F1: Drivers Pushing for Greater Head Protection for 2017 Onwards

[Phil Anderson]

I understand your frustration in this matter but can you tell me how to make the Isle of Man TT races safer? How about the Ulster GP or the Dundrod races? How about all the other real motorcycle races on real roads with trees, lamp posts, stone walls etc? Can you tell me how to make them safer?
Just tell me what they can do. OK?

Motorcycle racing is not the same thing. Its apples and oranges. Bit I will bite. (excuse the pun) The stuff you are listing is "Road Racing" now there is only so much you can do to make a road course safe. When riders race on proper race tracks there safety is well up there as much as it can be at least as the rider is exposed. Yes we have had the awful death of Marco Simoncelli but the FIM bought in new regs for helmets, many rides also have air bags built into there leathers now as well.

As I say though bike racing and car racing is not the same thing. But you by all means carry on with your straw man

 

[Andy_J]

Motorcycle racing is not the same thing. Its apples and oranges. Bit I will bite. (excuse the pun) The stuff you are listing is "Road Racing" now there is only so much you can do to make a road course safe. When riders race on proper race tracks there safety is well up there as much as it can be at least as the rider is exposed. Yes we have had the awful death of Marco Simoncelli but the FIM bought in new regs for helmets, many rides also have air bags built into there leathers now as well.

As I say though bike racing and car racing is not the same thing. But you by all means carry on with your straw man

<modedit: snip> Motor sports are dangerous. Lets not sanitise them to the levels that the politically correct liberal apologists want. And by the way, helmets have not changed since Marco's death. Trust me I use them and I have to abide with ACU regulations. Air bag leather race suits were also in use at the time of his death and they would not have saved him.
Of course it's not the same thing, but where do you decide that one motorsport should be safer than another? Are bike racers less worthy to you? Can't you lot just leave it alone and go play golf or something?
I'll tell you what, lets restrict all F1 to 30 MPH max. There you go that will be safer.

 

[Phil Anderson]

That day will never come, unless we remove all the drivers from the cockpit and continue racing with RC cars.

Danger is an inevitable part of motorsport, if drivers, or even spectators, don't wish to risk a heavy injury (driving on the edge gives a rush they obviously are all addicted to) they can also choose not to race and play chess on weekend's.

Every fatal loss is one too many, but I am sure if we could ask the death about their opinion they would do it all over again, because of the kick. I can't imagine Senna not being a driver and instead ending his days as an 93 year old office clerk.

I never said not hurt I said at worst get broken bones. And yes that day will come we are 97% there now. We just need to go this last little bit. But yes there is all ways a chance of a driver dieing there is no way to stop that as sometimes in motorsport just goes wrong. But that does not mean we should sit by and not bother just because.

Most drivers are not addicted to it. Most of them all say the same thing. They dont even feel they are going that fast. There is a Nascar driver interview I see last week I cant remember who it was but said "I don't feel that fused going 200 mph as you only know you are going that fast when you wreck"

Its a good point there I think as Nascar is getting safer and that is only a good thing.

Ps sorry for the rant

 

[Phil Anderson]

What a pathetic and liberal answer. Motor sports are dangerous. Lets not sanitise them to the levels that the politically correct liberal apologists want. And by the way, helmets have not changed since Marco's death. Trust me I use them and I have to abide with ACU regulations. Air bag leather race suits were also in use at the time of his death and they would not have saved him.
Of course it's not the same thing, but where do you decide that one motorsport should be safer than another? Can't you lot just leave it alone and go play golf or something?

First of all don't be so bloody rude. It is not a pathetic and liberal answer. You used a straw man to try and win a debate where there cant be a winner. You cant compare cars and bikes on any level it just cant be done. and not only can that not be done you then try and use road racing witch as we all know is a over a 70% chance of death to a rider then racing on a track.You know even the mega awesome and best rider ever Valentino Ross
He said: 'I did a lap of the Isle of Man, and I understand why people love this because it’s f**king awesome – it’s unbelievable, great. But, unfortunately, it’s too dangerous. Sometimes, riders are crazy"

'The Isle of Man is very difficult. If you make a mistake, maybe it’s the last mistake.'

