Safety is Vital to Formula One, But at What Cost?

“You accept the fact that Formula One is totally futile and stupid and still you carry on, because what is out there on the track is so exhilarating for the selfish man behind the wheel.”  -  Jackie Stewart

“Jimmy ranked with, perhaps even out-ranked, Nuvolari, Fangio and Moss, and I think we all felt he was in a way invincible.  To be killed in an accident with a Formula Two car is almost unacceptable” - Bruce McLaren

“That year of 1968 was horrific, with a driver being killed on or about the seventh of each month.  On the seventh day of each month you weren’t keen to go out in the car.”  - Chris Amon

“We all get scared, but I get scared that something will happen with the car.  It’s the cars that break, not the drivers.”  - Jochen Rindt

“I worshipped the guy.  He was totally adorable.  Everybody in motor racing turned out for his funeral.  And there were plenty of red eyes from the hard guys.”  - Frank Williams

“I was trying to get people to help me, and if I could have turned the car over he would have been alright.”  - David Purley

“Francois had become part of our little family His enthusiasm and character were such that he sort of lightened our lives.  He was always outgoing and there was a sparkle about him.  The loss of Francois must have been close to losing a son.”  - Ken Tyrell

“It makes me extremely angry when we lose drivers of the calibre of Tom.  People do not listen enough to the drivers, yet we are the ones who take the greatest risk.”  - James Hunt

“Hello Gilles: I still cannot believe that you are no more… I did not know Nuvolari but I will talk to my daughter with pride about you.  I will be able to tell her that I delighted in you and cried for you. 

"I have within me the sense of infinite emptiness that I feel nothing will be able to fill except with my tears.  I hope that up there you have found a circuit and when the starting light is green, go Gilles.”

“Roland was just a great, great guy.  He’d be top of the list if you were going out for a drink with the boys.”  - Nick Wirth

“There is not a driver in the world who will not be shocked and deeply affected by the terrible news.”  - Nigel Mansell

These comments, along with others not mentioned are witness to the losses in Formula One.  Formula One and death have gone hand in hand for decades, yet in over 15 years F1 has not had a fatality in racing, testing, or qualifying. 

The lack of death on the track is proof that Formula 1 has become a very safe sport, and its record has been unmatched by the large series; INDY and NASCAR have been struck by deaths more recently.

F1 does still have its accidents. Silverstone 1999, Montreal 2007, Hungaroring 2009 are all proof of how safe F1 has become.  Michael Schumacher, Kimi Raikkonen, Robert Kubica, Mark Webber, Felipe Massa are just a few of the recent F1 drivers that have been through an accident and lived to either race, walk, or live since the time of their experience.

The lack of death in Formula 1 is the result of constant improvements to safety, a quest taken up by Sir Jackie Stewart.  From the method the ARMCO barriers are placed or shaped, to the existence of an on track medical facilities and proper safety car, Jackie Stewart has had a hand in it.

Shunned at first for his ideas by those within the F1 fraternity and outside Sir Jackie Stewart has had an uphill battle, yet through perseverance, and belief in his dreams and ideas he has made them a reality. 

By taking on this difficult quest Sir Jackie has changed the sport for the better, and while he may have stepped away from the battle front others have taken on the fight for him. 

From season to season, from a shocking accident to another the sport is adapting new safety measures aimed at prolonging the lifespan of their participants.  Yet as F1 is becoming safer, is it losing its identity?

Thanks to that work drivers are not lost, and it is possible for the fans to focus on the successes and glory rather than death on track.  The lack of fatalities has also improved the following of the sport as fans are not turned away by horrific images comparable to those from the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. 

F1 is thus safer, but as the sport seeks to become ever safer is it sacrificing its excitement and its character?  Is F1 becoming a mere set of high speed parade laps to promote products and manufacturers?

