Track Safety in F1

[Jimmy Magnusson]

With the new decade most of the F1 tracks have been modified or upgraded in various ways to improve track saftey (and paddock size, despite there now being only 11 teams. Where did everyone camp out in 1989?). This has often included large tarmac runoffs, which the drivers enjoy, because they can go off and rejoin without much trouble. I'm not such a big fan of these runoffs, though, and for various reasons. Firstly, I don't like how parts not part of the race track is sometimes used to gain an advantage (Example: Massa overtaking Kubica at the last corner at Fuji last year). Secondly, mistakes should be punished.

But the main reason I don't like the tarmac runoff is because I consider it unsafe. The new bus stop at Spa is a good example. Outbreak yourself into the chicane and you're fine, you just loose a few seconds. But what if you have a high speed accident, or aquaplane off during a wet race? Tarmac. Wall. Boom. Crash. Wet tarmac especially won't slow you down the slightest, was obvious during races like the GP2 support race at Istanbul a few years ago. And those cars crashed into a soft tyre barrier, not concrete. I don't know about you, but I just can't stand all this tarmac that isn't a part of the racing circuit itself.

[flagwaver]

Like almost anything to do with safety it is a compromise. If we replaced all the run off with gravel traps then there is a danger that cars will dig in and roll. or be stopped very near the edge of the track. My understanding is that the blacktop is of a high abrasion material so the cars can maintain some traction even in the wet, something they can't do on grass.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

A cocked wheel due to a knock on the suspension, and the car will slide forever on it's undertray along the tarmac since not all the wheels are in contact for the braking effort to bring a car to a halt before hitting something solid.

Some tarmac to allow a driver to save the car, but also gravel beyond that to help prevent the big impact. The combined distance of both would be less than that of many of the current tarmac run-offs

[Lord Summerisle]

there was an interesting article in the MSA Motorsports Now publication middle of last year on the safety features at Paul Richard circuit - that has highly abrasive tarmac run off surfaces, the blue zone, and if the car hasnt stopped by then, it enters the very abrasive red zone - which ruins tyres, requiring a tyre change ASAP.

nor have bikes/riders reached the barriers - the tarmac has stopped them sliding too.

[Rockmunky]

Why can't it be like this?


Track, then grass to punish mistakes, and to stop drivers extending the width of the track.
Tarmac, to catch the big spinners.
Then gravel to slow the really big ones?

[garcon]

Anyone reaching the kitty litter in that set up deserves an award... for bravery, or optimism...

[Ralf's Girl]

I personally like the diagram (apart from the fact that it has too much tarmac) - I think that might be how Hermann Tilke designs his circuits.

I have no problem with tarmac run-off in theory - it's just how they're used that's the problem. Take the Massa/Kubica battle in Fuji last year - it was great fun to watch, but they went onto the tarmac run-off several times and if anything it made them go quicker. If using tarmac instead of gravel/grass is supposed to make things safer, it seems like a flawed plan.

[Knowlesy]

I'd prefer the following:

Track>>>oil slick>>>very sharp, vertical cattle grid.

The motivation to not crash would be enormous and mistakes would be punished inappropriately.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

I'd prefer the following:

Track>>>oil slick>>>very sharp, vertical cattle grid.

I'd go further than that:

Track>>>Crocodile pit......hey Bernie,maybe for next years Oz GP eh!