planetf1.com

F1 MERCENARY wrote:Peroni suffered a fractured vertebrae.

I heard he got a concussion as well?

If sausage curbs are meant to discourage driving wide, then why is there (my guess) only 20 feet of it on this particular curb? Me thinks the curbing would run all around the corner... the ramp at the beginning positioned well before the turn where it cannot launch a car.

In this case, the sausage curb looks like an orphan sitting in the middle of nowhere. And not well staked down, either.

Asphalt_World wrote:

DFWdude wrote:Here's the slo-mo of the Peroni flight during the F3 race.

http://www.espn.co.uk/video/clip?id=27557450

A question...
What was that 20-feet of sausage curbing doing all by its lonesome on the curve? Looks beyond ancient and should have been removed long ago.

And a Comment...
Looks like the Halo did its job very well. This would have been far more serious without it.

The sausage was anything but ancient. It's a modern way to stop drivers gaining advantage by running wide. It failed massively today and won't be seen again.

I know what sausage curbing is used for. My complaint is why is there only 20 feet of it, when the turn would normally demand 150-200 feet of it?

DFWdude wrote:If sausage curbs are meant to discourage driving wide, then why is there (my guess) only 20 feet of it on this particular curb? Me thinks the curbing would run all around the corner... the ramp at the beginning positioned well before the turn where it cannot launch a car.

In this case, the sausage curb looks like an orphan sitting in the middle of nowhere. And not well staked down, either.

It is positioned in a way so that if you stay within the confines of the curb at that particular point, the trajectory of the car means you will likely be within the track limits for the rest of the curve. In other words you can’t run wide, cut back inside the curb, then run wide again, or at least if you did there’s no time to be gained.

DFWdude wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

DFWdude wrote:Here's the slo-mo of the Peroni flight during the F3 race.

http://www.espn.co.uk/video/clip?id=27557450

A question...
What was that 20-feet of sausage curbing doing all by its lonesome on the curve? Looks beyond ancient and should have been removed long ago.

And a Comment...
Looks like the Halo did its job very well. This would have been far more serious without it.

The sausage was anything but ancient. It's a modern way to stop drivers gaining advantage by running wide. It failed massively today and won't be seen again.

I know what sausage curbing is used for. My complaint is why is there only 20 feet of it, when the turn would normally demand 150-200 feet of it?

Because if you run a wide line through the Parabolica, the sausage kerb would come in to play and make you either go wide of back off. It was positioned in a place where cars would have to go if taking advantage of a wide line. It was not needed around the entire corner to take effect.

Looks like we add the name of Alex Peroni to the names of Charles Leclerc and Tadasuke Makino as drivers whose lives have been saved by the halo.

Thank You FIA and the Grand Prix Drivers' Association.

Mort Canard wrote:Looks like we add the name of Alex Peroni to the names of Charles Leclerc and Tadasuke Makino as drivers whose lives have been saved by the halo.

Thank You FIA and the Grand Prix Drivers' Association.

And Sean Gelael.

By now, the body of evidence is enough that I don't think the Halo is really open to debate anymore.

Exediron wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:Looks like we add the name of Alex Peroni to the names of Charles Leclerc and Tadasuke Makino as drivers whose lives have been saved by the halo.

Thank You FIA and the Grand Prix Drivers' Association.

And Sean Gelael.

By now, the body of evidence is enough that I don't think the Halo is really open to debate anymore.

Thanks! I had not seen that before. The marks on Galeal's halo certainly show a significant impact.

...and there are still diehard halo haters out there. Many of them are Ferrari fans who would not have Leclerc to cheer on if not for the halo.

Mort Canard wrote:

Exediron wrote:

Mort Canard wrote:Looks like we add the name of Alex Peroni to the names of Charles Leclerc and Tadasuke Makino as drivers whose lives have been saved by the halo.

Thank You FIA and the Grand Prix Drivers' Association.

And Sean Gelael.

By now, the body of evidence is enough that I don't think the Halo is really open to debate anymore.

Thanks! I had not seen that before. The marks on Galeal's halo certainly show a significant impact.

...and there are still diehard halo haters out there. Many of them are Ferrari fans who would not have Leclerc to cheer on if not for the halo.

Debris also hit the Halo on Jordan Kings car as well.

So thats Leclerc, Makino, Gelael, King & Pironi who've possibly avoided seriously injury or worse thanks to the Halo.

It's not the ideal solution for every variable but it's hard to argue against it's introduction now.

I mentioned it in another thread - the high-attrition surface used at Paul Ricard?

It doesn’t matter how many times I watch that clip, I’m still amazed at how that car took off!! It seems to defy the laws of physics!!!

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Nothing works as well as gravel for preventing drivers from going off track.

100% correct. There's a problem though because there's not a lot worse than gravel for causing a car that has gone off to skip through the air and in to a barrier without slowing down.

