Goodwood 74th Member's Meeting

[John Turner]

Ooh, Brian, I have tapping away in the back of my mind from long ago when I was in insurance the term 'proximate cause'. The injury could be said to have flowed from the accident since had it not happened, the injury would not have either. I'll shut up now!

[Normal Bloke]

[

[gary396]

Statement from Goodwood today:

Statement: We're pleased to report that Michiel Smits is now recovering at home with his family after an incident in the Bruce McLaren Trophy when his Lola T70 was struck by stray bodywork from another car causing him to crash.

Speaking today Michiel said 'I am enjoying my own bed at home at the moment, my injuries are serious but will heal in 3 months.

'Given the situation I am a happy person as it could have been much worse. The car will be repaired ASAP to join races when I can, I am already looking forward to next year's event.'

Goodwood wishes Michiel a full and speedy recovery.

[Teletubby]

Originally Posted by Brian A

As far as I know, the broken collar bone sustained by Stephen Bond in the Lotus 18 was NOT a result of the accident.

He landed in the entrance on the pedestrian tunnel hanging upside down, the injury was caused when he was released from his belts and fell down.......

or so the story goes.

The story is wrong. 😉

[Rudernst]

Originally Posted by Teletubby

The story is wrong. ��

I suspected that

the story was to good to be true

RE

[midgetman]

The editorial by Damien Smith in "Motor Sport" today covers the incidents, made more personal by the fact that he and his son were spectating at the site of the Cooper/Lotus interface when it happened. It makes sobering reading, and 3 points particularly sound familiar:

1. He finds it unacceptable for organisers to hide behind the "motor racing is dangerous and you spectate at your own risk" clause
2. He calls for graded licences similar to the FIA's sports car gradings
3. He openly questions the balance between circuit safety and period accuracy, recognising it is a problem without coming up with answers

Nice to know I'm not a lone voice...

[John Turner]

My son wrote similarly in last weeks MotorSport News (pg13) and I don't think there has been any suggestion during this that you were by any means a lone voice Max

[Moneyseeker]

Originally Posted by midgetman

The editorial by Damien Smith in "Motor Sport" today covers the incidents, made more personal by the fact that he and his son were spectating at the site of the Cooper/Lotus interface when it happened. It makes sobering reading, and 3 points particularly sound familiar:

1. He finds it unacceptable for organisers to hide behind the "motor racing is dangerous and you spectate at your own risk" clause
2. He calls for graded licences similar to the FIA's sports car gradings
3. He openly questions the balance between circuit safety and period accuracy, recognising it is a problem without coming up with answers

Nice to know I'm not a lone voice...

Agreed and aside from the drivers and spectators, Lord March was very lucky and as other race organsiers have found, eventually that luck runs out.

If we are going to recreate racing from the 50's and 60's almost as it was in period then you will have period accidents and we all know the outcome of many of those. As much as for the future of Goodwood safety needs looking at and I am sure the MSA will look at all the footage and reports. it needs looking at because if a car goes into the crowd area again and spectators are killed or badly injured, that will be the end of racing there with the circuit as it currently is. IMO

[bauble]

Personally I can not recall any incidents, but were any spectators killed during the circuits hey day?

[GORDON STREETER]

I have spectated and competed at Goodwood over the last 50 odd years and personally I can't remember anyone being killed in an actual race. Seen loads of awful crashes that although looked "fatal" luckily they escaped although some have been badly injured.
The track is "what it is" although in the heat of the moment self preservation seems to go out of the window with some drivers ! What I have noticed is that a lot of the "incidents" seem to happen on the slower corners with the chicane being one of the major culprits. Yes people have been killed there but very few and mainly in testing, Bruce McLaren (car failure) and I seem to remember a F3 guy (Fabi) ? that crashed into the barriers because it was icy ! also a girl in a Caterham at a sprint. It would be a pity to see it stopped as It's certainly a circuit that keeps a lot of people interested in motor racing, compared to your average clubbie event at most other UK circuits the numbers spectating have to be seen to be believed !

[bauble]

I have spectated and competed at Goodwood over the last 50 odd years and personally I can't remember anyone being killed in an actual race. Seen loads of awful crashes that although looked "fatal" luckily they escaped although some have been badly injured.

Sadly Gordon, your memory is faulty, as I can recall at least three fatalities during racing at the circuit; One of my youthful heroes, Mike Keen in the 1955 Nine Hour Race, Bert Rogers and Tony Dennis at the 1956 Easter Meeting.

Not happy memories.

[Moneyseeker]

We live in a different world now and Damien makes a good point in the MS piece that organisers can't just stamp motor racing is dangerous on a ticket. If the Lotus 18 crash had occured at Revival both the tunnel and the disabled viewing area would have had a greater number of people and the subsequent greater chance of injury or worse.

