Why Barrichello was wrong about the Safety Car

[Dave Brand]

OK, this is how it should have been done. One marshall runs out with a double sling and attaches it to the rear drive shafts. Takes about 30 seconds. The second marshal follows with the cable and attaches it to the sling, and retreats behind the barriers, max 30 seconds.

So simple, isn't it? But....you DON'T attach slings to drive shafts, or any part of the suspension on a single-seater. Drive shafts are strong in torsion, but are not designed to take bending stresses. Attempting to drag a car by the drive shafts would result in bent drive shafts, possibly even broken suspension components; it ain't gonna be easy to move it in that state. All racing cars have strong points for towing; except in exceptional circumstances only these points should be used to attach slings.

The car was on grass, and winching it back to safety while the two marshals are safely behind the barriers is no problem.

As I've said before, the car needs to be steered. This involves a marshal walking alongside the car; however you do it, somebody has got to be in a potentially dangerous position during the whole operation.

May I remind the naysayers that there were marshals around the car for longer than that.

Most of the 'naysayers', myself included, are people with actual experience of handling race-track incidents at some level or other. One man's (or woman's!) naysaying is another man's constructive criticism. The marshals were initially trackside for a longish time because they believed they could move the car to safety. When this proved impossible, they retreated behind the barriers while a safe way of dealing with the incident was decided on.

Isn't it typical that whenever someone comes up with an innovative idea, there are many who will rush up to say it's a lousy idea.

With respect, winching stranded racing cars to safety is hardly an innovative idea - it's normal practice in situations, such as gravel traps, where the recovery vehicle can't get close to the car.

Your credentials are impressive. I suggest that you let the motor racing world have the benefit of your experience by volunteering to work on recovery at your nearest race track; I can assure you that you will be welcomed with open arms!

[Valve Bounce]

OK, we'll winch it your way. I'll accept your explanation that putting any bending load on the drive shafts to tow the car at walking pace will stress them more than putting 900+BHP in torsion to accelerate the car from standstill to 100MPH in a couple of seconds. Any marshal needed to steer it would have been on the track for a period of time shorter than the marshalls were actually there. Usually, when you winch or tow a car backwards, it is not necessary to steer the car as the wheels align themselves to the direction they are towed.
The use of the safety car in this case was overkill in my opinion. Personally, I feel that a safety car should be brought onto the track when there is a dangerous condition, and in this case, my impression was that the car was not creating a dangerous situation. We have seen conditions where cars have been left in similar situations on the side of the track without bringing out the safety car.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

[EvilPumpkin]

Valve - with the greatest respect, when there are marshals trackside that IS a dangerous condition - for them.

Just bear in mind that the 2 marshals that have been killed in F1 in the last 2 years were actually in areas that should have been safe. That being the case, how much more dangerous is being on the side of the track.

As I think Dave has mentioned, marshals clubs are always looking for people and people with recovery experience such as your own particularly.

Please don't take this the wrong way - but before you can make an informed opinion on how dangerous a situation is, you need to have experience of it. As noted before, there are plenty of Oz marshals in the Marshals forum that will be able to put you into contact with the relevant marshalling club.

[calais]

i thought the marshal who died in monza was standing somewhere where he should not have been standing.
i stand corrected if i'm wrong!!!

[Mr V]

your right Calais, he was, and it could be said that the poor guy at Australia was also possibly standing in the wrong place, although this was more a freak accident, but, the point EP made was correct, marshalling is dangerous, not matter where they stand, and you can't get more dangerous than on the race track, trying to clear away a broken car, even if the drivers are aware of the marshals!

[calais]

oh, i agree, it is a dangerous and thankless job, and they deserve to be treated with their utmost safety in mind, but in my view, wouldnt just a localised yellow flag situation have been just as appropriate in canada???
looking at it from a safety perpective, imagine if during the safety car period, someone had pitted, and realising that the safety car was coming in that lap, he was driving rapidly to catch the field up. that somehow defeats the purpose.
i'm not saying it was a bad idea to use the safety car in canada, but from a safety viewpoint, yellow flags may have worked as well.
but then again, i'm not a marshal, so i cant really say!!!

[Red]

Originally posted by calais
[...]wouldnt just a localised yellow flag situation have been just as appropriate in canada???

Err... nope. Actually Pumpkin already said that. Granted that the drivers do not overtake under a yellow flag situation, but "reducing speed" if they're waved is somewhat very vague. Actually I remember a pole position that was achieved in such circumstances, and guess what, it was at Monaco, and if you really don't remember who he was, oh yes, it was Mika Hakkinen! Hardly a reckless and cruel guy!

