>It seems that the main causes of fatalities/injuries in F1 then were
>two-fold. Firstly the tubular spaceframe construction crumpled and
>trapped/crushed the driver's legs. Secondly the risk of fire was extremely
>high in an impact. Couple these together and you get a highly dangerous
>sport.
Olivier Panis legs last year.
Right.
Yet, some circuits look surpirsingly "unsafe" in some places, like Spa
and Suzuka, with 1 meter wide run-off areas.
Right, one argument was that the ambulances had too long ways to
travel at the Ring.
A 1999 F1 car, with 800hp and improved aerodynamics compared to 1976,
would be much faster, and very strong suspensions would be needed to
endure all those jumps. Plus, in mid-air, the sophisticated
semi-groundeffect aerodynamics would not work properly, and wild
crashes like the Dalmas flip at Petit Le Mans or the similar
Winkelhock crash at the Ring would happen.
The cars could get thrown over the armco into the forests, and it
would take an awful lot of time to get a driver out of there again.
Yes, we will get "Ben Hur" again, with Schumacher hitting others.
At least, the fans will see the cars nearly every minute, while at the
Ring, they passed only 15 times.
--
_____
/_______\ .\\ a t t h e a d
I XT /~~~~
I 500\_____ 1977' Yamaha XT.Rex 500 Enduro
\____/\__I_I http://www.racesimcentral.net/