Many people who buy a ticket and stand where this ticket allows will presume that it is safe to do so by the organisers, I think what Damien is alluding to is that the 'customer' can't neccesarily make the decision based on a line on the back of the ticket.

I am sure Lord March and the team at Goodwood will look carefully at what happened and it may be as simple as closing the tunnel during races, although that won't stop car parts going into viewing areas.

Whatever, like all of us I would prefer that Goodwood made subtle changes now and we are not debating a more trafgic incident in the future and more radical alterations are imposed.

I also agree with the comments that some of the cars are simply too fast for Goodwood, racing ended there in period for a reason and the cars are now faster in many cases than in period - as threads on this forum are discussing.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by bauble

Sadly Gordon, your memory is faulty, as I can recall at least three fatalities during racing at the circuit; One of my youthful heroes, Mike Keen in the 1955 Nine Hour Race, Bert Rogers and Tony Dennis at the 1956 Easter Meeting.

Not happy memories.

Not faulty bauble I did state that "I" couldn't remember as I am only a "spring chicken" compared to some and only spectated there in it's last 5 years of racing before it was stopped
As a thought several drivers were killed in period not through the track being "dangerous" but the lack of safety equipment that has been made mandatory in todays racing thankfully.

[bauble]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

Not faulty bauble I did state that "I" couldn't remember as I am only a "spring chicken" compared to some and only spectated there in it's last 5 years of racing before it was stopped
As a thought several drivers were killed in period not through the track being "dangerous" but the lack of safety equipment that has been made mandatory in todays racing thankfully.

Apologies Gordon, as an aging rooster I do go back a lot further than your youthful self, my first visit being in 1952.
I seem to recall that the infield was often ploughed and caused spinning cars to dig in and overturn, and I think this was a factor in both the Rogers and Dennis accidents.
But is was a long time ago.

[andy97]

Originally Posted by Moneyseeker

We live in a different world now and Damien makes a good point in the MS piece that organisers can't just stamp motor racing is dangerous on a ticket. If the Lotus 18 crash had occured at Revival both the tunnel and the disabled viewing area would have had a greater number of people and the subsequent greater chance of injury or worse.

Many people who buy a ticket and stand where this ticket allows will presume that it is safe to do so by the organisers, I think what Damien is alluding to is that the 'customer' can't neccesarily make the decision based on a line on the back of the ticket.

I am sure Lord March and the team at Goodwood will look carefully at what happened and it may be as simple as closing the tunnel during races, although that won't stop car parts going into viewing areas.

Whatever, like all of us I would prefer that Goodwood made subtle changes now and we are not debating a more trafgic incident in the future and more radical alterations are imposed.

I also agree with the comments that some of the cars are simply too fast for Goodwood, racing ended there in period for a reason and the cars are now faster in many cases than in period - as threads on this forum are discussing.

Agree with all of this and it may be worth comparing the reaction at Goodwood to that at Shoreham Aur Show last year. At Shoreham non spectators were killed nevertheless it has alerted the authorities to review how historic performance aircraft are displayed in the future. In brief, my understanding is that high energy displays are no longer permissible and aircraft such as the Hunter will be limited to fly pasts unless displayed by full time professional and authorised/ licenced operators (eg the military) who have had their display routine approved.

If the Lotus 18 had crashed into a crowded area resulting in several deaths there may have been a similar (enforced) response.

Rallying has also had some very significant changes forced upon it as a result of a couple of recent accidents.

The motor sport authorities and organisers need to look carefully at the risks of our sport, and the lessons identified from recent incidents, to continually improve safety and reduce risk so that our sport can continue. If they don't, it may be taken out of our hands.

[grantp]

Originally Posted by andy97

If they don't, it may be taken out of our hands.

I think that trend will be inevitable - the only question is "How quickly?"

On the other hand "they" have yet to ban the more dangerous amateur passtimes like skiing and horse riding. Indeed highly injurious activities like cycling are actively encouraged, so perhaps there is some hope ....

[andy97]

Originally Posted by grantp

I think that trend will be inevitable - the only question is "How quickly?"

On the other hand "they" have yet to ban the more dangerous amateur passtimes like skiing and horse riding. Indeed highly injurious activities like cycling are actively encouraged, so perhaps there is some hope ....

But Grant, the key difference with those sports is that they rarely have incidents that cause danger to a number of spectators, just to the participants.

[midgetman]

Sorry, post deleted.

