Jules Bianchi passes away following accident at 2014 Formula 1 Japanese Grand Prix

[Blitz24]

Back in 1997, Hakkinen and Villeneuve were given suspended bans for doing exactly this in Japan. It needs stamping out.

Yellow means yellow.
Double yellow means :censored:ing yellow.

So Double Yellow is just an elevated yellow but not yet full-blown SC? Seems to create a gray area.

 

[niky]

I can say from personal experience that's a load of it... People make out aquaplaning as dangerous but that's because people don't do anything while its happenng to them. Last year I had some really bald tires on tring to get some more miles until I could use the warranty to get a new set, and it was absolutely pissing it down on the Interstate. I was probably doing 80 over a bridge so water was just pooling and there were cars all over the sides who had smashed into them, faced backwards, etc.. Honestly, it was when in doubt power out..

But I'm not sayin Jules can't drive, nor any other driver. I just don't think it was aquaplaning, as Vettle went off similarly a corner before the one Jules did in the Esses.

It's already been said, but I'd like to chime in... I've been hydroplaning. A lot. In many different cars. I've had UHP tires on my car with the sketchiest of treads coming back from the track in a torrential downpour, and I've had merely slightly sketchy road tires on powerful rear drive sports cars in the same.

With my track car, I had no grip, the car going two to three feet sideways over each puddle, but I could keep on going. Because front-wheel drive.

But with a rear driver... even at steady throttle at a much slower speed... with tread still remaining on the tire... you're going sideways... and you're going to have to try to catch it. Again... and again... and...

Aquaplaning/hydroplaning is no fun. You can catch and correct it at low speeds (Low, in this case, being 80-100 km/h), but at over 200 km/h in a car that's too light to properly squeeze its tires into the ground, with aerodynamics that don't work when you're sideways... no such luck.

 

[Liquid]

So Double Yellow is just an elevated yellow but not yet full-blown SC? Seems to create a gray area.

Good point. I was being simplistic for humourrous effect but good point, grey area found. Double yellows should be coupled with a safety car. Because surely that's the whole point of being "prepared to stop"?

 

[Blitz24]

Good point. I was being simplistic for humourrous effect but good point, grey area found. Double yellows should be coupled with a safety car. Because surely that's the whole point of being "prepared to stop"?

Triple yellow with flashing light to emphasize the danger on the track...
This could backfire if people are from America and translate flashing yellow as go faster.

 

[fortbo]

I saw the crash video it's bad...

 

[tomhart9]

No, it was in a Dodge 2500. 2wd only.


Well, like you said when only half of the wheels are in the water, the other two are not. You can still move about (if we are talking left and right) but the problem is people don't think it out. Car pulls right, they pull hard left and keep left even when out of the water and that's where they over correct, and spin like the Lexus driver I saw. You can still direct the water with the wheels, and accelerate to keep it in line. I'd almost like to say it's like rev matching, where you need to estimate what will happen when you're out of the scenario.

In my truck when it happened, it was fish tailing for a good three to four seconds, with intermittent waterfalls of water all over the road, on both left and right sides. However, I have gotten a close call in my other car, Taurus (with even worse tires) and that one pulled me hard right, and it was a similar situation of going over a flooded bridge.

I don't think the issue was aquaplaning as much as oversteer then underster, where he may have overestimated where the water was. Rosberg was complaining of it all day and maybe we didn't hear it from Jules, or maybe it was the tires he was on had met their end.

Although I've had little experience of it, I have an understanding of Aqua/hydro planning of: hitting standing water in such a way and speed that instead of going into the water and maintaining contact with the road, you skim over the surface of the water which obviously has no grip.

To me, what you're describing is just you driving into a large puddle and one side of the car getting slowed down "pulling you to one side"

When you say you got "pulled hard right" unless you were flooring it or braking heavily at the time surely there wouldn't be any acceleration due to the hydroplaning to "pull" you around the road?

 

[Jaywalker]

I saw the crash video it's bad...

It's absolutely horrific! I'm seriously amazed that he's still alive. For a 6XXKG F1 car to lift a crane of that weight into the air, the impact must have been tremendous! (And he hit it at the rear, where the counter-weights are - its heaviest point.) Let's hope & pray he makes a recovery.

The attempted cover-up by Bernie, FOM & FIA is absolutely disgraceful. 👎 (They're desperate not to damage F1's already tarnished name any further, imo.)