[calais]

you do have a point there, red.

i remember mika raising his arm to acknowledge that he saw the yellow's, but that doesnt mean to say that he slowed down at all.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by calais
wouldnt just a localised yellow flag situation have been just as appropriate in canada???

tough one to call, but i think along the lines that if one car can end up in a place on the track, then another can reach that same position, imagine tha carnage if another car had a mechanical failure and hit JV's car whilst the marshals were working on it?

now, i know that it could be argued that a safety car can be used at every instance if you follow my train of thought, but a car that goes off the track (gravel trap) is safer to be removed than a car on the track.

[EvilPumpkin]

ok basic (and this is an off the top of my head overview)definitions of yellow flag are:

Steady Yellow (or single waved yellow in F1)
Reduce speed, danger ahead, no overtaking

Waved Yellow (or double waved yellow in F1)
Reduce speed now, danger ahead, no overtaking, be prepared to take avoiding action

However, I've done some work on FIA flag regulations and (and if anyone knows different, I'm open to correction as always) there is no actual definition of what constitutes "slowing down" - obviously it's relative, due to the many different forms of racing, but there aren't even any guidelines for this.

IME drivers don't really back off very much at all in deference to yellow flags.

calais - re Monza - it's generally agreed that the marshal was somewhere he shouldn't have been - but at the same time, if you want to take that point of view, the Canadian marshals "shouldn't have been" trackside during racing. The fact of the matter is they were precisely where they NEEDED to be - but let's be honest - no-one really SHOULD be on a small grass verge when there are 22 maniacs in huge cars going a couple of hundred mph less than 15 feet away from them...!

There's some dispute over the Australian marshal - AFAIK he was behind catch fencing which should technically have been safe - don't forget there were spectators injured in that incident as well and I doubt very much spectators would have been permitted in a designated "unsafe" area.

Incidentally, it is possible that the late decision to bring out the safety car may have been because it was felt the drivers were not backing off enough under the waved yellows - it would explain a lot if that was the case, now that I think about it.

[Valve Bounce]

Originally posted by EvilPumpkin
Valve - with the greatest respect, when there are marshals trackside that IS a dangerous condition - for them.

I totally agree with this point. My argument is that had the marshals + tow car operator been ordered to winch the car back off the track, marshals would have been on the track for less time than they actually were.
I often feel that marshalls running onto a track to remove debris when cars are racing around at full chat are doing a death defying act. I am sure that the question of safety for marshals should be addressed in detail - I remember at one stage that Max had floated the idea of electronically controlled sections of the track where speeds could be limited to a defined speed (like the 50kph used for pit lanes) in the event of accidents. This is probably the answer.
Going back to the subject of this thread, perhaps if Rubens had come in when JPM did, he might have been in a position to win the race.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

[Dave Brand]

We seem to have missed the point here in the discussion of safety car versus yellow flags. As I said in an earlier post, the purpose of the safety car is not just to slow the cars down. An important function of the safety car is to close the field up so that marshals working trackside know that they have periods of a couple of minutes to work before the cars come round again. Yellows slow traffic down, but they don't create discrete gaps; that's why safety cars are used.

[Valve Bounce]

I think if cars were moving past an accident zone at 50 KPH, the marshalls could manage to remove debris and almost anything else safely. Of course, a marshall can be used to direct traffic to one side of the track under such conditions while the debris/vehicles, etc are removed. It is this bunching up that I object to in motor racing, as it defeats any gain a driver may have made by driving faster than his opponents before this. Of course, we would need these electronic controls to be carefully positioned so that the speed of the cars can be controlled absolutely.
Many feel that an extended period of driving slowly behind a safety car creates a dangerous situation as the tyres cool during this period. Some even attribute Senna's fatal accident to this phenomenon.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

[EvilPumpkin]

As Dave has said, it's not just the speed, it's also creating safe gaps to work in - and of course guiding the cars around the incident.

If the safety car really creates a dangerous situation, then the alternative is to simply red flag any incident that cannot be cleared safely - I don't think any of us would like to see that.

I find it hard to believe that the level of tyre cooling that can happen during SC time could really lead to a fatal accident - unless the driver was careless enough to treat his car as though it was capable of performing as though it had warmer tyres - after all, they must KNOW their tyres will cool down a bit if they slow down. That's where driving skill comes into it.

Given the amount of safety regs that have come into place over the years in F1, I also doubt that drivers/teams would continue to tolerate the safety car if they felt it was a serious safety risk. Any protests I have seen have been on the basis of positions/leads being lost - but that's motor racing. Most other classes have Safety Car facilities - why should F1 be any different?

[Jordi]

We should remember when Bryan Herta spun in Elkhart Lake in 1998, and then got run over by Alex Barron, it was a local yellow, but Barron crashed before he could see it. Marshalls were very lucky to escape in time that day.

