The Motorsport Thread (Part 2)

[Ambient Sheep]

Has there been any discussion about what Grosjean was doing prior to the accident?

Not that I've seen.

That swerve was so violent that, as I said earlier, it almost looks like something broke on the rear of the car, but there's been no mention of that, although maybe they'll find something during their examinations.

The closest I've seen to comment on it was from the BBC version of that earlier interview, which also included some quotes from Steiner:

Steiner added that he had also spoken to Grosjean about the accident.

"He remembers how he wanted to get out, or how he got out, he explained that very well to me," said Steiner.

"What he asked me was, 'How did I end up there?' I said, 'You ran over (Alpha Tauri driver Daniil) Kvyat's car, basically, you turned right and ran over his front wheel, and that turned you around and put you in the wall.'

"He said, 'I didn't see the car.' I don't want to put words in his mouth and say he doesn't remember it, I think he didn't realise what he did.

"I wouldn't say he lost any memory of it. I think it went so quick that he cannot remember it."

(https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/55146277)

[Bently Sheds]

Has there been any discussion about what Grosjean was doing prior to the accident?

Jolyon Palmer does a nice YouTube deconstruction of the events leading up to the accident, he suggested Grosjean was moving across to get inside of KMag and Kvyat was in his blindspot.

[Blumf]

That swerve was so violent that, as I said earlier, it almost looks like something broke on the rear of the car, but there's been no mention of that, although maybe they'll find something during their examinations.

Yeah, that's what I'm wondering about. I could believe a mechanical failure, as it was a very fast move across the track, but if not, looks like a really stupid maneuver.

[Ambient Sheep]

Todt's quite right to be looking into gloves.

Totally agreed.

Under FIA standard 8856-2018, outer clothing needs to withstand fire for a minimum of 12 seconds, shoes for 11 and underwear/socks to provide an additional five. Grosjean was in the fire for about 30 seconds, well in excess of what his clothing was certified for, and as there's no additional underwear/sock layer under the gloves, it's little wonder his hands were burnt.

Indeed.  However, if one takes his statement above at face value, it sounds as if they started melting the moment he stuck them into the flames.

As for whether he should do Indy, IndyCar's safety team is probably the best there is, certainly far beyond what F1 has. They've multiple trucks staffed with firefighters and medics ready to be deployed at a moment's notice and are usually on the scene of an accident within seconds.

Oh I don't doubt that, I've seen them in action myself back when it was on BT Sport (it comes as part of my Virgin package) but that's partly because it's so fucking dangerous, with even tiny mistakes -- like Romain is prone to, bless him -- having serious consequences.

Two words: Robert Wickens.  A slight wheel touch, ends up being cheesegrated along a section of vicious catch fencing -- that his team had repeatedly asked to be replaced -- and a highly-promising driver (he nearly won the first race of the season as a rookie) ends up paraplegic at 28 in just his 14th race.

https://www.autosport.com/indycar/news/138167/wickens-team-boss-calls-for-oval-safety-changes

Injured IndyCar driver Robert Wickens' team boss Sam Schmidt has renewed calls for safety changes on ovals following the Pocono accident.

Wickens sustained injuries to his spine, lower extremities and right arm when his car was launched into the catchfencing over Ryan Hunter-Reay in last Sunday's race.

The Canadian rookie had rods and screws inserted into his spine during surgery on fractures on Tuesday, but a medical statement afterwards said the "severity of the spinal cord injury is indeterminate".

Schmidt Peterson team co-owner Schmidt was left quadriplegic after a crash on the Orlando oval in 2000.

Dan Wheldon was driving for Schmidt when he suffered his fatal crash at Las Vegas in 2011, and SPM drivers Mikhail Aleshin and James Hinchcliffe both sustained serious injuries in oval accidents in the last four years.

"We've got to figure something out, and I've been saying this since Dan died in 2011," Schmidt told Autosport.

"I hate complaining about something or calling for changes when I haven't got a solution. I'm not the guy with the answers.