 

[Barra333]

It's absolutely horrific! I'm seriously amazed that he's still alive. For a 6XXKG F1 car to lift a crane of that weight into the air, the impact must have been tremendous! (And he hit it at the rear, where the counter-weights are - its heaviest point.) Let's hope & pray he makes a recovery.

Not that it makes it much better, but remember that Sutil's ~600kg car was hanging off the front of the crane, offsetting some of the weight.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The attempted cover-up by Bernie, FOM & FIA is absolutely disgraceful.

What cover-up? The fact that they didn't broadcast footage of the accident? Most networks have a policy of not showing footage until they know a driver is okay - it's exactly what they did for Massa back in 2009 - and the footage in this case is particularly distressing. Everything that was gathered was forwarded to the Japanese police as evidence for the investigation, in accordance with Japanese law. The only footage that has emerged is amateur footage.

So, what cover-up?

 

[Barra333]

It would be good if they released a clip of Bianchi's on board to the point that the car left the track. That would probably answer what we have spent the last page or two debating without there being anything distressing to anyone.

 

[Mic_Col]

. . . Code 60 is a speed to slow for F1 cars to stay cool al tho its a short distance.

Yeah I just did a read of the code60 specifics. I was surprised to find that the 60 stands for 60kph. I do watch Lemans and did so this year ( I guess that fact went in one ear, out the other ) bear in mind it was only introduced this year and the important thing is it works well.

I really think a version of code60 is exactly what F1 needs now. 120kph would be better, and for the length of a sector, the heat build wouldn't be close to or in anyway worse than they already experience stopped at the start line.

Just an idea, to help cool them ( if it looks like an issue ) would be some extra air openings that can be popped open in the speed controlled zone. Harrier jump jets have something similar when they hover.

 

[Grayfox]

120kph would be better, and for the length of a sector, the heat build wouldn't be close to or in anyway worse than they already experience stopped at the start line.

Then you'll have people braking just before the sector which could cause more issues.

 

[Jaywalker]

What cover-up? The fact that they didn't broadcast footage of the accident? Most networks have a policy of not showing footage until they know a driver is okay - it's exactly what they did for Massa back in 2009 - and the footage in this case is particularly distressing. Everything that was gathered was forwarded to the Japanese police as evidence for the investigation, in accordance with Japanese law. The only footage that has emerged is amateur footage.

So, what cover-up?

We saw Massa's accident over & over. (Supersport - SA) Jules' accident wasn't even mentioned, let alone shown. FOM removing videos from the 'net. That's covering up, imo. In those conditions, a safety car should have been deployed immediately after Sutil's shunt & they know it. (And yes, I'm aware of the normal procedures/rules.)

 

[Tired Tyres]

Then you'll have people braking just before the sector which could cause more issues.

You'd have to have a slow down zone in the sector before the Code 60 sector with no passing allowed.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

We saw Massa's accident over & over.

Only once it became apparent that he wasn't dead.

Jules' accident wasn't even mentioned, let alone shown.

Marussia didn't even know. All they knew was that a car had gone off and that Bianchi wasn't responding. The marshals who witnessed the accident would have alerted race control immediately, and warned that it was a serious one, and race control would have stopped the footage from being broadcast.

FOM removing videos from the 'net.

Which they have been doing for years.

They're covering it up, imo.

That's got to be the worst conspiracy ever - why would they got to all those lengths to hide the footage, then allow the team and Bianchi family to comment on it?

The lack of footage does not prove a conspiracy. I have seen amateur footage (albeit unintentionally), and I can tell you this much - if you haven't seen it, you're better off not watching. It is one of the most disturbing things I have ever seen. Or it was until I read your post.

 

[Jaywalker]

Only once it became apparent that he wasn't dead. No, live.


Marussia didn't even know. All they knew was that a car had gone off and that Bianchi wasn't responding. The marshals who witnessed the accident would have alerted race control immediately, and warned that it was a serious one, and race control would have stopped the footage from being broadcast. OK, but DC going on about the medical car being there for Sutil was a bit ridiculous, since he'd already got out of his car & was walking about, clearly unharmed.


Which they have been doing for years. Doesn't make it right.


That's got to be the worst conspiracy ever - why would they got to all those lengths to hide the footage, then allow the team and Bianchi family to comment on it? To prevent bad publicity for F1.

