Watching NASCAR this weekend, there were at least three crashes that would’ve been fatal if not for a full roll cage. The drivers walked away because they had them. What is different about F1 that lets the driver survive racing at such high speeds while being so exposed?
F1 cars (and other open wheel cars) have the functional equivalent of a full roll cage, but it’s not made from steel tubes. The monocoque tub of an open wheel car is made of carbon fiber, which is light but very strong and rigid. It is designed to serve as a safety cocoon for the driver in an accident. There is a roll bar over his head in case the car flips over.
Also, other parts of the car (nose, sidepods, transmission, etc.) are designed to break off and absorb energy in an impact, thus imparting less force to the driver.
Finally, the cars are much less massive than stock cars (about half the weight, IIRC), which is what makes these techniques workable.
It doesn’t always work, though.
In 1994 Ayrton Senna, quite possibly the greatest driver in F1 history, was killed when a tire snapped off his car in an impact with the wall and hit him in the head, killing him instantly.
Also, in 1999 (I think) Greg Moore was killed in the last CART race of the season when his car flew through the infield, flew sideways, and smashed against a wall top-first at a very high speed.
I watched that race live. To this day (moment even) I did not know that was the particular cause of his death. I had assumed the impact alone was enough to do it. His car went airborne after clipping a bump in the road.
And Tony Renna of the IRL was killed just a few months ago. Dale Earnhardt died because he made unapproved modifications to his own safety gear.
No safety systems are perfect. Motorsports are hazardous, as we discussed here recently. But all professional racing series take safety very seriously, and injuries and fatalities are generally declining.
Oh, and to answer the OP, I forgot to give the obvious answer: Don’t get into accidents. Sounds flippant, but what with all the technology in those cars, F1 has turned into what amounts to high-speed parade laps, and as long as your engine doesn’t blow and your pit crew gets you out quickly enough you almost can’t be passed.
F1 is exciting because of the innovation, not the racing, at least not anymore.
Man, you should’ve seen the Brasilians when this happened. People openly crying in the streets, at the bars. It was all they talked about for months. It was almost as much sadness as there was gladness when they won the World Cup!
Not true – the HANS device (which probably wouldn’t have saved his life anyway) was optional equipment at the time. It wasn’t made mandatory until after his death.
After the death of Senna and Ratzenberger (a day before Senna), Formula One safety rules became very stringent. The crash test examinations are very stringent these days. Apparently the Mclaren MP-4/18 which was supposed to be racing in 2003 was not allowed just because it failed certain crash tests and they had to literally abandon the whole project and use a modified version of the previous years car.
Since last year new safety measures like tyre tethers and HANS devices have been made compulsary which not only increase safety for the drivers but also for the spectators.(There were some fatalities when a stray wheel of an accident prone car flew into the spectator stands).
Formula One is considered the pinnacle of motor racing because of the extensive use of technology- whether to make the cars faster or safer, and no teams limit their spending to achieve these goals.
Projectiles are a serious danger to drivers in open cockpits. At the 1997 South African grand prix a track marshall ran to the opposite side of the track to assist a broken down Renzo Zorzi, and was hit and killed by the car of Zorzi’s teammate, Tom Pryce. Meanwhile the fire extinguisher he was (unnecessarily) carrying flew out of his hand and smashed into the head of the Pryce, killing him also.
I wasn’t referring to the HANS device. Earnhardt’s safety harness failed in an unprecedented fashion, and Bill Simpson (founder of the company that made it) said that he had told Earnhardt that the way the belts were installed (which Earnhardt had done personally) was wrong and unsafe. This site covers the dispute:
I saw the race live as well. The cause was due to the steering column fracturing where it was cut and rewelded to shorten the column. Senna lost his steering just as he turned into a very high speed corner. The amazing thing is that he would probably have survived despite the high speed head-on impact with a concrete wall if the suspension piece had not pierced his helment.
One of the major safety improvements to the F1 race courses are the gravel pits which are now required on the outside of all high speed corners. The gravel is very effective at slowing down the cars that go off course. The downside is that once in the gravel, the cars dig in and it is usually impossible to get going again so the car is almost always out of the race.
