A Coruna Rally Tragedy

[TenEightyOne]

Six people, including a pregnant women, have been killed after a car left the road during the A Coruna rally. Sixteen more people are listed as "critical". It's not clear yet who the team/drivers were but it's reported that they weren't injured.

We see lots of discussions in these forums about racing standards, about closed cockpits, about all kinds of motorsport safety. It seems to me that I've seen little about spectator "enclosure" standards for rallies. I'm sure we can all think of car-to-spectator rally crashes in the past, surely this is something that warrants the most urgent attention?

Don't post the video if it surfaces (which I'm sure it has)!

Story - BBC.

 

[Downhill Dino]

It's interesting how rally spectating works. Like a 'at your own risk' type of deal. Of course, they don't exactly allow the road blocking crowds that existed 30 years ago but people are still close. Stuff happens.

 

[GOTMAXPOWER]

It looks like the driver is Sergio Tabeayo who has been rallying for 6 years in the same car: http://ewrc-results.com/profile.php?p=36803&t=Sergio-

Unfortunately most rally accidents involving spectators are easily avoided through a bit of common sense and educating those without it where they should stand to be safe.

 

[ClydeYellow]

The problem is that you can have all the standards you want - drivers, team members, race car and track engineers may be bound by those standards, but the crowds aren't so easily persuaded. Policing spectators along a rally stage may well be a lost cause.

And when I say "policing", I mean it. I've seen the local police having to keep people off a run-off area.

If spectators aren't willing to watch the event from the designated areas and only from those areas, this will keep happening until rallies are banned.

 

[[Nor]MclarenF1]

Petter Solberg has a little black flag on his roof at Loheac RX today in memory of those who lost their lives in the accident.

 

[dan0543]

The problem is that you can have all the standards you want - drivers, team members, race car and track engineers may be bound by those standards, but the crowds aren't so easily persuaded. Policing spectators along a rally stage may well be a lost cause.

And when I say "policing", I mean it. I've seen the local police having to keep people off a run-off area.

If spectators aren't willing to watch the event from the designated areas and only from those areas, this will keep happening until rallies are banned.

I agree, it's a tough job to persuade crowds not to spectate somewhere especially when they are spread over a large rally stage. People I know tend to follow an unwritten rule not to stand on the outside or on the exit of a corner, because obviously the cars could go wide but also because of loose rocks and debris. That said I'm not sure what the circumstances of this crash were, but I certainly wouldn't feel safe standing on the outside of a corner. Unfortunately the only way I think this unwritten rule would spread is by word of mouth, and there's always a risk there may not be a real rally enthusiast spectating every corner to help people stay safe

 

[ukfan758]

Perhaps Jersey barriers could be placed along the trail where spectators are?

They are used a lot in the US to protect construction workers.

 

[twitcher]

Sad news, never like hearing stories like this.

With Rally racing, I think the best thing you can do it increase safety is basic education. Unless we're talking about dramatically changing rallying itself (which, if we're honest with ourselves, is quite likely as time progresses), it's always going to be dangerous for everyone involved. Educating spectators on how to stay safe is the best way to reduce their risk of injury.

Also, at some point, the General public is going to have to accept that motor racing is dangerous, and that no matter how "safe" you want things to be, there will always be risk. No one close to the situation really gets too upset when a surfer drowns, or when some snowmobilers get caught in an avalanche, or when a skydiver does a face plant, because most people accept that those are dangerous activities which may have the most serious of consequences. To me though, it seems that for whatever reason, people have removed motorsports, especially auto racing, from that group of ultimately dangerous activities and lumped it in with team sports, where death is extremely rare.

I'm not at all saying that I like death, or that the extreme danger is what draws me towards Motorsports. I'm just saying that I accept that death is part of the risk. In most action sports, once you reach a certain skill level, you start doing things where the outcome is either life or death. There's no "walk away with minor injuries." Despite the danger, people still attempt to ride bigger waves, bigger mountains, jump higher, farther, etc. Obviously, as those sports grow, so does the safety culture within them. However, I would argue that in most action sports, the safety culture is more about the preparation and support as opposed to "softening up" the activity itself.

