Club Arnage

I may make some angry by posting this, but I hope 2011 will be the last year with amateur drivers at Le Mans. I really don't understand why they are there - heritage? If so, why is it important to keep?

I made myself unpopular with Radio Le Mans by twitting to them that I agreed with Romain Dumas when he ranted over the amateur drivers Saturday evening - for some reason the guys there think amateurs are the greatest and that the pros just need to adjust. One hour later, Romains car was demolished when Rocky tried passing an amateur.

Antony Beltoise (who took McNish off) is technically a PRO, but take another look at the team. Before and during the start of the race, I chatted with an elderly french gentleman (it was his 62'nd Le Mans). He knew both Beltoise and the team owner (the one with the polish name, I don't remember). They are not experienced race drivers - not at all! The owner is a former table tennis champion - and just another a rich guy with a "Luxury Racing" team. The name of the team says it all. How they have made it into the GTE Pro class, I don't know.

And I'm not saying anything about the Ford GT team...

I'm from Denmark, and I was obviously put down by TK not making a single lap of the race. But that's not why I'm writing this - for me, Le Mans is so much more than Tom K! The way I see it is that I'm travelling 3000 km to enjoy the place and watch the race. Le Mans is the greatest motor race on the planet! But there's no greatness watching rich people have fun so they can brag about it at the golf course or in the pub.

I read in my morning paper that TK has been asked to write a report to FIA. He is not pointing fingers at anyone, but he does say that the crashes occurred (and that actually included Jan Magnussens Corvette crash) while experienced drivers were trying to overtake inexperienced drivers - and that the crashes would not have happened between pro's. TK knows what he's talking about.

I think Le Mans should be a purely professional race from now.

The GTs and the less professional drivers are part of the challenge.  OK we've had a couple of nasty incidents this year but I'd still think they are a fundamental part of the race and should stay.  I'm sure a few of the 'amateurs' are actually much better drivers than some of the professionals.

On the same grounds some of the Pug drivers should also be banned, disgraceful driving when blocking the Audi.
Keep the Gentleman drivers in my view.

Hi

I'm sorry but I totally disagree with what you say.

Amateur drivers are the very fabric of what makes Le Mans so very special. The day they stop taking entries from these drivers is the day the race dies. It is part of the magic, the dream of any man taking part in the worlds greatest motor race. Look at the entry list. Two thirds of the drivers were gentlemen (and a Lady) drivers this year. Who would fill the grid?
 How could we have amazing stories like Jean Rondeau winning in his own car in 1980? Paul Newman finishing second in 1979 behind two Yankee amateurs? Mike Newton winning LMP in a small underfunded team with an aging car for two years in a row a few years back? I could go on, but these are the stories that make Le mans special.

 Look what happened in the World Rally Championship a decade ago. The teams went media crazy and pushed out the amateurs. We went from long 5 day rallys with 170 cars to a three day sprint with 30 cars. The fans walked away, the media became uninterested and it died a slow and painful death. Would you want the same to happen to our beloved race?

 Everyone who has ever sat on the pit straight and watched those cars limp over the finishing straight after 24 hours harbours a burning desire to one day take part in that race. Would you take that dream away?

 As for the accidents? This is motor racing. It is dangerous. It is already too sanitized. Tou want safe? take up lawn tennis!
 It was also very clear to me that it was not the fault of those Amateur drivers in the two crashes you refer too. Plenty of Pro drivers made mistakes, and do every year. Magnussen punted off Horst Felbermayer at 8am leaving him in hospital with a big repair bill for starters. He is a Pro driver. He caused an accident.

 As for the two Audi crashes. They were very much of their own doing. They all sat in the same drivers briefing on Tuesday morning and were told that the slower cars must stay on the racing line, and it would be down to the faster cars to make a clean pass. Both McNish and Rocky tried to dive down the inside of cars that were moving towards the apex. The AM drivers were doing exactly what they were told to do. They took a risk, they paid the price.

