Saudi track

[alangbaker]

Here we go again?

Schumacher lucky to be mostly unhurt and Haas has a car they can salvage nothing from.

Brilliant circuit, Herman. Just brilliant.

Sorry, but this one is not on Tilke.

Tilke doesn't decide where the races are going to be held. The FIA decides that and they decide based on who pays enough.

Yes: Tilke could have turned down the commission to design a track on that site.

But he didn't pick it.

[TimH]

Yes: Tilke could have turned down the commission to design a track on that site.
But he didn't pick it.

He could have designed something safer.

[Chris Livengood]

It's pretty easy not to watch it if you don't like it.

The race was sweet and all you guys can do is bitch.

[tige00]

Great track and great race, racing is dangerous no matter what we do its just part of the sport, and speed is the allure for fans we don't go to see them go slow, if so watch Nascar, I for one want to see the technology put to test, cars are safe drivers are up to the task.

[Lynn]

The track with unprotected concrete walls is dangerous. It is so sad that the Saudis don't have the space and money to build a safer track.

[problemchild]

The track with unprotected concrete walls is dangerous. It is so sad that the Saudis don't have the space and money to build a safer track.

Makes you wonder how so many of us survived racing cars in the 21st century, especially before they castrated our best tracks.

[reidhazelton]

You can have safety and an interesting race - they are not mutually exclusive.

I never understood the bravado associated with criticizing safe, modern tracks. Drivers used to die in crashes far, far more frequently than they do today. What does it add to the racing (from the viewer's point of view or the driver) to race on a more inherently dangerous track? Nothing. It's akin to why I hate almost all racing movies - they all over hype the danger aspect of racing like we all have some sort of death wish. I want to race again next week. Not take stupid risks and feel like some hardass, beefcake, alpha male that survived to tell the tale.

It's an extremely callous view of life, and the loss of it, to bemoan safety improvements. Is the racing any worse now that we have safety barriers, HANS devices, fire suppression systems, halos, or any other safety item? No. Yet, every time a new safety item pops up the same group of "we never had that **** when I was a kid" types complain about them. I'd guess they also think seat belts and airbags kill more people than they save.

If it makes racing safer, and stops drivers and friends from dying or getting injured, I am all for it. Why would you not be?

[mont7]

The track with unprotected concrete walls is dangerous. It is so sad that the Saudis don't have the space and money to build a safer track.

This is an old article, and not sure they still expect to race on it in 2023, but the Jeddah track is temporary and will be replaced:

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/sa...-2023/4655200/

[Roland V. Johnson]

You are right Reid, however always remember the only safe racing is No Racing. Where the line gets drawn between safe racing and just racing is always a moving target. Road America without the Kink, Road Atlanta without the Dip, RIP, etc takes something away from the sport. The tracks I have enjoyed the most always have a place or two that makes you tighten the belts, and sometimes hold your breath a bit.

[reidhazelton]

You are right Reid, however always remember the only safe racing is No Racing. Where the line gets drawn between safe racing and just racing is always a moving target. Road America without the Kink, Road Atlanta without the Dip, RIP, etc takes something away from the sport. The tracks I have enjoyed the most always have a place or two that makes you tighten the belts, and sometimes hold your breath a bit.

Totally. My point is more that we can have safety and quality racing. The solution is not getting rid of the Kink, but adding a NASCAR-style safer barrier to the wall. That safer barrier will improve safety and not diminish racing. I don't think the Kink is the worst corner on that track for what it's worth. You can have the tighten your belt adrenaline rush without defying death. I go to race for the racing, not to play Russian roulette.

