Safety of car recovery (and trucks on circuits)

[Andres125sx]

It's not my intention to discourage contributions to threads, I apologize if the facepalm picture I posted is interpreted as mockery of your posts, Andrés. Won't happen again, it's not what I meant.

Actually, yes it was, so thanks

The fact that De La Rosa and Wurz complain about bumps in braking zones doesn't mean they are caused by braking, even if they say so. They're drivers, not pavement builders.

But they drive there each seasson, so if they see them bigger each seasson... exactly on braking points... both of them... coincidence? It could be, but I´ve never bought coincidence theories

That's a construction defect, not a problem inherent to porous asphalt.

Actually, porous asphalt, with a reduced amount of asphalt and a larger amount of rocks is better to support loads, that's why it's used in base courses.

The top layer is usually less porous because of durability issues. The less water that enters the top layer, the longer the layer will last.

However, having a larger amount of asphalt makes the layer more susceptible to plastic flow.

And what´s the reason to use an specific mix of rocks/asphalt? Because I guess with higer rock it´s better to support loads but it will be more prone to thermal cracking, but with higher asphalt mix it may induce corrugations or slippage cracking under heavy loads. I wonder what´s better for a race track


Anycase my only intention here was theorizing about what may be the problem, because I cannot belive all people in charge is so stupid to do not use porous asphalt if it´s perfectly valid. We´re not talking about Emperor Ecclestone as you call him, but any track owner too. It´s not one or two exceptions, it´s the norm, no track use porous asphalt except ovals, so IMHO most reasonable and cautious approach should be thinking we´re missing something about porous asphalt used for racing tracks. I was trying to find out what may be that reason we´re missing

Maybe it´s not the braking bumps problem, but there must be something apart from cost, because if it would be cost at least those resurfacing will be using porous asphalt, and they´re not, they continue resurfacing with traditional asphalt, even tracks at england, belgium, etc. where rain is almost a certainty, so sorry but I cannot believe all of them are so stupid, there must be some reason we don´t know

[CBeck113]

To put this discussion to rest: braking does cause bumps, but not all alone. If there is a bump there already, then the suspension from the front wheels can begin to oscillate after hitting the bump during heavy braking, creating the vertical force which Ciro was referring to. This is also the reason why these braking zone bumps are generally spaced pretty equally. I hope that we can continue with the discussion now.
I see the only good solution to be the mandatory speed limit; there's still a chance that a person on the track could be hurt, maybe even killed, but it would be so much safer. The statement above about the drivers respecting each other is true, and the source of the problem: this generation has been trained to use any advantage they can find, so letting off means voluntarily leaving tome in that dangerous sector. At least they recognized this problem and will hopefully do something against it - and enforce it too.

[strad]

Is this a result of the greedy times we live in or just because the drivers no longer fear crashes?

Both I think. However from the videos I have posted it is pretty certain that a lot comes down to this feeling of invincibility they feel when strapped into cars where they feel totally safe.

[Hobbs04]

I've been to a number of electric go kart pay to race 10 laps or so and there is typically a worker within the track that can slow each kart via remote. I hate this because sometimes they only slow one driver if your a tad too aggressive or hit the plastic barriers. I think a system to regulate the drivers not only to speed but maintain the gaps to all drivers during a specific sector is technologically possible but removes the issue of a drivers who try to drive 99.99999% of the posted limit as they do in pit lane.

I'm sure with all the data coming to our iPads during the race could also auto pilot the drivers through a section and once they have passed an imaginary line then the speed would return.... Also if a driver gains an advantage on the field in this area he would be slowed via remote to that designated gap....

The biggest problems I see with this system can be dealt with proper planning and trial and error such as it was dialing the exact distance in the DRS zones.

[Manoah2u]

I think 'control imposed over a driver' should never ever be allowed or advocated in F1 (or sports in general).

There is a difference in purposefully controlling (dictating) a driver versus 'limiting' the vehicle at his disposal.

The pit limiter is for pit safety. though i'm not entirely sure, the pit limiter is not mandated technology, but it is mandated
the car is not to reach above a certain speed, f.e. 80kph. the pit limiter is an electronical device that limits to exactly here because a driver is prone to make judgemental errors on driving both below this speed and still fast enough not to drop too low. thus, push button and push pedal down essentially a 'no brainer button'.

i'm not sure if there should be a 'yellow flag' limiter in the same sense like that of the pit limiter, even though i do believe it would be good to say that under double yellow there should be a speed limit, f.e. like in the pit, 80. It's recognisable enough for driver to be a double yellow due to the steering wheel lights and the flashing lights alongside the track.

a dash message could be given as a warning too about the set speed limit.

then the drivers are at their own game but still have to comply to the rules; if they drive too fast - 10 second pit penalty to be carried out within a lap after verdict. driving too fast in a dangerous environment should be penalised accoringly, so the faster the driver goes, the harder the penalty.