Mechanical failures may happen in the place of the yellow... And you sometimes may wonder that in Monaco they never use the Safety Car, but the speed at Monaco is considerably slower...

the Gilles Villeneuve is a fast track with few runoffs... so I think the use of the Safety is good in this case

[Dave Brand]

Sorry, Valve Bounce, removal of debris, etc., from a live track is NOT safe, whatever the speed of the cars. It's dangerous enough with the safety car out, but that does at least remove the possibilty of the odd driver who hasn't seen the yellow flags or sees no reason to slow down. Much as we'd like to think that such things don't happen, in real life they can, & will. Yellow flags do not control speed - they merely tell the drivers to slow down, which is open to all sorts of interpretation. As EP has said, the alternative to the safety car is to red flag the race, something which nobody wants unless it is absolutely necessary.

The most important point which is drummed into marshals at training sessions, on-post briefings, etc., is safety. It is also made very clear that no marshal should do anything which he (or she) considers unsafe, no matter who asks him to do it.

I'm sorry if such pedantic insistence on personal safety spoils your enjoyment of a race; getting hit by a car tends to ruin a marshals day as well!

[Valve Bounce]

You seem to avoid the issue I am talking about - the electronic control of car speeds as floated by MAX. I am talking about electronically controlling the speed of cars down to 50 KPM, not waved yellows. Pedantic insistance of safety spoiling my enjoyment is not the issue here, your sarcastic comment about a marshal getting hit is no appreciated. If it behoves you, I was the one to post the thread about that poor marshall being killed here in Melbourne last year. I just don't want to get into dumb arguments with you. As I said before, I suggested winching a car off the track which would have taken less time than the actual time the marshalls spent on the track, which you seem to also have conveniently avoided. That when you tow a car backwards, there is no need to steer it.
If you want to avoid the issues I am talking about by switching to some other dumb points, then there is no need for us to discuss this any further.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

[Valve Bounce]

Originally posted by EvilPumpkin

I find it hard to believe that the level of tyre cooling that can happen during SC time could really lead to a fatal accident - unless the driver was careless enough to treat his car as though it was capable of performing as though it had warmer tyres - after all, they must KNOW their tyres will cool down a bit if they slow down. That's where driving skill comes into it.

There have been several accidents caused by tyres cooling down during the safety car period - as mentioned many times by Martin Brundle. As I said before, I have seen a reference that this caused Senna to not realise that his tyres had lost their grip during the safety car period, and caused the subsequent tragic accident.
I am not saying that the safety car should not be used - it should be if the conditions are dangerous on the track; in this instance, I agree with Rubens that it wasn't.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

[EvilPumpkin]

I'm not avoiding any issues, I'm simply expressing my own opinion. I'm sorry if that's a problem for you valve - I was under the impression that was the point of a discussion.

However to address your points:

1. Electronically controlling speed - IF it's an option for all circuits and I'm not sure that it is...
How is slowing the cars down to 50kpm by electronic means any different in terms of tyre heat then doing it with a safety car? The only difference I can see is that cars would (potentially) be able to keep any lead they had - assuming that all cars had been moving at the same speed prior to that of course....

2. I think Dave has already asked you how much winch experience you have with race cars - a question YOU have conveniently avoided. You also chose not to address any of my queries about how the winching of the car in any mode could potentially cause damage. Basically you've ignored anything that's been said that doesn't support your argument.

I've tried to be nice about this, but you're not making it easy - so this is what I'd like to say in a slightly less pleasant manner.

If you don't like the way marshals work - go do it and show them how your way is better. I think we could have a much more fruitful discussion if you at least had a small amount of experience with track work rather than assuming that because you've worked with winches on other vehicles, you must know how to do it with racing vehicles.

[Valve Bounce]

Originally posted by EvilPumpkin
I'm not avoiding any issues, I'm simply expressing my own opinion. I'm sorry if that's a problem for you valve - I was under the impression that was the point of a discussion.

However to address your points:

1. Electronically controlling speed - IF it's an option for all circuits and I'm not sure that it is...
How is slowing the cars down to 50kpm by electronic means any different in terms of tyre heat then doing it with a safety car? The only difference I can see is that cars would (potentially) be able to keep any lead they had - assuming that all cars had been moving at the same speed prior to that of course....

2. I think Dave has already asked you how much winch experience you have with race cars - a question YOU have conveniently avoided. You also chose not to address any of my queries about how the winching of the car in any mode could potentially cause damage. Basically you've ignored anything that's been said that doesn't support your argument.

I've tried to be nice about this, but you're not making it easy - so this is what I'd like to say in a slightly less pleasant manner.

If you don't like the way marshals work - go do it and show them how your way is better. I think we could have a much more fruitful discussion if you at least had a small amount of experience with track work rather than assuming that because you've worked with winches on other vehicles, you must know how to do it with racing vehicles.

