A Marshal was killed in the incident

[Tristan]

My point precisely

[Ralf's Girl]

What a tragic accident. Just months after a marshal died at Monza, another one dies, and in the first race of the season. And it must have taken courage for TGF, DC and Barrichello to discuss that in front of the media in the press conference.

But this accident (yet again) begs the question - what is the point of wheel tethers? I (and I am sure many other people) have been saying that they don't work ever since they were first introduced. Yesterday I saw on ITV's coverage that they have introduced double wheel tethers...fat lot of use they were. There doesn't seem to be any way of keeping wheels on the cars in accidents, because this is the second time inside 7 months that a track marshal has been hit and killed by a flying tyre.

My thoughts are with his family and friends.

[Valve Bounce]

It is up to the race organisers to provide a reasonable degree of safety for both marshals and spectators. In this particular area I had the impression that the spectators may have been too close to the track, and reports are that there was a gap in the fence. The TV this morning did show a gap in the fence. Also, I am not totally convinced that they are using the right type of mesh - a diamond patterned tripple twist mesh with some give would not have unravelled. The tripple twist mesh is used for boulder fences, and the Geotechnical company GEOBRUGG have films of huge boulders rolling down mountain slopes being retained by such fences.
It is never too late to review safety procedures and provisions, and the FIA will be doing just that.

[Schumacher]

Originally posted by Valve Bounce
It is up to the race organisers to provide a reasonable degree of safety for both marshals and spectators. In this particular area I had the impression that the spectators may have been too close to the track, and reports are that there was a gap in the fence.

Moving the fans back will just lead to more *****in about F1 being boring. Accidents like these will happen especially when you have drivers who are closely matched in terms of machinery. Everyone wants to beat everyone else. Thats what F1 is all about. I say again accidents like these happen. They`re unfortunate but we cant start putting barriers on the fans etc. As for the Stewards they are brave men and women. But they know the risks of the job when they come to the track in the morning.

[Valve Bounce]

I certainly hope you are not suggesting that there shouldn't be barriers in front of the fans!! On many circuits, the spectators are much further from the track. I fully agree that standing right next to the track with a screaming F1 car going past metres away would be the most exciting thing any fan would want, even with a barrier in front, but I don't think I would like to stand that close to the track without a barrier.

[Diabando]

The fence around Albert Park is excellent. It was a freak situation.

The fence is constructed with a concrete base which come up roughly to my chest (and I stand at 5.2). The (very strong) wire must go well over 6 foot above that. Wherever there is a marshall station, there is a gap between the concrete and the mesh of about 30cm, and a section across (about 5 foot), so the marshalls, when there is an accident, can slide through it and attend the car/driver with fire equipment etc.

Thats the thing...it is just a freak accident, for the tyre to go through the gap (which it did), it would have almost been a perfect fit, maybe a centimetre either side...it a complete fluke that it went through..that the tyre hit the fence at that exact point, height etc etc.

Its a double edged sword really...if you close the holes, you give the marshalls no access to the track, and therefore no help in accidents, which is WHY they are there!...I would perhaps think that maybe they can close the holes and replace them with gates...or something...something has to be changed.

As far as the spectators go...the gap between the track and the spectators is huge, and in such a huge incident, you are bound to get hit by a bit of debris. YOU choose to stand alongside the fence, and you are made aware of the consequences before you enter the track. The mere fact that the spectators escaped with just minor cuts and bruises is testament to the safety of the fence. Where I always sit, in the Fangio stand, there is a marshall hole right in front of us, and I have always been fully aware of the danger of debris. I CHOOSE to sit there.

I feel just awful for the Marshalls family - it is indeed a tragedy, and one perhaps that should never have happened.

I am sure that next year, the fence will not contain the marshall station holes. I am not sure what they will do, but I am sure the engineers will find an excellent solution.

[Schumacher]

No Valve Bounce Im not suggesting that we remove the barriers that already exist! What Im saying is that while the barriers may look small to some - they're reasonably useful and we dont need any more. We can improve the safety of the marshalls by FORCING them in some way to stay on their posts. This marshall like the last one was not on his designated post - while this is a tragedy - maybe if the marshalls themselves would follow the rules - we would`nt need to worry about putting in new barriers etc.

[Valve Bounce]

Diabando - I suppose a vertical gap with the opening facing the direction the cars are travelling. Sort of an opening with an overlap. I don't know how to make it clearer. Sorry. In the long run, I suppose the flag marshals in F1 will be replaced by some lighting system together with the remote computer controlled system that will be introduced in 2003. I personally favour a different mesh system, (see my post above) because some debris did puncture a hole in the mesh. I have had some experience with designing boulder fences, and I suppose the application cannot be that different. I fully realise tripple twist mesh is extremely expensive, but it can be erected year after year if not damaged. They are guaranteed for about 50 years.

