Nasty !!

[Cyberman]

Rather a nasty coincidence as this follows on from Henry Surtee's fatal accident last week which was very similar. I also saw a police program last night where a motorcyclist had a pheasant smash his visor and leave him with extensive facial injuries at 60mph(allegedly). Visors need to be much more strong and solid IMO.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/8168807.stm

[centurian]

Rather a nasty coincidence as this follows on from Henry Surtee's fatal accident last week which was very similar. I also saw a police program last night where a motorcyclist had a pheasant smash his visor and leave him with extensive facial injuries at 60mph(allegedly). Visors need to be much more strong and solid IMO.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/8168807.stm

Yeah, just seen some of the replays. Can't see why the nut was still airbourne though - there was no car in front of Massa to throw it up.

Very lucky to be alive. Despite being semi-conscious, he had enough instinct to hit the brakes, which may well have saved his life.

Not sure how much more protected the drivers can be - unless you install windscreens. Bizarre co-incidence though.

[VectraMan]

Yeah, just seen some of the replays. Can't see why the nut was still airbourne though - there was no car in front of Massa to throw it up.

It was a bit more than a nut. It looked more like a tube, about 4 inches long. But it was kind of strange that it was bouncing along the road like that.

[centurian]

It was a bit more than a nut. It looked more like a tube, about 4 inches long. But it was kind of strange that it was bouncing along the road like that.

More information

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/8169206.stm

Seems it was a spring, hence why it kept bouncing. It came off Ruebens car 4 seconds earlier, so he was probably just out of sight on the replays.

Crash speed was only 62mph instead of 162mph, so hitting the brakes probably saved his life.

Also to deal with Cyberman's original comment "Insiders believe Massa's life may have been saved by the latest generation of carbon-fibre helmets, which were introduced four years ago and are approximately twice as strong as their predecessors"


I guess in many ways, this is a success of F1 safety, not a failure... he's still alive.... much like Apollo 13 was deemed a success because the astronauts came back in one piece.

[OwlHoot]

Rather a nasty coincidence as this follows on from Henry Surtee's fatal accident last week which was very similar. I also saw a police program last night where a motorcyclist had a pheasant smash his visor and leave him with extensive facial injuries at 60mph(allegedly). Visors need to be much more strong and solid IMO.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/8168807.stm

Obviously in their obsessive drive to save weight, racing car designers are starting to shave the tolerances of parts below what is needed to ensure the contraption is safely held together with all the forces acting on it.

[VectraMan]

Seems it was a spring, hence why it kept bouncing.

LOL! They don't have coil springs, they have torsion bars, which wouldn't "bounce" as such. But of course everything is made as light as possible.

Crash speed was only 62mph instead of 162mph, so hitting the brakes probably saved his life.

I know it sounds dramatic, but in truth he probably would have been uninjured from a 162mph crash. He's injured because of the lump of metal hitting and going through his helmet, not because of the crash, something BBC news aren't capable of reporting properly.

But yes it does highlight just how good the driver safety is. I can't recall anything like this happening in all the time I've watched F1.

[cojak]

"I honestly don't believe in coincidences in life," [Barrichello] said. "Things happen for a reason and I think this is the second message.

That's because you're not a mathematician/engineer, Dear.

McLaren team boss Martin Whitmarsh added: "What happened today was a shock.

"We've got to make sure we do everything we can to make F1 as safe as it can be.

"But a spring coming off and being in a collision four seconds later is an incredible circumstance and coincidence.

That's because you're a mathematician/engineer, Dear.

Apart from things falling off cars there are probably no similarities between the two accidents (different car, different component failing, different circumstances leading up to the accident, etc).

This needs investigating obviously, but just because things appear to be the same it doesn't mean they are...

[cojak]

Obviously in their obsessive drive to save weight, racing car designers are starting to shave the tolerances of parts below what is needed to ensure the contraption is safely held together with all the forces acting on it.

Not obvious really. The amount of engineering design, stress analysis, material development to compensate for weight reduction is truly amazing.

That's one of the main reasons that F1 is so horrendously expensive to run.

[cojak]

It boils down to component failure (materials or build) or pit crew failure (more likely in my view).

We'll have to wait to see what went wrong in both accidents before any accurate conclusions can be drawn...

[VectraMan]

It boils down to component failure (materials or build) or pit crew failure (more likely in my view).

You're probably right about that. Failures cost results (Barichello lost his best run, and Button could only do one run on too too much fuel because they were checking his suspension), so they don't skimp on safety to save weight. In fact, F1 cars are amazingly reliable these days, and the Brawns have had hardly any technical problems with this year's car.

Surtees' accident was caused by debris (i.e. a wheel) from somebody else's accident coming back on track, which is entirely different. That situation was addressed a few years ago with the introduction of wheel tethers, but they don't always work and just shows that no safety measure is every 100%.