planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:16 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 3:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2367
Okay, and yet... Kimi is 'brave' but Nico is 'reckless' for barrelling into a 'clear track' in qualifying that time... interesting.

See I'd say Jacques was brave trying to take Eau Rouge flat, but Kimi driving into smoke was pretty stupid. I wouldn't describe this guy as brave either...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nYyvYNvdq0

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 3:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14046
ALESI wrote:
Okay, and yet... Kimi is 'brave' but Nico is 'reckless' for barrelling into a 'clear track' in qualifying that time... interesting.

See I'd say Jacques was brave trying to take Eau Rouge flat, but Kimi driving into smoke was pretty stupid. I wouldn't describe this guy as brave either...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nYyvYNvdq0


I agree its nuanced not binary. The clip - I would say you could easily make an argument for that being brave. It certainly takes bravery to keep your foot on the throttle with zero vision.

Consequences of bravery don't have to be good and it's not always a good thing to be brave.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:21 pm
Posts: 5402
I wasn't aware that this happened at Donington, or that he was in the same hospital where I had surgery last week. Seeing his picture, I was shocked how young 17 year olds look. I imagine car racing drivers not looking like children.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2017 1:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 2:14 am
Posts: 2361
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 9:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6540
Location: Mumbai, India
A heartfelt message from Billy on Twitter, thanking all his supporters:


_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1822
Based on Twitter timelines, looks like Herbert has been heavily involved with him and the family. Good to see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1862
Location: Miami, Florida
Placid wrote:
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation

this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1618
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Placid wrote:
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation

this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.


What should be looked at are the cars. Can they be strengthened to protect the drivers legs better?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14046
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Placid wrote:
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation

this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.


Aye, but this is the 21st century. Nothing bad is allowed to happen without mass hand wringing and people shrieking about the need for measures to prevent anyone from being at risk of being hurt ever again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14046
Herb Tarlik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Placid wrote:
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation

this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.


What should be looked at are the cars. Can they be strengthened to protect the drivers legs better?


You see this is what irritates me. Not the poster but the statement any taken actions make.

What happened to Billy Monger is something everyone knew was possible. It's not come out of nowhere. Knowing it was possible the cars should have been designed with that in mind. If the cars were safe enough before they will be now. It hasn't suddenly become less safe and neither has new risk factor emerged. Any change would indicate the cars were not strong enough previously. If not, why not?

I'm all for improvements in safety where new tech gives new possibilities e.g Hans device or Techpro barriers or where risk factors have increased - cars getting faster for example. But nothing has changed here. The car should be as safe as practicable anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1862
Location: Miami, Florida
Herb Tarlik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Placid wrote:
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation

this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.


What should be looked at are the cars. Can they be strengthened to protect the drivers legs better?


Yes the cars can be strengthened, but unless the front end and cockpit are reinforced with solid billet titanium structure and then fortified with steel tubing, the results of an impact like Billy Monger's will still be about as bad, and in this incident, even a cockpit like that wouldn't maintain its integrity.

No matter what you do Speed x Mass / Stationary Object = BOOM!

In the early 90's Ernie Irvin suffered a hellacious crash in NASCAR and the steel cage tore apart. Reason why?… Reference equation above. DONE.

The only thing that would have prevented such an impact is installing sensors in every car and when a car loses control, the system detects the proximity of other cars on the circuit and would instantaneously cut power and apply maximum braking force to try and prevent impacts under acceleration and/or higher speeds. If Billy had scrubbed off just a little bit of speed, he might have walked out unscathed.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 5:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1618
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Placid wrote:
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation

this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.


What should be looked at are the cars. Can they be strengthened to protect the drivers legs better?


You see this is what irritates me. Not the poster but the statement any taken actions make.

What happened to Billy Monger is something everyone knew was possible. It's not come out of nowhere. Knowing it was possible the cars should have been designed with that in mind. If the cars were safe enough before they will be now. It hasn't suddenly become less safe and neither has new risk factor emerged. Any change would indicate the cars were not strong enough previously. If not, why not?