[Moneyseeker]

Originally Posted by andy97

Agree with all of this and it may be worth comparing the reaction at Goodwood to that at Shoreham Aur Show last year. At Shoreham non spectators were killed nevertheless it has alerted the authorities to review how historic performance aircraft are displayed in the future. In brief, my understanding is that high energy displays are no longer permissible and aircraft such as the Hunter will be limited to fly pasts unless displayed by full time professional and authorised/ licenced operators (eg the military) who have had their display routine approved.

If the Lotus 18 had crashed into a crowded area resulting in several deaths there may have been a similar (enforced) response.

Rallying has also had some very significant changes forced upon it as a result of a couple of recent accidents.

The motor sport authorities and organisers need to look carefully at the risks of our sport, and the lessons identified from recent incidents, to continually improve safety and reduce risk so that our sport can continue. If they don't, it may be taken out of our hands.

Indeed and it's worth noting that the restrictions placed on air displays and the subsequent increase in event insurance will have a knock on effect for classic car and motorsport events that combine air and track activity, certainly some of the smaller ones and some of the smaller promoters have lost the appetite for it.

The comparison goes further, in the early days after the Shoreham there was much huffing and puffing amongst the air show officianado's, not wanting restrictions on air shows and pointing to the safety record of air shows, when in fact a Gnat jet had crashed at Oulton Pk CarFest only a short while before and freak accidents, etc. When of course a freak accident is even more unaccountable and hard to plan for so in theory would lead to even tighter restrictions.

Having worked in the motoring events industry for years, I can tell you that any event director breathes a sigh of relief if they get through any event that involves large numbers of public combined with any moving vehicles without incident and it's also worth pointing out that two examples of tragedy's at non- motorsport events are a lady who was killed when hit by a horse and carriage at a country show when the horse was spooked and bolted and a youngster killed by a traction engine at a steam show when moving at walking pace.

Public events are dangerous per se because of the huge number of variables, motor racing and air shows get more focus on incidents because they are seen as inherently potentially dangerous activities anyway.

I was part of the event team that ran the London to Brighton Veteran Run and I recall when we first sat down at our planning meeting we said - 500 pre-1905 cars, doing a 60 mile route on public roads, in the winter and starting in semi-darkness, what can possibly go wrong?! But during my 6 years or so on the event there were very few incidents and those that occured were minor traffic bumps.

[Rudernst]

after some thinking....

My opinion is that the Cooper/Lotus 18 crash was the worst possible scenario at Goodwood:
- i.e. a single seater flying into spectator area

but this time with the best possible outcome:
- no one seriously hurt

a free warning, so to say

personally, i have always regarded the chicane and start finish line area as potential hazard area, and left myself some margin of safety there as a driver
precisely because i was aware of the risk of debris flying into the crowd
i did not want that on my conscience
to me this is the most sensitive area of the circuit
highest concentration of speccies as close as possible to the track

currently the drivers briefings at Goodwood are general:
"drive safely, dont do anything stupid"
not particular, such as my comment above regarding the start finish line

you can argue both points
- you dont want any accidents, so you dont highlight danger spots
because that involuntarily declares of "Open Season" in the other areas
- or try to avoid the worst case by warning precisely against it

my choice would be the latter because in my experience of managing people, advice and reccomendations are heeded the more, the more specific and the better explained they are
my personal opinion of course and not the true gospel as handed down to Moses by HIM.

as to the professional drivers:
i think they need seperate face to face briefings
from one pro racer to another, or even better involving a good mind coach
these men are programmed all their life to extract the maximum out of their cars, in modern cars on modern circuits, where you walk away from and accident and run a low risk to hurt anybody but yourself
sure its their profession and they live from it
so cant undo this de-programming of something burnt in so deep in one public briefing without personal interaction

it will be interesting to see what GW and the MSA will make from recent events in future

also, while i have found the video footage of the crashes on Youtube very interesting for analysis,
if Goodwood were mine, i would not have put them there to draw additional attention to the risks involved
but then of course, i dont understand anything about event marketing

RE

[VIVA GT]

/\/\ I think this is a very interesting & well thought out reply, especially pertinent as it comes from someone who competes at Goodwood.
The comment about on-line videos is very interesting and although I don't understand the marketing angle either, I suppose it's all down to the enjoyment of 'thrills & spills' which is another (apart from the joy of pure competition) drew to motor sport spectating. back in the days of VHS Video's I remember a series of 'HAVOC' (sp?) videos that were just a compilation of accidents & offs, these all seemed to sell well, and I would hope that none of the material used included accidents where drivers or spectators got hurt.
I've watched some of the official Goodwood on-line videos and have found most of them quite entertaining, but admit to have cringed strongly when watching a beautiful historic machine being wrecked against the barriers.
I think that Goodwood do have an excellent number of wonderful events like the Members Meeting, Revival & F.O.S. but must surely take notice of the warning from the most recent and make moves to ensure that 'things like that' can't happen again and so that no one gets hurt. Otherwise the events will be stopped by the powers that be and then everyone, (drivers, owners, spectators & Goodwood itself) will lose out.