[Crash Test]

There was a rather massive photo of the moment of impact on the front page of the newspaper this morning.

Yes it did go through the gap in the fence, and the fence did deform a little (an F1 tyre would fit through the hole if it were in an upright position).

I know up here on the Gold Coast, they replaced the marshals gaps that they still use down in Melbourne with a smaller square area, with a strengthened square steel section border. The edges of the fence at Melbourne wasn't strengthened at all.

Perhaps the freakest thing is that if Jacques had hit 30cm further down, the contact would have been made with the retatining post, and i doubt that poor bloke would have lost his life.

Another thing, the gap between the concrete and the crowd is no different to the similar areas on permanant circuits. In fact many that I know would have a shorter distance. Also i see the question of why they were standing there anyways. Even if you eliminate flag marshals, and put them at a safer place, you are still going to have fire marshals, and recovery teams/doctors who are going to be close to the action. Plus this guy was a crowd marshal- he has to stand between the crowd and the track, that's his job..

[Hans.ca]

Valvebounce is quite correct in suggesting that the fence should have an overlap. I would suggest at least 5 feet and reinforced. The outside fence, going in the direction of the cars, would be the overlapping fence. The space between needs to be at least 2 feet wide so that a marshall can get thru quickly. I have seen this used on many circuites. As photographers we always carried a wire cutter to get an opening big enough to stick a lens thru. Probably was not such a good idea.
Lights to replace flags was tried at Mosport at corner five. It was not to popular with the drivers. They used to tell us that they could tell from the way the marshall was waving the flags just how bad the situation was. I tend to agree with the drivers. When you see a marshall almost jumping up and down waving the flags you know you better pay attention.
I sure would like to find out a little more about this triple twist wire mesh that is mentioned in another post. Like what gauge is it and who makes it? Is it galvanized, hot dip or electro plate? Any answers would be appresiated.

Moving the spectators back does not work to well. You just need to see Paul Ricard track, the spectators there used to complain all the time.

[R]

I think the suggestion by Valve Bounce to have overlapping fences sounds like the way to go. I had no idea such holes in the barriers that we've heard of in this case even existed.

Replacing flag marshalls with lights sounds like a bad idea for the reason Hans.ca mentioned.

[Crash Test]

I will never forget a case on the Gold Coast in 1993, where the hole in the fence saved a marhsals life. During a Nascar support race, there was a spill, and a couple of marshals went out onto the track to clean up the mess. By the time they got it out of the way, the field was coming back around...and one of the guys had to dive through the hole. Had it not been there, he would have been minced. Also if there was a flap, or some other cage that would be difficult to get in and out of, it might not have ended so nicely...

[Valve Bounce]

I'm sorry but I don't have the specific details of the tripple twist mesh - I don't work overseas anymore where the specs are. To give you some idea, to form a mesh, if the wire is only twisted half a turn, as soon as the wire is cut, the mesh will unravel. This is the cheap option that all contractors used to propose to me as an alternative, which we routinely rejected. The tripple twist means that any single strand is woven in such a way that it goes away from any point not in a straight line, so that if a strand is cut, the mesh will not unravel. Sorry if this is unclear. I cannot remember the gauge but it is thicker than the normal fences around commercial properties. Yes the wire is galvanised. Of course, you can also use a cable mesh which is extremely expensive, but strong enough to hold back an F1 car coming at it front on at high speed. It is just a matter of where one ends in expenditure because there is a helluva lot of fencing around the track. Someone said that the people were standing a long way from the track, but I checked the photo, and that fence was only about 3 metres from the track. I suppose where you have people standing so close to the track, they will inevitably be showered with flying bits of razor sharp carbon fibre shards in this type of a crash, and this is the risk they must be aware of. Personally, I would stand there myself, and enjoy the cars and the sound. I just want to put it into perspective that I don't want to criticise anyone - this is constructive in approach. Don't forget that I was distraught when I started this thread.

[Sonatrap]

Sad news ... but **** happens!

Nobody is forced to drive ,nobody is forced to watch at the trackside, or help out ...so stay away if you´re not sure.
F1 is a shadow of its former self because as the danger decreases so does the sport .Suck out the danger and you are left with a mere spectacle...we are nearly there anyway.
It´s unbelievable that people are calling for more automation as a result of this sad incident (that obviously no one would wish on anyone).Let drivers drive.