And the benefit of not having a computer take 'control' over the driver is first of all that there is still the skill of the driver needed ; in my rush to keep or win position, am i able to control my emotions and comply, or will i risk a penalty - and , the danger of driving 78 kph instead of 80 which makes the driver behind close in a bit more. and the exit of the danger zone to return to normal operating speed.

it would make it safer for the marshalls, keep the thrill in the race and keep drivers away from being 'puppets'.

I am absolutely pro-speed limit; but i'm very biased and negative towards a race-controlled speed imposement in the form of a 'hijack' that blocks the speed above 80kph.

[autogyro]

So the discussion comes around as expected to computer control over the car from outside.
It would be far easier to make the cars autonomous with pit lane computer control like an arcade game.
The drivers could then learn to race motor cycles and participate in a real man's sport.

[Andres125sx]

spanish tv said they probably will use same code 60 used in lemans, even when Gene said it´s a bit risky because you have to brake at points where you usually don´t to enter the yellow sector at 100kmh, but looks like this will be the choice.

Anycase I hope they only do it with rain, as on a dry track I´ve never seen any uncontrolled car on yellow flag zone, problem is with rain and aquaplanning, if dry theres no problem at all.

Also, I´ve never seen anyone talking about one of the biggest problems here, tracks with not enough exit zones for F1 cornering speeds.... that´s a real problem, not that I´m saying yellow flags, rain, etc are not, but with bigger exits Bianchi would be participating in Sochi, I see it this easy. And I´ll repeat I hate saying this because Suzuka is my favourite track by far, but if we really want to discuss safety problems, I don´t see the reason this has not been mentioned yet

[Manoah2u]

Also, I´ve never seen anyone talking about one of the biggest problems here, tracks with not enough exit zones for F1 cornering speeds.... that´s a real problem, not that I´m saying yellow flags, rain, etc are not, but with bigger exits Bianchi would be participating in Sochi, I see it this easy. And I´ll repeat I hate saying this because Suzuka is my favourite track by far, but if we really want to discuss safety problems, I don´t see the reason this has not been mentioned yet

agreed. deep gravel, longer 'run off area'. There was definately area for it, the barriers could have been located way further to the back. an upward 'slope' would be also of help me thinks. still, the problem was not the 'crash zone', it was what jules hit. he did come in quite fast, so he'd have hit the barriers relatively harder than sutil i presume - but it would not been a problem, really and jules would be participating in sochi without problems.

I think suzuka might need some 'safer zones', if you compare suzuka to other tracks its a tad 'outdated' to modern f1 'standards'. Then again, Monaco has the walls just inches away, so, i still not sure.

[marcush.]

The straight on trajectory (car unable to change direction -because of loss of brakes ,lost wheels ,aquaplaning etc should not be long but a gravelbed ,safely slowing down cars going at high speed .
And I think furthermore grass should be avoided completely as it is very dangerous and not allowing any significant speed reduction when wet.

so the "perfect" runoff may be a graveltrap starting tangential to the cornerentry after say 30m allowing cars that go way too fast at unabated speed to come to a safe stop .

This could be augmented by a very high grip tarmac stripe with excellent draining capacity -so as soon you touch the runoff the car needs ALOT of power to keep its speed and no gains are possible when leaving the track perimeter -drivers would lean on this not visible curb -yes but as you go too far it just slows you down .. so what?

[Ciro Pabón]

As explained in several previous threads, gravel has a friction coefficient that's one third or less of asphalt.

Gravel traps are not traps, they're more like roller coasters.

Gravel launches the car in the air, effectively robbing the driver of control, that's why they are not used anymore (except at circuits that have no money to pave them).

When you enter a gravel trap you're not aquaplaning but "gravelplaning".

[strad]

Yes Ciro and often flipping them and when the roll bar is buried deep enough you're up to,, or down to the drivers head

[WaikeCU]

I still think the safest bet is a full course yellow behind the safety car whenever a crane has to be deployed on to the circuit.

[xDama]

I still think the safest bet is a full course yellow behind the safety car whenever a crane has to be deployed on to the circuit.

/thread.

[Richard]

I see the FIA is going to trial the speed limit idea in Austin FP. They're calling it a "virtual safety car" for when there are marshalls, tractors or obstacles on the circuit. Drivers will have to keep to a speed about 35% slower than a normal dry lap time.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/29829303

Off topic - Of course being the FIA they don't issue a press release, that'd be far too obvious.