What amount of power is too dangerous for Formula 1?

[strad]

Spare me from your fears WB.
WHen you make it sooo safe people just take bigger risks.

[Ciro Pabón]

Well, there are several tricks you can use to make the road seems more dangerous. For example, logarithmic painted strips or reduction in width. I use them all the time.

However, the question still is not answered. How much power is enough?

I'd say that even if you think that 1.000 hp (the figure quoted so many times in this thread with some kind of nostalgia) was a good way to demand respect from those guys at NHRA (wich, btw, use 7.000 hp engines, don't give a damn about straight acceleration or decceleration and laugh heartily at what they call the "pencil sharpener engines those europeans use") you have to reckon that those turbo engines in the 80's were tuned for ONE lap.

Those engines have to be detuned for racing, or they wouldn't have lasted 5 laps. That is dangerous, at least for your racing career...

So, how much is enough? That's a question Lazy Latinos ask all the time to more job oriented people, btw.

One thousand HP? 2.000? Maybe 1.000.000 HP? Is there a line or is it always the bigger the better? Isn't there some coffee to smell where you people live? (and I'm not talking about you, Strad, I know you, or at least I think I know you).

If someone quotes Donohue AGAIN to respond the original question ("... when you can make tyre marks from the start to the end of the straight...") I'm gona puke by all the testosterone impregnating this thread.

We're so machos we don't even need brakes, ain't we?

For example, down here we're so fearless that we brake with our extremely large dicks... Pitbabes, take notice.

[nipo]

Spare me from your fears WB.
WHen you make it sooo safe people just take bigger risks.

Have you heard of "proximity flying"? Maybe I haven't got the term spot on but something like that... It has to do with base jumpers going for the extra thrill of flying very very close to the cliff wall (roughly a few feet away from the videos a friend showed me) at close to 150 kph. That's before deploying the chute, of course.

Why do they do that? Because, for these guys, it is "not dangerous enough" to just jump off a cliff.

In case the F1 drivers, team personnel and spectators (i.e. everyone involved from a safety perspective) all agree that F1 is "not dangerous enough", they'll have my vote to take as much safety features away as they want. Otherwise, it is plain stupidity to try and look like a hardcore racing fan by saying F1 is too safe. Plain stupid.

[Giblet]

Safety can go too far, but making it dangerous when it can be safe is like being poor when you can be rich. It's illogical to me.

Enclosing cockpits for me is too far, but making sure tracks can be as safe as possible for racers and fans.

Problem is that 'back then' there were gentlemen all racing each other. You simply did not cut across someone and expect them to move.

Senna of course changed that, but he was driving that aggressive 'never back down' way WITH the dangerous cars, and his death meant that cars were made safer, and rightly so. The new generation inspired by Senna's ruthlessness (like Schumi) were able to careen off track like so many billiard balls and still curl up with their current supermodel on their yacht after the race, instead of the old way of being read your last rights after being ejected from a thin walled death trap.

What I don't get is that drivers, because they are 'safe', think its OK to act like a psychotic arse.

Much of the 'sport' of these current 'sportsman' is gone. Most would be dead by seasons end if they raced in the 80's or previous.

If with great power comes great responsibility, then with more safety comes less accountability.

'Back then', you endangered another car on track by dangerous driving, you were not respected as sane. Now you're just a 'racer'.

[flynfrog]

For example, down here we're so fearless that we brake with our extremely large dicks... Pitbabes, take notice.

Sometimes mine falls off the bed and yanks me onto the floor.

[Richard]

The point at which too much power is dangerous is related to track design as well as human endurance and car design.

More powerful cars require more safety features for the same overall level of risk.

For the avoidance of doubt, yes I wish cars slid off track more often because that is a greater challenge to the driver. Yes that would add more risk of a DNF. However, a DNF should be as safe as possible. Destroy the car but not the human.

[strad]

Yes call me stupid...along with some of the best drivers to ever sit in a race car. Today they drive very poorly because they think they cannot be hurt. They aren't scared that if they screw up they'll die.
Part of what made F1 drivers special over the years was that they were considered braver than the rest. The standing start alone was considered far more dangerous than a rolling start. The whole game was dangerous and the drivers knew it and raced anyway. I have heard more than a few of them from back in the day, say that they never thought about the danger and that they would have paid to drive.
It was a different, some might say better world and men.
Ya know, what you guys have said about danger over and over again?
""""I don't want to see another driver die."""
YOU don't want to SEE...get it..It's all about you not the drivers.
To roughly quote Samuel Clemmons...
The fear of death stems from a fear of life...Those who live life fully are not afraid to die."
I will repeat what you don't seem to understand...I do not want to see drivers die...I want them to live,,to the fullest, by cheating death. IF from time to time the tree of this sport needs to be watered with heroes blood..then so be it. Don't cheat the drivers of their glory because you are scared to witness death.
Answer me this..
Would you rather have Ayrton Senna die the way he did..OR..in a hospital bed slowly drowning in his own bodily fluids and suffering the embarrassment of crapping himself and struggling for hours to live before that final breath and old age takes him?

[nipo]

Yes call me stupid...along with some of the best drivers to ever sit in a race car.

That's not what I said. Don't derive something I didn't say.