 I do hope that TK takes time to look at the bigger picture before he submits his report to the FIA. The FIA buggered up endurance racing last time they took an interest. We need to hope and pray that this does not happen again. It is alright pandering to the big factory teams and the Pro's, but when the interest dies and the boardroom decide to spend money elsewhere, than this magical sport we love so dearly will wither and die, just as Rallying has. I was a huge rally fan and watched it die. Please don't let me live through that again.

Si

All you need is for the FIA to get involved and your in trouble. Back in the early 90's when they decided endurance racing should be 3.5 litre engines they had the smallest entry ever. A lot of amateur drivers kept it going.
Perhaps the cars were to quick, the diesels were running under the 3.30 lap time the ACO wanted.

Why blame all accidents on amatures?. I am also not pleased that my team audi 3 was in the first hour, but i think it was risk that Allan took to be first. But thats not a reason to destroy Lemans by only using pro drivers. I would like to think that Pro drivers has the skill to drive amongst les skilled drivers without crashing.

The pro's need to take a long hard look at thier actions tbh, diving into spaces when a GT car is already commited is foolish. I would not blame either of the two ferrari drivers for the crashes that befell the Audis.

There must of been 1000's of passes over the week that envolve a P1 car overtaking a much slower GT car or Aston, to only have the few coming togethers that happened is a testament to the skill of both the pro's and the am's.

IMHO McNish must look at his own driving, his crash was avoidable from is point of view, he could easliy have made a safe pass a couple of seconds later.

I think part of the problem is the current competitiveness at the top.  Audi and Pug are so close and their cars so reliable that both teams are both able and under pressure to push for the full 24h.  Time was you would not be sprinting all the time and you could make take a few corners to pass a slow car.  Perhaps they now feel the need to pass immediately.

Sorry, bit off topic but made me laugh out in the office when I read it ......  ;D

Oh come on be fair. The Astons weren't over taken that often ;)

I agree the time difference between 1st 2nd 3rd etc is so small now missed overtaking manoveures here and there over 24 hours can mean all the difference.
Should it be changed no but it'll possibly get worse & more competetive if more factory teams join.

I've had people say to me why don't they stop the different classes racing together if accidents like this happen, that surely would be the end >:(

Absolutely agree.

I think that not only does the OP have a Tom K fixation but that his understanding of what makes the race great is limited to when TK started winning. McNish was totally at fault for the crash thatcould have killed him and the public. It is therefore totally unreasonable to lay the blame at the lack of professionalism of the lesser drivers.

Beltoise did not "take mcnish off" and thus I have rarely read such an badly thought out, not to say pig ignorant, post on CA.

Completely agree Andy (and others). Never forget the beginnings and essence of Le Mans. I'm sick and tired of works team drivers (and some daft spectators) blaming amateurs for the crashes. You are correct - they were briefed before the race and new the rules.
What next - Ecclestone?????

And your point is?


What a load of bollocks. Happens nearly every race in F1 with pro drivers.

As I see it Endurance racing has always had the mix of Professional and "Gentlemen" drivers and cars of differing categories.  That is what makes the events so interesting to watch.

With the close result this year for sure every second is important.  However,  I think it is wrong to loose sight of the fact to win you have to be running at the end of the race.  That means staying out of trouble.

Without knowing what the three drivers were thinking in the moments before the McNish incident it hard to apportion blame for what followed.  IMHO asking the drivers after the event Is flawed since they will add their judgement on what happened.

t.

Completely agree with LB, Steve, Andy, etc  Have you actually seen the McNish accident?  That was totally on Allan, as I said on a different thread, that was a dumbass passing maneuver by a very experienced driver who should have known better.  From what I've seen from sportscar racing in recent years is some deplorable driving from the pro's, as well as the amateur drivers.  Many of the pro's seem to believe they have a divine right to do whatever the hell they want on the track, and the lapped cars are simply supposed to fall off the road to make way for them.  Doesn't work that way.  Gentleman drivers have been a part of the sport since the beginnings, on many occasions keeping the sport alive.  Agreed Andy, the first post on this thread is one of the more pig ignorant statements I've read on the forum in long time.  Sorry if your beloved TK never got a chance to drive, but direct your anger at Allan McNish, not Beltoise.
Fax

Audis driven over agressively, who'd have thought it.