The lack of footage does not prove a conspiracy. I have seen amateur footage (albeit unintentionally), and I can tell you this much - if you haven't seen it, you're better off not watching. I've seen it. Terrible. It is one of the most disturbing things I have ever seen. Or it was until I read your post. Your opinion, which you're entitled to. Just as I am. Done here.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

No, live.

I don't know what coverage you were watching, but I saw the world feed, and the replays were not shown until Massa was removed from the car. I remember everyone complaining that replays hadn't been shown.

OK, but DC going on about the medical car being there for Sutil was a bit ridiculous, since he'd already got out of his car & was walking about, clearly unharmed.

When Michael Schumacher had his ski accident, he was conscious and coherent for two hours. Some of these injuries have a delayed onset, and given the lack of information, DC could have easily come to the conclusion that the medical car was there for Sutil. After all, the only image that was released had Bianchi's car largely obscured by the crash barrier.

Doesn't make it right.

Actually, it does. The footage is their intellectual property. And releasing the footage would be inappropriate given that Bianchi's condition was uncertain, and Japanese law called for that footage to be handed over as evidence in an ongoing investigation.

 

[Grayfox]

You'd have to have a slow down zone in the sector before the Code 60 sector with no passing allowed.

It will be like going into the pits, slowing down at the last second to gain every bit of time possible.

I don't know what coverage you were watching, but I saw the world feed, and the replays were not shown until Massa was removed from the car. I remember everyone complaining that replays hadn't been shown.

The only time it is shown is if it is being shown and the car goes off, like the crash with webber.

They were showing the battle and a crash happened.

But if it was not aired, yes you are right.

 

[Vinylshark]

So far you're only not allowed to overtake in the little area where the yellow flag is. Why not say you're not allowed to overtake in the whole sector where the yellow flag is and show drivers their current gap to the car in front of them on their steering wheel? Green when they enter the sector and red when they're about to close the gap to the car ahead? I think this would make it easier for drivers to judge the speed they have to drive while being in a yellow flag sector.

 

[Swagger897]

It will be like going into the pits, slowing down at the last second to gain every bit of time possible.

Wasn't there a double yellow at Monaco this year?

 

[Jaywalker]

Seems I'm not the only one who's considered that there might be a 'conspiracy'.

 

[Pezzarinho17]

I don't read that in the same way as you, and I think the only cover up going on is out of respect to Jules Bianchi. The FIA are still reviewing the incident, so there would nothing gained by showing the footage and allowing the public to form opinions before the FIA can express their own.

 

[Touring Mars]

I don't think conspiracy is the correct word - if there are possible legal issues (which I reckon there must be), then it stands to reason that FOM may wish to prevent all and sundry from obtaining access to their high definition footage of the incident. And then there is also the question of respecting Jules Bianchi, his family and his teammates. I don't think they are doing anything wrong - the people who need to see the footage will see it, those who don't will have to wait.

 

[Pezzarinho17]

Also, this may end up in a court so that video would be evidence.

 

[Jaywalker]

I don't think conspiracy is the correct word - if there are possible legal issues (which I reckon there must be), then it stands to reason that FOM may wish to prevent all and sundry from obtaining access to their high definition footage of the incident. And then there is also the question of respecting Jules Bianchi, his family and his teammates. I don't think they are doing anything wrong - the people who need to see the footage will see it, those who don't will have to wait.

'Conspiracy' was the word prisonermonkeys used when I said yesterday that I thought they were covering things up. The article merely shows that there are 2 trains of thought on the matter, one of which I subscribe to... (Which he finds 'disturbing'. )

 

[TenEightyOne]

'Conspiracy' was the word prisonermonkeys used when I said yesterday that I thought they were covering things up.

Because it's the right word, that's probably why.

You say Bianchi's accident "wasn't even mentioned", which was wholly incorrect (I've watched three different channels' coverage now, they all talked about it as soon as it happened).

You said that FOM were removing videos from the net; yes they are. They always have, F1 is big money business and they own the pictures. Add to that an incident which has just happened and which is (rightly) under judicial review. Why wouldn't FOM continue to remove videos as normal?

You then say you know the rules and procedures and that somehow the FIA (who you seem to have utterly confused with FOM) didn't follow the rules and procedures by not putting the safety car out... how so?

There's nothing abnormal going on and no cover-up going on.

