The best thing from the weekend, and one I will take away from it if no one else Had the powers that be pushed forward and risked safety we might have lost a rider, or two, or three.
I am truly sorry for the fans but standing water on a motorbike is a recipe for complete disaster. No one lost their life this weekend, and we must all be glad for that.
All the points made are valid and I fully agree, racing in those conditions would have been disastrous. Testing trumps racing? Dorna should have made a firm decision in this regard. The testing could have been postponed. The only winners in this situation is HRC and Marc. Actually 4 factories were against racing on Monday - Yamaha among them. They have testing in Spain on Wednesday. Which is a logistic nightmare meaning that on Monday evening they should pack amd be ready in Aragon on Tuesday evening - by car it takes 18h, I am not sure about trucks though.
I assume they wanted to test in Aragon because theu atruggle there usually. If they postponed it, they would no longer be allowed test since it violates rules if race is yet to happen on the track, there needs to be several weeks forgot how much between the test and race. Not to mention that private test costs several hundred thousand EUR Thank you for the great writing David. I have some comments.. Coming soon. As sson as I get into a quiet place to write. The rain wasn't sitting in a pool at the side of the track, it was on top of the tarmac, going nowhere.
I don't think tarmac itself would be affected by drought since it has no water component. I live 20 miles away, and although we had quite an unusual drought in the area for weeks, the drought broke a couple of weeks before the race. I would say the previous two weeks were about normal for the UK.
The rain on the day was not unusually hard, as David says. It was just a shame it didn't move on and blow out after 3 or 4 hours. Unfortunately after the low opinion expressed by the F1 drivers and Moto GP riders even in the dry the issue lies entirely with the new track surface.
Rippled tarmac ground flat-ish with power tools and seemingly no or not enough camber to move water off it. Silverstone has run plenty of wet car and bike races since the rebuild, including Moto GP, the layout hasn't changed, only the track surface. What was their reasoning?
There was a clear advantage in a total cancellation for Honda and Yamaha, I get that, but not for the other teams, factory or satellite.
I have to say I was surprised. Cal said on BT Sport that he'd be up for it, but he never follows the party line! I was there, I gave up and went home before the final announcement, as I was so cold and wet I was past caring. I was also at the wet and races, and I can confirm that the rain was definitely no worse. Yesterday you could see the standing water, and they couldn't race on it. I disagree with the nutcases on Twitter saying they should have raced.
What a farce. I wonder how this will impact the British Superbike round in two weeks time? The parking is terrible, and the facilities worse the queues for the toilets are legendary.
And is this small circuit suitable for now near bhp bikes? What a mess! First and foremost my thoughts go to Rabat. I'm still playing in my mind that horrible crashfest on FP4, and the fact that it could have been much much worse.
We can lay the blame on Pringle and the circuit, but honestly I think that once again Dorna and IRTA are the major responsible for this unbelievable mess! And there can be no excuses. My impression is that as usual, they are there to cash in as much as they can, but they "wash their hands" about everything else.
Everybody knew the safety issues, as Hamilton stated. And Uncini excuse was "we wouldn't have had the time to do anything about it" How about sending some workers to open some drainage like they did in Sepang after resurfacing? BTW: with all due respect: isn't Zaffelli the guy responsible for some of the problems of the new resurfaced Sepang circuit? They had a month to take some action Again, at Dorna they love to keep things blurred : if there are no rules, then it's easier to get away with everything.
Why can't there be a simple rule that states that when the race is canx on Sunday they will race the following day. Teams will know and they will be ready, all the organisation can keep an open option on all workers that expires on 2pm sharp on Sunday if the race take place, and the people who cannot attend will at least have the opportunity to see the race on TV. It was appaling to see everyone waiting for what?
And now IRTA: how can we have a safety commission meeting with nobody being warned? So some riders just meet up and some showed up because they "saw it on TV" True, it would not have made any difference, but it's unacceptable that kind of amateurism at this level. It was the right decision not to race, and yes maybe Tito's crash helped in making that decision. Nevertheless, Motogp is not gladiators and lions in the Coliseum. We want good thrilling racing, nobody wants a carnage.
I know, I was not there freezing under the rain for many long hours, but I'm sure that every fan of the sport agrees that safety comes first. Will heads roll? No, or rather maybe some heads but the wrong ones in my opinion. It's up to Dorna to make sure that the circuit meets the right standards. While at the upper level nobody seems to be in charge and take responsability.
