A caveat to my previous post...
I was in two minds whether to provide the link to that video.
However, my reasons for doing so outweighed my reservations:
* I think it's important to understand the seriousness of the incident. Some reports may have given the impression Bianchi wasn't travelling at a fast speed - this doesn't appear to be the case;
* Green flags are being waved - clearly this was inappropriate given the conditions and the trackside presence of a heavy machine;
* There are no close-ups of Bianchi or post-incident footage;
* I take no pleasure in watching the video and I don't believe it's voyeuristic. I've seen videos of many motorsport accidents over the years (including in the film 'Senna' and an excellent BBC documentary on GP racing). I’ve found such clips have informed me as a fan of motorsport: that danger is part of the sport, that we're fools to turn away from the reality of that danger and we should have even more respect for the drivers prepared to risk their lives on track.
Last edited by CamCG; 6th October 2014 at 17:13.
When a car weighing approx 700kg can make a tractor weighing four or five times as much move like that, it shows the tremendous force of the impact.
He's lucky to be alive and I wish him a full and speedy recovery.
It's about time these machines were removed from trackside permanently and a better system put in place.
I suspect the green flag is being waved because the marshalling post is slightly after the accident point (admittedly by a very small amount) & drivers are being advised the next section is clear. The post before was showing waved yellows (I've no idea if they were single or double) to instruct the drivers to slow down until they have passed the next green flag.Originally Posted by CamCG
The impact is sickening, and he will be fortunate to recover from that kind of crash - we can only hope for the best.
As for the green flags, they would have been shown at the first marshal's post after the incident. There were yellow lights and double waved yellow flags covering the area of Sutil's crash. Whether the Safety Car should have been deployed is a moot point, and hindsight is 20/20 vision.
Valtteri Bottas has made the point that both Sutil and Bianchi lost control at a point on the circuit where the cars go light as they go over a low crest, before the track goes downhill into the left-hander at Dunlop. Bottas also said that at that point in the race although the racing line was damp as opposed to wet, and the tyres were hot enough to cope, if a driver strayed off-line the track was wet and the tyres immediately lost grip. Sutil and Bianchi were both on well-worn Intermediate tyres. Some drivers had just pitted for Wets, even though there were only a handful of laps remaining, as the rain was increasing in intensity.
A press release today described Bianchi's condition as "critical but stable".
Bloody hell!!!
Nothing short of miraculous that he survived that!
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
This has worrying similarities to the accident Maria de Villota had and I'm not referring to them both being in Marussias.
If marshals are working and a heavy lump of lifting machinery is being used, the racers should be behind a safety car at a safe speed for the conditions for the H&S of the marshals, drivers and spectators. End of!
No.
All that needs to be done is for the double waved yellow flag area to be extended and the drivers to be made aware that they must slow down to a certain "delta", which will be monitored by the FIA via the telemetry which is already available.
My view is that if a front loader is to be deployed in the wet it should only happen under a SC. Waved yellows should be ok in the dry. That footage of Bianchi's accident was horrendous. I wish him well but I am fearful
That's got to be one of the scariest and most horrific accidents I've seen, I'm quite stunned actually.
Good grief, that crash is a shocker.
Open cockpit, at that speed under a several tonne tractor. I only expect bad news, but can only hope for a miraculous recovery.
From a sport that constantly boasts about how safe it is, I do not understand why the tractor was allowed on, with the cars still going around (albeit slower), and the track in such a terrible condition.
Sod's Law would suggest that this place is the most likely for another accident. Very sad.
Thats the first time ive seen the footage of the crash, it looks horrific ,like most said he is lucky to survive...
Here's hoping that Jules Bianchi makes a full recovery.
I would have hoped that race control might have learnt something from the second practice session. When Ricciardo went off they spent over 5 minutes with the recovery crane moving it under yellow flags...before deciding that they needed to red flag the session.
That's an awful crash... best of luck to him. Obviously no idea quite how bad he is, but having seen Richard Hammonds crash its amazing what you can recover (mostly) from...