So basically, everyone involved needs to be more aware of the potential dangers, and be more educated on how to best protect themselves. That's the only way I can think of to up safety at rallying without starting to destroy what rally racing is.

 

[Northstar]

Perhaps Jersey barriers could be placed along the trail where spectators are?

View attachment 442716
They are used a lot in the US to protect construction workers.

I've always been kind of surprised they never put these types of barriers in the more popular spectating areas at least. In this case something so simple would have saved several spectator's lives as the car didn't really get airbourne.

 

[ClydeYellow]

Jersey barriers could be used only where it's possible to transport them - you'd need a transport truck AND a crane to access the area you intend to fence off; the only WRC rally where I think this may be possible is the ADAC Rallye Deutschland, maybe the RAC.

Also, I am not sure whether or not jerseys would be safe were they to be hit at >200kph, sitting on unsteady ground (think mud, or gravel).

 

[Legro]

It's always a sad thing to hear.

One option to prevent these sorts of accidents from happening is simply doing what Rally Finland has done, which restricts people from approaching the stage without paying for a ticket, and accepting pointed spectating areas that have been approved to be safe by the organiser, have multiple marshals on the stage watching the spectators and not let cars on the stage before there are no spectators in dangerous areas. This may make going to the stage to watch the rally less appealing, as in many cases you can't see the cars as well, but is considerably safer for all.

Barriers would just ruin the spirit of rallying, and cars could fly over the barrier into the crowd who thinks it's safer because of the barrier.

 

[ukfan758]

Barriers would just ruin the spirit of rallying, and cars could fly over the barrier into the crowd who thinks it's safer because of the barrier.

So cars crashing into crowds is part of the spirit of rallying?


In all seriousness, why would a barrier ruin it?
I would rather protect the fans from a good 50% of car-in-crowd accidents (estimation) than none at all.

 

[Legro]

So cars crashing into crowds is part of the spirit of rallying?


Why would a barrier ruin it?
I would rather protect the fans from a good 50% of car-in-crowd accidents (estimation) than none at all.

Because to this point the cars have run in various different environments, cutting corners, near all sorts of obstacles that could be found near the stage, including ditches and even houses, with those concrete blocks, most stages, that used to have their own likeness, would appear as... well road works zone, and thanks to the inconvenience of getting the blocks even near the stage, the stages would have to be moved closer, and sometimes even onto, wider larger roads. And with that happening more people would nearer the potential car flying over the barrier, to which all I can think of is the Le Mans 1955 incident.

You could protect those people by simply telling them not to be where the car may run off, instead of placing a piece of heavy concrete (that could make the accident worse for the drivers, and in worst case also the spectators) in front of them, because that happens to work with motorways where the people have no other option than being there.

 

[Venari]

Nothing needs changing. If your spirit of self-preservation is such you'll stand in the wrong place at a rally meeting, then Darwin be with you.

 

[twitcher]

It's always a sad thing to hear.

One option to prevent these sorts of accidents from happening is simply doing what Rally Finland has done, which restricts people from approaching the stage without paying for a ticket, and accepting pointed spectating areas that have been approved to be safe by the organiser, have multiple marshals on the stage watching the spectators and not let cars on the stage before there are no spectators in dangerous areas. This may make going to the stage to watch the rally less appealing, as in many cases you can't see the cars as well, but is considerably safer for all.

Barriers would just ruin the spirit of rallying, and cars could fly over the barrier into the crowd who thinks it's safer because of the barrier.

As a Canadian, I've always been a little bit mystified as to how Rallies in Europe are actually organized in terms of the infrastructure, and more specifically, how ordinary people deal with their roads being shut down....from what I can tell as an outsider, it just would not fly in North America, as too many people would complain about the inconvenience, as well as property damage. The only rallies I've ever seen in NA take place on logging roads and forest service roads in the middle of no where, whereas in Europe, many rallies take place on roads that get used every day.

So, based on that, and relating back to the bolded portion of the quote, how do you take control of a region's public roads, and at the same time, tell people what they can and can't do in regards to being near the road to the point of charging them to be near a road which their tax dollars payed for. Remember too, we're talking about 100 of kilometres of rally stages, not a 5km street circuit. When I watch rallies in Europe, the roads clearly run beside private property. I don't think anyone can tell the property owner that they can't watch the race from their own property, and they certainly can't charge them to be there.

