Safety of car recovery (and trucks on circuits)

[Tim.Wright]

A friend with that F1 app says he went off at 213kph (132mph).

203km/h is the highest recording from the app. Some analysis done by Blanchimont and Shreiker say the actual impact speed was around 100km/h. Say 70-110km/h to cover both.

This is interesting... I'm not sure how much we can trust the app, but it would be interesting to list the velocities of every driver who passed the yellow flag section. This will give us a decent comparison of how much each driver lifted off.

If you lose control of the car of have a failure under double double waved yellow conditions, you should be going sufficiently slow enough that you can't make it to the barriers:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YbABEfA2cg[/youtube]

As unpopular as it might be, I'm still tending towards the theory that Jules was travelling unreasonably fast.

[Richard]

Maybe you can't measure the average speed of a car in the "danger area" very accurately but you can check if the driver pressed the "limiter button".

You can measure speed very accurately from car telemetry. So it'll be easy to see cars that were faster than xx kph after time yy.

The bit that is tricky is some sort of positioning system to enforce a speed limit at a specific part of the circuit. That also has sporting issues with drivers sneaking a bit extra.

Hence the simplest method is to simply enforce a track wide speed limit when there are double yellows or a SC. It doesn't need any electronics, just programme the dash to show the delta like they do for the safety car. It could flash red if the delta too high. In 2015 they could have an SC button on the steering wheel so the driver doesn't need to stare at the dash.

It would be interesting to list the velocities of every driver who passed the yellow flag section. This will give us a decent comparison of how much each driver lifted off.

That would be a very useful study. It would need the driver's speed on the previous 2 or 3 laps when the sector was green, then the speed under double yellow.

[Andres125sx]

I disagree, there´s a reason they don´t have normal trucks running around in the gravel traps.
It´s because they will get stuck. If you start soldering on bars and stuff it too will get stuck.

No, they will get stuck because they use normal size tires and 2 wheel drive. Clearance is irrelevant here, the problem is if wheels spin and dig into the gravel, that´s the reason cranes will never get stuck on gravel traps, those wheels will never spin over gravel

They don´t need to absorb any energy,

Oh yes they definitely do.

It would be better if they do, but we´re talking about a worst case scenario when a car loose control with yellow flags. As you know that´s not a usual situation, I´ve only see it rarely, and always with hard rain and cars aquaplanning.

The purpose of the bumpers is not acting as protection barriers, their only purpose is to avoid the driver´s head being the first part crashing against a metallic crane. With bumpers it will be the car, and the car will absorb part of the energy and bounce so driver will be way safer than currently

You´re not trying to fix the problem, only the symptoms as someone said.

If you want to fix the problem then we should be talking about tracks like Suzuka where there´re fast corners with no exit at all.

That´s the real root of the problem, and I hate saying this because Suzuka is my favourite track by far

GitanesBlondes is right on the money. The system is already in place, it works brilliantly, it´s by F1 standards extremely cheap and it´s extremely safe.

As I said I agree with that for wet conditions, but if dry I don´t think that´s necessary. With safer cranes would be more than enough I think

Anycase I´m not denying the top speed rule would be safer, I´m only saying cranes should be safer, no matter if you implement more safety rules

the soldered bars still do not help marshals on track. Why are you ignoring this all the time?

Because I´ve seen marshals avoiding an uncontrolled car. But never seen an uncontrolled car avoiding a crane, or anything

Anycase marshals are main reason I agree with wet conditions the speed limit would be better

Would your idea be to solder bars on someone´s face next time?

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
thinking about it, will tell you soon

[daveyrace]

I have to first say that when I saw Sutils car go off and the tractor and marshals come out I was wincing at the thought that they were not using the safety car for that corner incident.

When I first saw the video of the crash three things stood out to me.
1. The fact that the impact point started high up at the helmet/rollhoop area of the car not any typical impact absorbing crash structure, very rigid.
2. The car decelerated in a very short time/distance.
3. The impact was not head on, it was almost side on.

This is what used to happen when f1 cars hit poles, trees,fences etc.
The rapid deceleration at an angle would be enough to cause the head injuries without any external injuries, from previously studying automotive crash testing I know that rotational injuries and rapid deceleration on the brain can be the worst type. The outcome would have been better had he hit one of the wheels thus using the impact structure round the car. Its not so much about how fast he was going initially but the acceleration to stop during the impact.

Now I myself have never seen it as being particularly safe having large lumps of odd shaped metal with many soft vulnerable marshals moving around them in an area next to a track that has just had a car crash off(high likelyhood of another doing just the same which is evident from many past races). When the FIA puts so much effort into making these areas by the track bigger, softer and safer.
It used to be that drivers had to go flat out on tracks with trees, poles etc just a few meters away. Instead of slowing the cars, they removed the trees and poles or offered protection at these danger points. Its a race, cars can and will come off the track at some point. There should not be an item around the track that is dangerous in this way. You may as well not bother with the tyre barriers and massive runoffs if you are only going to stick a jcb infront of it during a race. The video of that wet race at the Nurburgring in 2007 with cars almost hitting a jcb shows there is a precedent for this and should have given those safety bods in F1 a wake up call.

