That dangerous hairpin at Montreal

[Valve Bounce]

I am stunned that the hairping is so dangerous, with the cars going in opposite directions separated by a low wall. Had Kubica's car gone over that stub wall (as Martin commented) and hit another car going in the opposite direction, somebody would have been killed.

[tinchote]

I don't think it's a big deal. It basically happens at every circuit: if a car cuts before a turn and keeps going, it will cross the track eventually, and could crash on another car. The only real solution to that is to race on an oval or similar.

[Valve Bounce]

I don't think it's a big deal. It basically happens at every circuit: if a car cuts before a turn and keeps going, it will cross the track eventually, and could crash on another car. The only real solution to that is to race on an oval or similar.


In this particular corner, I think that a higher safety wall is necessary.

[ShiftingGears]

I don't think it's a big deal. It basically happens at every circuit: if a car cuts before a turn and keeps going, it will cross the track eventually, and could crash on another car. The only real solution to that is to race on an oval or similar.

Agreed.

[wmcot]

In this particular corner, I think that a higher safety wall is necessary.

You're probably right, but I don't recall seeing anyone hit that wall before??? We can all be glad that the wall was just high enough and safe enough this time!

[aryan]

Well, they should highten the wall by a meter or something.

They probably will, given what happened today.

[CroftPilgrim]

I don't think it's a big deal. It basically happens at every circuit: if a car cuts before a turn and keeps going, it will cross the track eventually, and could crash on another car. The only real solution to that is to race on an oval or similar.

Because oval racing is safer?

I dont have the exact figures but there have been more deaths and serious injuries in Indy racing than formula 1 over the last few years.

Lets not blow this incident out of proportion. Kubica suffered a bad crash but the car protected him, as it is designed to do. We cant make circuits 100% safe and neither should we have a kneejerk reaction to every incident. If we want 100% safety lets pack up now and go home.....

[Valve Bounce]

Because oval racing is safer?

I dont have the exact figures but there have been more deaths and serious injuries in Indy racing than formula 1 over the last few years.

Lets not blow this incident out of proportion. Kubica suffered a bad crash but the car protected him, as it is designed to do. We cant make circuits 100% safe and neither should we have a kneejerk reaction to every incident. If we want 100% safety lets pack up now and go home.....


I don't think that increasing that dividing wall by a couple of metres is either a kneejerk reaction nor wanting 100% safety. It's just bloody common sense.

[dwboogityfan]

It always makes me laugh at how Bernie can criticise Silverstone for having poor facilities but he never says anything about Montreal.
One of these days someone will be killed because it is simply not safe enough for modern F1 cars.
Kubica was very lucky that his car did not fly the wall and go on to the otherside of the track collecting another car or perhaps worse ending up in a grandstand.
Stating the obvious why did the marshalls move Scott Speeds damaged car into a position where there was even the slightest chance another car could hit it?
In modern F1 safety is paramount and something needs to be done to improve it on that circuit- possibly SAFER barriers like they have on ovals would be a start.

[Mark]

But I think that saved Kubica was that he bounced off the concrete wall and kept going down the track, thus disipating the energy in the process. If he'd stopped immediately, against even a 'SAFER' barrier, he probably wouldn't have been so fortunate.

[ShiftingGears]

It always makes me laugh at how Bernie can criticise Silverstone for having poor facilities but he never says anything about Montreal.
One of these days someone will be killed because it is simply not safe enough for modern F1 cars.
Kubica was very lucky that his car did not fly the wall and go on to the otherside of the track collecting another car or perhaps worse ending up in a grandstand.
Stating the obvious why did the marshalls move Scott Speeds damaged car into a position where there was even the slightest chance another car could hit it?
In modern F1 safety is paramount and something needs to be done to improve it on that circuit- possibly SAFER barriers like they have on ovals would be a start.

It was there because they judged that noone would go off there, as it never happened before. I think F1 is safe enough without circuits being sanitised further.




"Because oval racing is safer?

I dont have the exact figures but there have been more deaths and serious injuries in Indy racing than formula 1 over the last few years.

Lets not blow this incident out of proportion. Kubica suffered a bad crash but the car protected him, as it is designed to do. We cant make circuits 100% safe and neither should we have a kneejerk reaction to every incident. If we want 100% safety lets pack up now and go home....."

Agreed!!

[waitey]

i think basically it will always take a major accident before something is done. Next year we will probably see tyre barriers there, and maybe a higher fence to ensure no cars can fly over to the other side of the hairpin.

