Newey on Imola 1994

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
User avatar
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:51 am
Location: SU 419113

Newey on Imola 1994

Post by JohnsonsEvilTwin » Tue May 17, 2011 9:31 am

A piece on Adrian Neweys thoughts of what happened on the day that shook F1.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/ma ... enna-death
Newey admits that he has considered the causes of the crash repeatedly over the past 17 years. "If you look at the camera shots, especially from Michael Schumacher's following car, the car didn't understeer off the track. It oversteered which is not consistent with a steering column failure. The rear of the car stepped out and all the data suggests that happened. Ayrton then corrected that by going to 50% throttle which would be consistent with trying to reduce the rear stepping out and then, half-a-second later, he went hard on the brakes. The question then is why did the rear step out? The car bottomed much harder on that second lap which again appears to be unusual because the tyre pressure should have come up by then – which leaves you expecting that the right rear tyre probably picked up a puncture from debris on the track. If I was pushed into picking out a single most likely cause that would be it.
More could have been done.
David Purley

copperkipper1
1
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 6:32 pm

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by copperkipper1 » Tue May 17, 2011 10:35 am

"The little hair I had all fell out in the aftermath" - LOL

Is he joking?

Steering column failed if you ask me.

andrew
0
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 2:08 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by andrew » Tue May 17, 2011 10:40 am

So tyre pressure too low, car bottomed out and it was goodnight Vienna.

So was this driver error (going off line) or just a case of one of those nasty things that happens in life?
copperkipper1 wrote:"The little hair I had all fell out in the aftermath" - LOL

Is he joking?
Try reading the quote in its entire context. He is speaking about the accident changing him physically. Someone died in something he designed. That's gonna be a hell of a shock for anyone!
copperkipper1 wrote:Steering column failed if you ask me.
Do you know something that Adrian Newey doesn't? :wink:

JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
User avatar
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:51 am
Location: SU 419113

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by JohnsonsEvilTwin » Tue May 17, 2011 10:48 am

If it's a puncture, as many think it was then no, it wasn't driver error.

So the crackpot theory that the cars tyres weren't warm enough can be rested I reckon. The car oversteered, understeer is what happens on tyres not fully race warm.
More could have been done.
David Purley

Richard
Moderator
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:41 pm
Location: UK

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by Richard » Tue May 17, 2011 11:14 am

A better quote would be ...
Newey wrote:The honest truth is that no one will ever know exactly what happened. There's no doubt the steering column failed and the big question was whether it failed in the accident or did it cause the accident? It had fatigue cracks and would have failed at some point. There is no question that its design was very poor. However, all the evidence suggests the car did not go off the track as a result of steering column failure

Steven
Owner
User avatar
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 5:32 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by Steven » Tue May 17, 2011 11:23 am

Yes I tweeted that on http://twitter.com/f1technical yesterday evening as I was kind of moved by him saying it would be very difficult for him to go and watch the Senna documentary/film. It marks the mind of an integer and moved person.

HampusA
0
User avatar
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:49 pm

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by HampusA » Tue May 17, 2011 11:26 am

the more interesting bit is that Sennas body had no bruises at all.
And that if the suspension had not penetrated his helmet he would still be alive.

How much did Newey design on the car? everything?
The truth will come out...

gridwalker
6
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 11:22 am
Location: Sheffield, UK

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by gridwalker » Tue May 17, 2011 11:29 am

Slightly off topic, but thanks Tomba : that is the first time I've seen the word Integer used in that context.

I'm used to it meaning a discrete unit in mathematics, so it took a little while for me to realise you meant it in the original sense of "a complete entity".

That is actually a very fitting turn of phrase for Mr Newey ... I might have to use that sometime :)
"Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine ..."

andrew
0
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 2:08 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by andrew » Tue May 17, 2011 12:06 pm

I wonder where this leaves the Italian investigation? I think under Italian law, a guilty or responsible party has to be found (as is happening with Kubica's accident). Who do you blame for a puncture??
JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:If it's a puncture, as many think it was then no, it wasn't driver error.