"But what I've asked for since then is that in the turns where there is no grandstand so no spectator sight-lines are affected, they should go double-high with the SAFER barrier.

"Maybe that's only a short-term fix, but the SAFER is tested and it doesn't spring the cars back onto the track like some people have worried about regarding the 'plexiglass' solution.

"If you looked at a replay of Mikhail's accident, at Robbie's accident, and others - including NASCAR - another three feet of SAFER barrier would have contained the car within the track without this cheese-grater effect that catchfencing has.

"I don't know if that's a long-term fix, I don't know the level of investment required, but certainly on turns where spectator viewing isn't an issue, the oval tracks need to do something like that."

_{^{(emphasis mine)}}

He does go on to say "I can't praise enough the IndyCar safety team", but if nobody has the authority to force the track-owners to clean up their act, it's always going to be more inherently dangerous than F1, despite Indy having improved the safety standards of the car a lot in recent years.

I just think that, given how accident-prone Romain is anyway, him and Indy are always going to be a bad mix, unless he ends up being one of those drivers who skip all the ovals.

[Blumf]

Jolyon Palmer does a nice YouTube deconstruction of the events leading up to the accident, he suggested Grosjean was moving across to get inside of KMag and Kvyat was in his blindspot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyTeDaiUL6s

Thanks, that's a good overview.

[Ambient Sheep]

Jolyon Palmer does a nice YouTube deconstruction of the events leading up to the accident, he suggested Grosjean was moving across to get inside of KMag and Kvyat was in his blindspot.

Thanks for that, I'll be checking it out.

Yeah, that's what I'm wondering about. I could believe a mechanical failure, as it was a very fast move across the track, but if not, looks like a really stupid maneuver.

I'm afraid so.  Even if Kyvat hadn't been there, you have to wonder if he ever would've been able to straighten up again.

Come to think of it, I did read something (actually, I think I heard it on the Missed Apex podcast) that suggested that he was actually swerving to avoid piling into rapidly braking cars ahead of him.  Had forgotten that until now.

[Ambient Sheep]

By the way, it's worth noting that tomorrow's FP1 & FP2 are, unlike last week, on at the correct local time, so quite late in the day.  Also, they're starting on the half-hour, for some reason.

BBC 5 Live Sports Extra times are:
FP1 13:25-15:05
FP2 17:25-19:05

Saturday's FP3 is back on the hour: 13:55-15:05 although looks like it's going to be website only.

[Ambient Sheep]

This is sweet:
https://twitter.com/Vetteleclerc/status/1334552648951984128


And this is amusing:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/bottas-wouldnt-look-so-good-if-russell-beat-me/4920518/

As someone on Twitter said:

I am sure he will dominate George in practice and qualifying. Before somehow, inexplicably finishing behind him and Max Verstappen on Sunday.

:-D

[touchingcloth]

Jolyon Palmer had an article out recently about how as a former Halo sceptic he's now a convert - have any other drivers come out in the same way?

[Ambient Sheep]

Yeah, Grosjean himself.

I think others have too (certainly some ex-drivers have)... but have now run out of time to research my half-memories, I'm afraid.

[touchingcloth]

It was weirdly contentious, the old Halo. I can't think of any other safety innovation off the top of my head which the drivers were against. No doubt there have been against changes to downforce or run-off areas or chicane angles or whatever, but the Halo was kind of unique in that it had no conceivable impact on the quality of racing, and yet I remember a significant number of drivers being quite vocally against it.

Probably in hindsight that was because most racers hadn't seen a death on a race weekend - or even outside of one - until Bianchi's, and even then it was one which was easy to chalk up to being a freak accident, likewise for that time a tyre boinked off Massa's head. More than anything that fact that it was such a long stretch between Senna and Bianchi was as much a fluke as anything else.

[Wonderful Butternut]

Well to be absolutely fair, considering the previous gap for a fatal crash at a race weekend was 12 years between Paletti and Ratzenberger, (although di Angelis died at private testing in between), it's not unreasonable to see that long stretch between Senna and Bianchi as the evolution of safety in F1 rather than a fluke.