And yes the helmets did change. They changed the catch system as to stop it coming undone. But no you are right it would not have saved him. But it could save a rider now and you have to make every change you can if it saves one life its a damn good start.

I have never at any time stated that one form of motorsport should be safer or make one safer faster then another. I want them all to be as safe as we can make them and that goes for any sport not just motorsport.

And no I cant as I don't like golf

 

[Andy_J]

And no I cant as I don't like golf

OK. Take up knitting instead. Leave motorsports alone. Go and watch cricket or some other soft sport but leave motorsports alone. There are enough do-gooders in this world that spoil things, don't be one of them.

 

[Phil Anderson]

OK. Take up knitting instead. Leave motorsports alone. Go and watch cricket or some other soft sport but leave motorsports alone. There are enough do-gooders in this world that spoil things, don't be one of them.

Well if wanting to make motorsport safer makes me a do gooder then so be it. I would rather that then be happy to see people get hurt or worse. Nice to see what you get your kicks in life out of. I just hope that julia wilson and Susie Behm ect never have to read your posts.

 

[Andy_J]

<mod-edit: removed>

 

[Michael Watts]

Motorsports are inherently dangerous, we all know this and every driver knows the risks too. All this is about is to keep someone from getting killed from a carbon fiber wingtip or debris coming off the track or another car and killing a driver. If you smack into a wall in an F1 car at 300kph you will probably still die..the risk is still there...Are you happy now?? Justin Wilson's death was avoidable with a canopy. Senna's death probably avoidable with a canopy. Not sure about Jules Bianchi, that was a hard hit, under a 4 ton tractor. I don't know why this is such an issue. its Safety. Perhaps you think these drivers don't need seatbelts or hans devices either.

 

[Andy_J]

So? How about restricting top speed to 40 mph then? That will make it much safer. Or safer still, how about doing it all on a simulator? Really safe then. They are either open cockpit racers or not? What is it to be?

 

[Jonas Bögemann]

Even the entrance tickets state that racing is dangerous for every party involved.
Hey, I'm just a spectator, but I'd be fine with lower barriers for a better view. Yes, I just said that.
People have to accept that there are a few things that can't be changed, since you would throw away what defines such a thing.
Formula 1 is with open wheels and open cars.
Rallying is point-to-point through a hell of terrain.
Indy500 is in a superspeedway with topspeeds of over 400km/h.
Racing is simply dangerous in it's nature and everybody who can't deal with it, spectators, drivers, marshalls and so on, simply should change their lifestyle. Guess what? Nobody forces you to take part.

 

[Phil Anderson]

<mod-edit: removed>

 

[Phil Anderson]

Grow up. You make me sick. Suggesting that I like or want to see people get hurt or worse. Get a life.

They know the risks, they accept them. Just like soldiers, sailors and Airmen. It's called choice.

I think it is you that needs to grow up. You cant even hold a grown up conversation without spitting your dummy out or just being plan rude to people. You cant even keep on the subject matter. First you change it to bikes now we are on to the armed forces, what next pilots? bank staff?

And as for your comment about knowing the risks. That is not the point. You sound like those guys that rape women and say things like, well they had a short skirt on and knew the risks of dressing like that.

Look at 99% of sports they are always looking at ways to make it safer or better.

 

[Phil Anderson]

Even the entrance tickets state that racing is dangerous for every party involved.
Hey, I'm just a spectator, but I'd be fine with lower barriers for a better view. Yes, I just said that.
People have to accept that there are a few things that can't be changed, since you would throw away what defines such a thing.
Formula 1 is with open wheels and open cars.
Rallying is point-to-point through a hell of terrain.
Indy500 is in a superspeedway with topspeeds of over 400km/h.
Racing is simply dangerous in it's nature and everybody who can't deal with it, spectators, drivers, marshalls and so on, simply should change their lifestyle. Guess what? Nobody forces you to take part.

I would like to have lower barriers also but I would never stand there if they did do as I know that fance one day might save many life's.

I accept many things that cant be changed. There is alot that should be changed but is not for one reason or another. But the point here is that by having a closed cockpit it can save life's. And no not that thing in the image. It likes like the old tv arial I had in my room as a teenager.Just like I am glad they are now using them in LMP2. Just look back at the Allan McNish. Most experts have said many times if that had been an open cockpit car he would have been very lucky to be alive.

