Bianchi Crash Japanese GP

[Scott]

I wonder how many street circuits might not be able to use cranes due to overhead power lines and such.

Overhead power lines are a danger to racing AND cranes.  They don't exist anymore in most large European cities - they bury everything.  I think on the rare occasion there is one near a circuit race area, they re-direct it for race weekend.

[Irisado]

Yes, I would have made the right call in his chair, and as I said in my post, it's pouring rain, why do you think it's unlikely to have an accident at the same place?

When has it happened before?  You name me a race where a car has gone off at the same corner, at precisely the same trajectory, and has been unlucky enough to hit a recovery vehicle.  There is no precedent for it.

You (impersonal pronoun) can sit in your armchair in front of the computer and say that you would have called for the safety car or stopped the race, but that's really easy to do when sitting at home.  We could all say that .  Charlie is under pressure from the FIA (who want to see a full race run), Ecclestone (who wants the same, albeit for different reasons), television companies, and even the viewing public.  He's not always going to get every decision spot on.  You are being way too harsh on one person, and I think that's very unfair.

It's VERY possible, and if the initial cause was a track condition that caused Sutil to aquaplane, then the chance of it happening again is even LIKELY.

To decide within one lap that it's too dangerous to continue is asking a lot.  It is not as though it was raining cats and dogs across the entire circuit.  It was not raining as intensely as it had been when they red flagged the original start.

You can't just change start times of a GP because a storm is coming in.

Yes, you can.

The forecasts on Friday and Saturday (correctly) predicted that the bulk of the storm would arrive at Suzuka on Monday, and that Sunday would be scattered showers, which is exactly what it was...don't forget most of the race was actually rain-free, just a wet track left over from earlier rain that was still lightly coming down as the race started (which would have fallen on the race if it had been run earlier perhaps?).  Like it or not, TV is what pays the bills.  It's not just about who can record the race either, thousands of bars and restaurants and their employees depend on the income a 3hr F1 race brings in. The rain wasn't even that bad according to most driver reports, but that part of the track became dangerous obviously.

When you're on the edge of a typhoon with guaranteed heavy rain which will disrupt the race, then changing the start time is reasonable.  It's not like showers or bands of rain that we may have, say in Europe, where shifting the start time would not be necessary or sensible.  This was a predictable, intense weather event.  They need to take action to avoid it.  There was a window to run the race earlier, and they chose not to take it.  An opportunity missed in my opinion. 

Read some comments on the web, The vast majority with an opinion are calling for Whiting's resignation.

Thank you, but no thank you .  There has been quite enough ill informed coverage and writing on various other events in the news today, and I don't wish to read more of it.

In this specific case, I am very upset about what has happened to Bianchi, but to blame one man for it is over the top and unreasonable in my view.

[Scott]

Oh look, Brasil 2003 and Spa 2010.  No, there weren't any recovery vehicles to hit...but then that wouldn't have been very sensible.

I won't prolong the argument point by point any more, but I completely disagree that this was not someone's fault.  If the part of Charlie's job where he decides if a SC should be called, or a recovery vehicle called, has to do with anything but driver safety, then he's doing the wrong job. 

Big recovery tractor vs little F1 car.  It should NEVER be even a possibility.

[Irisado]

I watched the 2003 Grand Prix in Brazil, and that was not typhoon weather.  It was very wet.  Alonso had a very heavy accident which brought the race to an end, but that occurred because he didn't lift off enough when entering the last section of the track when Webber had crashed.

The problem there was that the tyres they had brought were not suitable for the event.  They did not have deep enough treads to clear the water, and that caused the problems.

If you want to argue that tractors shouldn't be used as recovery vehicles, then I'm happy for them to come up with something else at Suzuka instead.  However, this shouldn't be the using the safety car more often, as I've said in the other topic.

Finally, there is far too much blame in society in general.  Everything always has to be somebody's fault.  Why cannot it just be said that it was a very unfortunate racing accident which everyone learns from.  Fault finding, especially in situations like this, is an unnecessarily antagonistic and pernicious way of solving problems in my opinion.  We all do it from time-to-time, I know I have, but I find that it rarely solves anything.

[John S]

Finally, there is far too much blame in society in general.  Everything always has to be somebody's fault.  Why cannot it just be said that it was a very unfortunate racing accident which everyone learns from.  Fault finding, especially in situations like this, is an unnecessarily antagonistic and pernicious way of solving problems in my opinion.  We all do it from time-to-time, I know I have, but I find that it rarely solves anything.

Amen to that.   

Sometimes we also have to take responsibility for our own actions, drivers are not always angels on track and in general all of them, give or take one or two of the present F1 grid, accept that motor racing is inherently dangerous.

Funny though how some of the biggest critics of the Japan situation, amongst the current crop of drivers, have put plenty of other drivers at risk with dodgy if not downright dangerous moves. 

[Scott]

Yes, just like the FIA's finding...all very pragmatic.

Typical FIA:  'We did not make a mistake...Bianchi made a mistake.'   

