|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
27 May 2016, 16:23 (Ref:3644896) | #51 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,745
|
hard to say. people deal with grief in different ways.
so i hope that this process helps them with closure and if they can achieve some measure of it then perhaps they too will also benefit from the process. but agreed...my personal opinion is also that they wont find it from a trial and as you say a trial may even do more harm then good. its all just sad really. |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
27 May 2016, 16:40 (Ref:3644901) | #52 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,745
|
switching focus a bit, of course the family feels one way as they lost a lot more than any of us have in this situation, but as a motor sports community does anyone actually think less of JB because of the findings from the report? rather does he need to be exonerated as it were?
a tragic loss of course, possibly one that could have been avoided and lessons to be learnt for sure but for me reading a report (or the parts of it i have read) that lays blame with the driver in no way diminishes what i know of JB's life and what he was trying to accomplish with it. must say it saddens me to think that there may be an element here which causes the Bianchi family to believe that in some way it does. |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
27 May 2016, 17:38 (Ref:3644918) | #53 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,864
|
Quote:
I don't think less of JB. I doubt any driver thinks before doing something voluntarily (picking a particular line, etc.) think "This is going to cause me to crash". We have any number of crashes during a season by drivers of all experience levels and ultimately the drivers are the largest factor in making them happen. This is one that just lead to his own death. Then the question might be "He should have known better than to take that risk". I expect he was taking a calculated risk and as mentioned in a post above... At this level of the sport, the incentive is to not lift to fight another day, but to push the envelope and get away with what you can. Especially if you are new driver. But at the end of the day, he likely took a risk and paid a price. IMHO, its a bit of a red herring. At the risk of feeding the potential trainwreck... If I was his family, I would have confidence in who JB was and not focus on trying to clear his name. Don't focus on if people think it was his fault or not as IMHO, there is no adequate answer there (i.e. would an apology from various entities or individuals really help or even be sincere?). If I had decided to go forward with the legal action that the result (and his legacy) would be if there was a chance for a push for improved safety. Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
27 May 2016, 21:02 (Ref:3644957) | #54 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,447
|
I feel for the family, and I'm sad for Jules who was by all accounts a lovely guy and a talented racer. But... he went off under yellow flags and nearly wiped out three marshals. No-one else did. Which suggests the conditions weren't at fault, the driving was.
Having stood trackside and watched drivers blatantly ignoring flags and putting me in unnecessary danger, my sympathy becomes diminished. Sorry, but the legal action is a travesty on the basis of shifting the blame. |
||
__________________
Bill Bryson: It is no longer permitted to be stupid and slow. You must choose one or the other. |
27 May 2016, 21:59 (Ref:3644965) | #55 | |||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,705
|
Whilst I have the utmost sympathy for the Bianchi family, I fear this action will do nothing but prolong the hurt and grieving process they are going through.
I've quoted Mike Harte's post here because he has expressed my views on this in a much better fashion that I could. Quote:
I don't like saying it, but it was Jules that was in error - the error being he hadn't sufficiently adjusted his driving to the conditions, that resulted in the departure from Control. The events that followed that departure from control were tragic, but they were one of a number of possible crash outcomes but each and everyone of them could only come about after control was lost. |
|||
|
27 May 2016, 22:20 (Ref:3644970) | #56 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,884
|
|||
__________________
The older I get, the faster I was. |
27 May 2016, 22:48 (Ref:3644975) | #57 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,593
|
The loss is still there as is my sympathy.
I doubt much good will come of this, but there will be much heartache and the negatives will probably outweigh the positives. |
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
27 May 2016, 23:00 (Ref:3644979) | #58 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,175
|
Quote:
That was another case where I thought an instant safety car should have been used, but wasnt. |
|||
|
28 May 2016, 00:06 (Ref:3644985) | #59 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,721
|
It's hard to apportion the blame to the deceased, but, as others have pointed out, he went off where others didn't. I still think there are questions to be asked about the presence of the recovery vehicle and/or the lack of presence of a safety car, but poor Jules lost it. There was no mechanical failure of the kind that did for, say, Jim Clark or Mark Donohue.