Another one who saw the Immola race, was a sad and very quiet day. Both my parents are big F1 fans and they both loved Senna.
It wasn’t the tyre, it was part of the suspension that pireced his helmet, plus crushing of the brain due to the sudden deceleration causing it to impact with the inside of the skull.
There was a programme made blaming the crash on cold tyres, which also reported that it was a tyre that killed him.
rsa, The last thing I heard was that the car had bottomed out over some bumps which caused the crash and the steering column was broken on impact?
Due to the criminal charges in Italy, the defense had alternative theories. I think the concensous of unbiased parties still points to the steering column as the likely cause of the crash. But I haven’t really heard anything for years so I could be wrong.
This seems like a pretty fair overview: http://www.atlasf1.com/99/dec08/horton.html
I remember Car&Driver magazine having an extensive article on the crash that pointed to the steering column.
Smackfu said:
I wish I saw this thread sooner. I’ll bring a little psychology into this as I read an article several years back (I’ll try and dig it up) but it dealt with brain waves of atheletes participating in high speed sports. It was an amazing article because it highlighted several of the top F1 drivers in the world. There was one overlying similarity that each driver had: Increase in natural dopamine levels during races.
You have all heard I am sure, of the child who is completely out of control being put on ritalin and becoming a different person i.e. a focused little person. Focus is what we are talking about here folks. Dopamine is manufactured in the Hypothalmu and among other things regulates the central nervous system.
When friends of the drivers were asked about their general overall demeanor they unanimously said, they were the most calm, cool, and collected people they knew. What does thsi say for science? It tell us that the increased dopamine in their systems allows them to stay calm and cool, while performing a task the requires lightning decision making, and reflexes second to non.
It is very fun to think of all drivers as being rogue adrenaline junkies…but a little confusing thinking of them as quiet…almost meek individuals.
BTW…I had an opportunity to drive a NASCAR up in New Hampshire at Loudan. It was a gift one year from my brother…so me and 4 other guys with similar gifts got to get behind the wheel for 10 laps. behind a pace car…The pace car driver said to each of us before we got in…YOU MUST STAY ON MY ASS AT ALL TIMES! DO NOT LAG BEHIND BECAUSE YOU WILL GET HIT…So I tried desperately to keep up with the driver who was going around 146 mph…I got to about 138 or 9 and could not imagine what it would be lile going 210 with fifty other guys right on your ass! Wonderful experience though.
You say that as if he should not have been carrying the extinguisher. I would respectfully disagree. There may not have been visible flames present at the time, but fuel tank ruptures are common in high-speed crashes, and the possibility of fire is always present. The rescuer first on scene at a race crash would look pretty silly if wasn’t carrying an extinguisher and the car and/or the driver suddenly burst into flames.
Actually, it is going the other way and much of the gravel is being paved over. Cars were bouncing out of control across the gravel. With asphalt, there is some traction allowing the driver to get control again.
Sadly, I remember seeing this incident and his car after crashing.
Here is a short video clip, horrifying is all I can say.
One serious weakness in the marshalling was that there were no spotters to ensure that it was safe for rescuers to cross the track, the marshalls just rushed to the first incident impulsively.
Tom Pryce was just breaking into points scoring placings and was regarded as a very promising driver, I’m not sure but I think his name had been linked with a top team by the time of his death, and he was touted as being a serious future world champion.
However, all this is an aside, the real issue here is that his death took place in 1977 not 1997 and in the intervening period the level of safety provision was massively increased, from significant changes to track layout such as removal of conrcrete barriers, to much bigger run off areas.
Here is the link I missed.
http://www.formula1news.it/dati/video.htm
I don’t know how to use spoiler tags or I would certainly have put the following in there, all I can say is that you have been warned!!
I do not recommend that you watch the Williamson one, I remember that one too and it was even worse than Pryce’s crash.The marshalls at the time were not equipped with flame protective clothing and the driver trying to get him out was his teammate David Purley who was equipped.
Like this:
Text to put in Spoiler box