I might be wrong, but wasn't Carlos Sainz a National Table Tennis or Squash Champion?

Seb Loeb was a French National Junior Gymnastics Champion.

Both are quite decent behind the wheel. I think they might have won a few things.

As someone who is trackside and right in the thick of it, I tend to agree now that the time has come to make changes. I was astounded on Wednesday and Thursday at just how damned bright are the Audi's headlamps, even by day, and actually I can empathise a bit with any driver, pro or amateur, when these monsters come up behind flashing their lights, especially at night. It must be almost impossible to know just how close they are, since the lights blind you completely, and also to judge the speed differential. Is it time perhaps to abolish the GT2 class entirely? Sitting with the radar team on the Mulsanne hump, which is exactly 0.55 of a mile from the last chicane, the Audis and Peugeots were doing over 190mph and only braking at the 200 metre board, whereas the GT classes were over 50mph slower and braking much earlier. Le Mans is a unique race, and we don't want to see it change sustantially, but surely safety must pre-empt all other considerations. Your opinions?

I consider modern motor racing to be safe enough as it is. When someone can climb out of a car unaided that has just hit the armco at well over 150mph, speared across the road to have another go on the other side, then i would consider that to be a safe sport. I see much worse injuries out riding my mountain bike week out week in.

Should we limit the cars to 80mph top speed and have them stop when it gets dark? In the interests of spectator safety should we make them watch from a hill outside Alencon? Where does it end?

It is a dangerous sport and i sure as hell don't want to see anyone get hurt, but there is such a thing as 'Acceptable Risk'. Those guys get paid a lot of money to drive those cars. If they no longer feel safe, then they should do as Sterling did last week and step aside. I know plenty of people who would take the Acceptable Risk and take the wheel.

My helmet and overalls are ready and waiting!

Thinking about it, that would give Aston Martin a chance to finish in the top 30. I do hope Dave Richards doesn't read our rantings.

What cars did the 917 or 512 compete against, pretty sure there was at least 50mph between a 917 and 911s? Cant imagine the old DB's etc with less than a 1000cc broke much over 120mph compared to a 5 litre Ferrari 375 which must of been well into the 160's

There has always been speed difference, what has changed now is that some pro drivers are treating the race as a sprint brought up on a diet of Senna and the i'm coming thru at any cost mentality they feel they are the top of the tree and everyone else is a less of a driver.

Maybe McNish should ponder his actions as i think in his past a F3000 i think has gone into the crowd with tragic results and it was only by the grace of god we did not see a repeat of 1955. when 3 pros trip each other up. However I am yet to read his take on this accident so will reserve judgement until then.

The above points are all sensible and debatable, but suely more suitable for another more considered thread that does not contain idiotic dumb-as-dogshit comments such as posted by the OP when blamed Beltoise (is he any relation BTW?) when it was clear McNish was at fault.

Son of France's answer to John Surtess.

Steve Kinser was a wrestler and he has since  won 20 World of Outlaw Championships and over 500 feature finals in sprint car racing.

christ.just seen rockies crash.saw nishys at circuit.hope there ok.the faster cars and drivers know its an endurance race.pace without patience wont get to the finish.first big crashes ive seen at LM scary.hope the message gets through.like one of the other guys wrote the stakes are high and the lead cars very close.shame about the astons mansell moment.cant wait for next year.