Swing and roundabouts I'm afraid.

To be honest after yesterday i don't see why I should care. We had numerous drivers deliberately going off track and another ignoring yellow flags.

If the drivers don't care about safety and are unwilling to compromise themselves in the name of safety why should the sport?

That's the sort of thing I used to roll my eyes at when playing on the original Playstation!

Seems like everything the FIA comes up with to stop drivers going off track causes problems... surely the electronic route is the answer, since the drivers (cough VETTEL cough) are hellbent on ignoring track limits.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Nothing works as well as gravel for preventing drivers from going off track.

100% correct. There's a problem though because there's not a lot worse than gravel for causing a car that has gone off to skip through the air and in to a barrier without slowing down.

Swing and roundabouts I'm afraid.

To be honest after yesterday i don't see why I should care. We had numerous drivers deliberately going off track and another ignoring yellow flags.

If the drivers don't care about safety and are unwilling to compromise themselves in the name of safety why should the sport?

And again today, drivers pulling back on to the track without looking and pushing each other off as per usual.

mikeyg123 wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Nothing works as well as gravel for preventing drivers from going off track.

100% correct. There's a problem though because there's not a lot worse than gravel for causing a car that has gone off to skip through the air and in to a barrier without slowing down.

Swing and roundabouts I'm afraid.

To be honest after yesterday i don't see why I should care. We had numerous drivers deliberately going off track and another ignoring yellow flags.

If the drivers don't care about safety and are unwilling to compromise themselves in the name of safety why should the sport?

And again today, drivers pulling back on to the track without looking and pushing each other off as per usual.

Actually I would give Stroll some leeway here, unlike Vettel his car had ended up stationary very close to the racing line and he had to move. I assume that's why his penalty was less.

lord byron wrote:Ive never been one to downplay things but this does seem like a one off,

I agree with Villeneuve if young drivers took less risks and think its ok to go at it like hammer and tongs and have the attitude that oh well its 2019 not 1950 my super duper all dancing designed cockpit will save me they are dreaming last week proved that anything can still happen.

BIB: There was another occasion a couple of years back where a GP3 car was launched off a sausage kerb at Spa. The difference there is that the large run off area meant the car landed before reaching the barriers, albeit then rolling into them. So the idea this is a one off and couldn't have been predicted (for the sake of clarity, I'm not suggesting you're saying that - it seems like the F1 drivers themselves were of that opinion) isn't correct.

pokerman wrote:

F1 MERCENARY wrote:Peroni suffered a fractured vertebrae.

I heard he got a concussion as well?

Yes, he was beginning to show signs of having suffered a concussion which is what prompted a more thorough examination which is how they came to discover the broken vertebra. Ideas such as sausage kerbs need to be discussed and well thought out before implementing them. What ever happened to RUMPLE STRIPS on the apexes? That was excellent because it provided enough of a vibration through the steering wheel without upsetting the cars too greatly and without causing damage unless the overstep was extreme. Sausage kerbs are impractical and have finally been proven to be dangerous, but at what cost?… Almost the life of a driver!

Things need to change sooner rather than later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj3r9xM9Dzo

Spa 2014, sausage kerb.

So its not a one off.

We are aware this isn't a one off. There's also the many times drivers clip them with their outer wheels and the suspension breaks catastrophically as happened to Massa and a few
others in India several years ago. And with those instances it should be noted that it was the corner with the least amount of load going though it and it snapped like toothpicks.
What needed to be done back then was assess the situation and take note that if such a device can cause that much damage on the most unloaded part of a car, what could
potentially be waiting to happen if a more significant portion of the car strikes such an object?

It's crazy that nothing was ever done or said about it in order to have them removed permanently.

The reality is that either gravel traps must return on every track or drivers choosing to utilize the outer bounds of tracks as part of the track need to be penalized for every voluntary
infraction, meaning nothing is wrong, no one forced them off, they just prefer going beyond track limits because it allows them to go faster through a given section of track. If you
slap them with 5-second penalties for every infraction, you best believe they'll have no issue staying within track bounds. As it stands today however, coupled with the POOR &
INCONSISTENT "enforcement" of the rules, drivers "consider" any paved section on courses to be viable racing realestate when it's not supposed to be. And spare me the argument
that it's too difficult to enforce across the board because other sports have devised rules that everyone said were impossible to adhere to and enforce, yet once implemented, athletes
and teams had no problems adjusting and adhering in order to comply with the rules.

For all the clever clogs they have in F1, sometimes it staggers me how the blatantly obvious is never looked at.
Diggers beyond the barriers lifting cars - there is no point having tyre barriers etc when the tractor is before it. A few near misses - Brundle 1994 in Japan, Hamilton 2007 at Nuburgring and it took Bianchi tragic accident to do something about that.