 

[Legro]

So, based on that, and relating back to the bolded portion of the quote, how do you take control of a region's public roads, and at the same time, tell people what they can and can't do in regards to being near the road to the point of charging them to be near a road which their tax dollars payed for. Remember too, we're talking about 100 of kilometres of rally stages, not a 5km street circuit. When I watch rallies in Europe, the roads clearly run beside private property. I don't think anyone can tell the property owner that they can't watch the race from their own property, and they certainly can't charge them to be there.

I'm not sure about higher density areas like Italy, but here the people can take once-a-year-event without casing trouble quite easily, partially because the stages are nearly always middle of nowhere, and no one except the residents who obviously have access from and to their houses after the rally cars have gone past, partially because the locals get money by both the organisers and having many people around buying things from them. And thanks to having the same stages in same place over and over again, the people living there often are more familiar with the sport than most spectators.

 

[ClydeYellow]

One option to prevent these sorts of accidents from happening is simply doing what Rally Finland has done, which restricts people from approaching the stage without paying for a ticket, and accepting pointed spectating areas that have been approved to be safe by the organiser, have multiple marshals on the stage watching the spectators and not let cars on the stage before there are no spectators in dangerous areas.

I didn't know Rally Finland had taken such measures. The problem - as many others pointed out - is that it wouldn't be possible to close the area and only allow access to paying spectators in the case of rallies that take place in public roads or, worse, pass through inhabited areas. However, take the monetary element out of the equation and I don't see why it wouldn't work. Money, perhaps? Organizing such a shindig would be expensive, and many smaller events would go under.

 

[RX-7_FD3S]

The FIA is meeting today in Geneva to discuss Rally safety with the death of the driver one or two week ago and this tragedy happening nearly back to back.

But honestly it's hard, total safety is really hard to achieve in a rally special. And you can't start to put concret wall or stuff like that. Would need too much work to be worth it for a series that is barely surviving.

People have to realize that when you go see a motorsport event there's always a risk of something happening. A jam throttle could push a car into a crowd, a flying tyre could hit people, object flying from a crash could hit people, specialy carbon part. And so on. You can multiply that per 10 when you go see a rally special because there's no sécurty fence or tyrewall.

 

[eran0004]

Perhaps Jersey barriers could be placed along the trail where spectators are?

View attachment 442716
They are used a lot in the US to protect construction workers.

But rally stages are often quite long and spectators are usually spread out along most of the stage. Even if you wouldn't need to put barriers along the entire length you'd probably need to cover about half the distance at least, so for a 40 kilometer stage that would be 40 kilometers of barriers to cover both sides of the track, plus the time and equipment required to place them and to move them between the different stages.

You can probably get a discount when placing a huge order, but it would still be expensive.

 

[niky]

Those barriers would be almost useless on a rally stage... or worse than useless... flipping a car up in the air... unless they're fastened firmly to the ground.

I'd prefer soft barriers... a mix of tires and sandbags... to slow the cars down as they go off.

But the logistics requirements would still be huge, considering the lengths of some of the stages.

 

[TenEightyOne]

But rally stages are often quite long and spectators are usually spread out along most of the stage. Even if you wouldn't need to put barriers along the entire length you'd probably need to cover about half the distance at least, so for a 40 kilometer stage that would be 40 kilometers of barriers to cover both sides of the track, plus the time and equipment required to place them and to move them between the different stages.

You can probably get a discount when placing a huge order, but it would still be expensive.

View attachment 443648

Please be careful and don't confuse Log Out with Check Out...

 

[Bo]

It's sad when there's any kind of death in motorsport, be it competitors, spectators or team members.

I can't really feel sorry for anyone who chooses to stand somewhere where they're likely to get hit however - stage rallying in any form involves frequent surface and subsequent grip changes, and if a car is going to leave the road in a motorsport event, the chances it'll be in a stage rally of some sort are rather high. It's no different to walking out onto a motorway to watch cars go past - if you stand on the hard shoulder or edge of the central reservation, nobody can really be liable apart from you if you get hit by something.

