Safety in Historics , Openwheelers& saloons

[Pierre]

As some of you may have gathered, one of my pet subjects is safety ,especially in historic's, well what are we , the motoracing fraternity going to do about this subject????.... With our litigious society ,both competitor and spectator for ever looking down our necks ,we realy do need to address this subject at the lowest and highest levels to protect our sport and or interests......! Not enough is being done.......

[Chris Griffin]

How about stop racing them. Park them in the paddock and just look at them! Try and remember, back in the old days, what it was really like. Can't get safer than that Pierre. Just what is it you are trying to achieve?

[Tracey]

I think the main essence of safety must lie with the governing body and the rules they set down. After that, it is up to the individual driver if they choose to go beyond this to improve their own personal safety. I love watching vintage sportscars, would love to drive one in a sprint maybe, but would want to add seat belts and roll hoop. OK, it might detract slightly from the origianl spec, but I would sooner see an amended car than a driver injured or killed. We have the knowledge now - we should use it.

Old cars must not be left to be no more than statues - that was not their design and, I feel, detracts from their beauty more!

[Mackmot]

I think people with no idea of how to build/prepare racing cars should be stopped from doing it and people should send their cars to professionals. Unfortunately this rearely happens because it costs money.

[Peter Mallett]

This seems to reflect your F5000 safety thread Pierre.

Let's assume that there is a band of dedicated professionals who need to increase their revenue. Thus they start by suggesting that unless a car is prepared by a "professional" there will be death and destruction.

Then let us look at the actuality.

There a many cars built to historic or vintage (in UK terms) by "amateurs". The owners of these cars have spent loving hours, not to mention loads of cash, in order to race their cars. They are most certainly not going to go out in an unsafe car. Or are you suggesting that all historic racers are suicidal maniacs?

If you ever take the time to read a programme you will find the statement "motor racing is dangerous". That is enough to cover most litigation unless it can be proven that a "professional" acted negligently, then it is a different matter.

Modern materials employed in the restoration/preparation of an old racing car make it even safer and don't forget whatever the age it must comply with the FIA regulations.

So apart from tying to boost somebodies business I persoanlly can't find any merit in this thread.

[simon drabble]

you have a definate point Mackmot. poor prepping is often the cause of dnf's and accidents. The problem is that some of the better known preppers charge so much for in some cases not that great work that clubbies on a budget do end up doing it themselves poorly. Fortunately I landed on my feet and am looked after by a very small team who only handle a few cars, but the car is always very well prepped and as a result I feel confident that its been properly spannered

[Pierre]

How do we actualy know the restoration meets current F.I.A. or sanctioning bodies regulations. The scrutineers won't be able to tell us. Do they posses the lab equipment to analise the materials used and or cracktesting equipment. I know they don't and most don't know what and where to look for any abnormalities that may be taking place.....

[Peter Mallett]

I really think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

You can't run at an FIA event without the necessary safety certificates. Foam in the tank - certified. Homologated roll cage - certified. Fire extinguishers tested and - certified. Fuel lines and cut out switches. Checked at scrutineering.

Where somebody can skimp is in braking etc. And if they do, well they deserve all they get, which is usually a large repair bill. Single seaters will have a "bespoke" braking system anyway so I see no problems there apart from normal maintenance.

[pvmw]

Originally posted by Mackmot
I think people with no idea of how to build/prepare racing cars should be stopped from doing it and people should send their cars to professionals. Unfortunately this rearely happens because it costs money.

I think this is an absolute load of nonsense. The great majority of amatear racers in this country could never afford to pay an "expert" to prepare their cars - let alone to build them in the first place.

I race a pre-war Frazer Nash. To describe it as time consuming would be an understatement, and I certainly couldn't afford to pay someone to maintain it. What I, and most amateurs in my position do, is pay the specialists to do the bits I can't do - white metalling bearings, radiator repairs, bodywork etc.

My car is inspected by scroots. before it is allowed out. Agreed, they can't check internals of items, cracks in components etc. However, I'd far prefer to rely on the results of my own preparation than on a bunch of comercially minded professional racing car maintainers. I bought a car with an engine "restored" by a very well known company who are renowned for the work they do - and I'm not saying who for obvious reasons. The work was ****, the engine was dismantled twice in the first six months of my ownership to sort problems, and was only sorted properly when I stripped it completely and re-did all the work myself. Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking all professional restorers/maintainers - I just prefer to have the personal knowledge of the state my car is in rather than relying on someone else. If anything, I'd suggest what is potentially more dangerous is that anyone can set themselves up in business as a professional, whether they have the skills/knoweledge or not.

