rec.autos.simulators

> Michael Lowery

> > Well...that's how we went motor-racing then.  It's all very easy to use
30+
> > year's of collective wisdom but the sport was far more dangerous then
for
> > both driver AND spectator.
> > But we didn't question it because it was .....well, it just WAS.

> > If somebody had invented chain link fencing and Armco barriers in 1954
that
> > terrible accident at le Mans in '55 may not have happened.  But it did,
> > because it was 1955, not 1995.

> > When criticising past behaviour...and technology...one has to remember
that
> > one is doing so from a lofty position that allows the benefit of looking
> > backwards into history.

> > --
> > Regards,
> > Bruce Kennewell,
> > Canberra, Australia.
> > ---------------------------

> > > > That's why motor-racing for a spectator back then was *far* more
> > exciting
> > > > than now.

> > > Kinda gives a whole new definition to the term "keep your eyes on the
> > > action", eh Bruce?  <g>

> > > --
> > > Chuck Kandler

> > > A man is no less a Slave just because he is
> > > allowed to choose a new Master every four years.

> MS (Waits for someone to take the bait <G> )

> > Bruce,
> > Agreed.  From our current "lofty position" I always shake my head in
> > amazement when watching a contemporary rally race. Just this weekend I
> > caught some of Speedvision's coverage of rallies from Portugal and
> > Spain. Thousands of spectators lining loose-dirt roads with cars
> > whizzing past kicking dirt into the spectators' faces....  It amazes me
> > that they can still run the races like that.

> > Michael Lowery

> > > Well...that's how we went motor-racing then.  It's all very easy to
use
> 30+
> > > year's of collective wisdom but the sport was far more dangerous then
> for
> > > both driver AND spectator.
> > > But we didn't question it because it was .....well, it just WAS.

> > > If somebody had invented chain link fencing and Armco barriers in 1954
> that
> > > terrible accident at le Mans in '55 may not have happened.  But it
did,
> > > because it was 1955, not 1995.

> > > When criticising past behaviour...and technology...one has to remember
> that
> > > one is doing so from a lofty position that allows the benefit of
looking
> > > backwards into history.

> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Bruce Kennewell,
> > > Canberra, Australia.
> > > ---------------------------

> > > > > That's why motor-racing for a spectator back then was *far* more
> > > exciting
> > > > > than now.

> > > > Kinda gives a whole new definition to the term "keep your eyes on
the
> > > > action", eh Bruce?  <g>

> > > > --
> > > > Chuck Kandler

> > > > A man is no less a Slave just because he is
> > > > allowed to choose a new Master every four years.

> > Rallying. Ugh how boring. Cars running minutes apart and no overtaking
<G>
> > Sounds a bit like modern F1 don't it?

> > MS (Waits for someone to take the bait <G> )

> > > Bruce,
> > > Agreed.  From our current "lofty position" I always shake my head in
> > > amazement when watching a contemporary rally race. Just this weekend I
> > > caught some of Speedvision's coverage of rallies from Portugal and
> > > Spain. Thousands of spectators lining loose-dirt roads with cars
> > > whizzing past kicking dirt into the spectators' faces....  It amazes
me
> > > that they can still run the races like that.

> > > Michael Lowery

> > > > Well...that's how we went motor-racing then.  It's all very easy to
> use
> > 30+
> > > > year's of collective wisdom but the sport was far more dangerous
then
> > for
> > > > both driver AND spectator.
> > > > But we didn't question it because it was .....well, it just WAS.

> > > > If somebody had invented chain link fencing and Armco barriers in
1954
> > that
> > > > terrible accident at le Mans in '55 may not have happened.  But it
> did,
> > > > because it was 1955, not 1995.

> > > > When criticising past behaviour...and technology...one has to
remember
> > that
> > > > one is doing so from a lofty position that allows the benefit of
> looking
> > > > backwards into history.

> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Bruce Kennewell,
> > > > Canberra, Australia.
> > > > ---------------------------

> > > > > > That's why motor-racing for a spectator back then was *far* more
> > > > exciting
> > > > > > than now.

> > > > > Kinda gives a whole new definition to the term "keep your eyes on
> the
> > > > > action", eh Bruce?  <g>

> > > > > --
> > > > > Chuck Kandler

> > > > > A man is no less a Slave just because he is
> > > > > allowed to choose a new Master every four years.

> Actually those rally men have my ultimate respect. I went to Keilder
forest
> some years ago to see a stage of the RAC rally as was at the time. Those
old
> Group A cars were terrifying to see in action. 600 bhp on dirt  at 120
mph,
> trees only feet away and spitting gravel all over the place at slip angles
> that would have made Ivan Major proud.

> MS

> > I agree with you (about the reference to modern F1 being boring) so
don't
> > look for me to jerk your fishing line! :-)
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Bruce Kennewell,
> > Canberra, Australia.
> > ---------------------------

> > > Rallying. Ugh how boring. Cars running minutes apart and no overtaking
> <G>
> > > Sounds a bit like modern F1 don't it?

> > > MS (Waits for someone to take the bait <G> )

> > > > Bruce,
> > > > Agreed.  From our current "lofty position" I always shake my head in
> > > > amazement when watching a contemporary rally race. Just this weekend
I
> > > > caught some of Speedvision's coverage of rallies from Portugal and
> > > > Spain. Thousands of spectators lining loose-dirt roads with cars
> > > > whizzing past kicking dirt into the spectators' faces....  It amazes
> me
> > > > that they can still run the races like that.

> > > > Michael Lowery

> > > > > Well...that's how we went motor-racing then.  It's all very easy
to
> > use
> > > 30+
> > > > > year's of collective wisdom but the sport was far more dangerous
> then
> > > for
> > > > > both driver AND spectator.
> > > > > But we didn't question it because it was .....well, it just WAS.

> > > > > If somebody had invented chain link fencing and Armco barriers in
> 1954
> > > that
> > > > > terrible accident at le Mans in '55 may not have happened.  But it
> > did,
> > > > > because it was 1955, not 1995.

> > > > > When criticising past behaviour...and technology...one has to
> remember
> > > that
> > > > > one is doing so from a lofty position that allows the benefit of
> > looking
> > > > > backwards into history.

> > > > > --
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Bruce Kennewell,
> > > > > Canberra, Australia.
> > > > > ---------------------------

> > > > > > > That's why motor-racing for a spectator back then was *far*
more
> > > > > exciting
> > > > > > > than now.

> > > > > > Kinda gives a whole new definition to the term "keep your eyes
on
> > the
> > > > > > action", eh Bruce?  <g>

> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Chuck Kandler

> > > > > > A man is no less a Slave just because he is
> > > > > > allowed to choose a new Master every four years.

> Just curious.  I never realized in my GP2 days that the little jink to the
> left as you enter the main straight was to line up with the exit from the
> banking.  I remember GP2 showed a bit of the banking as it disappeared away
> in the area of the first chicane.  I have long ago deleted GP2, but did it
> also show the banking coming onto the main straight (that is, if you turned
> around and drove backwards)?

>>I purchased this cool magazine with some really good stuff on F1,
>>called Formula 1 50 Golden Years (Fox sports?). It had this picture of
>>Monza's start in 1967 and it showed the end of the banking so well, I
>>thought many might want to see it. It is rather large, but I did not
>>shrink it as I figured detail would be appreciated more than speed.

>Great picture! Any more interesting pictures in that magazine?

>Andre

>>Oh yeah, better tell you where it is located! DUH!

>>http://mo-sbdc.org/slg/monza1967.jpg

>>SLG

>>(All spelling errors are intentional and are there to show new
>>and improved ways of spelling old words. Grammatical errors are
>>due to too many English classes/teachers)