Unfortunately I have seen, both first hand and as a spectator, that racers are all too slow to turn their gaze uptrack toward the action after a crash. This is especially important in rain or oil conditions when multiple bikes in a row may be crashing. I have no idea what could be done to ameliorate this tendency. Riders get dazed, and if uninjured are more interested in remounting or checking for crash damage on the bike.
External and internal fixation is a supreme teacher. I wish Tito a speedy and full recovery. Assessing a track for motogp readiness has got to be a real niche skill, but I feel like it's one that Dorna needs to learn how to get right. I recall some anxiety about a resurfaced Sepang as well recently, and with more tracks, the likelihood goes up that in any given season you'll be on a freshly resurfaced track. While motogp bikes are unique, in this instance at least it feels like you could have identified issues with an ex-racer there are a few?
In fact issues had already been identified by club racers, in cars - sometimes listening is a useful skill. Hopefully Silverstone can be a turning point for this, with all parties track, Dorna, riders having tasted the bitter pill here.
If not, I'm sure there will be an opportunity to re-learn the hard lesson. I was there with my young sons and decided to abondon the event after hours of waiting and no real update! I think the riders made the right decision but Dorna should have held the race on Monday at the very least and allowed us all to return to the event. Also I think the riders coud have come out to see the fans in a bus and toured the circuit to wave at us who were soaked to the bone.
It would have gone down so well if the riders came around to the various stands. Nobody in all of the above, apart from David's odd comment, has given a thought to the vast amount of money expended by hard working people who have now seen a signifcant amount of cash wasted due to a combination of circumstances beyond their, but not the organisers, control. The word "unprecedented" keeps cropping up in these summaries of the disaster that will come to be known as "Cock-up Silverstone ".
OK, let's take that further and agree that the fans who made their way to Silverstone need an "unprecedented" offer of compensation.
The top riders are paid millions each year and are all disappointed they couldn't race. How many of them, plus Dorna and Silverstone, would be prepared to contribute to an "unprecedented" fund to properly recompense the disappointed fans. I don't just mean the cost of the ticket. Consider, costs to get to the circuit, unpaid time off, camping costs, food and drink, fuel etc.
To think we could spend that amount of money, only to have a race cancelled, leaves a sour taste in my mouth. You're absolutely right, it's not just the ticket price for Sunday that should be reimbursed, it's the whole trip. All those expenses travel, lodging, 3-day passes, food, etc. I immediately thought of a class action lawsuit for all the spectators who wasted their hard earned money.
Needless to say, Silverstone is now off our list for future vacations. I live 40 miles from Donington, just by the M1 so can be there in 40 mins. I always used to go for practice but, unless it was a real biggie Rossi in , etc , I used to avoid. Poor facilities, no option to pay more to upgrade to the sort of seating freely available in Europe so Europe it was-still is in fact. Help me out here guys, Jonathan Palmer is no mug, is known for making money with his MSV-R but did transform the spectator experience in BSB, and is now reaping the rewards.
I understood FIM had-or were willing to-homologate the track, with minor improvements, but have not sanctioned the whole circuit due to misgivings about the paddock size, parking and mass access. Can anyone verify this? Silverstone has some built I hear are rented out to events around the UK.
I was never going Sunday, been ,11 and And despite not being in the market I could not believe what they were asking for walk up entry on race day. I hope Donington has a go, people are fond of the place IF it can provide the obvious.
Good post. We're between a rock and a hard place: - Silverstone is an excellent track to race MotoGP bikes, but average for spectating - Donington is an excellent track for spectating, but average for racing MotoGP bikes. On balance, I would prefer Donington, and I'll live with the hassle of access. In terms of getting in and out of tracks, consider cycling! You can get round Silverstone in 20 mins, and pick a different viewing spot per race without too much hassle. And no parking. I know - if everyone did it, it would be a mess, so let's just keep the secret between you and me, eh.
Yes, a very good way to get around the vast spaces of Silverstone. Donington certainly is in this company, as are Mugello, PI, Imola, Salzburgring, Spa etc with the ultimate demonstration of the form the original Nurburgring.
