Board Thread:Off-Topic/@comment-28176349-20171122034302/@comment-32774112-20171128092821

Amrosa wrote:

TrulyDrunk wrote:

Amrosa wrote:

SM Racer wrote: Put that one on the FIA. A track that narrow should never have been certified. The race has been held for 64 years. I don't see blaming this on the FIA certification. You could say the same for Monaco. And Baku is only narrow at the Castle. The rest of the circuit is very wide.

Unfortunately, worst than the GT crash, in the motorcycle race, one of the riders, Daniel Hegarty, was killed in an accident. It's not the longer the safer. All vehicles have increased so much speed so FIA certification should be continuously to ensure safety. So F1 cars are regulated to protect drivers. Yes so many crashes but you hardly watch anyone dies in 20 years.

And Macau staff are the worst. I watched different clips of accidents and surprisingly finding some staff would even snigger when seeing a crash! The gambling city has no regrads of human beings! Here are 2 fatal deaths in 2012 only:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF5GxvzNXVQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZNOaPa2alQ

I can't find their sense of urgency to rescue. They just paid to work and got used to watch people die.

And 5 years later, the corner barrier is still the same metal material.

Overall racing is one of the most dangerous yet exciting sport, but what people can do is try to make it safer, in all manner of ways. FIA is about money, not safety, no matter what all of the billboards at the tracks say. Do you think Germany lost the Grand Prix because Hockenheimring or Nürburgring aren't safe? They did it because they lost money, and Baku delivered.

Macau brings in money, probably lots of it. I'd make the argument that they could add restrictor plates like NASCAR does on certain tracks to limit the BHP, but crashes will happen. Look at Singapore and Brazil this year. The reason F1 got safer is because it is bad for business to kill off drivers like Senna or in NASCAR, Dale Earnhardt. Even after Jules Bianchi's death, FIA and F1 has not forced Suzuka to implement cranes instead of the tractors. They did institute virtual safety cars, but even still, if someone loses control in an area where there is an accident at Suzuka, who will the next Jules Bianchi be?

Other safety features, such as the HANS device, came out of academic research. Others, out of the demands of drivers. But the fact remains that at speeds of 50 to 100 times what a human usually moves at, there will be times when no amount of safety features can save them when something goes wrong.

I also think that there is a dirty little secret right now in F1. I think that the reigning world champion is suffering the effects of traumatic brain injuries. If you watch his interviews last year after the sideways crash in Hungary which was recorded at 10-Gs of force at impact and this week after the again sideways crash at Interlagos, he has trouble remembering things. He can't find words. He makes the excuse in the drivers interviews that he has a terrible memory. No. He is suffering from the effects of concussions. You're right about the business part, still I don't think Baku's tickets sold well, it's Azerbaijan government willing to pay.

Of course making profits is essential to keep holding events. So the Germans quit. Even Audi and Porsche quit lmp1 due to money reason. And F1 is popular but we don't watch F2 F3 often so F2 is dying out. Yes it's about money.

I'm not as knowledgeable as you, I don't know who decides the safety rules for all events, but someone has to step up. Like same in oval circuit, IndyCar looks much worse than NASCAR and GP3 looks much worse than F1. Whether it's new products from R&D or drivers demand, they should take action. It doesn't matter they can't help in extreme situations, just some deaths could have been totally avoided. And that's what I meant in last reply.

Speaking of Hamilton he should retire right now so other great drivers get a chance to drive a better car.