View Single Post
Old 12 Jul 2004, 11:09 (Ref:1033985)   #9
garcon
Weasel Wrangler
Veteran
 
garcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Antarctica
Wilmslow, Cheshire
Posts: 8,885
garcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Famegarcon will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
I'm very strongly of the view that you can't remove danger from F1 (or any motorsport for that matter), but you can minimise the risks and eliminate unnecessary risk. And I also very strongly believe that the progress made in the safety of F1 over the last 15 to 20 years has been absolutely superb. I have argued vehemently against those who have recently claimed that safety is not treated seriously and that the FIA is somehow negligent, because that denies the progress that continues to be made.

I also believe that an F1 car is probably the safest vehicle you could possibly be in if you're going to have a 150mph - 200mph accident. As proved at Indy.

However.

Yes. Max is right. We need to reel it in a bit. F1 cars are now pushing the envelope into territory only previously experienced in the development of military aircraft. And after two major accidents in three races, I fear that the next one might not be so lucky. It is time for the FIA to act, as it has done continually over the past few decades, to slow the cars a little. It doesn't need to be much, just back to 2003 lap times would be enough. But it would be a tragedy if the action is taken in response to F1's next fatality.
garcon is offline  
__________________
"Never pick a fight with an ugly person, they've got nothing to lose."
Quote