Utter stupidity having that tractor there at that time. The risk from leaving Sutil's car in place until the race would have or was likely to end was always going to be less than having a ruddy great several tonne JCB out there struggling to pull his car out. Charlie Whiting and the other officials have some big questions to ask about both their procedures and how this race was handled on the day.
^ Agreed – and why they proceeded to start the race at 3pm, knowing the weather front that was forecast.
Lack of light at that stage of the day has been cited as something that was also of concern.
There are "ruddy great several tonne JCB"s all around the track, parked behind the tyre wall, specifically for the purpose of retrieving cars quickly. They were used many times throughout the weekend, with cars travelling on the circuit. It's possible to "handle" a race competently but still have appalling accidents.
Decisions made will be questioned after the fact and maybe procedures changed, but risk can never be eliminated. He could have crashed into the other car, and then perhaps some would be indignantly shouting "why didn't the ruddy great several tonne JCB just go in and remove the car !". Not ragging on the poster, just an example that things look ordered and easy to make decisions on - after the fact.
I haven't seen the video. It's been reported to the FIA and FOM. I was at the race. After it ended, inside the paddock, I was next to the medical helicopter as it landed. It blew my hat off. There was a crowd of media and photographers humming around, trying to get pictures, waiting for the injured man. I had my camera around my neck. I put it away, turned around, and walked out.
I wish Bianchi all the best for a recovery.
Paul
Brutal and sickening crash. I hope that he makes a full recovery.
I do not know how the FIA will improve the cockpit saftey to mitigate against this type of crash. With an open cockpit design there is always going to be a way to penerate the head critical areas. Unless they regulate or remove the use of tractors or other lifting devices to the larger cranes that operate from behind saftey barriers but I can not see the practical applicaiton of this either.
It is a well known human foible to have all the answers after the event. So I would agree that hind sight gives 20/20 visions. There are lessons to be learned here no doubt. Ideally racing should only take place in the dry. That is never going to be practical however. The FIA certainly need to re-examine the deployment of recovery vehicles in the wet. Maybe look at the design of recovery vehicles. Perhaps even consider the enclosure of the open cockpits in F1 cars.
An enclosed cockpit would have changed nothing: it's a F1, not a tank.
Racing in the wet is fine as well: when a tyre is shot, it is as slippery in the dry.
Shit happens, and it was a freak accident.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
How many people commenting on this incident and defending the FIA have raced themselves or are familiar with UK racing? I broke down at Luffield at Silverstone back in 2010, I got the car onto the grass on the inside of the corner not completely out of the way but it would have been a freak accident for someone to have hit it. Was I allowed to go back and try and restart the car (cut out hot so likely would have worked)? No, even though I could have scrambled round into the pitlane. The car was left there until the race completed and then recovered, a practice well known to anyone in the UK. The one that stands out though happened to a couple of guys I know at a very very wet race at Thruxton in 2011, the first went off and crashed. The marshalls given the conditions and likelihood of incidents left his car where it was, not impeding the race track but it was clearly in an area where it could be collected by another car. Well that is just what happened, another guy I know spun off and crashed straight into the other car wrecking both. The conditions were far worse than at Suzuka btw. Nobody minded the way it turned out as none of us want the marshalls to risk their lives any more than they already do.
I think at all levels we need to think again about racing in really bad conditions. It is very rare here for an abandonment, that day at Thruxton was insane but the meeting went on, a few guys didn't start a couple more pulled out after a few laps as it was in their minds to dangerous. Three cars were wrecked in crashes, the other races seemed to have a similar wreck ratio. There just seems to be a mantra at all levels of motorsport that the show must go on.
Before anyone asks or makes an obvious point I really love driving in the rain but hate racing in it, the whole thing just becomes a lottery and is blooming terrifying.
I've raced for 23 years, also in the UK.
Marshalls worldwide are not valued nearly enough.
Safety is a case of progressing insight.
Hindsight does no good apart from as a learning experience.
Racing involves riscs. Not all can be excluded if it is to remain racing.
Shit will still always happen.
We HAVE to differentiate between club racing and F1.
Club racing is foremostly motorised sport.
F1 is foremostly BUSINESS.
Postponing an F1 race involves satellite time per example.
The balance is good versus bad publicity.
The fear of bad publicity has regulated, castrated the racing, overtaking moves et all quite seriously per example. Yet Monaco is still on the calender as F1 is foremostly an advertising circus.
That show MUST go on or it would not exist.
Agreed it was a freak accident. There are still lessons to be learned. I would start with recovery vehicle protocols. Racing in the wet will always be more unpredictable.
I agree and risk can't be totally eliminated.
According to current protocol, I don't believe the marshals or Charlie Whiting did anything wrong in their handling of the situation at the time of Bianchi’s crash.
However, there should be a constant openness and drive to improve safety - be that the cars themselves or track-side procedure.
I'd be very surprised if the protocol for racing whilst heavy machinery is in front of the cash barriers isn't revised after this race.
You are correct that it's easy to question things after the event.
However, I'd make two points…
First, I’ve watched previous F1 races which have continued under yellow flags whilst a heavy machine has removed a stricken car.
I can’t believe I’m the only one who has thought, “Wow, I really hope no one goes off and hits that tractor / JCB”.
Second, if someone did indignantly shout after an accident, "Why didn't the ruddy great several tonne JCB just go in and remove the car!", a reasonable retort would be that crashing into another F1 car or a barrier can't be compared to crashing into a heavy machine like a JCB.
F1 cars are designed and developed to offer protection from crashing into other F1 cars and crash barriers. They aren't designed (and probably couldn't be designed) to offer protection against something like a JCB.
Therefore, if an F1 car is to go off the circuit, it’s preferable for it to hit another F1 car or the barrier itself, rather than a heavy JCB-type machine.
I remember a race in Brazil in, I think, 2000. There was a downpour and at least 3 or 4 cars went off at the same corner over the course of a few laps. One after the other they banged into the last car to leave the circuit, but each driver was unharmed. That may not have been the case had a JCB-type machine been there trying to extract a car.
Given the above, I would suggest that any time an F1 car crashes / breaks down and its position requires its extraction, the race should continue under safety car until any heavy machine has made its extraction complete.
I’d also suggest that it wasn’t impossible to foresee an accident like this occuring and that protocol should’ve been amended a long time ago.
Last edited by CamCG; 7th October 2014 at 10:22.
I think they were lucky that 2 or 3 marshalls weren't killed, couple of metres the other way and could have been a lot worse.
I suppose the question will be asked is if he slowed enough for a double waved corner.
I guess no news is good news and hope that he makes a good recovery.
There are probably numerous solutions to further mitigate the risk, and I will be surprised if there isn't some kind of step taken - I just hope it's not a token gesture.
Indeed. Those have no cockpit at all.
Indeed.I suppose the question will be asked is if he slowed enough for a double waved corner.
That is imo the ham question, with apparently not being the answer.
I think that knocked the nail on the head sufficiently
Having enclosed cockpits won't solve many safety issues and actually could end up creating their own. How would drivers get in and out of their cars? Doors? removable bubble canopy? And so on... All of this would add complexity to the design of the car, more possible failure points, and would increase the chance of a driver being trapped in the event of an accident - if the car ended up upside down and on fire, for example. Current regulations state that a fit uninjured driver should be able to extract themselves from an undamaged car within so many seconds (8 I think, but could be wrong), having an enclosed cockpit would most probably increase that time.
Massa's accident a few years back when a stray suspension component hit his helmet may well have been negated should he have had some kind of defence other than that of his helmet, I'd doubt it would have made that much difference with Bianchi.
A sequence I shot in free practice on Friday :
Car slows and pulls over
Practice continues
Practice continues
Appearance of tractor from behind the tyre wall ( where they are always parked if not in use )
Marshalls assist
Practice continues
The tractor went back behind the tyre wall and dropped off the stricken car. Practice continued.