"Formula 1 is with open wheels and open cars" Formula 1 is open wheel. There is no such thing as open cars. well there is but not in the same sense.

 

[Azfalt Raser]

I used to be against this, in a way I still am partly, but one cannot account for the anomalies that happen like debris coming off a car and hitting a trailing driver in the head. Even if the lead up to that event is a string of events that may not have been properly tested (ie. new parts, unusual forces stressing car parts etc.) you need protection against it, simple.

BUT, I stressed this last time too, drivers today are pervasively taking unwarranted risks, with little reward and huge risks, and have a general disregard for track boundaries, rules and gentlemanly racing. This was hugely apparent in this years F1 racing, where track limits (white lines) were simply decorations, and unfortunately flags and track/weather conditions are not adhered to by drivers and race directors. J. Bianchi would have been racing today if he, race organizers, F1 safety committee would have better evaluated the risks with the evolving of F1 as a sport. Yellow flags in heavy rain/dangerous track conditions should be obeyed with a reduced speed. Have professionals working as track martials, trained highly effective individuals with a series of skills that enable them to answer acutely to any immediate accident. A multi billion dollar sport cannot affort to have people not adequate to operate in these extreme conditions. I, as a fellow racer, would be angry and frustrated as to why JB is not here today.

Like Schumacher said, these things happen so that we learn from them, they cannot pass without lessons being learned. I would urge drivers and the governing body of F1 to look at the problem as a whole, a canopy or halo will not stop your head being in danger when hitting a 4-6ton excavator at 120mph.

The fact is, in every era of racing, every category of racing, drivers risk/risked their lives, regardless of what safety equipment they did/did not have. Making cars safer, regardless of what is designed into the cars, is proactive.

But, it is the nature of this sport, where the driver is paid to outperform another driver, that requires a driver to take risks. In my opinion, at some point, the sport in general needs to acknowledge that the drivers need to take some responsibility. Much of the collisions and debris is the result of driver error, carelessness, or disregard for any safety. Partly due to the fact that cars are getting safer and safer to drive.

Why do I see drivers block other drivers when the car behind is coming up extremely fast on another car? Why do they "brake check" other drivers? Why do drivers move to the apex when they know that someone may dive down the inside? Why do drivers insist on dive bombing when their past experiences say it is a low percentage move?

Michael Schumacher forcing Rubens Barrichello almost into the pit wall
Nico Rosberg intentionally cutting Lewis Hamilton's rear tire with his front end plate
Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost intentionally taking each other out - twice.
Look at all the 1st turn incidents.

Cars can already be designed to be where only high g-force impacts will cause death.
Then what? Do we then design body baffle implants to prevent organs from being crushed to one side of the body cavity?

Organizing bodies need to re-asses the term "racing incidents".
The fact is, someone ran into someone, and they crashed. Who is at fault? oh..."racing incident".
Rules should be in place to mitigate "racing incidents", making drivers think....3 times before taking a risk.

Collisions
Person at fault, receives heavy penalties - not 10 second penalty or 10 grid place...
I'm talking, suspension, or the TEAM missing the next race or races. If fault cannot be determined, both are at fault. The financial implications for the team would be HUGE.
I know this is an extreme example, but I don't want to watch a race where half the field is taken out in the first turn. Everyone knows you're going to slow down. Yet, 7 out of 10 times, there is a collision.

I keep hearing "it's part of racing". Well, driving a vehicle as fast as possible, with high octane fuel, and running into each other or solid objects (what are those warning labels?), IS LIKELY TO RESULT IN INJURY OR DEATH - has always been a part of racing.

In the end, I find it ludicrous that the drivers want more safety designed into cars, without they themselves taking a long look at their own driving practices or the rules which allow them to dismiss running into each other.

Just man's nature, I suppose.

That's just my devil's advocate thought process. But how they race makes no difference to me. I just enjoy watching the sport.

 

[Phil Anderson]

The fact is, in every era of racing, every category of racing, drivers risk/risked their lives, regardless of what safety equipment they did/did not have. Making cars safer, regardless of what is designed into the cars, is proactive.