That being said, the only possible legit argument is that the halo would trap the driver. Even thought tests proved that it probably wouldn't, it now demonstratably hasn't. Given the force of Grosjean's crash, and that his halo stayed intact and saved his life, I think it's safe to say that an accident that'd deform the halo and trap the driver would have to be so forceful that in all likelihood it'd compromise the entire survival cell and the driver would be dead or at least too seriously injured to get out of the car anyway, halo or no halo.

Most of the complaints were that it'd somehow "compromise" F1's nature as an open cockpit series. Which is nonsense, really. And even if it wasn't nonsense, does seeing a titanium hoop on the car compromise F1 to the level of being worth someone's life? Even hypothetically before Grosjean's crash or Leclerc's near miss when a car came over the top of him a couple of years ago? Of course it doesn't. So yeah, obviously some complacency by drivers and ex-drivers going on. Of course in Palmer's case, maybe he felt safe cos he was so slow that he'd never be travelling fast enough to have a potentially fatal accident.

[Rev Arthur Belling]

Wasn't another (not altogether unreasonable) objection to the halo the fact that the central part was slap bang centre in the driver's line of sight and therefore would result in some (admittedly marginal) reduction in visibility of the road directly ahead?

[Ambient Sheep]

It was weirdly contentious, the old Halo. I can't think of any other safety innovation off the top of my head which the drivers were against.

The HANS device.  I think there may even have been more against that than the Halo.  Amusingly, IIRC, Grosjean was one of the vocal antis then too.  Or was it Barrichello?

Wasn't another (not altogether unreasonable) objection to the halo the fact that the central part was slap bang centre in the driver's line of sight and therefore would result in some (admittedly marginal) reduction in visibility of the road directly ahead?

I saw a quote a few days ago from a current driver saying that your brain soon learns to tune it out, just like it does your own nose.

(Not a perfect comparison by them, I admit, as one's nose moves with one's face, whereas the Halo does not, but one gets the general idea.  Especially as it's mainly corners the drivers are looking at, NOT dead ahead.)

[Wonderful Butternut]

The HANS device.  I think there may even have been more against that than the Halo.  Amusingly, IIRC, Grosjean was one of the vocal antis then too.  Or was it Barrichello?

I think HANS was a bit before Grosjean, tbh. I remember that NASCAR guy was against it (Earnhardt Sr. possibly?), and then got a skull fracture when his head was thrown around in an accident and died.

[touchingcloth]

Well to be absolutely fair, considering the previous gap for a fatal crash at a race weekend was 12 years between Paletti and Ratzenberger, (although di Angelis died at private testing in between), it's not unreasonable to see that long stretch between Senna and Bianchi as the evolution of safety in F1 rather than a fluke.

That being said, the only possible legit argument is that the halo would trap the driver. Even thought tests proved that it probably wouldn't, it now demonstratably hasn't. Given the force of Grosjean's crash, and that his halo stayed intact and saved his life, I think it's safe to say that an accident that'd deform the halo and trap the driver would have to be so forceful that in all likelihood it'd compromise the entire survival cell and the driver would be dead or at least too seriously injured to get out of the car anyway, halo or no halo.

Most of the complaints were that it'd somehow "compromise" F1's nature as an open cockpit series. Which is nonsense, really. And even if it wasn't nonsense, does seeing a titanium hoop on the car compromise F1 to the level of being worth someone's life? Even hypothetically before Grosjean's crash or Leclerc's near miss when a car came over the top of him a couple of years ago? Of course it doesn't. So yeah, obviously some complacency by drivers and ex-drivers going on. Of course in Palmer's case, maybe he felt safe cos he was so slow that he'd never be travelling fast enough to have a potentially fatal accident.