No one comments on this as it happens regularly without incident. There are risks ( clearly evident in this sequence ) even in good light on a dry day.
Paul
Nice photos!
With regard to racing or waved yellows or a SC while recovery machinery's out from behind the barriers, personally I think it would be a reasonable response for the default when it's raining (the level of which which may need defining, or else it could clearly be left up to Charlie's discretion) to trigger a safety car while such machinery is out.
Yes, all sorts of things can happen even in the dry, but the fact remains that things are enormously more likely to happen in the wet and that is likely to have been a significant factor on Sunday. It's impossible to avoid all risks in professional sport, but one has to make reasonable efforts to protect human life without spoiling everyone's enjoyment and I think that would be a move in the right direction.
BTW I haven't heard anyone remarking on how apparently close Jules' car came to taking out one of the unprotected marshals by the tractor - at least the driver's in an energy absorbing tub and is wearing a helmet.
Anyway, I agree with Joe Saward that there's too much daft hysteria going on about this incident at the moment, and the last thing we need is another knee-jerk reaction.
You could have réad it though.
Imo that marshalls are thé most underrated aspect of motorsports and F1 in particular and when one is killed in action nothing much is even saíd about it.
It's a hairy (un-paid at most if not all levels) past time. We were at the Goodwood FOS hill when a marshall was killed by a car hitting the finish gantry - a horrible, freak accident
Jules' family have released detail of his injury.
It would appear that the injury sustained is from deceleration, rather than a blow to the head. This would indicate to me that his helmet didn't actually hit the tractor.
Either way, an incredibly serious injury, and wish him all the best.
Whe the helmet is stopped by a heavy/immovable object then the brain decellerates rather abruptly. The skull´s integrity may be protected by the internal impact distribution of the helmet but the braín is still suffering a ´blow´.
Pretty amazed that's the 'only' injury he got.... Sounds v nasty and the odds aren't great....
Anyone know how Schumacher is getting on? Heard he went home but nothing since
You guys probably already know about this blog but for those that don't........some interesting comments by former F1 doc Gary Hartstein on drivers respecting the flag system and unfortunately lots of information on head injury.
http://formerf1doc.wordpress.com/?ut...ium=socialflow
That's really interesting... I reckon f1 might be improved if they used the SC more, it bunches up the cars which while sometimes unfair, does generate good action
What a load of nonsense.
If there's a recovery vehicle or marshals trackside, make the drivers activate the pit lane speed limiter two marshals posts before the incident. That way, any driver who has worked hard to build a lead isn't penalised, the race is neutralised for the shortest possible time, and the paying public can watch racing, as opposed to a crocodile of cars behind a safety car.
Any driver who fails to activate the speed limiter gets a 30 second stop-go penalty and points on their licence.
Fairest and most sensible solution IMHO.
Don't know about pit lane speed, but certainly some sort of limiter to have the effect you're suggesting.
But then if that's implementable, do we even need the SC any longer?
It would be fairly simple to implement, the cars already have 100% telemetry coverage both to and from the car, as well as GPS tracking and loop passing data.
Sounds like a great & simple solution to implement, have you got Charlie's phone no.?
I think you guys are referring to something like the Code 60 system used in 24hr races, I know some don't like that system but it has a fairly proven history of working in those races. Personally I think something like that is the best solution to avoid these sorts of incidents when a vehicle has to be recovered during a live race.
There is a petition for it running over on Change.org
https://www.change.org/p/mr-jean-tod...-code-60-en-f1
Just saw the film of the actual collision on Facebook,he is so lucky to be alive.Fingers crossed he recovers.
The problem I would have with it is that you are then automating the car and taking control away from the drivers. Even the current pit lane limiters require the drivers to press a button to activate it.
You could say it could be the start of driverless cars with the drivers sat in the garage driving via a monitor!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
