The Formula 1 / IndyCar Thread

Wasting more fire spray now. Not even on fire this time. Should stop it from his wages.
 
rick448 said:
I assume you have watched it? They weren't applying to his feet.
Click to expand...
Watched it las it happens and the marshall spraying Grosjean was one of the medical team from the medical car and Grosjean had smoke/steam coming off his legs. better safe than sorry in my book. The tit on the other side of the barrier in fire fighting uniform on the other hand needs shooting. As does the one washing the underside of Strolls Racing Point. Think Halo has just been justified in action.
 
I've viewed it again. The marshall was dousing flames back so he could get over the barrier flame free. The medic was spraying his legs and feet. I can't fault anybody on that side of the barrier.
The guy on the other side was just a rabbit in the headlights, should never steward again.
 
Let me get this right. Hit a barrier at in the region of 100mph, 53G impact, car split in 2, cockpit goes through a metal barrier, then a fireball, be in the fireball for almost 20 seconds....... and (albeit hastily) walk away.

Yup, miracle, right there.
 
Or just very good safety equipment.

And a hefty dose of good luck!
 
Got to love the comments about wasted "fire spray" (whatever that is) etc. I would suggest that with that sort of understanding of fire fighting at a race track I would keep my opinions to myself.
 
munch said:
Got to love the comments about wasted "fire spray" (whatever that is) etc. I would suggest that with that sort of understanding of fire fighting at a race track I would keep my opinions to myself.
Click to expand...
Oh dear, so my 36 years as a professional in the firefighting industry don't count then. Clearly you know better.
 
rick448 said:
Oh dear, so my 36 years as a professional in the firefighting industry don't count then. Clearly you know better.
Click to expand...
So what is fire spray then? and for your information, I do have an understanding of fire fighting at race meetings. As I am an MSUK instructor and part of my role is training Marshals in fire fighting etc.
 
munch said:
So what is fire spray then? and for your information, I do have an understanding of fire fighting at race meetings. As I am an MSUK instructor and part of my role is training Marshals in fire fighting etc.
Click to expand...
I was trying to talk in easy terms, if you think the firefighting techniques shown were good, then I pity anyone you instruct. I'll leave you to it, it's obvious you are an expert, and being an instructor proves it, well done :)
 
rick448 said:
I was trying to talk in easy terms, if you think the firefighting techniques shown were good, then I pity anyone you instruct. I'll leave you to it, it's obvious you are an expert, and being an instructor proves it, well done :)
Click to expand...
Well from a bunch of "amateurs" it wasn't bad, But I accept, as you should that being several thousand miles away and only seeing certain angles, doesn't really give either of us the whole picture.
 
My speed estimate at impact was off, it was actually 137 mph, not 100. Makes it even more of a miracle, stopping from that speed to 0 in what must've been inches, all the while his internal organs were still travelling at 137mph.

It's incredible he got a way from that, F1 dodged a bullet yesterday.
 
Dale. said:
My speed estimate at impact was off, it was actually 137 mph, not 100. Makes it even more of a miracle, stopping from that speed to 0 in what must've been inches, all the while his internal organs were still travelling at 137mph.

It's incredible he got a way from that, F1 dodged a bullet yesterday.
Click to expand...

The impact is being quoted at 53g, the barrier deforming a bit probably saved him there by dissipating the energy from the impact instead of it being a dead stop. As someone who has worked trackside as a photographer over the past few years, I'm very glad there were no marshals or photographers stood at the point of impact to be covered in burning fuel. I was very against the halo when it was introduced but it's saved his life in this crash.
 
That was the most shocking crash I have seen since the 70's/80's. Thank god he is relatively OK.
 
RichardC27 said:
The impact is being quoted at 53g, the barrier deforming a bit probably saved him there by dissipating the energy from the impact instead of it being a dead stop. As someone who has worked trackside as a photographer over the past few years, I'm very glad there were no marshals or photographers stood at the point of impact to be covered in burning fuel. I was very against the halo when it was introduced but it's saved his life in this crash.
Click to expand...

Without the halo frame being as integral as it is in the safety cell construction, it would have been a tragic outcome.

Also, IMO it puts a serious question over the use of Armco style barriers (at that position?) as the car design hitting at close to 90 degrees meant the nose went through the minor gap between the horizontal elements, instead of being deflected along the face of the Armco, and was on the face of a contributing factor in the car breaking apart and the consequent fireball.
 