Don't knock amateur racers. The majority of them are keen and competent. After all, its their neck that is on the line. Agreed, there are a few who's confidence outstrips their ability, but that is what scrutineers are for. If what you propose were ever implemented, it would finish amateur motorsport in this country - and also put a lot of the specialists who support the industry out of business overnight. Is that really what you are suggesting? I'm more frightened by the drivers who have so much money they can afford to have someone maintain and repair their car if they bend it, they take chances I don't because the cost of straightening it is insignificant to them.

[zefarelly]

Pierre . . .I'm not sure why you have such a huge problem, many of the historic cars racing today are safer than they've ever been, to say otherwise is an insult to safety cage manufacturers, car builders/preparers, the organising bodies and scrutineers, and the intelligence of drivers.

I know there are some cars out there which are not fantastically presented, but assuming the scrutineers check seat and belt mountings along with all the other safety equipment, what more can you do? the thought that all old cars should be in museums and never driven is rediculous, the onus is on the drivers to protect themselves, and by and large we do exactly that. no one wants to get hurt

[Peter Mallett]

Originally posted by zefarelly
the thought that all old cars should be in museums

Or given to "professionals" before being allowed out on the tracks. Hmm?

[zefarelly]

my race car is the first I've built and I'm convinced its as safe as any other in our series, we went to great lengths to ensure the cage is as well fixed as the regulations allow, we have conformed to the FiA and MSA books, and I've not yet been criticised in anyway at scrutineering. I wouldnt pay a 'professional' to do it because at the end of the day I trust my own judgement more than anyone elses . . . .I'm the one thats goig to be driving in it, having said that I'm more than happy that it gets inspected and I'm even happier to listen to any constructive comment regarding to safety.

[Pierre]

If now i have achieved anything , it is that i have officials and competitors thinking and talking about safety, so on we roll with our obsections in cars and their ideosentric quirks they have....... just remember the englishman [ FLACK ] i think who had his life taken from under him at PHILLIP ISLAND ,AUSTRALIA approx 2 years ago in a front engined B.R.M. restored with modern technology [power] and tyres.....!!!!!!!!!!!!THINK ABOUT IT/////////

[Peter Mallett]

Well there's no need to shout Pierre.

We all think about it. There was a fatality at Spa two weeks ago. That was very sad but as I said "motor racig is dangerous" we all have a duty of care to our families to make it less so.

I still don't see your point though. Do you wish to stop all historic motor racing? Or just get the contract of an entire grid of F5000 cars?

[Peter Mallett]

Hmm,

Actually I said "Motor racing is dangerous".

[Pierre]

What i won't is for all competitors and crew to think about each other , i don't wish at all to stop racing historic cars for one moment, i do really enjoy this catergory of cars.....BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FORMULA 500O KILLED OFF. I SAY NO MORE................

[simon drabble]

I am very confused having read this read through again - you say you want F5000 stopped and use as an example a fatal accident in a pre 61 single seater. I think it is fair to say that there are fewer accidents in historics than in modern racing as drivers are normally owners and have a better knowledge of their budget than a hired hand. Driving and scrutineering standards (in UK) are exceptionally high and having raced a fair amount in europe I would say they are there as well.
I hate to disappoint but I dont think you have got us thinking about safety I think we have a pretty good grasp of it already. Racing is all about calculated risks. No historic race car is going to be as well made as a modern F1. Having said that they are driven accordingly.
Re spannering - I would love to have both time and skill to do it myself. I do second best and use a team I have complete faith in.
I would suggest (with respect) if you actuially raced the cars yourself you would realize the high level of safety they have

[Tim Falce]

Originally posted by Mackmot
I think people with no idea of how to build/prepare racing cars should be stopped from doing it and people should send their cars to professionals. Unfortunately this rearely happens because it costs money.

Mackmot, do people who have no idea how to build/prepare racing cars actualy do it themselves? I expect you would like everyone to be made to send thier cars to proffesionals as that would be more money in your pocket.
I wouldn't let a proffesional go near my car and I have yet to find one that I would trust with it. It is my life and I want to know the car has been prepared the way I want it done, I do get other people to check my car over as things get missed by amatuers and pros alike.
As far as safety issues go with vintage cars, I know of at least 4 people that have been killed in modern cars, all with 6 point roll cages, I have only heard of one serious accident where i think the driver was killed in a vintage car and that was the one at Goodwood a few years ago

[Andrew Kitson]

Pierre, motor racing will always be dangerous, always has been, always will be. So long as a vehicle is moving along at speed and everything around it isn't, add in the other vehicle/competitor/judgement element and accidents can happen. Even in the modern 'safe' F1, look at Sato in Austria - he is very very lucky to be alive. It is part of the game.