The real issue is the timing of the tractor recovery and the difficulty that marshalls are having in lifting the unbalanced 2014 cars. The tractor should have been and gone by the time Bianchi arrived or shouldn't have been there at all until the section was properly neutralised. There's also the possibility that Bianchi was somehow at fault; in fact there are a number of possibilities, ifs and buts that we don't have the answers to right now, I guess if you're to be believed we'll never have them.

 

[mustafur]

Because it's the right word, that's probably why.

You say Bianchi's accident "wasn't even mentioned", which was wholly incorrect (I've watched three different channels' coverage now, they all talked about it as soon as it happened).

You said that FOM were removing videos from the net; yes they are. They always have, F1 is big money business and they own the pictures. Add to that an incident which has just happened and which is (rightly) under judicial review. Why wouldn't FOM continue to remove videos as normal?

You then say you know the rules and procedures and that somehow the FIA (who you seem to have utterly confused with FOM) didn't follow the rules and procedures by not putting the safety car out... how so?

There's nothing abnormal going on and no cover-up going on.

The real issue is the timing of the tractor recovery and the difficulty that marshalls are having in lifting the unbalanced 2014 cars. The tractor should have been and gone by the time Bianchi arrived or shouldn't have been there at all until the section was properly neutralised. There's also the possibility that Bianchi was somehow at fault; in fact there are a number of possibilities, ifs and buts that we don't have the answers to right now, I guess if you're to be believed we'll never have them.

Under the current rule set nothing was really wrong with the pickup situation, there was only 1 lap in race conditions from Sutil crashing and bianchi hitting the tractor which would be roughly 2 mins, I wouldn't really fault it since the car requires someone to balance it and it was almost out of the way by the time the crash happened.

The big issue is the fact that they could do this while drivers are affectively at race speed(yellows mean slow down but it's only a marginal sector time they go by).

 

[Swagger897]

Interesting interview with some of the drivers from earlier.. Seems like Fernando and the rest sound more interested in closed cockpits than they did a few years ago..

Q: (Andrea Cremonesi - La Gazzetta dello Sport) We are talking about closed cockpits; I would like to know your feelings about this option?
FA: I probably tend to agree to at least check and try or test the idea. I think we are in 2014, we have the technology, we have aeroplanes, we have had many other samples that they use in a successful way so why not think about it? All the biggest accidents in motor sport over the last couple of years have been head injuries so it's probably one part where we are not at the top of safety. Even in my case, in 2012 at Spa, I could probably have died there in corner one if it had been 10 cms closer to my head. If the technology is there and available, and there is the possibility, I would not exclude it, for sure.

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2014/10/16465.html

EDIT:

Is there anything wrong with just trying this out for one race? Say Canada where (at least I think) there is the least likelihood of a major crash (with the exception as to what happened with Massa)..? I know that the situation that provoked this may be a one in a million, but what would it hurt to try this out? I think that is what they should have done with the V6 engines first of all. Not in testing but the first race see how the crowd likes them.

I bet we could have heard a whole bunch less complaining if we tested it out..

 

[Imari]

Is there anything wrong with just trying this out for one race? Say Canada where (at least I think) there is the least likelihood of a major crash (with the exception as to what happened with Massa)..? I know that the situation that provoked this may be a one in a million, but what would it hurt to try this out? I think that is what they should have done with the V6 engines first of all. Not in testing but the first race see how the crowd likes them.

I bet we could have heard a whole bunch less complaining if we tested it out..

What would one race tell you? If you do the race and no one dies of a head injury then they're good?

A race gives you absolutely no data as to whether closed cockpits would be helpful unless there's a major accident in which they would be relevant, and even then it's only a single data point.

And whether the crowd likes them or not is irrelevant too. With engines, maybe it would have been a good idea. With safety, the crowd can go jump in a lake if they don't like things that make the drivers safer.

If they want to find out whether closed cockpits would be helpful, then they need engineers doing the math, followed by rigorous crash testing. And that's going to be bloody expensive.

 

[Northstar]

Is there anything wrong with just trying this out for one race?

Yes, in order for a closed cockpit to have any benefits it would have to be designed to work with the other existing safety features as well as a few other new ones relating to the canopy itself. This would pretty much require building a bespoke chassis just to optimize the system, which would be insanely expensive if it was only going to be for one race. It's really an all-or-nothing scenario, you can't just do a race here or there until you are comfortable with it.