There is a post race blog video on Alan's website. Typical PR stuff about the build quality of the R18

http://www.allanmcnish.com/output/home.asp

Who hasn't sat at LM, looked at a passing GT or P2 car and thought 'If I win the euromillions'

Part of the spectacle of going is the thought that it <might> just be possible to go out there and play with everybody else? Without GT pro / am, and to a lesser extent P2, the event would lose a lot of its appeal.

TK doesn't like slower cars? Well Audi should make him an F1 car then.

Are we talking about pro drivers versus amateur, or are we talking about banning/slowing the diesels?

If the ACO took the steam out of the Audi vs. Pug competition then the chances of that whole incident scenario would reduce substantially.

Are we witnessing a "Concorde moment" where Pug & Audi have reached a pinnacle?

Other teams can't/won't compete with the mega-budgets that these 2 teams have.

I can't be alone in thinking that a Pescarolo or an Oak Racing win would not be enjoyed by the French, can I?

The 3 Audi's were undoubtedly "on a mission" this weekend, and in return we all saw some very unsporting/dangerous driving from the Pug drivers, didn't we, M. Gene?

The ACO has to realise that unless they slow these 2 teams right down then their will be deaths on the track & the other teams will give up on LMP1

As for headlight technology I bet they all start using it soon.

Why should we slow the diesels or any of the cars for that reason? Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought it was a race? If we step back a little in time it was to test how good a car (and more interestingly, their headlights) that Le Mans started in the first place was it not?

We always see this, slow them down they are going too fast mentality and then the regulatory bodies scrabbling to ban cool stuff that's been invented to subvert a rule etc. What the ACO/FIA et al should be doing is coming up with much cleverer rules that allow for innovation and propeller heads to come up with cool stuff that will ultimately make it to the road but keep competition going in the sport. If Audi and <spit> Peugeot can get a tractor to go so fast, why cant other builders? The rule makers (and people much cleverer than I'll ever be) need to think out of the box and find a way to make it happen - if the answer is just to keep slowing one or other type down then why not just stop development and call it the Classic Le Mans? (I'll go get my fireproof suit on now reaqdy for the onslaught)

Oh, and I agree with 99.9% of people here, Nishy's accident was entirely of his making and no, amateur drivers should never be barred from entering Le Mans, even the idea of it is silly or we may as well call it the FIA World Sportscar Series. Oh, hell, wait a minute ......

Good points and we are almost touching upon the real problem. The ACO changed the technical regs for this years race. The cars had smaller engines and were about 100-130bhp down on last year. The result was that the teams found speed elswhere. Both Audi and Peugeot ran with much less downforce this year to regain speed. I read interviews with both Davidson and McNish after the test weekend where they both said that the cars felt underpowered and required the drivers to carry more speed through corners, and only worked when pushed to the limit.
 So as a result of the ACO pegging back the top cars we have ended up with cars still running under 3:30 but requiring a much more aggressive driving technique. Hardly a step forward.

Thats the biggest problem with motor racing. No matter how you write the rules, those clever bods in the backroom will always find a way of going just as fast.

 Anyway. We have just witnessed probably the best race of a generation. Yes there were incidents, but show me a year at Le Mans when there wasn't? Personally i think the current format is brilliant. If every race in the future is going be as good as the one we have just seen, then that suits me fine.

Why?

To prevent deaths that are entirely preventable.

I love the idea of clever bastards finding loopholes in regs, be it ACO, or F1, or any other.  Just wish I had the brains for that sort of work...

Yes it's a race and yes they can peddle those diesels pretty fast.  I don't deny anyone the opportunity to build & race these machines, but if closing speeds on corners are close to a 50 mph difference isn't that too dangerous?

God forbid we end up with an F1 type situation where all of the cars are within 107% of each other, that's why sportscar racing is so damn interesting.

I suppose the ACO will turn the wick down a bit, but not too much as Pug will lean on them as compatriots and Audi will lean on them due to massive investment in the track.

Still, I reckon the crowd would go wild if Henri grabbed top slot one year  ;D

Thanks for the comments - and for not flaming me :)

So amateurs on Le Mans is part of the tradition. I appreciate that. The last thing I want to see is a spiritless Le Mans.