Now investing "millions" as some have put it into making these tractors a safer item to crash into is no big deal for F1. It must happen. The current tests would probably cover it as long as the structure on the tractor was at the right height!
Changing the regulations so that tractors do not go onto the track until a safety car is called/initiated in those kind of conditions would not be hard.
Getting drivers to go slower or not crash is not going to happen by telling them to. Saying Jules was going too fast is a bit of a mute point, he went off for whatever reason and should not expect to hit something as dangerous as he did. How many of you would sit in an F1 car going at just 10mph heading towards a jcb weighing several tonnes where the first point of impact was your helmet. I know I wouldn't. They are called accidents for a reason. All the drivers are making informed risks but the hazards should and could be reduced.

I hope Jules is fighting hard, he is a great driver.

[Piraxian]

Could something like the following possibly work? I'm not a massive fan of safety cars for the record, but thats because they always seem to be out for 2-3 laps longer then required so all cars can un lap themselves. I'm trying to come up with a way to avoid that so a safety car could be out for a minimum of 2 laps if the issue can be resolved quickly and this is about the best i've got so far.

1. For any marshall or recovery vehicle to be allowed onto the circuit a 'short term' safety car must be deployed
2. The safety car must pick up the lead driver and all other drivers must form up behind the safety car. Any cars which are in front of the lead driver can pass the safety car but must not exceed a certain speed during their lap while they catch up (say 80kmh)
3. The safety car on it's first lap must back up all drivers
4. All lapped cars at the end of the first lap under the safety car must pull into the pits and wait there till all other cars have passed, at which point they can leave the pit lane and rejoin the end queue
5. Safety car is brought in as soon as all marshals and recovery vehicles have been safely removed from the circuit

[langwadt]

Could something like the following possibly work? I'm not a massive fan of safety cars for the record, but thats because they always seem to be out for 2-3 laps longer then required so all cars can un lap themselves. I'm trying to come up with a way to avoid that so a safety car could be out for a minimum of 2 laps if the issue can be resolved quickly and this is about the best i've got so far.

1. For any marshall or recovery vehicle to be allowed onto the circuit a 'short term' safety car must be deployed
2. The safety car must pick up the lead driver and all other drivers must form up behind the safety car. Any cars which are in front of the lead driver can pass the safety car but must not exceed a certain speed during their lap while they catch up (say 80kmh)
3. The safety car on it's first lap must back up all drivers
4. All lapped cars at the end of the first lap under the safety car must pull into the pits and wait there till all other cars have passed, at which point they can leave the pit lane and rejoin the end queue
5. Safety car is brought in as soon as all marshals and recovery vehicles have been safely removed from the circuit

it is going to take a long time compared to waving yellow flags, what if a driver needs immediate help?

at 80km/t I doubt they can to catch the SC, that AMG is not that slow and is going flat out, I think "only" something like 40 seconds slower per lap

[Manoah2u]

side question; how do they get drivers 'out of their cars' safely?

apart from the severity and horrendous nature of jules' crash, the removed airbox provided some 'accesability' to the driver.
Now i know these conditions are rare, but, let's just analyze a bit.

the driver is strapped to his chair, has a hans device. how is he pulled out of the car? does the seat come off? in case of a possibile spine injury (or neck), how do you remove a driver from this tight environment without actually damaging further?

will they cut open the top? isn't there a safer way to get a f1 driver out of their car?

imagine a situation like bianchi with a car on fire....

[notsofast]

There are two different scenarios that should be considered.

First scenario - - marshalls need to enter the track itself in order to clear debris. This is the case where you deploy the safety car. It bunches up the field so that marshalls have about 1 minute of clear roadway each lap to do their job.

Second scenario - - there's a hazard that can cause serious damage if a car were to leave the track and collide with it (be it a marshall or a jcb). In this case, enforce a full-course speed limit, e.g., via the pitlane rev limiter. No need to bunch up the field with a safety car. Automatic 10 second stop-and-go penalty for any driver who completes any sector faster than what the speed limit allows.

[langwadt]

side question; how do they get drivers 'out of their cars' safely?

apart from the severity and horrendous nature of jules' crash, the removed airbox provided some 'accesability' to the driver.
Now i know these conditions are rare, but, let's just analyze a bit.

the driver is strapped to his chair, has a hans device. how is he pulled out of the car? does the seat come off? in case of a possibile spine injury (or neck), how do you remove a driver from this tight environment without actually damaging further?

will they cut open the top? isn't there a safer way to get a f1 driver out of their car?

imagine a situation like bianchi with a car on fire....