You are different from the drivers in the past because (1) you are not an F1 driver (oops... correct me if I'm wrong...) and (2) the drivers in the past did not have the luxury of racing safely. For them to be in the sport they need to have that bravery and courage that made them the "men" that there were, that is correct and I have a lot of respect for them. However, it does NOT imply they would not have opted for more safety had it been a realistic option for them. You, on the other hand, demands the level of safety to go down deliberately.

To be fair with you, I think some drivers (even the current crop) would be happier men WITHOUT some of today's safety features. Like HANS which according to some are very uncomfortable. They might grumble a bit and say something like "we are racers and safety isn't our thing". In reality they are okay with helmets and fire suits, plus I think in the right state of mind all of them would all have preferred to have Kubica's tub rather than those of 25 years ago. What they really mean is they don't like to be ripped of the rights to decide what kind of safety they want. I don't think they really mean safety is detrimental to the sport in the way you described it to be.

Would you rather have Ayrton Senna die the way he did..OR..in a hospital bed slowly drowning in his own bodily fluids and suffering the embarrassment of crapping himself and struggling for hours to live before that final breath and old age takes him?

Oh, c'mon, are you serious? I think everyone here, Senna fan or not, would agree there is absolutely NOTHING for him to be embarrassed about if he lived till today and would die in a hospital in the future. Would Niki Lauda have been greater had he not survived?. If that is how you look at it, fine, but I tell you you are at (or over) the edge of insanity.

Going back to your question. Does it matter what we prefer of Senna's fate? I'll use your own words: it's all about you not the drivers. It is all about you who like to SEE drivers in constant danger, to cheat death. It's all about you who equate death to greatness.

And please, make up your mind, do you want to see them die or not? Your Senna question implies you do.

[PlatinumZealot]

The thing is guys.. Acceleration never hurt nobody. And if the car is too fast at the end of the straight just crank up the down-force

DRS too fast? Brake earlier!

What I am saying is, most of the accidents happened IN the turns right? The last end of straight accident was Webber and Kovaleinen? Could a 1200hp engine have made the accident worse that it was? It is hard for me to visualise...

[SiLo]

Basically make them slower in the corners and faster on the straights via less downforce. The HP can stay the same in my opinion.

[strad]

Oh, c'mon, are you serious? I think everyone here, Senna fan or not, would agree there is absolutely NOTHING for him to be embarrassed about if he lived till today and would die in a hospital in the future

Come on ..You completely miss the point...I would rather and most that would stop and think about it, would opt for a quick demise in the midst of great enjoyment over choking and thrashing, spitting up blood and slowly drowning whilst panicking over what is coming. Having been there I can assure you there comes a point where out of love you'd smother them to end the suffering.
That my friend is how the end comes to the vast majority in hospitals awaiting death from old age. It's not clean or nice. I don't wish that on anyone and certainly not a hero or great man.
Even the architect of the safety campaign, Jackie Stewart, has said it gone too far.
Now when he says that, then I feel I'm on pretty solid ground and not the demon you'd like to portray me as.
I still mist up over many of my fallen heroes, but I take solace that they went while enjoying life to the utmost and that their deaths were necessary for the sport to be what it was and I guess from your point of view for it to become what it is.
And BTW, It's not the power as such that is dangerous. IMO

[flynfrog]

Oh, c'mon, are you serious? I think everyone here, Senna fan or not, would agree there is absolutely NOTHING for him to be embarrassed about if he lived till today and would die in a hospital in the future

Come on ..You completely miss the point...I would rather and most that would stop and think about it, would opt for a quick demise in the midst of great enjoyment over choking and thrashing, spitting up bloodsnip....

So we should go back to the 60s when drivers died all the time? Hell lets give them chariots and let them fight lions.

[Richard]

Lets ask Lauda, does he think "damn I wish I'd died".

I agree with Strad's motive, that racing is in danger of being too sanitised. A driver/car/team should suffer the consequences of crossing the boundaries of grip/talent. That doesn't mean death, it simply means there should be more likelihood of going off, and if you go off then there is more likelihood that it is the end of your session.

[HampusA]

However, the question still is not answered. How much power is enough?

How long is a piece of string?

[nipo]

@strad - I still think you're inconsistent in terms of what you really want. But I take your point. I can agree with the "cars are too easy to drive" part (remember we are armchair specialists so this might not be the case), which diminishes the cost of mistakes. Whether that produces bad drivers, or just more daring ones, is another debate.

I still think when some people say the safety is going too far doesn't really mean they don't like safety. It is that they don't like the COST of safety. For example, if you invent a barrier that is 1cm thick and can properly absorb the impact of a head-on 300kph collision without any run-off, everybody would buy it. Today, however, we have run-offs as big as the Mohave Desert and I think that's an example where some people will start having doubts (rightly so) about "getting too far". Me included - I think huge tarmac run-offs are detrimental to the sport.

Then again, to ask drivers to "cheat death" is another topic.

Perhaps the reason for me jumping on your posts is that recently I have a friend who's suffering from depression and is a little suicidal. He told me he is going for a sky diving licence so he can "die while doing something exciting". It isn't funny when you really know a person and you know you could read in the papers one random day that he's dead. I wish his chutes deploy every single time. Amen.

And, yes, I don't think power is the main issue. I vote for the power to at least get back to 1000hp. Then, lengthen the brake distance and bring back gravel traps. Another thing is, can the rules be changed so that cars tend to oversteer more? I have a feeling that might produce better racing (again, armchair not-even-specialist opinion).