When F1 was first established as a series in the 1950s the flimsy cars were driven by average men in simple clothing.  The drivers had no protection from the elements such as an 800g spring which nearly ended Felipe Massa’s life, from fires that have been rampant throughout F1, or things like rocks, fire extinguishers, or many other threats. 

In 2009 the cars are put through strenuous sets of tests that determine the cars’ strengths and reactions to various impacts or situations, while the drivers are protected from outside threats including fires and rocks. 

The level of safety that is available to the current F1 driver is unmatched by previous seasons, and in 2010 the drivers will most likely be even more protected.

Having a driver that can climb into the cockpit knowing full well that their safety lies not only in the hands of god is beneficial to the spectacle as drivers are able to push without having that uneasy feeling of impending death at each corner. 

Safety to the drivers can not be sacrificed for the sake of the person within the car and the sport itself.  Yet when the tracks that the drivers are competing on are being modified to make them safer F1 suffers. 

There are tracks such as Monaco that can not really be modified because I doing so one would have to demolish blocks or add another tunnel. 

There are other tracks such as Monza and Imola that required modification to add to the racing experience.  There is modification that makes a track safer, such as longer run off areas, yet the line between making a track safe and boring is quite thin. 

A track can be modified by replacing gravel traps with a concrete run off area.  This modification allows the car to continue the race after venturing off track without getting beached in gravel.

A flat and deep concrete run off area also makes a track far safer; a car no longer veers out off control when it drives off track, and instead the driver is able to apply brakes to slow down the car before the eventual crash that is bound to follow. 

Felipe Massa’s accident could have been fatal had there been no run off in Hungary; Felipe already concussed and stunned by the impact of the spring in the last second was able to apply the breaks slowing down the car and decreasing the poser of the impact, but had there been gravel the car would have most likely been launched into the air after leaving the track and impacted with greater velocity into the tire wall.

While adding run off areas is one safety measure adding extra chicanes to slow down a car takes away from the character of the track.  The Belgian track at Spa was modified heavily with the addition of the Bus Stop chicane; this did slow down the cars, but the very identity of the track of the sacrificed.

There are some chicanes that need to be altered because of how the cars now react on track, yet what if the FIA decided to remove Eau Rouge or add a chicane to it?

In 2004 the Indy GP of the United States was only contested by a fraction of the grid because Michelin was made the mistake of bringing the wrong tires to the race; the teams asked for a chicane to be added to turn 13 where the tires failed on several occasions, and while the race was a fiasco the decision by the FIA can not be faulted.

Adding a chicane to turn 13 would resemble adding a chicane to the Eau Rouge or modifying Beckets.  There are some things that can not be changed, can not be modified, and in doing so F1 tracks are losing their very character. 

F1 tracks have been designed in a certain way to showcase a car’s potential, speed, and beauty.  By making a change to parts of the track simply to slow down a car takes away from the excitement.

If F1 continues along this path then today are tracks will be ghosts of yesterday; will the sport still be as exciting?  If the threat of incident is eliminated from the races will F1 still be exciting F1?    More importantly, what will be the justification for the large salaries that F1 drivers enjoy? 

F1 in the 1950s was a sport run by average amateur men who had other professions outside the F1 circle, yet sometime in time the sport became a business. 

F1 drivers were no longer just sports men, and certainly not amateur drivers; F1 pilots were now employees of large companies and business representatives, and their salaries grew significantly. 

As F1 speeds picked up and the sport became far more competitive, salaries grew immensely; the most well paid jobs are also some of the most dangerous, and the speed combined with the danger of F1 has classified the drivers into that category.  If F1 drivers no longer face any danger can their salaries be justified? 

The future is difficult to predict, and many questions will come and go.  Twenty years from now will F1 still be the pinnacle of motor-sports as it tries to become a safe and respectable competition? 

More importantly, will there be drivers willing to compete if F1 has become an uncompetitive parade of red, silver, yellow, white, blue billboards for the richest companies?