And the dream of being able to do the race yourself - I can relate to that! This year was the first time I had a chance to drive my Espace on the track... Would I like to drive a race car there? Yes, of course!

But how many of the 249,500 spectators will ever be able to raise the funds for running Le Mans? Not to mention the millions who watch it on tv? And why should money make the difference - I'd much rather see talent be rewarded.

I don't want to see private teams exit from Le Mans - why should they? But I'd like to see more talented drivers on Le Mans - and yes, that includes the Peugeot drivers, and frankly I find it pathetic when a team owner puts himself in the car instead of picking the best man for the job. It's just bad management.

Not allowing the GET Am class at Le Mans (not in the ALMS or LMS though) next year will be a step in the right direction IMO.

About the McNish accident - Audi went for a closed top car with wider fronts and drivers seated lower. Driving that car must feel like having blinkers on. There is obviously also a problem with the way the gravel trap works for prototypes - the car was just never 'trapped'.

/Anders

Absolute and total drivel, are you seriously trying to insult out intelligence?

(http://www.straferight.com/photopost/data/500/medium/double-facepalm.jpg)

Picking through the thread we see that the back room boffins combatted the reduced power with less downforce, which could possibly have led to a 1999 flying Mercedes syndrome, but instead led to an "Audi flying low over gravel" syndrome. I agree also that the speed difference between the classes has always been there, but when you create more and more technological cars which lap faster and faster, no matter in which class, then when an accident happens it is going to happen with a "bigger bang for your buck" than before. Cars are better and more edgy too, but are the drivers, especially the amateurs, the same percentage better than their cars are? In 2001, then years ago, the winning Audi managed 321 laps, whereas this year the winning Audi posted 355, and increase of 10%, so logically an increase in average speed of the same margin. Surprisingly, because I thought there would be a greater difference, the Corvette posted 314 laps this year and the Porsche 283 in 2001, so again a difference of about 10%. Now this begs the question "are drivers 10% better than ten years back". One only has to watch the McNish Audi advert to learn a thing or two about fitness levels needed to cope with the G-forces today.

Just a couple of points:


Sadly, money makes ALL the difference, Pro or Am. Look at the 'professional' drivers in F1 for example. Yes, there are those on stupendous salaries but quite a few 'pro' drivers that have rich parents or sponsors that brought their way in (either in the first place or continuously) - any team short of $10-20m will always look to fill the second seat with a pay driver.


Isn't that one of the benefits of being a team owner? Perhaps you could speak to Martin short at Rollcentre on the matter?


That does seem to be the case, yes. The car literally flew over the trap and hardly touched the gravel, but, at those speeds almost anything with a flat bottom would have done the same. The problem is not the trap, it's the design of the cars and the rear fin this year was supposed to help - perhaps it did, perhaps without it the impact would have been even greater but it's pretty obvious that it did not work in exactly the way that the ACO had envisaged that it would.

Just a bit of math.......
time difference 1st. to 2nd 16 sec. Laps 355
that will be ,045 sec pr. lap you can lose. How many corners can you then afford to sit behind a p2/gt car.
The line between winning and comming 2nd/crashing is very thin. If you want to be first, maybe you need to accept the risk and take the chance to overtake.
So the audi accidents was on Rocky/Mcnish, Pro racedrivers who knew the risk, and accepted it to be able to win. This time it did not work, but i think they will be right back next year doing just the same style of racing. cause if you slow just a little bit down you might not crash, but you are shure not to be first. And 2nd ist only the first loser.

Kenn

If you look at some of the photos available on the net it's clear to see that IF McNish had squeezed past Belthoise in the Ferrari that he then had to Porsche's to 'deal with' just seconds ahead.  Cannot remember which teams but I think one of them was Flying Lizards.  Deffo not AM and correctly on the racing line.

So what was McNish actually trying to achieve?