[Westroc]

Just to put a finer point on what Mosport was like back in the day. Turn 1 had armco which faced you at almost 90 degrees at the exit. 3 rails high on wood posts. Think narrow country road with a foot of gravel shoulder then maybe 2 feet of chewed sand dirt then armco. Yeah that close. Plus corner is high (screaming third gear) w/ camber on entry and flat exit and lifting is NOT an option on exit. Next time you talk to Brian Graham ask him. His dad (?) was in a Crossle 60) and had a big one. I came thru 3 cars back and pretty unsighted and there was car everywhere you looked. Turn 2 enters flat out and you are looking at sky. Falls left 60-80 feet then grass sloping wickedly away to tire wall. Miss the turn in late and it's oh sh t time. Turn 5 is quite downhill but had a bottoming gully. No matter what ride height you probably bottomed the car right where you needed to finish (or begin in my case) braking. Then another 90 facing guard rail which was really banged to hell. Seem to remember it being maybe 20 feet of surface. Maybe more but I do remember a guy in the crowd gave me a smoke way before any corner workers ever showed up and they were close. (Refer back to my alledged braking point) TWICE. Turn 8\9 is a big deal (you think) until you actually go out there on foot. Then it's not. It was always paved over there if you shot off. Far as I know. Garages where worse than terrible and we called the restaurant the Tomaine Palace. Showers were a cesspool. Fans were over the top. And I LOVED every damn minute of it. I can't even begin to tell you just how good legions of improvements Ron Fellows and his group have done. Jim.

[Peter Olivola]

Totally. My point is more that we can have safety and quality racing. The solution is not getting rid of the Kink, but adding a NASCAR-style safer barrier to the wall. That safer barrier will improve safety and not diminish racing. I don't think the Kink is the worst corner on that track for what it's worth. You can have the tighten your belt adrenaline rush without defying death. I go to race for the racing, not to play Russian roulette.

The problem with a safer barrier at the Kink at RA is the wide variety of cars in a club racing weekend. Who do you tune it for, GT-1 or FV?

[Rick Kirchner]

still softer than concrete

[Peter Olivola]

still softer than concrete

I don't think a GT-1 tuned safer is significantly different at impact abatement for a FV than Armco.

[douglap1]

Any of us who have been doing this for a while have hit something, and know that it is not possible to make any circuit totally safe.

However, the compromises that are made to safety for any temporary street circuit that I have ever seen are just too much. The Saudi track in particular with those speeds and practically zero run-off area is absolutely ridiculous. I'm glad nobody in F1 or F2 was injured.

It seems that F1 is having more and more temporary street circuits these days which is a real shame. Can you imagine the track improvements if the F1 circus was lured to race at Road America or Road Atlanta. And then all of us club racers would benefit from those improvements for decades. Who do these temporary street circuits benefit? Nobody that I know.

[problemchild]

I don't think a GT-1 tuned safer is significantly different at impact abatement for a FV than Armco.

I don't know the specifics of safer bearing design, but a FV in the kink will be doing 110 mph, and a FF doing 125mph. I expect a GT1 car much faster. If it is OK for SCCA to run the Runoffs at Daytona and Indy, designed for 200mph Cup cars and Indycars respectively, how is that any different than the kink?

[Peter Olivola]

I don't know the specifics of safer bearing design, but a FV in the kink will be doing 110 mph, and a FF doing 125mph. I expect a GT1 car much faster. If it is OK for SCCA to run the Runoffs at Daytona and Indy, designed for 200mph Cup cars and Indycars respectively, how is that any different than the kink?

I'm not sure either is applicable as the safer barriers at both are on the oval sections where thee is much less likelihood of a frontal impact. The Kink has a very high percentage of both frontal impacts and billiard shots into the opposite wall. The "give" necessary to effectively attenuate a GT-1 car's deceleration would probably have the opposite effect on a FV or FF i.e., exacerbate the billiard effect.

Then there's the problem of reducing the distance between the track and the nearest impact object.

The solution, unrealistic as it is, would be for the railroad to abandon the right of way so a proper runoff could be constructed.

[TimH]

Who do these temporary street circuits benefit? Nobody that I know.

Hotels and sponsors.

[problemchild]

The problem with a safer barrier at the Kink at RA is the wide variety of cars in a club racing weekend. Who do you tune it for, GT-1 or FV?

I don't think a GT-1 tuned safer is significantly different at impact abatement for a FV than Armco.

I'm not sure either is applicable as the safer barriers at both are on the oval sections where thee is much less likelihood of a frontal impact. The Kink has a very high percentage of both frontal impacts and billiard shots into the opposite wall. The "give" necessary to effectively attenuate a GT-1 car's deceleration would probably have the opposite effect on a FV or FF i.e., exacerbate the billiard effect.