So the crackpot theory that the cars tyres weren't warm enough can be rested I reckon. The car oversteered, understeer is what happens on tyres not fully race warm.
It was not crackpot at all. Only ones who think it is crackpot are the ones who believe that their hero was incapable of error. It was just another theory amongst a sea of theories.

The science behind it was sound but as with everything else it is just a theory.

Truth is it is unlikely that the true cause or at least a common consensus, will be reached as to the cause of the crash.

JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
User avatar
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:51 am
Location: SU 419113

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by JohnsonsEvilTwin » Tue May 17, 2011 12:56 pm

Andrew,

You bring no facts to the table. Just arbitary soundbites polished and regurgitated for some reason only you could hopefully expand on.
andrew wrote:The science behind it was sound but as with everything else it is just a theory
What Science do you speak of?

I have already pointed you to the fact the car oversteered. It would have understeered if the car's tyres were not up to what Senna had expected at the time.
There are countless stories, even Schumachers on board shows the car oversteer after negotiating the bump in the road up ahead.

Every scientific explanation, from drivers to investigators to documentaries have all said it was a perfect storm scenario. Tyre, Corner, bump and car all combined to create the incident.
At that speed and on that corner, god himself would struggle oversteering at 180mph. Especially in that Williams, which was notoriously hard to drive given that the team couldnt use the fabled active ride, traction and ABS in 1994 as it had in 92 and 93.

So yes the theory his tyres werent warm is crackpot because there is no evidence for it. Unless you are hoarding evidence I have yet to see?

As for this beauty.
andrew wrote:Only ones who think it is crackpot are the ones who believe that their hero was incapable of error.
Where did I mention Senna was incapable of error? He made many actually, so your assumption is a wrong one.
JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:If it's a puncture, as many think it was then no, it wasn't driver error.
Iam going by Newey's opinion. Note the IF IT'S A PUNCTURE bit.

If you must reply can I politely ask you PM me? Unless of course you have verified evidence Senna crashed due to cold tyres, in which case I and many others would love to hear it.
More could have been done.
David Purley

andrew
0
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 2:08 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by andrew » Tue May 17, 2011 1:13 pm

As I mentioned it is just a theory in a sea of several theories. We all like to think our heroes are infallible but they are just as human as the rest of us. No harm in acknowledging that.

If you want to PM me about anything, I would like an explanation about that PM from the 14th?

JohnsonsEvilTwin
0
User avatar
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:51 am
Location: SU 419113

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by JohnsonsEvilTwin » Tue May 17, 2011 1:18 pm

andrew wrote:As I mentioned it is just a theory in a sea of several theories. We all like to think our heroes are infallible but they are just as human as the rest of us. No harm in acknowledging that.
So you felt the need to say it was Sennas fault to achieve that end?

Christ almighty
More could have been done.
David Purley

andrew
0
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 2:08 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by andrew » Tue May 17, 2011 1:25 pm

I did not place blame anywhere. My question is, where did the puncture come from? I think under Italian law, there has to be a responsible party. You see what I'm getting at here?

But the true cause will probably never be agreed on. Just a tragic accident and that is how it should be left I think.

TzeiTzei
10
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:19 pm

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by TzeiTzei » Tue May 17, 2011 1:28 pm

andrew wrote:My question is, where did the puncture come from?
The debris?

Richard
Moderator
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:41 pm
Location: UK

Re: Newey on Imola 1994

Post by Richard » Tue May 17, 2011 1:29 pm

Tomba wrote:Yes I tweeted that on http://twitter.com/f1technical yesterday evening as I was kind of moved by him saying it would be very difficult for him to go and watch the Senna documentary/film. It marks the mind of an integer and moved person.
That should be the mood of this thread, it should be about Newey and his thoughts. Have some respect for him talking publicly about something that is still painful and by his account, very personal.