MikeFromCanada wrote:I agree 100% with marcush. It is up to the teams to be trusted to provide their drivers with a safe vehicle to race in. It was very well known that running the tyres at that camber provided a significant safety risk, yet they still went ahead and let them race as is.
Sure you may say F1 is a dangerous sport and that you can never be 100% safe, but knowing full well that an area on the car is compromised and not doing anything about it is just being negligent. It is similar to having a hairline leak in the fuel lines and then coming on the radio saying "keep running, it's only 1 more lap to the finish, we should be okay". There should be no doubt when you are dealing with people's lives.
That's the point: you obviously can't trust the teams on that. Spa 2010 AND 2011 were a clear example of that. Don't get me wrong: when there is something technically wrong with car that could be harmfull to the driver they will let him pull over, but if the car is technically without flaws but has elements that could put the driver in danger anyhow they will not act, even when there are events where that system proved to be harmfull. Remember the Renault Lotus of last year from which the sidepod exploded just outside the pitstraight? They didn't removed or even changed their front exit exhaust approach at all, only some more heat protection. Biggest example of all would be ground effect: teams never made sure the car was enough protected to make sure the driver would be ok when he lost control at the amazing cornering speeds they got. Even the exception confirms the rule: the introduction of carbon fibre chassis was hailed as a great improvement of safety for the drivers, but at the same time made the car much lighter and thus faster.
Teams will not trade speed for safety.Pretty much understandable given the competitive nature of F1. It's rather the FIA who needs to ensure safety.