Yeah, my previous comment made it sound like I was suggesting no safety improvements of note had been made since Senna. I'm more just surprised that given how much of a weak point the driver's head is in a fully open cockpit that Bianchi was the first to die that way after such a long gap. I wonder if the Halo would have arrived before Bianchi if it had been Massa killed and Surtees injured.

[Blumf]

There was talk, around the time of the Halo introduction, of going full fighter jet style sealed canopy, Wonder if that's still on the cards with this recent accident. On the one hand, it'd be hard to escape with it, but on the other, it might provide better protection from the fire.

[Ambient Sheep]

I think HANS was a bit before Grosjean, tbh.

You're quite right.  2003!  I thought it was nearly a decade after that.  Grosjean started in 2009.

And yeah, it was Barrichello.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/atlasf1-9881/barrichello-not-using-hans-in-race https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/barrichello-blames-hans-for-crash/117134/ https://www.grandprix.com/news/dont-worry-about-barrichello.html

[Alberon]

There was talk, around the time of the Halo introduction, of going full fighter jet style sealed canopy, Wonder if that's still on the cards with this recent accident. On the one hand, it'd be hard to escape with it, but on the other, it might provide better protection from the fire.

I dunno. It's easy to see it getting jammed shut in the sort of accident Grosjean had, or if a vehicle was overturned (as happened later in the same race). Even if the cockpit stayed perfectly sealed the driver could end up getting cooked or asphyxiated in a fire.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

The main arguments raised against the halo that still hold water are that the sport is open wheel racing and the drivers accept the risks; that even with it that just leaves all the other potential weird events that can and still will kill a driver, while also of course accepting that some safety advances have no negative and we should do everything to pursue them.

It's conceivable in another form of accident the Halo could be the reason the driver can't escape.

I wasn't in favour of bringing it in and I'm still not in favour of it but at the same time it isn't something I feel strongly about. It has been fairly unintrusive for the spectacle, it hasn't made it seem insulated and boring.

[Bently Sheds]

It has been fairly unintrusive for the spectacle...

I used to be able to easily identify the drivers by their lids, but halo (and the generally crap style of modern helmet decorations) makes that harder. It would be cool if they could colour code the halo or make it stand out for each individual driver...

[Famous Mortimer]

I wasn't in favour of bringing it in and I'm still not in favour of it but at the same time it isn't something I feel strongly about. It has been fairly unintrusive for the spectacle, it hasn't made it seem insulated and boring.

But...Grosjean would have died if it wasn't in place, right?

[Blumf]

https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2020/races/1060/sakhir/practice-1.html

FORMULA 1 ROLEX SAKHIR GRAND PRIX 2020 - PRACTICE 1

1	63	George Russell	Mercedes	54.546		49
2	33	Max Verstappen	Red Bull Racing Honda	54.722	+0.176s	29
3	23	Alexander Albon	Red Bull Racing Honda	54.811	+0.265s	18
4	77	Valtteri Bottas	Mercedes	54.868	+0.322s	44
...

Wow, Russell taking to it like a duck to water. Not a good look for Bottas.

Will be an interesting weekend.

[Alberon]

I still think Bottas' only real competition will be Verstappen and Russell will do well to finish in the top five, but it could be a quite entertaining race.

At the other end, will Latifi beat his new teammate?

[Alberon]

Russell fastest in Practice 2. Bottas was eleventh.

Tomorrow is going to be very interesting indeed.

[Wonderful Butternut]

Issue seems to be that Bottas is making mistakes rather than is slower. He had a time that was faster than Russel's deleted in Q2 and had damaged his car in Q1.

Pressure.

[Blumf]

Bottas seems to be off the ball recently.

[Blumf]

Well, Bottas managed to do it:

1	Valtteri Bottas	53.377
2	George Russell	53.403
3	Max Verstappen	53.433
4	Charles Leclerc	53.613

...


Shame Norris quit for some reason (engine?) after a good Q1

[Alberon]

Bloody close though. Very good qualification for Russell.

[Blumf]

Yeah, I'm wondering if he's had much practice on the Merc car before this week?