I was wondering how you were going to spin this to propagate your pro-SCCA stance. Safer barrier is either good for club racers or not. If I touch wheels with another car in the kink at 125mph or on the banking at 140mph, the direct or indirect contact with the wall or safer barrier is not going to vary much between the two locations. I for one, would much rather crash a FV into a safer barrier than Armco.

[Peter Olivola]

I was wondering how you were going to spin this to propagate your pro-SCCA stance. Safer barrier is either good for club racers or not. If I touch wheels with another car in the kink at 125mph or on the banking at 140mph, the direct or indirect contact with the wall or safer barrier is not going to vary much between the two locations. I for one, would much rather crash a FV into a safer barrier than Armco.

Do you actually have anything to contribute to any conversation that doesn't include a dig at the SCCA?

Just so we're clear, the track and the other sanctioning bodies who run there besides SCCA haven't felt putting a safer barrier at the Kink would accomplish anything. One of the primary reasons is that few initial wall contacts "at the Kink" are actually at the Kink. Most are between 11 (the Kink) and 11a. What happens most often "at the Kink" is loss of control that involves contact further down the track. Those locations would be better candidates for safer barriers.

There have been far fewer actual Kink hits than this conversation suggests. The most vivid in my memory was an FC that went straight in (about a 75 degree angle to the Armco) when the front wings folded under the front wheels. The driver walked away from the incident.

[billtebbutt]

"What happens most often "at the Kink" is loss of control that involves contact further down the track. Those locations would be better candidates for safer barriers."

Is there a reason this hasn't been done then? Alternatively, because every accident is slightly different than the one that comes afterwards (so, its pretty difficult to predict *exact* incident occurrence and outcome), why not put the barriers all the way from and including the Kink to the area you suggest further along? Like "WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER"!!!!

This doesn't seem difficult to me (and I have run at Road America), unless I am missing something.

cheers,
BT

[Mike B]

Just so we're clear, the track and the other sanctioning bodies who run there besides SCCA haven't felt putting a safer barrier at the Kink would accomplish anything. One of the primary reasons is that few initial wall contacts "at the Kink" are actually at the Kink. Most are between 11 (the Kink) and 11a. What happens most often "at the Kink" is loss of control that involves contact further down the track. Those locations would be better candidates for safer barriers.

Are we talking about a different Kink?

https://twitter.com/indy44/status/1142104023668891650

[Peter Olivola]

Are we talking about a different Kink?

https://twitter.com/indy44/status/1142104023668891650

Wasn't aware of that change. Tire wall at the Kink. Safer further down the road.

[EYERACE]

I wonder what sort of flap would occur if someday at the Middle East F1 races (Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia) a female driver was an entry ??

[billtebbutt]

I wonder what sort of flap would occur if someday at the Middle East F1 races (Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia) a female driver was an entry ??

Funny that you mention that. In today's Globe and Mail, there is an editorial (written by a woman) advocating that F1 needs to stop supporting races in those jurisdictions. Not related to the lack of female F1 drivers, but due to those countries' positions and policies on human rights (or lack thereof) in general. Of course, the author knew the motivating reason for having races there: money.

It was a decent read actually.

cheers,
BT

[Fred Michael]

I wonder what sort of flap would occur if someday at the Middle East F1 races (Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia) a female driver was an entry ??

We tested in Saudi with a field that was half filled with women. It is not an issue

[E1pix]

^^^ This.

Yep, and there’s an entire F1 support Series that’s chock full of Ws.

No races in the Middle East yet, but soon.

The world is a changing, and the more drivers and fans racing generates can only be good for racing itself. In this case, the concept potentially doubles the possibilities.

[dalz]

My problem with these modern circuits is all the pavement surrounding the racing surface. Policing the limits of acceptable boundaries shouldn't be up to administrative decisions. A few years ago Max was penalized for using too much INNER surface through a COTA tight turn. What is extra asphalt doing INSIDE a turn?!? If you want to put your car down there, it should be grass or something so you deal with the consequences. There should be an area of grass at these places, before the desert of pavement, to make a wayward driver pay a price of at least a ruined lap time. I laugh at tracks like the wacky Charlotte Roval, where a safety runoff becomes the accepted short straightaway between two turns. Ridiculous.