If it goes on like this they might aswell send all the drivers to a glorified arcade to remote control 3/4 scale cars around spectatorless tracks with cameras all over the place.
R. I.P. MARSHALL AT Melbourne....but if the way some think things through gathers momentum R.I.P. the glorious sport of F1 as practised by Fangio, Clark, Stewart, Lauda ,Senna etc etc.

[Valve Bounce]

We all understand that no one is forced into F1 one way or the other. However, I see no reason why we cannot make things safer for the marshals as a matter of utmost priority. I cannot see how F1 would suffer if we made it safer for them by giving them better protection. I could not care less if not a single person is killed in the future in F1 and I don't see how this could detract from the sport. Death happens only because of the nature of the sport - the speed of the machines. Death is not a prerequisite for the enjoyment of F1.

[Roy2]

Another cyberspace-tough guy. That man's life was worth more than the entire history of F1. The price others have paid for our enjoyment is far beyond anything we are entitled to. You and I have been getting our jollies at the cost of other peoples' lives.

The level of carnage in the old days of Fangio, Clark, et al, would never be tolerated today. Incremental safety improvements have allowed motor racing to survive, are the reason why society has continued to tolerate it. Today's level of carnage will not be tolerated in the future, so it's imperative that next year it will be impossible for similar accident to cause a similar death.

So whether you like it or not, safety will be discussed in these forums by those who value motor racing.

[Tristan]

I think we all agree then... volenti non fit injura, as they say

[Liz]

I find myself agreeing with Mr. Mallett (believe it or not) - this is not garland dancing, this is motor sport and this is dangerous business. Everyone hates to admit that sometimes things just happen and there isn't any way to keep it safe 100%...the real problem with the wheel tethers is just as has been stated; they are made for low speed crashes, and they do stop a lot of danger, although there is an added danger of the tethered wheel coming back into the survival cell and braining the pilot. All we can do is our best.

[Tristan]

And I find myself agreeing with LIZ!!??? Whatever next!

[Valve Bounce]

I think that the double tether is supposed to prevent the wheel from coming back to hit the driver. At the speeds the present F1 cars race at, it is impossible to eliminate the element of danger or the likelihood of a fatal accident. However, God forbid that we return to the days of Clark, Collins, Petersen, Bandini, or Lauda et al. (or even Senna, for that matter). And I would challenge anyone to tell me that F1 was any more exciting in those days. For those who need reminding, Lauda not only suffered severe facial burns, he actually breathed hot burning fumes into his lungs. How on earth can that make F1 more exciting, I ask you.

[Wrex]

Sonatrap, I think they call it progress. I for one, do not watch formula 1 for BLOOD, especially from volunteers that give up there time in the name of safety.

I agree that Motorsport is dangerous, but constantly looking for new ways to make it safer is imperative to the sports survival. Air travel is alot safer than 30 years ago, because they learn from every crash that happens. Should they have accepted that planes drop from the sky and concentrated on speed and price?

The sport has suffered a little, but as I said, that's progress.

There is a cost we must pay for motorsport, preventable deaths are too expensive.

[Sonatrap]

´And I would challenge anyone to tell me that F1 was any more exciting in those days´

It most definitely was.But not because of the horrific accidents like the infamous Lauda crash but because of the racing:

- A time when races were won on the track , not in the pit lane.

- When overtaking was not a rare delicacy but a main dish

- When cars were immediately identifiable because of their shape and their sound and not the product of an inch thick rule book that designs most of the car for you

-When changing gear was a fundamental part of the drivers art

- When drivers and teams were not merely a commodity to be traded

-When drivers thanks to an almost complete absence of driver aids could show what they could really do ( not just when it rains ) and not hold each other up (which is so completely out of order).

Now , all this and much more contributed to a more exciting sport but , unfortunately it was a far more dangerous one.The thought of any one killing themselves while participating in what is a mere sport is absolutely appaling .It was then, and it is now.But the whole thing has lost its way and gone far too far .The proverbial baby was thrown out with the bath water ...I believe in the pursuit of sanitising the sport for largely commercial interests.

The dilemma is that we should be inclined to lessen danger where we see the opportunity but at the same time if all the danger were erradicated it would cease to be a sport.There is a balance and to find it more people need to take an interest in the history of the sport and uncover it's core values.These must also be taken into consideration.I wouldn't call it progress if what was the greatest sport in the world evolves into a mere occassion.

Sunday´s tragedy seems to have been a freak accident. But what about the refuelling that goes on in the interests of providing an easily understandable spectacle for the TV viewer( to compensate for the lack of action on the track).That's an accident waiting to happen.How far has the sport progressed if it tolerates this lethal risk for commercial reasons .

