2014 F1 Season.

There is video of it.

He hit the lifter nose first very hard. It went bouncing into the air.

If the lifter wasn't there it looks like it would have still hurt.

Incredible how he survived that crash  and nobdy else was hurt. Truly horrible accident! 

A cantilever lifter must be possible - Keep all that horrible hardware behind the protective barrier at all times must be the outcome of this!.

G

Oh my goodness! That is a big one.

I'm astonished he made it out in one piece.

How fast must he have been travelling - under yellows and a safety car - to hit at that speed?

Don't think the SC had been deployed at that time.

Don't forget the main aim is to keep the speed up to maximise the downforce, therefore keep tyre temps up and try to get the tyres to cut through the surface water.

Plus the Marusia has less downforce than most.

I don't know what speed others were doing in the same area.

And if you aquaplane you can accelerate. 

Not the first time a car has hit a recovery vehicle at Suzuka.

How can you time out the bloody access to a post while you are editing it. Hopless.

Previous post part 2.

Maybe something like this can be implemented:-

In WEC and since this year Le Mans this is called code-60 or a slow-zone (heard this term from the commentators) in which drivers have to go max 60 km/h and not overtake. It is monitored via the mandatory GPS in the car and they are informed via the onboard marshalling system.

With the control they have over every aspect of the engine,gearbox and diff it shouldn't be too difficult.

Suzuka type circuits do pose an extra problem with there compact nature, so a prevention of the tractors on circuit side until the field is neutralised is a better idea especially if, as in this case the driver of the car is already out. It is better for a F1 car to F1 car crash than an F1 car to tractor. In this case Jules would have probably have missed the Sauber and hit the barrier like Adrian.

My son says the Green flags were still being shown in Dunlop curve. Not sure of where the marshal posts are but I thought it was at least 2 yellows before a waved double yellows.

Not sure about the hitting of the recovery vehicle before, certainly Martin Brundle managed to avoid one and subsequently hit a marshall. I've seen it happen in other forms of motorsport, and of course we had the truck on the track in last years Korean race.

My mistake then. I thought he managed to collect the marshall and the vehicle.

No you don't.

http://t.co/11kUVGkO1y

Obviously something went wrong with the flagging.

Cars sliding on water/ wet grass etc feel like they are accelerating when in fact the are de-acclerating less as the friction normally expected isn't there.

Of course you do, otr to be pedantic, can. It's one of the first things they teach you at driving school.  F1 may be advanced but it can't break the laws of physics. We are talking about aquaplaning here, not skidding or spinning, where the lateral forces can slow you down, as does cornering normally with normal grip.

Aquaplaning means no grip, means no way to add any more energy therefore you won't accelerate any faster, just not slow down as fast as you expect.

I'm in the "if you aquaplane you can accelerate" camp.

Your correct, aquaplaning means no grip, but this is the reason you can accelerate. When cornering the centrifugal force is opposed by the tyres grip on the road surface. When the opposing force is removed due to aquaplaning, the unhindered centrifugal force will cause you to accelerate.

There is a centripetal force, but in physics there is no centrifugal force as such, only inertia.

Centripetal force is the one that causes an object to move in circular type motions, such as the motion of a satellite, which in that case is called gravitational force.

In the event of inertia, then [Newton] an object will continue in a straight line at a constant velocity infinitely, in the absence of any acting force. Obviously there is always a cause of slowing down on Earth's surface, which is the friction caused by air, sometimes called drag [and also the friction of the car's wheels against water in the case of aquaplaning as in this discussion], which is [are] force[s] against continued forward motion in a straight line, and therefore causes a negative acceleration, sometimes called deceleration.

Aquaplaning cannot possibly result in acceleration. Otherwise we have discovered perpetual motion ...

ATB from George

Correct.  The friction co-efficient of tyre running over water will be far less than between tyre and Tarmac. Technically, there will still be some friction as there is still opposing contact between tyre and water, but this would be minimal.  It will still mean the vehicle will be decelerating to some extent (albeit far more slowly than usual)...unless there are other forces acting to push the car on, eg: downhill (gravity). 

When cornering the centrifugal force is opposed by the tyres grip on the road surface. When the opposing force is removed due to aquaplaning, the unhindered centrifugal force will cause you to accelerate.

Nobody is suggesting acceleration continues perpetually, but initially, at the instant of aquaplaning the car will accelerate due to the centrifugal force or whatever you'd like to call it, being applied to the car.

The other force would be the centrifugal force (or whatever it's called) produced when cornering.

Speaking of tangents..

I wonder who will get to drive the Marussia at the weekend..