He overtook his team mate & then had 3 cars in front of him on the racing line.

The whole thing has nothing to do with Amateur drivers and everything to do with either McNish suffering 'a red mist' or was so pumped up by team orders/expectations that he felt he had to just go for it, despite the fact that there were still 23 hours of racing ahead of him.

We've all complained about Poo-Joe's attitude & team orders, but let's be honest & realise that Audi must have had something similar for their drivers.

This battle for LMP1 supremacy is the root of the issue.  We cannot, and should not, seek to prevent the 2 teams from competing.  After all it makes great motor racing which is why we all enjoy it.  The issue is that the 2 of them are solely focussed on each other & are spending millions of Euros trying to gain the upper hand.  

Audi spotted the opportunity in the regs to introduce diesels and Poo-Joe decided to re-take the race as a matter of national pride.  No one else has been willing, or able, to follow for a variety of reasons including money & marketing.  Aston had an opportunity to develop a diesel engine [possibly might wish that they had...] but as they pointed out they do not offer a diesel in any of their cars therefore why go racing with a diesel when customers cannot walk in to a show room on Monday morning & ask for a car with the engine that won Le Mans on Sunday.

Maybe we all need to agree to disagree but I personally believe that the diesels need their wings severely clipping in order to restore safety and proper equivalency.

I'd also like to win the Euro-Millions lottery & have a threesome with Davina McCall & Suzi Perry.

Now there's a thought for those of us suffering mid-week syndrome ....

  I think it is more to do with budgets that fuel types. Five years ago Audi had petrol engines. Has anyone been able to beat them for the last decade- diesel or petrol? No. The amount of money they spend, they would probabaly win with a car powered by carrots. Why should they be pegged back? Instead of the ACO constantly tweeking the regulations in an attempt to be seen to do something, why don't they sieze the opportunity, and spend that time and effort to encourage new manufacturers?
  We had engines and a large group of management from Nissan (not Neee-san Jim) and Toyota at the weekend, plus Mazda came along with that glorious noisy bastard of a group C car. The ACO want to be seen as green, why not dangle a big green performance break in front of these Japanese companies which are all heavily developing hybrid technologies? The only way to break the domination of Audi and the other team that should not be mentioned, is to have more factory teams with deep pockets come to the party.

Again though, as i said before, I can't believe we are griping about the performance of cars that have just provided us with one of the best races i have seen in the last 20 years.

Si

You really have taken a shine to the lad there Mr Zarse!
 ;D ;D

Not so much as a gripe as a thought process.

By this I mean if I were the ACO and if I were sitting down this week to analyse the race how would I look to improve the race & also make it safer.

Clearly it needs careful handling and should not be a knee-jerk reaction.

Roll on 2012  ;D

Hugh Chamberlin said exactly that, Audi and Pug have huge amounts of money compared to all the other teams, which other team could get Michelin to make them bespoke tyres for example?

I do not see a connection between the crashes and the motive power of the cars, rather drivers under pressure or not taking a risk and it not paying off.

There is a weight of expectation on McNish nowadays as he is precieved as one of the fastest drivers in the field, maybe that is also a factor?

Adinsen. I have to say that I do disagree with everything that you say really. Amateur drivers are a fundamental part of endurance and in particular the worlds greatest motor race the 24 hours Le Mans.

I also agree with the many here who have commented previously concerning the Mc Nish incident. What was he thinking? Even if he had got beyond Beltoise I could not see what his next move was going to be at all?

I am extremely grateful for the fact the circuit was so well prepared that no one was hurt. I have looked at that section of circuit on many occasions and wondered what the ACO were thinking about building such huge gravel runoff areas to the detriment of the viewing public possibly – no even with that it took a good deal of luck to result in no one dying or for that matter even sustaining any injury at all.