It's like the villeneuve/ralf crash at albert park in 2001, that caused them to have a look at the fencing at albert park for marshalls. It could have been made safer before hand, but it took a major accident to make some changes.

Despite formula one's great safety standards, there would be numberous parts on each circuit that could be made more safe. Why aren't the changes being made?

[N. Jones]

No track changes! His accident was horrible but we do not need to make things safer.

Has everyone forgotten that he survived??

[Valve Bounce]

But I think that saved Kubica was that he bounced off the concrete wall and kept going down the track, thus disipating the energy in the process. If he'd stopped immediately, against even a 'SAFER' barrier, he probably wouldn't have been so fortunate.

Mark!! we are talking about a higher barrier to prevent any future prang there from going over the wall; not a safety barrier that would have stopped the car stone dead. :rolleyes:

[Mark]

Valve!! There was mention of that in other posts. Please pay attention.

[Valve Bounce]

No track changes! His accident was horrible but we do not need to make things safer.

Has everyone forgotten that he survived??

Well, if his car had bounced over that stubb wall, somebody else would have been killed - did you think about that?

[Valve Bounce]

Valve!! There was mention of that in other posts. Please pay attention.


Yeah!! mine :rolleyes:

[Ranger]

There are several points on the calendar in which a nasty situation like the one mentioned above could arise. BUT it would take freak circumstances with less luck than today, and that is down to the simple fact that RACING IS DANGEROUS.

[ShiftingGears]

Yeah!! mine :rolleyes:

And post number 9 in this thread.



Before the race I was thinking about how strangely picturesque the circuit is for an F1 circuit, and sure enough people are now saying that the track is too dangerous. Rather typical.

[Valve Bounce]

And post number 9 in this thread.



Before the race I was thinking about how strangely picturesque the circuit is for an F1 circuit, and sure enough people are now saying that the track is too dangerous. Rather typical.

Well, we could take down all those prison like barriers at Albert Park, and that would be picturesque.

[ShiftingGears]

Indeed it would be. More hairy for spectators, but more picturesque. And?

[wedge]

Kubica's accident was similar to Greg Moore death at California which claimed his life.

The concrete wall at the problematic area in Montreal is not the problem.

What happened was that Kubica was forced onto the grass at speed, hit a piece of asphalt paving which launched his car into the air and smack into the barriers.

In the case of Greg Moore, its why we have asphalt run off because its easier for a car to scrub speed when its spinning off on four wheels - which is why in America, on the large ovals, there's huge asphalt run off on the exit of T2.

I'm not an expert. I have no idea whether that concrete wall in question should be demolished and replace it with asphalt or a sandtrap. What I do know is that grass and asphalt DO NOT MIX.

[Valve Bounce]

Indeed it would be. More hairy for spectators, but more picturesque. And?


...........and it wouldn't take all that time to put up or remove, blocking my bicycle path each year for 6 weeks at a time. :(


I'm just being silly here - it's 10 o'clock, and I am waiting for Boston Leagal.

[Valve Bounce]

Indeed it would be. More hairy for spectators, but more picturesque. And?


...........and it wouldn't take all that time to put up or remove, blocking my bicycle path each year for 6 weeks at a time. :(


I'm just being silly here - it's 10 o'clock, and I am waiting for Boston Legal.

[ShiftingGears]

...........and it wouldn't take all that time to put up or remove, blocking my bicycle path each year for 6 weeks at a time. :(


I'm just being silly here - it's 10 o'clock, and I am waiting for Boston Leagal.

Ahh thats tough mate. I watched that show once...it has a strange multitude of cameras zooming in on people. :thatconfusedsmileyicanneverfind:

[Valve Bounce]

Ahh thats tough mate. I watched that show once...it has a strange multitude of cameras zooming in on people. :thatconfusedsmileyicanneverfind:



......................and totally zany.

[N. Jones]

Well, if his car had bounced over that stubb wall, somebody else would have been killed - did you think about that?

Nope.

I am still against it. All it takes is one small change before tons of things are changed to neuter the sport.

[schmenke]

It always makes me laugh at how Bernie can criticise Silverstone for having poor facilities but he never says anything about Montreal....

Has Bernie ever critisized Silverstone for poor safety standards? :confused:

I don't really understand the sudden concern for increased safety at the hairpin... :confused:
Did the wall not perform exactly as intended? :mark:


Boston Legal :up: :D

[F1woman]

Nope.

I am still against it. All it takes is one small change before tons of things are changed to neuter the sport.