|
||
|
28 May 2016, 05:12 (Ref:3644996) | #60 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
Quote:
Overriding details like this do matter. Is there a guarantee of survival had the vehicle not been there? No. But it's presence did make the likelihood of survival far lower. If there is no decently explainable reason why that vehicle was there without an FCY, then it's presence is an overriding factor. These factors can, and often DO, shift the responsibility for a given accident. Suppose for a moment that Bianchi HAD gone off due to a failure, or that he had tried to slow down for the flags and made a mistake while trying to do so. Is the presence of the crane still an irrelevant factor? Of course not. The reason he went off is simply not as big an issue as the fact that something was there which, by any reasonable measurement, should not have been. Let's step away from Bianchi's crash to explain it a bit differently... If I went off the road and into a ditch, and in doing so hit something laid across that ditch that was not legally authorized to be there(say, a large piece of pipe for a construction project that was never approved), the reason I went off is not relevant to who is responsible for any injuries I suffer as a result of hitting that pipe. Whether I lost control or went off due to a burst tire, getting pushed off, or anything else only effects whether or not I get cited for failure to control my vehicle. The pipe is an overriding factor - I may have been injured just as badly if it hadn't been there, but we only know that my injuries came as a direct result of hitting that pipe. Because of this, whoever put the pipe now is at fault for the resultant injuries. It should be no different here. |
|||
|
28 May 2016, 06:13 (Ref:3645000) | #61 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,593
|
There are two aspects as you point out. There is the cause of the accident and the situation that led to the severity of the injuries.
It's an interesting analogy. Does it make a difference if the pipe was authorised to be there and there was a speed restriction in place? The road and the track are different so we probably can't develop the analogy much further. |
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
28 May 2016, 06:16 (Ref:3645002) | #62 | |
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 186
|
The pipe example is a good one but what if there was a sign saying "slow down potential hazard and men working" would there still be no blame on you?
We have all seen the video of the crash and I would like to know what we would say if JB had gone off 3m further to the left. The marshal would nod have moved in time and would be dead instantly for sure. Bianchi "probably" would have walked away. |
|
|
28 May 2016, 06:42 (Ref:3645007) | #63 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,525
|
I don't think FormulaFox's analogy really stands up as the piece of heavy machinery and marshals were legitimately meant to be there at the time and the double waived yellow flags alerted the drivers that they were there.
His analogy may work if a foreign object was on the track and it was not meant to be there, for example a manhole or drain cover, and there was no warning. |
||
__________________
ยินดีที่ได้รู้จัก |
28 May 2016, 09:57 (Ref:3645030) | #64 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,864
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
See what I'm getting at a bit better here? |
|||||
|
28 May 2016, 10:34 (Ref:3645038) | #65 | |
Veteran
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,500
|
This will prolong the family's grieving period for months if not years.
Heavy price to pay going legal on this matter. |
|
__________________
CanAmMan |
28 May 2016, 11:02 (Ref:3645045) | #66 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,593
|
FormulaFox I see what you are getting at. Which is why I noted the two elements to this.
There are just two different points of view here. One that when a yellow is out the driver needs to take responsibility to drive fully in control. The other is that this isn't relevant here and the race control should take full control take responsibility away from the driver (SC or red flag) before sending out a hazard to clear up a previous issue. As with most things there is no clear cut answer. Both situations could be relevant in different scenarios. If Bianchi hadn't gone off under yellow there is no issue. If the crane wasn't there then the consequences are lower. As you say. #43 |
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
28 May 2016, 11:03 (Ref:3645046) | #67 | |||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,593
|
Quote:
#43 |
|||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
29 May 2016, 04:09 (Ref:3645359) | #68 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 6,635
|
And Schumi's near miss in Brazil.
|
||
|
29 May 2016, 04:13 (Ref:3645360) | #69 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 6,635
|
Quote:
Manor in these terms reminds me too much Simtek team in 1994 (Roland and Andrea accidents). Last edited by Mekola; 29 May 2016 at 04:18. |
|||
|
29 May 2016, 04:23 (Ref:3645362) | #70 | |
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 197
|
I think the distance is sufficient not to impact upon the present Manor iteration.
|
|
|
2 Jun 2016, 15:17 (Ref:3646582) | #71 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 753
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and says 'Can I join you?' |
2 Jun 2016, 15:34 (Ref:3646588) | #72 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,565
|
Quote:
However, once he left the track and was on a slick surface with no grip whatsoever, Bianchi should have removed the pressure from the accelerator, in my opinion. |
|||
|
2 Jun 2016, 18:42 (Ref:3646642) | #73 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,652
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Incognito: An Italian phrase meaning Nice Gearchange! |
2 Jun 2016, 20:55 (Ref:3646685) | #74 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,565
|
True. His fronts had locked up, but his rears were to some extent still driving him onwards. But it couldn't have helped, though.
|
||
|
3 Jun 2016, 05:22 (Ref:3646736) | #75 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,211
|
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Australian Grand Prix Corporation To Launch Legal Action Against A1gp | GTRMagic | A1GP | 34 | 22 Sep 2005 04:27 |
Here we go again - car makers to launch legal action against the FIA | Super Tourer | Formula One | 1 | 14 Oct 2004 14:56 |
Legal action against Ferrari | paulzinho | Formula One | 28 | 20 May 2002 11:18 |
Legal Action | Speedworx | ChampCar World Series | 24 | 27 Feb 2002 20:29 |
AVESCO Commence Legal Action Against Calder Park Raceway | RaceTime | Australasian Touring Cars. | 4 | 7 Sep 2001 23:35 |