I'm all for improvements in safety where new tech gives new possibilities e.g Hans device or Techpro barriers or where risk factors have increased - cars getting faster for example. But nothing has changed here. The car should be as safe as practicable anyway.


F1 cars have gone through many decades of innovations to make the driving compartment much safer. Have F4 cars had that level of refinement? I doubt it, hence my response. This might be the time to re-look at the cars and how well they take head on collisions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 5:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4798
It's ridiculous to say that after any major incident to call an inquiry "hand wringing." Just because the governing bodies want to look at what happened doesn't mean that they want to make wholesale changes to anything. It's just looking at the circumstances of the accident to see if and where improvements can be made.

Flying is dangerous yet is very safe as millions of people travel by air every year and the number of injuries and deaths is very small in comparison yet there is still an inquiry after every crash. Doesn't mean that commercial flying isn't safe, it just means that learning from accidents helps prevent further ones.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 6:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7355
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Placid wrote:
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation

this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.


What should be looked at are the cars. Can they be strengthened to protect the drivers legs better?


You see this is what irritates me. Not the poster but the statement any taken actions make.

What happened to Billy Monger is something everyone knew was possible. It's not come out of nowhere. Knowing it was possible the cars should have been designed with that in mind. If the cars were safe enough before they will be now. It hasn't suddenly become less safe and neither has new risk factor emerged. Any change would indicate the cars were not strong enough previously. If not, why not?

I'm all for improvements in safety where new tech gives new possibilities e.g Hans device or Techpro barriers or where risk factors have increased - cars getting faster for example. But nothing has changed here. The car should be as safe as practicable anyway.

Yes, it should. I assume a main point of this enquiry will be whether or not that actually is the case, there's not much more the FIA could be investigating, as F1 MERCENARY pointed out it's a pretty open and shut case in terms of what happened and there's almost certainly no blame to be apportioned.

It should be the case that formula cars are always as safe as they could realistically be yes, but what should be and what is are often two different things, maybe this accident has highlighted that something might not be as safe as it could be to the FIA and MSA, hence the investigation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2017 10:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1862
Location: Miami, Florida
Herb Tarlik wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Placid wrote:
There will be an inquiry on the investigation of the crash jointly by MSA and the FIA.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... estigation

this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.


What should be looked at are the cars. Can they be strengthened to protect the drivers legs better?


You see this is what irritates me. Not the poster but the statement any taken actions make.

What happened to Billy Monger is something everyone knew was possible. It's not come out of nowhere. Knowing it was possible the cars should have been designed with that in mind. If the cars were safe enough before they will be now. It hasn't suddenly become less safe and neither has new risk factor emerged. Any change would indicate the cars were not strong enough previously. If not, why not?

I'm all for improvements in safety where new tech gives new possibilities e.g Hans device or Techpro barriers or where risk factors have increased - cars getting faster for example. But nothing has changed here. The car should be as safe as practicable anyway.


F1 cars have gone through many decades of innovations to make the driving compartment much safer. Have F4 cars had that level of refinement? I doubt it, hence my response. This might be the time to re-look at the cars and how well they take head on collisions.

For a couple of decades now, any series sanctioned and endorsed by the FIA must meet a minimum set of standards including in the way of safety. F4 cars survival cells are manufactured to a strict set of regulations to promote safety just as with any other FIA sanctioned series, F4 included. The one thing to keep in perspective is that different series entail different costs and the level of safety is in accordance to the level of calculated risk/danger. What that means is that the requirements of an F1 car compared to those of F4 are vastly different because the cars are smaller, lighter, less powerful and carry less speed, so the level of construction required to deem the survival cell of an F1 car appropriately safe isn't necessary for F4. Even still, the cars in F4 have been involved in countless accidents for some time now and no one has been this badly injured. Based on that, even not knowing if the survival cells are built to a specific safety standard, the cars are perfectly safe if you run the numbers.