In my personal opinion (I stress my opinion), the level of safety is obviously good for those involved in the sport and those that spectate, but detrimental to driving standards. With acres of gravel and nothing to hit, many drivers take a desperate lunge to overtake often resulting in a DNF to both cars,knowing they won't be hurt. Look at the 'stock car' antics of those who should know better in the BTCC! They would not drive like that if the tracks were still tree lined, for example, the Oulton Park of old. Even Schumacher can get away with dubious driving unpunished. Perhaps the FIA safety campaign should look more at the driving standards?

As others have said, the drivers of these historic machines know what they are doing. They know the risks.
If they want to race say an old 50s single seater without roll hoop,it is their choice.If they had doubts they would not do it.

What should be absolutely paramount is the safety of those who chose not to compete, but go along to watch or marshal. I cannot see how an F5000 car can be deemed any more dangerous than any other quick single seater!
I saw many F5000 races first time round - I worked as a lad as a 'gofer' on a team that had a Lola T330.
The quick F5000s I have seen in recent years have all had superb preparation, better than I remember back then.
Long may they race!

[simon drabble]

I think you might have to admit your view is in the minority here Pierre!

[zefarelly]

I think you could be right there Simon !

I have yet to meet any competitor on the historic racing scene who disregards any of the safety issues, although a good few cheque book racers do seem happy to smash stuff up in order that they dont loose, they still dont endanger themselves or other competitors, when you've spent years earning and building a car, the last thing you want to do is not be able to race it because your injured or the cars a total loss !

[Peter Mallett]

Dunno about you Zef but in my car I've got. Automatic fire extinguisher. Foam filled fuel tank (it fills much quicker these days). FIA seat. FIA full harness. Full SD FIA approved cage (with additional SD bars). AP Racing brakes. FIA Cut out switch. Fully armoured hoses (fuel and braking) running inside the car to protect them from impact damage although the fuellines have no connectors inside the car or anywhere near a bulkhead. All flammable materials except door trims which are a championship requirement, removed. Basic structure as manufactured (therefore no lightened panels). I could go on but my point is that having got here by my own and the efforts of professionals I see my car as safe as anything out there. Am I wrong?

[Mackmot]

I didnt mean to insult the many amateurs who do put a lot of time into their cars and have done a competant job but I often go to club races and historic races and see cars which you would not want to drive. Sometimes cars which deffinately deserve more respect.

Another thing that we discovered on F1 cars was that you can get wishbones etc crack tested and they pass easily but after we got all new ones made and cut up the old ones they were rusted to (rude word) on the inside. I think that in some forms of historic racing like F5000 or F1 they have to move away from trying to keep the original parts and be forced to run with reproductions because it these cars are just so dangerous.

[Tim Falce]

Maybe Pierre would like speed humps on the exit of each bend and Gatsos half way down every straight

[HiRich]

Reading this thread, I can see some issues:

First, passing scrutineering is patently not proof that your car is safe. Just because you have all the kit fitted, and Mr. Scrute has pushed your tyres a bit & given you a ticket, that's no reason to feel confident.
Secondly, I don't agree that all cars should be prepared professionally (as Mackmot suggests). We all know there are cowboys out there. Many (especially at the lower end) could never afford it. Indeed many find the preparation as much fun as the tracktime.

However, there might be a middle line. We recently lost a wheel to a 50-year old fatigue failure. I could see a case for entrants having to maintain a dossier of safety-checked parts.
- Which components, and at what time intervals they have to be checked might be prepared by the series club (perhaps based upon guidelines defined by the MSA or FIA)
- Each safety-critical compnent needs to be marked with a unique code (so all your lower wishbones are marked LW1, LW2, etc.), and the entrant needs to have the dossier on hand at every race...
- So occasionally scrutineers can pull a car in for a full safety check (similar to the spot-eligibility checks that happen at historic events). The entrant must be able to present the list of items that need to be checked, point out the marker code on each component fitted to the actual car, and match off an approval sheet for each fitted component.
- Perhaps additionally, the entrant has to gain an 'MOT' certificate once every year. He presents the car and dossier (probably the day before racing, at agreed pre-season test days, or special regional events at a local garage at the weekend), it takes no more than an hour, and he receives a 'super-scrutineering' ticket. Provided it is free or a token price (mainly covered by MSA fees), well-communicated, and relatively painless, I think people would accept it.

This might achieve the (presumed) objectives of:
- Raising awareness of the importance of safety and good preparation.
- Raising the standard of preparation
- Creating a system flexible to the multitude of different cars out there.
- Keeping costs and general levels of dickabout down to a minimum