Box Brownie said:
Also, IMO it puts a serious question over the use of Armco style barriers (at that position?) as the car design hitting at close to 90 degrees meant the nose went through the minor gap between the horizontal elements, instead of being deflected along the face of the Armco, and was on the face of a contributing factor in the car breaking apart and the consequent fireball.
Click to expand...
The Armco wasn't on a run off area on a bend though where a car is more likely to hit face on. The incident took place on the straight where a car may run wide and would result in a glancing blow. It was just unfortunate that the contact on track swung the car around at the wrong angle to go off into the Armco.
 
I was against the halo to begin with, I remember my feelings when I first saw it on a car. My reasons were more about aesthetics than anything else. I thought it was ugly.

We can be in no doubt about its effectiveness now though, it has done its job on several ocassions since being introduced. It's part of a package and that whole package saved Grosjean yesterday.

I'm happy to change my mind about the halo, I think the debate about it, for or against, is now over.
 
Dale. said:
I was against the halo to begin with, I remember my feelings when I first saw it on a car. My reasons were more about aesthetics than anything else. I thought it was ugly.

We can be in no doubt about its effectiveness now though, it has done its job on several ocassions since being introduced. It's part of a package and that whole package saved Grosjean yesterday.

I'm happy to change my mind about the halo, I think the debate about it, for or against, is now over.
Click to expand...

I think the IndyCar equivalent (Aeroscreen) may well have saved the lives of both Justin Wilson and Dan Wheldon if it had been in use then.
 
nilagin said:
The Armco wasn't on a run off area on a bend though where a car is more likely to hit face on. The incident took place on the straight where a car may run wide and would result in a glancing blow. It was just unfortunate that the contact on track swung the car around at the wrong angle to go off into the Armco.
Click to expand...

Yes, point taken in regard to the likelihood of angle of impact.....................but in future maybe some mitigation for what, % wise, was considered unique but has now been shown be an ever present danger.

Plus, Armco is not a nirvana solution and one reason I think I recall reading of/about its progressive removal from UK motorways was because the number of incidents of it not 'stopping' HGV's from crossing into the other carriage way had increased to a point where improved methods i.e. shaped & higher than Armco concrete barriers had to be installed.

Note ~ no we cannot mitigate for every possible circumstance but in common with normal cars safety measures > laminated glass, seatbelts, side intrusion bars in the doors, airbags [including the fuller suite of them now being more common]. F1 > rear mounted engines > fireproof clothing > HANS restraints > lower seating position/higher cockpit sides and cushioning > HALO. There is only so much that can be done to ensure(?) crash survival in the cockpit.................so next areas are the trackside mitigations.

PS there was early commentary made that the way Romain Grosjean drove was (highly?) questionable as a major factor in the incident :thinking:
 
Last edited:
Box Brownie said:
PS there was early commentary made that the way Romain Grosjean drove was (highly?) questionable as a major factor in the incident :thinking:
Click to expand...

Darting from one side of the track to another without checking your mirrors at 170mph is ill advised at best, the incident was completely Romain's fault. Kvyat said after the race he was initially very angry at the way Grosjean was driving prior to the crash
 
Glad he is ok that was nasty, however I think with Grosjean he was always destined for a big one, surprised he has lasted this long.
 
Hamilton has corona virus and will miss the GP on Sunday.

I’d love it if they put George Russell in the car.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
Hamilton has corona virus and will miss the GP on Sunday.

I’d love it if they put George Russell in the car.
Click to expand...
It will be interesting to see how whoever they put in it compares to Bottas.
 
The money is on Stoffel Vandoorne as replacement
 
Box Brownie said:
Yes, point taken in regard to the likelihood of angle of impact.....................but in future maybe some mitigation for what, % wise, was considered unique but has now been shown be an ever present danger.

Plus, Armco is not a nirvana solution and one reason I think I recall reading of/about its progressive removal from UK motorways was because the number of incidents of it not 'stopping' HGV's from crossing into the other carriage way had increased to a point where improved methods i.e. shaped & higher than Armco concrete barriers had to be installed.

Note ~ no we cannot mitigate for every possible circumstance but in common with normal cars safety measures > laminated glass, seatbelts, side intrusion bars in the doors, airbags [including the fuller suite of them now being more common]. F1 > rear mounted engines > fireproof clothing > HANS restraints > lower seating position/higher cockpit sides and cushioning > HALO. There is only so much that can be done to ensure(?) crash survival in the cockpit.................so next areas are the trackside mitigations.