Slightly off topic (apologies) I would like to say that I find myself visiting quite a few sports sites and Club Arnage remains to me one of the very best by a long way. I think it is great that someone can come along and pitch an opinion with which no one agrees and that the result (with a couple of predictable exceptions)  is an interesting and well argued debate.

I am looking forward to 2012 already and in doing so – hoping that the tradition of the worlds greatest motor race will be upheld and we will once again be able to enjoy watching drivers of all calibres from all over the world as is the tradition.

 

Having read through all of this, ultimately everything is just fine the way things are.  The car did its job in protecting McNish, the debris fencing protected the spectators, and there are some very fortunate photographers.  If any changes at all need to made, the blokes with the cameras may need a bit more protection there, but its their call to be there in the first place.  Accidents of this violence are pretty common in Indycar and NASCAR racing, just a matter of making sure the correct safety measures are in place when they do happen.  It was a poorly executed overtaking maneuver resulting in a big accident, like I said happens all the time in racing.
Adinsen's notion that amateur/gentleman drivers should be excluded is laughable, there wouldn't be a hell of alot of cars on the grid if that were the case.  Gentleman drivers are the backbone of sportscar racing, there are not a huge number of drivers on a the grid who are getting paid to be there, most are financing their ride one way or another.
And Adinsen, stop groping for excuses for McNish's accident.  I like Allan very much, think he's a terrific bloke and a hell of a racer.  But he f**ked-up, plain & simple, he had no business trying to pull off a pass like that twenty-nine minutes into a 24 hour race.  That overtaking maneuver was going to go pear shaped from the second he thought about it.
Fax

Another thing that needs debating is what good did the hideous new fin do in reducing the accident. The honest answer is that I have no idea whether it helped or hindered the accident process, does anyone know?


IMO we could have had an equally informed and interesting debate without the original poster's ridiculous comments. I too love CA for the very reasons you mention, but it has never been a place where fools have been suffered, and you've been involved in a few fairly strident flamings yourself, so it's equally predictable to my mind that you can't resist having a pop on here.

Enough silly comments already from Danes, let alone Fins...

Looking at Rockenfellers accident, it looked more like the fin acted as a sail, and caused the car to spear off and impact the wall more forcefully than it may have done without the fin, rather than spinning along the track a la mansell. That said, it didn't get airborne.

McNish has gone on the record stating that the fin worked as intended in his own accident.

Agreed, not sold on the fin yet.  Something of concern that has been brought up is the effectivness of gravel traps in the case of high speed accidents where the cars tend to fly right over them.  They've come up with a pretty clever alternative to the gravel traps at Paul Ricard (and several other venues I believe) They've installed abrasive layers to the tarmac around corners to help arrest a sliding car, they gradually become more abrasive the further off the racing surface a car ventures, to point where they will wreck the tires.  But it beats being catapulted off kerbing in the barriers.
Fax

Knowing the FIA,they'll mandate a ballistic parachute system which fires if an on board computer determines if the car is being driven outside its expected envelope of performance. This will be as about as effective as farting into a hurricane.

Asphalt run off is a very effective medium.

Joining the debate after looking at the videos...IMHO,

In the McNish accident, the gravel trap didn't "trap" the car (it would have probably sent it rolling violently if it had), but equally it didn't get properly airborne, as it skidded/skipped across the gravel leaving a pretty constant plume of dust behind it.  The tyre wall, armco and the structure of the car did their job by absorbing a huge amount of kinetic energy quickly, but in a relatively controlled way; the loose wheel had little energy left when the photographer was running away from it.  That it went into the barriers at the angle and height it did, and that nobody got hurt may well have involved a certain element of luck.

In the Rockenfeller accident, the quick spin left into the barrier was probably more down to the contact from the Ferrari moving right against the middle/rear left of the Audi, which put both right wheels well onto the grass; combined with bags of grip on the left side wheels on the tarmac, the dynamics are inevitably going to slew you left - very quickly.  Again though the car didn't get properly airborne.