First thing, Canada got the best F1 fans thanks Canada for a great show. But I agree something have to change, the wall on the Canadian race track is very dangerous. Kubica is very lucky, it's needs to change. F1 is becoming more and more safer Canada F1 need to do something about that wall.

[N. Jones]

Accidents are always going to happen. Do we raise every wall on every track just in case?

[F1woman]

Has Bernie ever critisized Silverstone for poor safety standards? :confused:

I don't really understand the sudden concern for increased safety at the hairpin... :confused:
Did the wall not perform exactly as intended? :mark:


Boston Legal :up: :D

You are not funny, Bernie need to step down he alone can't single handily run F1, they need to be several people making decisions especially regarding safety for the drivers. Now he want to introduce night driving for F1.

[keysersoze]

But I think that saved Kubica was that he bounced off the concrete wall and kept going down the track, thus disipating the energy in the process. If he'd stopped immediately, against even a 'SAFER' barrier, he probably wouldn't have been so fortunate.

At the angle he hit, whatever was there he would've "bounced off." Just like Senna.

Saying that if he would've "stopped immediately . . . he probably wouldn't have been so fortunate" seems pretty obvious. Or are you saying that a tire wall could've made his nose dig, thus bringing him to a more immediate stop?

[Dagman]

there are a lot of "ifs" here guys, what if there had have been a car in front of Robert and he plowed into it? You could make changes all day long based on different scenarios.
the important thing is that he is okay thanks to the saftey of the drivers cell and if he did go over the wall hopfully it would save his life as well

[zoostation]

its all if's and but's to be honest

anyone can say 'what if this happens'

a serious accident could happen at ANY circuit no matter how neutered the tracks become.

corner workers, and pit workers will ALWAYS be at risk, what do you suppose we do to protect them?

i suggest we calm down, and be thankful that f1 is as safe as it is.
was the corner dangerous before rk's accident?, well im sure 99% of people would have said no as theres never been any major accident there before.

just my two cents :)

[schmenke]

You are not funny....

I wasn't trying to be funny :mark:

[nigelred5]

There seems to be a bit of a pocket there exactly where he hit. possbly removing that pocket and actually bringing the wall closer might improve the angle and make it more of an oblique impact. I suspect there is no fencing there so as t onot destroy the sight lines across the hairpin for all the viewers. He hit the rear wheel of the Toyota first, which lifted the front wheels, then he hit the curbing didn't he? I'm suprised no one has had a similar incident there as it's one of the few possible passing areas.

I imagine Safer barriers are kinda difficult to install over a temporary wall, but there and champions wall surely seem good places to consider.

[Easy Drifter]

Does anyone know which Toy it was?

[call_me_andrew]

I am stunned that the hairping is so dangerous, with the cars going in opposite directions separated by a low wall. Had Kubica's car gone over that stub wall (as Martin commented) and hit another car going in the opposite direction, somebody would have been killed.

The wall isn't there to separate the cars. The wall is there to protect the corner workers. Does having no wall at all look any safer?

http://www.atspeedimages.com/2004_alms_sears_point/audi_r8_approaching_turn_11_and_corvette_c5r_passi ng_garages.jpg

The only reason there's so much emphasis on saftey in F1 is because Senna died. It didn't matter that Roland Ratzenberger died in the same weekend because Senna was popular.

Saftey isn't taken as seriously in the Indy Car Series because the only drivers to die are unpopular. Paul Dana had no buisness being in a professional racing series, so he was (for lack of a better word) expendable.

[Valve Bounce]

I think when that wheel of JV came through the fence and killed a marshall also made the organisers here much more safety conscious, and they have made the necessary modifications to that safety fence.

[pits4me]

I don't think that increasing that dividing wall by a couple of metres is either a kneejerk reaction nor wanting 100% safety. It's just bloody common sense.

I've sat in the hairpin grandstands and making the wall higher could obstruct the view for the fans seated in the lower section.

While I agree its a tragedy waiting to happen, you could say the same about any track hazard or "S" bend where an airborne car (or one with no brakes), could hit oncoming traffic.

There are risks in this sport but Kubica's walking away from yesterdays incident is a testimonial to the HANS device that F-1 resisted for so long.

[pits4me]

I imagine Safer barriers are kinda difficult to install over a temporary wall, but there and champions wall surely seem good places to consider.

I've often thought about safer barrier on Champions Wall but that narrows the track by what -- 24"?

[Sandfly]

I have been in that spot and am cetain that a fence on top pf that barrier would protect both the workers in the hairpin and the drivers on the exit side from debris in a wreck like Kubicas. BUT, montreal is rife with similar safety compromises. They have wooden plywood signs on 2x4's on the inside of the fencing in many areas. They have ARMCO around most of the place and it is obvious that there is a minimum of runoff area.