The vast, vast majority of all rallying spectator injuries/fatalities could likely be avoided if people didn't stand on apexes or corner exits, or just generally anywhere a car is likely to to go if it has an accident. Freak accidents happen, and you can't do anything about that. Even if you stood high up and far back, as such:

There's still a minute chance that a car could hit a rock or similar, bounce the wrong way, and end up going towards the crowd. It's very unlikely though - it's about as safe a place as you could stand.

Doing something like this? You're asking for trouble.

 

[Grandea GTR]

I think it would be a better idea to increase the legal distance between the spectator and the track. Then again, I'm sure there will be many that will break that law.

 

[Bo]

You can't impose such a rule because of that, unfortunately. It's virtually impossible to enforce fully. You can however increase general policing and maybe warn those who are standing in a dangerous spot.

 

[ukfan758]

But rally stages are often quite long and spectators are usually spread out along most of the stage. Even if you wouldn't need to put barriers along the entire length you'd probably need to cover about half the distance at least, so for a 40 kilometer stage that would be 40 kilometers of barriers to cover both sides of the track, plus the time and equipment required to place them and to move them between the different stages.

You can probably get a discount when placing a huge order, but it would still be expensive.

View attachment 443648

I was only thinking of placing those walls where the main crowd areas are, all 40 km would be absurd and finacially impossible...

 

[The Chosen One]

But rally stages are often quite long and spectators are usually spread out along most of the stage. Even if you wouldn't need to put barriers along the entire length you'd probably need to cover about half the distance at least, so for a 40 kilometer stage that would be 40 kilometers of barriers to cover both sides of the track, plus the time and equipment required to place them and to move them between the different stages.

You can probably get a discount when placing a huge order, but it would still be expensive.

View attachment 443648

Considering that there may only be about .2 to .5 km or less of total (major) spectator area on a typical rally stage actually equates to around $20,000 - $40,000 in barriers, which saves you $10,795,000 or 590 times less of the cost.

 

[eran0004]

I was only thinking of placing those walls where the main crowd areas are, all 40 km would be absurd and finacially impossible...

Considering that there may only be about .2 to .5 km or less of total (major) spectator area on a typical rally stage actually equates to around $20,000 - $40,000 in barriers, which saves you $10,795,000 or 590 times less of the cost.

200 to 500 meters on a 40 kilometer stage? Probably 2 - 5 km - if you only place barriers where spectators actually stand, which you can't know for sure before the rally has started. 20 to 50 kilometers would probably be needed to cover all the bases.

What is needed is for the organisations arranging rallies to follow the FIA guidelines by the letter.

If the safety standards can't be met, it's the duty of the "0" cars to report it so that the rally doesn't start until it's safe. And if the spectators insist on standing in high-risk zones then the rally should be cancelled. That's sad, but perhaps that's the only way of making the crowd realise that signs are there for you to read and follow.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I was only thinking of placing those walls where the main crowd areas are, all 40 km would be absurd and finacially impossible...

Considering that there may only be about .2 to .5 km or less of total (major) spectator area on a typical rally stage

Without meaning any offence to either of you... I'm wondering if rallies in the US run very differently from those in Europe? Maybe that's part of the European problem, of course.

In Euro rallies if you can get there you can stand there. And it could be just about anywhere.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Only ever spectated at the WRC in Wales once, aside from the lack of any spectator safety measures at all people were using the track to walk between locations... Brought new meaning to the phrase 'oblivious idiots' for me. Just in the one place I was you'd have needed about 500m of barriers at least on one side, but they still wouldn't protect people from their own stupidity.

... But it's part of rallying, and I don't see an effective solution that doesn't reduce the already slender viewing experience further. Fixed barriers are out of the question, so you'd need a literal army of marshalls to police the crowd, which would have to be herded to 'safe' locations, inevitably reducing the visibility for the paying spectators.

My condolences to the families affected by this, but motorsport is dangerous, it'll disappear before it's made totally safe for all involved.

 

[[Nor]MclarenF1]

I have to agree with @MatskiMonk. The very nature of rallying makes policing and "herding" spectators more or less impossible. I think the only thing to do realistically is to inform spectators about the risks as good as possible and make it very clear that it's at their own risk. Rallying is by it's very nature a hazardous sport, for participants and spectators alike.