discussed in detail, but I have one question. Is the footage amateur, or is it FOM footage?

Fan footage from the grandstand. From either Q2, Q1, R or S

[turbof1]

The FOM is making author claims like crazy on those youtube videos. Even though it's amateur footage meaning they have no leg to stand on, youtube's policy unfortunaly is to block videos automatically upon such a claim.

[Blanchimont]

There might be additional FOM videos. In the video (you can still find it on liveleak), one can see a FOM camera man turning the camera towards the scene just in the moment of the crash.

Btw, i estimated the terminal speed for Bianchi from the existing video and my calculations showed an impact speed of ~40 m/s or 144 km/h.

[SectorOne]

Btw, i estimated the terminal speed for Bianchi from the existing video and my calculations showed an impact speed of ~40 m/s or 144 km/h.

Interesting, how exactly does one go about doing this? What´s the process of it all?

[Blanchimont]

I used Google Earth to locate the approximate location of the amateur camera. From that i know the distance to the crash scene. I assumed a probable path that Bianchi took from the racing line to the position just before the impact.

I then measured some angles in Google Earth and together with the video timing information from the frames, this speed was my best guess. I would say that the error range lies within +- 20% because of all the assumptions and measurments i made.