Like most of the "old" courses the safety standards are "grandfathered" in.... that means that as long as F1 is getting paid enough the FIA looks the other way.

[Valve Bounce]

I have been in that spot and am cetain that a fence on top pf that barrier would protect both the workers in the hairpin and the drivers on the exit side from debris in a wreck like Kubicas. BUT, montreal is rife with similar safety compromises. They have wooden plywood signs on 2x4's on the inside of the fencing in many areas. They have ARMCO around most of the place and it is obvious that there is a minimum of runoff area.

Like most of the "old" courses the safety standards are "grandfathered" in.... that means that as long as F1 is getting paid enough the FIA looks the other way.

We must have different safety standards and mindsets in Melbourne, because there's nothing like that at Albert Park.

We (Australians) don't pay the FIA to look the other way - we take steps to improve safety standards, even to the point of making life difficult for the many people (including myself) who visit the park in the mornings to ride around or jog or walk. During the GP month, Albert Park looks like a prisoner of war camp.

[wmcot]

Accidents are always going to happen. Do we raise every wall on every track just in case?

No, we just create a tunnel of safety fencing that totally encloses the cars on the sides and top preventing them from throwing debris off the track or running off the track themselves. (Small chunks would still be allowed into the crowd, possibly putting an eye or two out.)

The point is that it is impossible to see every single possible freak accident that could happen in advance. The marshal's death in Australia during JV's accident was caused bu the opening in the wall bein only a few centimeters wider that the tire that came through it. Not to mention that the tire had to travel at precisely the correct angle to pass through, also.

A "freak" accident can occur at any point on any track. The only way to prevent those from happening is to stop all forms of racing and demolish the tracks.

[Wilderness]

Freak as this may have been, there is room for improvement at the haipin IMHO:

Pave the runoff areas beyond a 2 meter grass strip so cars can scrub speed off (or maybe even regain control)[/*:m:1vhum8np]
Pave around/get rid of all access roads that act as launch ramps[/*:m:1vhum8np]

As much as I dislike most of Hermann Tilke's circuit layouts, I do appreciate the runoff areas he adds (plus the amazing paddocks...).

[Easy Drifter]

Me dumb. It was clear it was Trulli. Ralph was too far back. Not that it matters. It was another racing incident.

[Roamy]

well if you want to fix the wall put up a high catch fence so spectators can still see the action into the corner. Also if you want circuit safety then you have to cushion all places on the track where a car could potentially hit head on. Kubica was fortunate as he obviously glanced enough to keep his brain from crushing against his skull which happens if you hit too direct. It would be interesting to see how the hans device played in this accident.

The most dangerous circuit is Monaco by far and I fear will pay the price for running on the aniquated outdated track. We have now cushioned many walls on oval circuits which have help drivers eliminated severe injuries or death. While racing is a dangerous spot and drivers sign up for that aspect, I do think tracks can have common sense applied. Think back to JV and Zonta at Spa. Had it not been for the tire walls JV certainly would have been killed. Also with any safety improvement - if the driver loses control and hits their head direct at a high speed they are gonners. So there is also some luck involved. Senna may have lived if the suspension arm didn't pierce his helmet. The cars today are about as safe as you will get them and this is a great tribute to F1 - I think perhaps Champ Car would be second.
Well on to indy

[keysersoze]

Saftey isn't taken as seriously in the Indy Car Series because the only drivers to die are unpopular. Paul Dana had no buisness being in a professional racing series, so he was (for lack of a better word) expendable.

I think most would agree that F1 is the pinnacle of safety in motorsports, so in that respect EVERY series could be accused of not taking safety "as seriously" as F1.

However, you also imply that in the IRL safety is neglected, which is an outlandish statement. And to suggest that the IRL only considers safety measures in the context of their popular drivers is . . . absurd.

[Roamy]

IRL tracks as I understand have finally cushioned all corners. Long overdue!! there neglect for safety has left many drivers crippled or dead. That is why I am not a big fan of openwheel oval racing. It is now a bit more tolerable.

[race aficionado]

IRL tracks as I understand have finally cushioned all corners. Long overdue!! there neglect for safety has left many drivers crippled or dead. That is why I am not a big fan of openwheel oval racing. It is now a bit more tolerable.

Check this video out - it's part of a video project I worked on. It shows those cushions fousto is talking about.