This was the odd freak occurrence and to re-invent the wheel over it is absurd. This is nothing more than people looking to get their 15 minutes in.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1618
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
this is pointless and dumb. The facts are that it was a unique set of circumstances that led to a driver spinning out and stalling on a specific portion of the track so abruptly that it led to catastrophe. "Investigating" do nothing but waste time and money.

There was no gross negligence on anyone's part and safety crew and track officials reacted swiftly and efficiently in a perfectly satisfactory level.

This is life at 150+MPH. Live with it like he is.


What should be looked at are the cars. Can they be strengthened to protect the drivers legs better?


You see this is what irritates me. Not the poster but the statement any taken actions make.

What happened to Billy Monger is something everyone knew was possible. It's not come out of nowhere. Knowing it was possible the cars should have been designed with that in mind. If the cars were safe enough before they will be now. It hasn't suddenly become less safe and neither has new risk factor emerged. Any change would indicate the cars were not strong enough previously. If not, why not?

I'm all for improvements in safety where new tech gives new possibilities e.g Hans device or Techpro barriers or where risk factors have increased - cars getting faster for example. But nothing has changed here. The car should be as safe as practicable anyway.


F1 cars have gone through many decades of innovations to make the driving compartment much safer. Have F4 cars had that level of refinement? I doubt it, hence my response. This might be the time to re-look at the cars and how well they take head on collisions.

For a couple of decades now, any series sanctioned and endorsed by the FIA must meet a minimum set of standards including in the way of safety. F4 cars survival cells are manufactured to a strict set of regulations to promote safety just as with any other FIA sanctioned series, F4 included. The one thing to keep in perspective is that different series entail different costs and the level of safety is in accordance to the level of calculated risk/danger. What that means is that the requirements of an F1 car compared to those of F4 are vastly different because the cars are smaller, lighter, less powerful and carry less speed, so the level of construction required to deem the survival cell of an F1 car appropriately safe isn't necessary for F4. Even still, the cars in F4 have been involved in countless accidents for some time now and no one has been this badly injured. Based on that, even not knowing if the survival cells are built to a specific safety standard, the cars are perfectly safe if you run the numbers.


F1 MERCENARY wrote:
This is nothing more than people looking to get their 15 minutes in.


Wow....the amount of cynicism contained in these 13 words is off scale.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1862
Location: Miami, Florida
No, it isn't.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 27, 2017 2:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14046
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
No, it isn't.


Is there such a thing as a cynicism scale?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 03, 2017 6:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 12:38 pm
Posts: 295
Prayers for Billy.

I'm thinking life itself contains, no, demands inherent risk. Nothing, no matter the cost, can protect everyone from everything.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 4:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:29 am
Posts: 665
I just read this news about Billy Monger:

https://www.motorsport.com/lemans/news/ ... ev-919583/

This sounds like a great project, I'm disabled and if it had been around when I was younger I'd have been interested in getting involved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 2:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4798
Billy back behind the wheel!
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-40497230

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1618
RaggedMan wrote:


Awesome! God speed Billy!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 4:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 58
Very nearly another horror crash today when Sophia Floersch almost hit a recovery vehicle.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 4:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2597
^ Damn, that is scary. What formula was that?

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 58
tootsie323 wrote:
^ Damn, that is scary. What formula was that?


ADAC Formula 4.

And she has been fined €5000 by ADAC for sharing that video without permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 9:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5741
Location: Michigan, USA
G926 wrote:
Very nearly another horror crash today when Sophia Floersch almost hit a recovery vehicle.


I saw that earlier. I realize it was apparently under red flag conditions, but I don't think it was safe of the SUV to cross the track like that at a mostly blind corner until all the cars had returned to the pits.

As for fining her for sharing the video, well, technically the rules do say you don't get to... but still a bit silly IMO.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Jenson's Understeer and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group