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/29573232

[Dare]

To me it was just a perfect storm for this particular
race....no matter how well you plan for every imaginable
incident something unimaginable  can occur.Racing
is a business and unfortunately bad accidents happen.

[Scott]

Beating a dead horse...

The FIA has come up with a cute idea, called a 'Virtual Safety Car'.  Isn't that darling.  They go on about how, ahem, some drivers slow down to a degree during double waved yellows, others slow down more.  They don't want to talk about how much Bianchi slowed down, well, because they don't want to single out a guy in a hospital bed, do they?  So they'll come up with an electronic gizmo that will allow them to ensure all cars slow a certain degree.  That's great Charlie, but we've all seen rainstorms that cause even the slowest cars to just spin off the track while aqua planing...are you sure the best thing is to NOT ALLOW HEAVY MACHINERY in any possible danger zone, without first calling out the SC.  Why not throw that in to the regulations or guidelines that the FIA uses for track management?

Clearly, they assume 0% blame.  If they even open the question as to whether they should not have called out the tractor, then I suppose it leads them into taking some responsibility, and we know they aren't very interested in that route.  I still maintain that it is 100% the fault of the race director who put a 5 ton (wild guess) tractor on a hot racetrack at an outside turn, in extremely questionable conditions.  THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

Yes, asked what I would have done in that situation as race director, I would have left Sutil's car where it was while getting track reports about conditions and evaluate if a SC was justified.  I would not have called for the car to be removed unless the SC was on track.  If Bianchi had spiked off and hit Sutil's car in the meantime, it is most likely he would have been uninjured, since the cars are designed to withstand impacts with other cars, but not a tractor. 

Really, I just don't get why this isn't the simplist of questions with the simplest of answers.  Why bother building such safe barriers if you are going to put a large, heavy, metal object in front of them????

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/formula1/29581592

[Jericoke]

Time to address the unpopular aspect of Bianchi's crash:  gravel traps.

We all saw Sutil's car bounce across the gravel.  It did not slow the car at all.  Those of us who managed to see Bianchi's crash saw the same thing.  There was no friction at all:  the gravel trap was worse than useless.

Paved run offs may make for aggressive, consequence free driving in dry conditions, but it may well be a life saver in wet conditions.

[lkjohnson1950]

Just as an aside here, how can FOM claim copyright infringement on fan shot videos? If you shoot video, shouldn't you own the rights to it? 

[Jericoke]

Just as an aside here, how can FOM claim copyright infringement on fan shot videos? If you shoot video, shouldn't you own the rights to it?

Presumably if you buy a ticket you are engaging in a contract that does not permit recording of the event.

Now, if you managed to record the race from outside the venue, that would be fair game.

[lkjohnson1950]

If it doesn't say "No Video" on the ticket, or refer you to a terms sheet, it's not a contract.

[John S]

Just as an aside here, how can FOM claim copyright infringement on fan shot videos? If you shoot video, shouldn't you own the rights to it?

Races are not held in public but in private for the purposes of the law, the only exception could be Monaco. As Jeri has already stated if you could film from a public area it would be harder to claim copyright infringement, especially if no monetary gain results from such a video.

It's Just like models and celebrities whose image has a monetary value so you can't use even publically shot photos for advertising or promotional purposes. Video of F1, all the cars, tracks, races and so on have a monetary value as they are sold commercially to broadcasters and news media outlets and any use of such images, however shot, probably are covered by copyright laws.

 

[Irisado]

Scott: I'm sure that Charlie Whiting isn't feeling particularly great emotionally.  Nothing he has said in his press conference has suggested that he is looking to shirk responsibility.  The fact of the matter is, however, that drivers are supposed to slow down dramatically and be prepared to take avoiding action under double waved yellows.  I very much doubt that any of them slowed down to that extent, so a proposal to have some kind of delta is not without merit.

Time to address the unpopular aspect of Bianchi's crash:  gravel traps.

We all saw Sutil's car bounce across the gravel.  It did not slow the car at all.  Those of us who managed to see Bianchi's crash saw the same thing.  There was no friction at all:  the gravel trap was worse than useless.

Paved run offs may make for aggressive, consequence free driving in dry conditions, but it may well be a life saver in wet conditions.

The accident had nothing to do with the gravel.  Sutil missed most of the gravel trap, and mainly went across grass and tarmac.  It's such a short run off there anyway, and there was no chance that he would have avoided the barrier given the narrow nature of the circuit, so the gravel had nothing to do with any of this.

[Jericoke]

Scott: I'm sure that Charlie Whiting isn't feeling particularly great emotionally.  Nothing he has said in his press conference has suggested that he is looking to shirk responsibility.  The fact of the matter is, however, that drivers are supposed to slow down dramatically and be prepared to take avoiding action under double waved yellows.  I very much doubt that any of them slowed down to that extent, so a proposal to have some kind of delta is not without merit.

If you didn't get a chance to see Bianchi's crash, you can clearly him skip by a green flag.  Perhaps the worker had the wrong flag out, but there were no double waved yellows.  No way an F1 driver slows for a green flag.