But, it is the nature of this sport, where the driver is paid to outperform another driver, that requires a driver to take risks. In my opinion, at some point, the sport in general needs to acknowledge that the drivers need to take some responsibility. Much of the collisions and debris is the result of driver error, carelessness, or disregard for any safety. Partly due to the fact that cars are getting safer and safer to drive.

Why do I see drivers block other drivers when the car behind is coming up extremely fast on another car? Why do they "brake check" other drivers? Why do drivers move to the apex when they know that someone may dive down the inside? Why do drivers insist on dive bombing when their past experiences say it is a low percentage move?

Michael Schumacher forcing Rubens Barrichello almost into the pit wall
Nico Rosberg intentionally cutting Lewis Hamilton's rear tire with his front end plate
Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost intentionally taking each other out - twice.
Look at all the 1st turn incidents.

Cars can already be designed to be where only high g-force impacts will cause death.
Then what? Do we then design body baffle implants to prevent organs from being crushed to one side of the body cavity?

Organizing bodies need to re-asses the term "racing incidents".
The fact is, someone ran into someone, and they crashed. Who is at fault? oh..."racing incident".
Rules should be in place to mitigate "racing incidents", making drivers think....3 times before taking a risk.

Collisions
Person at fault, receives heavy penalties - not 10 second penalty or 10 grid place...
I'm talking, suspension, or the TEAM missing the next race or races. If fault cannot be determined, both are at fault. The financial implications for the team would be HUGE.
I know this is an extreme example, but I don't want to watch a race where half the field is taken out in the first turn. Everyone knows you're going to slow down. Yet, 7 out of 10 times, there is a collision.

I keep hearing "it's part of racing". Well, driving a vehicle as fast as possible, with high octane fuel, and running into each other or solid objects (what are those warning labels?), IS LIKELY TO RESULT IN INJURY OR DEATH - has always been a part of racing.

In the end, I find it ludicrous that the drivers want more safety designed into cars, without they themselves taking a long look at their own driving practices or the rules which allow them to dismiss running into each other.

Just man's nature, I suppose.

That's just my devil's advocate thought process. But how they race makes no difference to me. I just enjoy watching the sport.

I like your thinking. Almost everything you have has hit the nail on the head. \if only like you say those that run things could see what you have said.

But I still feel that closing the cockpit would make it safer for when something does go wrong as sometimes things go wrong for another driver how is driving around and minding there own business and they get hit in the head ie Justin Wilson and Henry Surtees.

 

[P*Funk]

Motor sports are dangerous. Lets not sanitise them to the levels that the politically correct liberal apologists want.

I wasn't aware that the union of millionaire F1 drivers were a bunch of raging liberal pansies.

 

[Azfalt Raser]

I like your thinking. Almost everything you have has hit the nail on the head. \if only like you say those that run things could see what you have said.

But I still feel that closing the cockpit would make it safer for when something does go wrong as sometimes things go wrong for another driver how is driving around and minding there own business and they get hit in the head ie Justin Wilson and Henry Surtees.

And the one miracle.... Felipe Massa. And to come back from that to a high level of competition.

I find it amazing that, we as fans, can get into such in-depth discussions and we don't even drive the cars. You guys made some really good points/posts.

Thanks to RD/RD staff for the venue and fostering a positive atmosphere for discussion/debate for our passion.

 

[paracletus]

Purely as a spectator, don't think it matters whatever they decide. I'm not going to stop watching f1 if they put a lid on it.
However, i don't know if it'll make the sport much safer. In fact, it's possible that the lid may even be an additional hazard after some types of accidents.
If they can prove it's safer overall, then yeah go for it.

 

[P*Funk]

Really at the end of the day I couldn't care less what the cars look like. Indy has legitimate criticism from the fans about those ghastly wheel pods that I believe showed their weakness this year but that's a legitimate criticism. Arguing about the open/closed thing is simply shuttered to the reality. If the legacy of F1 is open cockpits then that's a legacy of danger that has somehow avoided being changed until now. We can argue if certain safety motivated changes have gone too far, like paved run off that doesn't punish mistakes, but in the end you can't justify knowingly retaining a danger that has no tangible effect on the racing for the sake of cosmetics.

 

[nsfgp]

A good link for some reflection and quiet moments ... not for a debate. First time I heard that story with Gerhard.
http://jalopnik.com/5453786/exclusive-reader-photos-from-formula-ones-blackest-day