And BTW if any consenting adult dies during a race it is not a price they paid for my enjoyment.It's a risk they took in the pusuit of their own gratification.

[Valve Bounce]

OK, let's think this post through to see where the excitement has gone, and how the sucking out of danger has left us with a mere spectacle, OK??
1.Time when races were won on the track and not in the pit lane - now how did the sucking of danger got to do with that? The reason why cars cannot overtake so easily nowadays is because they are more evenly matched in terms of power, and more so because of the huge rear wings which cause severe turbulance and make slipstreaming extremely difficult.
2.When overtaking was not a rare delicacy but a main dish - well I don't see how sucking the danger out here affected the taste of the dish. In fact, if anyone tried to overtake nowadays, it is far more dangerous as Jacques found out last weekend.
3.When cars were easily identifiable by their shape and sound - I don't see how the sucking of danger had to do with this - moreover, many cars had the same engine in those days, like the Coventry climax which sounded like sh!t compared with today's cars, or when most of the cars had a Cosworth Ford V8 which in no way compares with today's V10's in sound, although not because the danger was sucked out of them,
4. When changing gears was a fundamental part of the driver's art - here again, this was not caused by the sucking of danger out of anything, but by the development of geaboxes so that the gears can be changed faster without mistake, all in an effort to improve the efficiency of the car and improve lap times.
5, When drivers and teams were not a commodity to be traded - again, this has nothing to do with sucking of danger etc. but because F1 has evolved into a business and is no longer a sport, although I fail to see how this affects the excitement of a race,
6.When drivers , thanks to a lack of drivers aids could show what they could really do - again this has nothing to do with sucking of danger but has resulted from the development of F1 cars which it is impossible to legislate against. This includes trax, and all the other computer aids, but which may actually make the cars more evenly matched and increase excitement.

The fact that all the above contributed to a more exciting sport is not because of the sucking of danger out of the sport but because conditions and cars were different then. The fact that danger is lessened now is because the cars have been strengthened beyond anything imagined possible then, brakes improved, fuel cells fitted to cars, tyres improved, ... I can go on for a lot more. The fact that these cars go at such high speeds make it impossible to eradicate the danger no matter how hard we try.

Now I want to explain this post for a very good reason - the policy here is that if anyone does not agree with a post, you attack the post, not the poster.
At no time have I tried to insult or abuse anyone, I want to be very clear on this point. We have here a friendly forum - you don't have to agree with anyone to post anything. If you don't agree with any post, feel free to attack the post.

If you want more excitement, introduce rules to minimise the size of that rear wing - that's all it would take. AND you will have overtaking and all the excitement back. Again this has nothing to do with danger - just common sense.
Danger or death is not a prerequisite to the enjoyment of F1, it is a by product of the extremes in power and speed of F1 cars, and as long as they can go that fast and sound that great, F1 will be exciting if we just get rid of those damn huge rear wings.

[Airhead]

Well, this is a good one to wade into..

The danger to the drivers has decreased over time. As witnessed by the violence of Jacques crash. The cars are safer by far than thos of even a few years ago.

I don't believe this decreases the enjoyment for the rest of us. The reason behind the lack of overtaking needs to be analysed in the context of the cars as well as the tracks. For most street circuits, the speed of the cars has out grown the track widths.

This to me is where the next step in safety needs to be made. With the tracks not the cars in issolation. I hasten to add that developing safer cars should continue.

I also agree that the unfortunate Marshall was doing something he obviously wanted to do for his own enjoyment. But I doubt he would have done it if he thought there was even a remote chance of being killed. I wouldn't, would you?

[Delman]

From myself, and I suspect (and hope) all other readers and contributors to this forum, the most sincere condolences and commiseration to the family and friends of the marshall who died doing what he loved most.
I had a similar marshall stationed directly in front of me (opposite the Jaguar Pits) and the gap to which everyone is referring was in fact a horizontal slit about twelve inches high (300mm) and the width of one of the fence mesh panels (maybe 10ft (3m)).
A small enough orifice through which it would be hard to imagine the passage of anything large enough to do real damage, until you take a look at 1/2mv2 and realise that it doesn't take a really large piece of anything to do damage at those kind of speeds. I must say that the gap in front of me seemed to be crying out for a hinged flap, allowing the marshall (mine was equipped with an extinguisher) access to the track, at the same time stopping anything with any size coming through.
I know, it's all very well being wise after the event, but with motor racing, Murphy's first Law needs a rider.
'If anything can go wrong it will (and at the worst possible time)"