LOGO
Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 05-05-2012, 11:01 PM   #21
zdoppiklonikaa

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
495
Senior Member
Default
In my opinion there should be more circuits on the calendar that punish mistakes.
There should be more circuits in motorsport that punish mistakes. The latest thing to get my goat in other series are penalties for 'exceeding track limits'. If you don't want drivers to exceed the track limits, build a wall. Then they will desist.
zdoppiklonikaa is offline


Old 05-07-2012, 08:55 PM   #22
ycMC0PLg

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
444
Senior Member
Default
Mark Webber retorts:

https://twitter.com/#!/AussieGrit/me...c.com%2F9hhmxr
ycMC0PLg is offline


Old 05-08-2012, 01:47 AM   #23
Solo3uc4

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
460
Senior Member
Default
Dubious comment from Mark, IMO.

One could easily argue that weak or practically non-existent circuit standards killed Jim Clark.
Solo3uc4 is offline


Old 05-08-2012, 02:22 AM   #24
TOD4wDTQ

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
514
Senior Member
Default
Dubious comment from Mark, IMO.

One could easily argue that weak or practically non-existent circuit standards killed Jim Clark.
I don't think Mark's Petrov comment was in connection with Jim Clarks death as such, more likely related to the lack of safety standards back in those days. The picture is from the race at Aintree in 1962, and not Hockenheim 1968.
TOD4wDTQ is offline


Old 05-08-2012, 02:24 AM   #25
DumErrory

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
423
Senior Member
Default
Dubious comment from Mark, IMO.

One could easily argue that weak or practically non-existent circuit standards killed Jim Clark.
That's a bit of a leap, isn't it?
DumErrory is offline


Old 05-08-2012, 03:22 AM   #26
denSmumbSes

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
544
Senior Member
Default
That's a bit of a leap, isn't it?
Maybe I read the tweet incorrectly, but I took his comment about VP as suggesting the Russian wouldn't have the nerve to race in Clark's era. I felt using Clark to prove his point was odd, since Jim was likely killed by shunting into the woods.

Perhaps Mark doesn't remember just how lucky he was to escape death after a horrific design / set-up issue sent his Group C (IIRC) Mercedes leaving the track whilst doing 2-3 gainers into the trees at LeMans.
denSmumbSes is offline


Old 05-09-2012, 09:37 AM   #27
lidya-sggf

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
384
Senior Member
Default



A pretty good read about all the challengers, through Mugello, although there is a lot of launch information. If you follow the links within the site they will direct you to a lot of his newest technical analysis.
Scarbsf1's Blog | Everything technical in F1
lidya-sggf is offline


Old 05-09-2012, 03:22 PM   #28
brorialsibers

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
396
Senior Member
Default
One could easily argue that weak or practically non-existent circuit standards killed Jim Clark.
With the benefit of hindsight sitting here almost 45yrs later you could argue that, but that's how circuits were in 1968. The circuits were different and attitudes towards racing and safety were different.

p.s. "The cause of [Jim Clark's] crash was never definitively identified, but investigators concluded it was most likely due to a deflating rear tyre." Wikipedia
brorialsibers is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:36 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity