DoubleFault wrote:But it was a reaction to 3 accidents - AS, RR and KW's.
Had they not happened, there wouldn't have been any change - why?
You've missed the accident for Barrichello as well. But you've pretty much answered your own question. Safety concerns don't get highlighted until something happens. The accident's highlighted the fact that the speed of the cars and the overall amount of downforce generated were not in line with the overall amount of protection of offer for the drivers. The accidents were pure bad luck but it showed F1 needed to invest more time into safety. It wasn't just the individual accidents but the overall number of incidents across the pre-1994 build up plus those early season and the amount of injuries to drivers that caused the FIA to quickly look into remedial actions.
My original point though was that IndyCar has time to respond, the FIA didn't, and because of this IndyCar (i hope) will make the correct decisions whilst I believe that the FIA made their decisions on the basis of a few seperate accidents.
If IndyCar were to be racing in 2 weeks time, and again 2 weeks after that like Formula 1 was in 1994, then there would be massive media pressure on them to make changes. Look at how many times speed has been brought up this week, and don't race on ovals, close cockpits.
If they were to make a big change it would be a random reaction - for 10 years or so they have been racing with this same formula of V8 Honda/whoever engines and a Dallara (G-Force) chassis. 3 fatalities, and only now are they questioning if changes should be made.
DoubleFault wrote:My original point though was that IndyCar has time to respond, the FIA didn't, and because of this IndyCar (i hope) will make the correct decisions whilst I believe that the FIA made their decisions on the basis of a few seperate accidents.
If IndyCar were to be racing in 2 weeks time, and again 2 weeks after that like Formula 1 was in 1994, then there would be massive media pressure on them to make changes. Look at how many times speed has been brought up this week, and don't race on ovals, close cockpits.
If they were to make a big change it would be a random reaction - for 10 years or so they have been racing with this same formula of V8 Honda/whoever engines and a Dallara (G-Force) chassis. 3 fatalities, and only now are they questioning if changes should be made.
Have you been reading the Robin Miller articles I've posted? Asking for change is nothing new, it just hasn't been as mainstream as now.
Despain: Racing has become dramatically safer but we were reminded today it still is dangerous. The inevitable question out of this is whether the type of racing we saw today is too dangerous, and if so, what is to be done about it?
Miller: “Way too dangerous. I’ve been writing stories since the ‘90s that this kind of insanity, this wide-open mile-and-a-half pack racing
***Some say you should live each day like it was your last... but who wants to live each day in wild panic and extreme death anxiety?
The universe, look at the hugeness of it... it is a dizzying thought that little ol' me is the centre of it all!***
Has anybody watched the Dan Wheldon: A Tribute that was shown on Sky Sports a few days ago? I started to watch it 10 minutes ago, couldn't keep watching. The show itself wasn't what was getting me, it was more reliving the helplessness whilst watching and thinking about Dan's family.
Now Bernie Ecclestone came up with his opinion too, that of course, oval races in F1 with 34 cars on 1.5 miles never would take place and that indycar racing in general has become too dangerous. He better should have kept quiet but screwing around in the open wound of a comercial concurrent at this moment is one of the worst things the poison dwarf has ever done
"Those who risk nothing, do nothing, achieve nothing, become nothing" - David Jefferies
Bernie is right though - 34 F1 cars racing on an oval would never happen - we struggle to get a 24 car grid, don't know where the extra 10 cars would come from
Antonov wrote:if only StefanGP would have been allowed
Why on earth would ANYONE think that. F1 does not need any more fantasy merchants and dreamers in its mix. It already has those and they are far better equipped than Stefan will ever be. The guy is a charlatan and basically does not have the wherewithall or resources.
Bottom line when you look at joke teams like Alibababa Genie Renault Proton Lada Lowtoss, who have all the assembled talent of an HRT and even Virgin Marussia they all hardly meet the morals of bona fide entrant. Stefan GP would have been an even more fantasy fuelledteam than those aforementioned. It takes more than an imaginative and fact bereft PR department, something Stefan proved time and again is where he would at best slot into the F1 picture.
* I started life with nothing, and still have most of it left
“Good drivers have dead flies on the side windows!” (Walter Röhrl)
* I married Miss Right. Just didn't know her first name was Always
Those are just from rubber, oil, dirt etc. in the first 11 laps, if he'd been hit on the head by anything remotely resembling a wheel then there would have been more than one funeral. It amazes me people buy into this bullshit, especially from the guy who labelled the Dallara The Crap Wagon, I mean I like the guy cos he often tells it as it is, but more often than not he talks out his arse. You only have to cast your mind back a few years to see what happens when you get hit on the head by a wheel.
I am very sorry if you find my posts long and boring, I like to type and often go off on a tangent.
If this is the case, you may click here to solve the problem, or alternatively here too.