You can also see tha hans device in action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8CVfyQhE_M


:s mokin:

[jso1985]

this is the first time we talk about the hairpin's safety, it was a freak accident that could have happened anywhere, so I really don't see it as an unsafe corner.

and when did Bernie slammed safety at ANY track? :confused:

[call_me_andrew]

I think most would agree that F1 is the pinnacle of safety in motorsports, so in that respect EVERY series could be accused of not taking safety "as seriously" as F1.

However, you also imply that in the IRL safety is neglected, which is an outlandish statement. And to suggest that the IRL only considers safety measures in the context of their popular drivers is . . . absurd.

Actually, when Champ Car unveiled the Panoz DP01, one of the selling points they mentioned was that it exceeded all F1 saftey requirements in crash testing.

I'm not saying it's just the IRL. F1 didn't take saftey seriously until Senna died. NASCAR didn't take saftey seriously until Dale Earnhardt died. But if (God forbid) something happens to Marco Andretti or Danica Patrick, there would be Hell to pay.

[Cart750hp]

I am stunned that the hairping is so dangerous, with the cars going in opposite directions separated by a low wall. Had Kubica's car gone over that stub wall (as Martin commented) and hit another car going in the opposite direction, somebody would have been killed.

Kubica lost control before the hairpin. Higher fence probably a better idea since the hairpin is flat.

[Wilderness]

If Kubica's car had not gotten airborne, no one would be talking about a fence. That's treating the symptom IMO. The car would not have gone airborne if the service road wouldn't have been there. That's why I say pave the entire runoff area. Cars would not launch off the service road with the added benefit of added friction to slow down the cars. Remember the grass was still wet from the prior night's rains. The only thing that slowed the car down, well just a fraction, before it hit the wall was the right front tire hitting a water barrel near where Speed's disabled RedBull was parked.

[wedge]

I'm not saying it's just the IRL. F1 didn't take saftey seriously until Senna died. NASCAR didn't take saftey seriously until Dale Earnhardt died. But if (God forbid) something happens to Marco Andretti or Danica Patrick, there would be Hell to pay.

Generally speaking motor racing reacts to safety and then seeks to pre-empt because it is only during real life accidents do the flaws in safety are fully exposed.

However, I'd say the Americans were more safety conscious due to the nature of oval racing. I believe Indycars ran foam cockpit restraints before F1 did, definitely so was pit lane speed limits, the HANS device was an American invention, IRL mandates a specially designed gearbox designed to cope with rear-end shunts into the wall - Ralf Schumacher rear-ended into the Indy wall and was out for a few months, an Indycar driver would've been back racing after a few weeks.

Regards to Dale Earnhardt, he made a pact with the Grim Reaper. NASCAR wanted to mandate to the HANS device but Dale didn't want to because he was too old-school. He thought HANS were for wimps and he still wanted to use an open-faced helmet. It's widely accepted that if Dale used the HANS device there would've been a higher chance of survival.

So what happened after that year's Daytona 500? Everybody used HANS, no questions asked!

[call_me_andrew]

So what happened after that year's Daytona 500? Everybody used HANS, no questions asked!

Actually, a lot of drivers initially used a different deviced called the Hutchens Device. While the HANS sits on the driver's shoulders, the Hutchens is worn as a harness around the torso. Drivers found it more comfortable, but when it was proven to be of inferior quality, it was banned.

http://www.speedpartz.com/newslettersummer02/Hutchens_device_drawing.jpg

I believe the consensus is that Earnhardt's death was caused by improperly mounted seat belts.

[BobbyC]

Also keep in mind one more reason for US safety -- John Fitch was Pierre Levegh's co-driver on that ill-fated Le Mans race in 1955. Fitch's safety advocacy is partially based on that tragic day.

Terry Labonte did a test of the track for the 4 August NAPA Auto Parts 200 Busch race and NASCAR probably will ask for more safety work done in that area before the race. Foam blocks might be a potential. Remember Jimmie Johnson's 2000 crash at Watkins Glen into The 90 when he hit the foam blocks, and the blocks took the impact?

[Easy Drifter]

One point: Kubica did not just lose control. He was hit by Trulli.
A higher barrier might or might not be needed. He did not go over it. Further if marshalls have to go over a barrier it cannot be too high or they won't be able to get over it or break a leg jumping down.
The answers are not always simple and there is no way to predict where and how a crash may happen.
Major changes to the track at that point could totally change the character of the turn and if you look at a high angle shot you will note there is not much room. There is a minor feature called the St. Lawrence River that kind of gets in the way.