[grantp]

Originally Posted by andy97

But Grant, the key difference with those sports is that they rarely have incidents that cause danger to a number of spectators, just to the participants.

I take your point Andy but I'm not sure that any authorities are really concerned about the category of those involved - spectator or participant adverse involvement is, typically, a good catalyst for the introduction of controls.

In the end the challenge for the organisers may not be regulation so much as Insurance costs and constraints. That may be less of a problem for the bigger events with higher priced tickets so long as a loaded ticket price will stand up in the marketplace.

In the medium term if the overheads or regulation force the smaller events out of the market the supporting structure for the larger events may disintegrate.


Events may disappear due a general erosion of public interest - unless, of course, the resulting fewer but perhaps larger events can make themselves pay no matter the resulting prices for any Insurance needs.

[Tim Falce]

It's just started on ITV4

[p261brm]

After reading the posts on the subject of, what could have been the end of Goodwood in it's present form. Very fortunate indeed, by the same token do we really want to watch classic racing cars competing on circuits like some of todays F1 venues, Bahrain springs to mind, I for one do not. I agree with all who point to the chicane being the cause of most of the incidents, and like it or not that area should be devoid of close to circuit spectators. God ( which ever one you subscribe to) forbid, we see Goodwood surrounded by 8 feet high catch fences, neither do I want to be in the pit lane of Goodwood or Le Mans as they were, with no protecting wall between my fellow mechanics and the track itself.
Mr Smith's view is understandable, but and a big but HE chose to be at that vantage point, with his son, in the same way I choose to be in various pit lanes, paddocks etc. and perhaps we might take a more serious look at the reasons where and why the incident started to take place, rather than stable doors and horses.

[DAYTONASME]

Having been "weaned" on historic racing as a junior member of the VSCC, when Neil Corner, Hon Patrick Lindsay, Simon Phillips, Michael Bowler and Willie Green were amongst the very talented, "amateur" front-runners.. and my bedroom posters proudly included the 1979 Lloyds and Scottish Historic Car Championship; my views(!) from the other side of the grandstand are.....

1) What Lord March has achieved with the Goodwood brand, both at the FOS, Revival and now Members Meeting, deserves high praise...from the collectors car community and the local councils/tourism etc..Three world-class, industry-leading events from nothing...

2) The marketing function at Goodwood does itself no favours by presenting edited "thrills and spills", most recently Stephen Bond's miraculous escape and Karsten Le Blanc's extensive damage to his Cobra..thankfully the Lola T70 accident from three weekends ago has never been "aired".

3)"Mixing" amateur race drivers, with multiple Le Mans, Touring car championships and F1 race winners is in my opinion very dangerous..for all concerned. I accept the RAC TT at the Revival, does this in part, but the amateur competitors in this race, are most often highly experienced.

4) More concerning is the "Goodwood effect", where amateur drivers are undoubtedly racing beyond their capabilities in an effort to show favourably against fellow racers and professionals.

5) The Goodwood circuit has more than ridden(!) its luck with the entry angle and location of the chicane (just ask Jochen Mass, Paul Knapfield and Tony Wood amongst others)..and the circuit management definitely made a mistake, when it negated the opportunity to dramatically re-profile the width of the pitlane in its entirety, during the recent "Control tower" building restoration. It amazes me the RACMSA or FIA-inspectorate routinely "sign-off" the circuit as safe, in its current format. Tradition is very important, but not at any price..

6) High speed demonstrations of F1, Group C, Group 5 and CanAm cars is an excellent Members Meeting innovation, but races for such machinery are in my opinion ill advised, and there is a precedent in Bruce McLaren.

7) "All the gear, no idea" - this has been an increasing feature of some "blue riband" historic meetings in recent years....I believe the MM and Revival selection committee need to address the alarming disparity in competitor ability and speed.

8) Surely all this damaging publicity "plays" into the hands of the local council "do-gooders" who seek to further restrict our sport and encourage further residential development immediately adjacent to the circuit?

This is purely a personal view; of something that has been building for the last few years at Goodwood. I've attended all bar two Festival of Speed's, every Revival with one exception and last years Members Meeting since its inception. I'm neither an owner, racer or preparer, rather a passionate enthusiast and spectator with a genuine concern that things at Goodwood circuit and in the marketing department, need fundamental review/change..now!