PS there was early commentary made that the way Romain Grosjean drove was (highly?) questionable as a major factor in the incident :thinking:
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying about trucks crossing carriageways on our roads, but there are two factors in this, the weight of the lorry and armco on our roads are generally only one rail high. Armco on race tracks are two rails high. A lorry tyre will have a much higher probability of riding over a single rail. If indeed that was a concrete divider that had been in that position on the track I don't think he would have survived, as it would have been a head on collision at very high speed and the car and himself would have come off far worse even with all the safety features F1 cars now have.
I think he was fortunate in the fact that the barrier did have some give in it and the nose of the car opened up the barrier pushing the rail up and over the car, the halo opening it up further to go up over his head, it was only when the barrier came into contact with the front on the hoop, roll over bar, hidden by the engine cover, that it ripped the back of the car off.
A concrete divider would only be any good for glancing blows.
A tyre wall, 3 or 4 tyres deep in front of the armco would have been much better, but again not the sort of thing they put on a track that far away from the exit of a bend and on a straight section of track.
 
nilagin said:
I understand what you are saying about trucks crossing carriageways on our roads, but there are two factors in this, the weight of the lorry and armco on our roads are generally only one rail high. Armco on race tracks are two rails high. A lorry tyre will have a much higher probability of riding over a single rail. If indeed that was a concrete divider that had been in that position on the track I don't think he would have survived, as it would have been a head on collision at very high speed and the car and himself would have come off far worse even with all the safety features F1 cars now have.
I think he was fortunate in the fact that the barrier did have some give in it and the nose of the car opened up the barrier pushing the rail up and over the car, the halo opening it up further to go up over his head, it was only when the barrier came into contact with the front on the hoop, roll over bar, hidden by the engine cover, that it ripped the back of the car off.
A concrete divider would only be any good for glancing blows.
A tyre wall, 3 or 4 tyres deep in front of the armco would have been much better, but again not the sort of thing they put on a track that far away from the exit of a bend and on a straight section of track.
Click to expand...
It is that latter thought that occurred to me as appropriate mitigation and I wonder if as a result of this one unusual set of circumstances there might/will be some changes to the barrier protection used?
 
I get the thinking that it was unexpected to have a car hit the barrier head on but would the angle it’s set with a glancing blow not direct the car back towards the track? Perhaps giant airbags in front of the barrier might help, or the water filled version?
I used to build runaway ‘train’ barriers underground and these were placed in threes getting progressively stronger so as to slow vehicles before the final stop, perhaps where room allows Armco could be placed in some places likewise?

Will any others at Mercedes test positive too assuming LH didn’t suddenly become infected?
 
Last edited:
mj4456 said:
I get the thinking that it was unexpected to have a car hit the barrier head on but would the angle it’s set with a glancing blow not direct the car back towards the track? Perhaps giant airbags in front of the barrier might help, or the water filled version?
Click to expand...
Glancing blows on armco usually result in the car just continuing along the armco until it stops. I have yet to see a single seater, saloon car or even a racing truck, bounce back out onto the track.
Years ago they tried catch fencing to slow cars down, but cars just got tangled up in it more than anything, if you did something similar with armco, first you'd need a lot of room to install it and then there is the added danger of launching a car into the air.
Even with the armco at tracks already, there have been instances where a car has launched up and over the armco as well as the catch fencing behind that as well as the fence behind that as well into the spectator areas.
 
I just hope that the press don't keep pestering him with dumf*** questions about his father.
 
2020 Formula 1 Rolex Sakhir Grand Prix

ATlTftV.png


Bahrain International Circuit – Outer Track
Lap data
N/A

UK Times

Friday 4th December 2020
Sakhir Grand Prix Free Practice 1: 16:30-18:00 (UK time: 13:30-15:00)
Sakhir Grand Prix Free Practice 2: 20:30-22:00 (UK time: 17:30-19:00)
Saturday 5th December 2020
Sakhir Grand Prix Free Practice 3: 17:00-18:00 (UK time: 14:00-15:00)
Sakhir Grand Prix Qualifying: 20:00 (UK time: 17:00)
Sunday 6th December 2020
Sakhir Grand Prix: 20:10 (UK time: 17:10)


Videos

Sim lap
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbXz79BtfwI




Previous Winners
N/A


Drivers’ Chosen Tyres
EbNEpJzX0AEutM5


Championship standings
KGxx9WP.png

IylcQVf.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top