"The driver’s seat is a single plastic cast, tailored to provide optimal support. Since 1999, rules have stipulated it may not be installed as a fixed part of the car. Instead it must be possible to remove the driver and seat as one after an accident, thus eradicating the risk of spinal damage."

[Vettel Maggot]

Jeez all this talk reminds me of pointless meetings, committees and projects at my work that make a simple issue way to complex.

CODE 60/80 for double yellows limited all the way around the track for dangerous situations instead of in a sector as no one is disadvantaged that way, done. Put a light on the dash the pre warns the driver for 2-3 seconds and that's that. The warning would countdown again to resume full racing speeds.

No need to reinvent moving equipment, cranes and waste millions of dollars.

And everyone wishing for more safety cars, doesn't that mean a standing re start next year?

[Ciro Pabón]

I repeat what was said in other thread about run off areas and, believe me, I really, really, really read before write because I work on road safety:

1. Passive measures on car (seat belts, roll hoops, skirts in cranes (!?)) are the least effective for car occupants' safety (and, ehem, that phrase doesn't mean they are ineffective, puhleeze, buckle up).
2. Passive measures on the track (barriers, elimination of fixed object, treatment of slopes on lateral areas, run off areas) are the second least effective measures
3. Active measures that point towards the avoidance of accidents are the preferred way for safety.
This way of thinking, of course, includes suspension of races under heavy rain, in the dark, at twilight of sunset, where aquaplaning is a very certain and grave risk.

The fact that only one in a hundred skids results in a mortal accident does not mean that the fault of this accident doesn't rest on the shoulders of race directors and fans that find entertaining to watch cars racing under the rain (yes, I'm talking about you and me).

Those persons in this thread that (smartly) deduced brake distances with friction coefficients of 0.7 could ponder that under rain this coefficient drops to 0.1 and when you aquaplane it drops to zero, no matter what run off area you have, its material, the barriers, the elimination of objects, or truck skirts (which are unheard of).

An inconvenient truth: friction coefficients vs speed for different amounts of water


Allow me to write this in fat italic letters (although I have slim hopes of the concept sinking among a veritable rain (ha, ha!) of original (and very respectable, of course, although a tad STUPID because that's not how engineering work) ideas.

Under rain your ability to turn is one third of your ability on dry tracks, even at 60 kph, even with downforce, even with only one centimeter of water, even with nice rules for safety cars and even with dashboard yellow lights.

I repeat again what I have said other times insisting on saying anew what I've already said (redundancy anyone?) about racing under the rain.

When you are at 60 cm of height with no windshield wipers and just a visor separating your eyes from water being thrown at you by a car running at 300 kph you cannot see sh1t.

It's the asphalt, stupid. Simple: porous asphalt.


These surfaces are mandatory on highways through Europe. Why they are not in racing circuits escape me.

Look, ma! No water! Miracles of modern science (1970 is modern apparently)


Is it magic? Do they use a giant hairdryer? Is Hermione Granger around? Did FIA write (yet another) rule about safety cars? No, kids! It's EVEN better: it's porous asphalt!


It's candy mountain, Charlie...

[Manoah2u]

I'll admit I see the effects of poreous asphalt regurarly, don't know why it didn't cross my mind why F1 tracks don't have them

the only thing i can imagine though is poreous asphalt might be more 'damaging' to the tires instead of 'normal' asphalt, as in far higher wear.....

[uk marshal 83]

I'm a longtime lurker here and a first time poster here.

I spend most of my weekends throughout the summer marshaling at various uk race circuits at all levels of meeting and from my point of view the problem is drivers not respecting flag signals. It happens at most meetings from the very top down to the humblest sprint, drivers will try to push the rules (as is their job).

the only solution I can see is have much harsher penalties for disobeying orders, if you leave the track out of control under double waved yellows it should be instant dsq, no ifs no buts, no warnings. if a car problem forces you to leave the track out of control you were going to fast in the first place.

all this talk of barriers on cranes is pointless, how will a barrier on a jcb help a marshal go home to his family if they get hit at 200kph+? don't forget tracks have other race meetings than just f1 with vehicles that need jcb's to recover them.

On the plus side the suggestion of porous tarmac is a good talking point and may be worth some investigation however just as water seeps in, from my experience oil / coolant / any liquid dropped by a vehicle will also seep in and then gets brought to the surface again during light rainfall mind you heavy rainfall does help to wash it away

[Richard]

How would porous asphalt compare with normal asphalt with regard to accumulating rubber over the weekend?

[CBeck113]

I imagine that the pores on the racing line would fill up with rubber - great for traction on the line, but passing would be harder, and when it gets wet...bad.