I still can’t get my head around the fact he actually walked away from that!
You could argue the Halo saved Lewis at Monzo too
4 Likes
Maybe that was a bit insensitive.
F1 in my opinion has always been pretty safe
(Well as safe as it can be driving a car at 200mph with your backside 1inch off the ground)
But I do feel it has been sanitised somewhat.
Honestly think the halo is the single greatest F1 innovation of the last 30 years. Has been absolutely worth its weight (or strength?) In gold since it’s introduction. Has saved so many drivers from death or serious injury. Leclerc was the first, I think, after Alonso span through the air and across the top of him.
4 Likes
Mazepin last weekend too. Not sure why we’ve had so many incidents like these since its introduction.
1 Like
Not really. Look up the list of deaths. I still remember watching the Imola Grand Prix weekend in 1994
There’s a brilliant documentary, I think it’s Life on the limit, that’s definitely worth a watch
2 Likes
Could it be restricted vision???
I’m not saying the halo is a bad thing, especially if it has improved safety, but if it hampers in other ways then maybe it needs a bit of a rethink.
Judge for yourself. Video here:
1 Like
Helmet cam has been an incredible addition this season
This one with Leclerc is like watching the video game
2 Likes
Life at the Limit? That was a book by Sid Watkins - strongly recommend everyone even slightly interested in F1 reads it - and if it’s the same, I didn’t realise there was a documentary as well.
ETA: ach no, Googled, and they are two different things with two slightly different titles. Should probably have done that first (he says, sheepishly). Still strongly recommend the book, but. And will have to watch the documentary sometime.
1 Like
Yeah I must read it. But there’s a lot of Sid in that documentary.
Have tissues handy, it’s very emotional
1 Like
So many assumptions on what the rules say and what they mean. I’m not getting into it here but that was what the little family dispute I had with my son was about.
Quoting one rule repeatedly at me isn’t enough. It needs to be considered in the light of all the other rules (that he’s never read) in case there are any modifiers and exclusions that modify the first rule.
FWIW I agree absolutely about the often quoted safety car rule when taken in isolation but as I’ve never read the rest of the rules either, I’m not going to agree that that’s the only way things could have been managed. He agreed with me in the end. Once he’d calmed down a bit 
This is a bit of deja-vu from another thread…
1 Like
I’m not an F1 driver (as much as I’d love to be), but that does look like it would hamper vision, especially at the speeds they’re going.
I have been fortunate enough to drive an F1 car (raceday experience) and speaking from that, I can say that everything happens so fast that even the slightest distraction could be disastrous.
Yes, these guys are professionals, and can more than likely adapt to the changes, but as @RichardL says, there could be a reason that more incidents have occurred since the halo’s introduction.
It could also be because people take more risks when they feel safer.
2 Likes
I’m pretty sure I’ve heard some of the drivers say they don’t notice it. I guess it’s like the windscreen wipers in your car (or in your case bus). They’re so close to your face, and you’re focused on points much further in the distance so you don’t notice they’re there.
Just going back to this point, because I’ve realised you meant it in the context that the restricted vision may be causing these incidents, but I don’t believe it is.
Romain had his own accident, I’m not sure they ever said why he darted from the left of the track to the right, but visibility had nothing to do with it.
Max landing on Lewis’s head wasn’t down to visibility.
Nikita crashing into George… maybe, but the bigger issue here was George very suddenly slamming on the brakes to avoid the spinning car and Nikita not being able to react fast enough.
1 Like
I do believe though that the drivers of the 80’s/90’s took as much risk but had a different mindset.
The car will do what I want it to, otherwise it will blow up or kill me.
That was probably the biggest difference between the likes of Schumacher and Hamilton.
Schumacher had absolute blind faith in the car, whereas Hamilton (and most of today’s drivers) would perhaps err on the side of safety.
I’m not saying either one is better than the other, just a different time and a different style of racing.
Interesting side question that’s just occurred to me. Given that it’s the teams that will be held liable in the event of anything serious, how much weight should the drivers views, in favour or against, have?
(I remember the halo was reportedly pretty well hated until it had proved it’s value in a few incidents.)
1 Like
You could argue the cars are faster now than they were back then.
I don’t think increases in safety have detected from the race. If anything, you find more people taking risks etc - rightly or wrongly
1 Like
At the risk of an argument, this is the bit of your brief summary that I really don’t agree with. I saw it that way at the time but I now think it better expressed as “reacted to changing circumstances”.
I have no proof of anything, of course, but the theory that he waited for the recovery operation to be sufficiently “safe” before letting the cars go is quite compelling to my mind.
Yes, I know I said I wasn’t going to get involved.
2 Likes
I say he changed his mind because he posted from race control that “Lapped cars will not be allowed to unlap themselves”, there’s no reason to post that message unless that is his plan, then on the fia radio Horner complains and says to let lapped cars go and they only need 1 racing lap, then we get a message from race control that says all the cars between Max and Lewis can unlap themselves.
That first message could of affected strategies from the teams etc and it should not have been posted, this is where it makes it look like Masi bottled it
2 Likes
I agree that’s an interpretation but it’s not the only one.
As I say, while it’s definitely the way it came across at the time I think what I now think of as my original “he’s just stupid” explanation doesn’t really hold water for me.
Do we know he posts the text personally BTW?