Your point 1. The cars only slow down over the section of track that is affected.
Your point 2 was addressed by Dave - racing cars are twoed or winched all the time, and I have accepted his explanation about damage (please refer to my post above regarding this).
I have never said I don't like the way the marshals work - find where I said this!! The decision to bring out the safety car was made by the Stewards, not the marshals. I have the utmost regard and respect for marshals, without whom, there could be no motor racing. In fact, if you go back to my thread about the poor marshal getting killed in Melbourne last year, you might perceive that I was most upset, and that the conditions on the track did not afford him sufficient protection. In fact, I am astonished at some of the risks marshals get up to in removing debris from a track, which I find quite frightening.
I think you have your wires slightly crossed as to my concerns about the sfety car and the safety of marshals.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

[EvilPumpkin]

ok - so at what point do they slow down? These cars are going at speeds in excess of 150mph most of the time - and their positions on the track are also important.

1. The slowing down would need to start at least 2 sectors before the incident.

1. Who controls the steering of the car? Does it go onto "autopilot"? If not, what are the ramifications of the car being slowed without the participation of the driver?

2.Is the system intelligent enough to understand what the driver and those around him are doing at the time it will be slowing him down? What if the "slowing down" section starts at a time when the driver(s) are dicing for position - bearing in mind that they should already be slowing before they actually reach the yellow flag sectors? What if two drivers are particularly close together?

As for your "acceptance" of Dave's assessment of moving cars, I believe what you actually said was "OK, we'll winch it your way. I'll accept your explanation that putting any bending load on the drive shafts to tow the car at walking pace will stress them more than putting 900+BHP in torsion to accelerate the car from standstill to 100MPH in a couple of seconds"

Now possibly it's just the way it's written, but that certainly seems to me to be the comment of someone who is basically saying "I don't believe you" in a rather sarcastic manner.

As for your attitude to marshals, you have already stated that the incident should have been handled a specific way - your way. The marshals were in charge of determining how that incident was handled. What I am saying is that unless you have had some experience of working trackside, you have really got no idea of whether what was done was correct or incorrect. And even if you had, each incident is different - nothing necessarily works the same way twice.

I didn't see your posts on Graham Beveridge's death - I appreciate you found it upsetting, but I doubt very much if you were any more upset than the rest of us - particularly those that knew him.

Your whole participation in this thread has been based on the fact that you know better than the marshals on scene how to deal with a stranded F1 vehicle - by definition that means you are unhappy with the marshalling of this incident - once again - if you know so much, then contribute your expertise to the marshals.

I think you have your wires crossed as I have never said you don't have any concern for the safety of the marshals (find where I said that) - I DID try to explain to you what was considered dangerous - but never said that you were unconcerned about it.

[calais]

one question i'd like to raise, if i may, is if the safety car is out on the track and someone pits, is there any rule that regulates his speed as he tries to catch up with the field????

[Dave Brand]

You seem to avoid the issue I am talking about - the electronic control of car speeds as floated by MAX. I am talking about electronically controlling the speed of cars down to 50 KPM, not waved yellows.

It would slow the cars down; what it wouldn't necessarily do is close them up to give the clear space which the safety car creates. Going slightly off track, living in a country whose government appears to favour electronic speed control for road vehicles, we don't want F1 setting a precedent.

Pedantic insistance of safety spoiling my enjoyment is not the issue here, your sarcastic comment about a marshal getting hit is no appreciated.

Sorry if it appeared sarcastic - it wasn't meant to be. I just don't think any marshal should be exposed to avoidable risk; my perspective is different to yours - I'm the one at risk.

As I said before, I suggested winching a car off the track which would have taken less time than the actual time the marshalls spent on the track, which you seem to also have conveniently avoided.

I don't think I've avoided the issue - I've expressed my opinion that in this instance winching the car off the track with no more protection than a waved yellow flag was not the safe option. Whether or not the car would have needed steering is a moot point - I think it would, you assert otherwise.

The bottom line on all this is that, in my opinion, based on my, admittedly limited, experience of handling racetrack incidents, the incident in question was handled in the safest way possible.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
I am talking about electronically controlling the speed of cars down to 50 KPM, not waved yellows.

This would be the best idea, but for the possibility of electronic glitches in an individuals car! This could prove even more dangerous than waved yellows or a safety car, should two cars driving nose to tail, and the car in front has an "electronic glitch" the car behind could very well do a "Rafe" as we saw in Australia, but this time where there are no gravel traps, imagine if it happened at Monaco?

[paul-collins]

Originally posted by mr v
This would be the best idea, but for the possibility of electronic glitches in an individuals car!

Consider that two cars in the Canadian GP got drive-thru penalties for speeding in pitlane, with their speed controls engaged! How would you ensure that all teams' tech worked the same? The only time you could ensure they're all at the same speed while maintaining their separation distance is if they were stopped!