In both of those cases, the dynamics of the accidents combined with the structure of the car left the drivers unscathed.  I have yet to hear mention of the third serious accident of last weekend at 0330hrs, where the video shows Mike Wainwright driving the No 60 Aston Martin Vantage running wide onto the grass outside the right hander after the first of the Porsche curves, slewed left in front of another car (without making contact with it), hit the opposite side barrier initially with the front right of the car which spun the right side of it into the barrier.  Which was a solid concrete wall.  Which resulted in (reported) injuries of broken ribs, a punctured lung and a fractured pelvis. 

A lesson or two there perhaps about LMP v GTE structural designs, probably something about fins, but more particularly about the relative energy absorption properties of tyres/armco, armco alone, and concrete.........
 
MG Mark 

Part of me wonders whether the "Fin" Structure had a role to play in slowing the cars marginally, and stopping the whole structure becoming airbourne?

In my mind, the only aerofoil which was effective when the car was skewing sideways, was the flat surface, which must have played some part (however small) in keeping the car relatively close to the ground.

Ultimately though, the crashes can only be branded as a success.  Nobody was hurt.  The fact is, Motor Racing is a dangerous sport.  We all sign up to this, the moment we buy and use a ticket.  Whilst you can always find more ways to make things safer, I don't think there is any action to be taken here.  Two MASSIVE accidents, zero injuries - the precautions work - so leave them as they are!!

Mike Wainwright's crash was no were near as spectacular as the Audi's however went sideways into concrete barriers, high G accident.
Wish him a speedy recovery from his nasty injuries.

I agree that the fins did a good job. If you look back two years to Treluyer's huge accident in the Pescarolo run Peugeot at Chappelle you get a good idea of the fin's affectivness. It was a similar accident, slightly higher speed; the car slewing sideways off the road. It then got air underneath it, started to pitch, the dug into the gravel and started to rotate. It rolled several times along the top of the barriers before falling back into the gravel. The key point being that the air got underneath and pitched the car into an angle that caused it to go down at an angle into the trap. With a fin fitted it would have stayed level and skipped accross the trap as the Audi did this time.
 
 To conclude, yes the fin works, but the gravel now has little affect.

I must admit I am fascinated by this. Mr McNish says it worked – then it worked.

Having risen to the mighty academic heights of CSE grade 2 physics, I am more than aware that I am way out of my depth here (but since when has that stopped me.) ;D

I would always have imagined that once the car got sideways then the ‘fin’ as a flat surface facing oncoming air moving (relatively) at (say) 150mph (?) would create drag at the top of the car (over the fin) which in turn would cause (opposite reaction) lift at the bottom.

I wondered if in fact this was evident with the McNish accident where the car gets sideways and skips (leading edge up) across the gravel??

As has already been discussed – they worked – McNish said so, and no one was hurt. I guess in the case of his incident had the fin not been there then it might have spun dug in and rolled?? We (and certainly not I) will ever really know perhaps?   

Isn't there more grip on the track, rather than off it, thereby turning a car with 2 wheels on and 2 wheels off away from the tarmac?

this is only truth if you dont break. By breaking into the turn the two righthand wheels would skid on the grass, turning the car left.

On last weeks Mid week motorsport on radio Le Mans (which I've only listened to today)they talked about Lamy being sacked during the race for not following team orders. possibly something to do with not making the pug a lot wider on track.

Anyone heard anymore about this?

If it's true it's shows how much pressure the drivers are under :o   

Judging by his official quote after the race, I's say it's entirely possible:

(http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/251019_10150331555778765_820063764_9944918_8347546_n.jpg)

Might be giving away my 'never back off, give no quarter' approach there :D

Lamy was pulled from the car on the Saturday night - long before there was any question of a "wide" Peugeot - because his lap times were not up to those of Bourdais and Pagenaud. A point he concedes whilst claiming that he was the quicker driver at Spa.
He says he won't be driving for Peugeot again and will be sharing a BMW with Dick Werner at Imola this weekend.