With the UK initially averse to motorsport, we are a country full of ex-airfields for race tracks, with a few notable exceptions. It desperately needs some competition and we will soon see if Mr Palmer thinks Donington can be that competition, sadly there is no other choice. Rockingham, being the most modern build in the country, missed the boat badly by trying to model itself only on an American form of racing that was never, ever going to be enough, multiple track days or not.
COTA allows bottled water only, absolutely nothing else. Brno was the same. Bottled water and nothing else. Even had to leave a ml coke bottle at the gate. Thanks for this excellent and interesting analysis. I think we can now have some insight into the complexity of this situation, and how there is unlikely to be a simple single solution.
A couple of thoughts though: I don't think I have ever seen a rider as completely freaked out as Mr Rins after his crash and his efforts to warn other riders, and the look on his face in the pits afterward, said it clearly enough; the wet conditions were impossible.
As much as I do concede the complexity though I think that Jinx's earlier contribution on the subject still has some significant merit. Whenever we hear jawboning about how hard it is to test something like wet weather drainage the overriding impression I got from the article was that it's in the 'too hard' basket.
Yes, you can't pour 10M gallons of water down to test the whole track but maybe a fire hose plus Mr Jinx's bag of marbles might have been of some assistance. And clearly, from now on, you can't just resurface a bloody race track and assume it will be right as rain either. Concur with your comments on US circuit's extra fees and restrictions except Cota. You are not allowed to take any sustainance into the circuit, including water. You must empty your water container at entry but are allowed to re-fill in the toilet block.
PS I have succesfully smuggled in sandwiches hidden in my underpants which drew admiring glances from the brolly dollies only to be dissappointed later.
I wonder whether this will be a watershed weekend for the sport, especially for Silverstone? Surely our great sport deserves bespoke homes around the world? I did a little research, and Autosport magazine conducted a poll in June this year, to rank the greatest F1 circuits. These were the top eight results:. Mugello; 2.
Assen; 3. Phillip Island; 4. Brno; 5. Misano; 6. Jerez; 7. Termas De Rio Hondo; 8. Its time to realize this, and for Britain to develop a bespoke, world-class motorcycle racing venue. I have no idea how this will be paid for, but Donington Park seems the best place for this. Hell, it's not like het Engels don't know how to find the place already. But the tricky bit it will take a little more effort.
And we can start with tossing the idea that permeable asphalt is a total solution for drainage issues in the rubbish bin. Permeable asphalt can play a role as part of a system, and may be of particular value in reducing wheel spray under mixed conditions. But there are limits that still require that a racing surface be sloped across the direction of travel to properly drain the track.
The first limit to permeable asphalt is the grade in the direction of travel which, which simply stated is: are we going uphill or downhill? Then there is the transition at the end of the graded section, does the track now flatten out, or does it quickly reverse slope?
And the latter is the nut to be cracked. And it is also exactly what is transpiring at Silverstone to make Stowe such a challenge to keep free of standing water. The general opinion of Silverstone is that it is flat and featureless, and while this may have some validity in the aggregate, it is not true about the Hangar Straight and Stowe.
The Hangar Straight runs downhill its entire length until the entrance to Stowe, where the track makes about a degree turn to the right, at the same time climbing steeply. So what we have is a viaduct and a dam. And the key to it appears to be this: Controlling the volume of water going into Stowe is equally and I suspect even more important than controlling the drainage capacity of that corner.
The area of the entire Hangar Straight is enormous. It is both wide and reasonably long, and it all points straight downhill to Stowe. So unless the total volume of water reaching Stowe is significantly reduced, you get a Duck Pond. There are two methods to control this volume; drainage via slope across the track, and drainage via the permeable surface to a drain field under the racing surface.
Only the former is probably valid for Hangar Straight. We have all seen the demonstrations of permeable asphalt, where buckets are emptied or fire hoses aimed at a nice flat surface and the water magically disappears. This is really no different than placing a screen over a bucket and pouring water on the screen. It will not collect on the screen, but run through into the bucket, with the only limitation being the volume of the reservoir available.
As long as there is a gap between the water level and the lip of the bucket we have few worries. But what happens when we tilt the bucket to one side, which simulates the conditions when the grade of the track is running downhill? In this case the raised part of the rim is the start of Hangar Straight, and the lowest part of the rim is the entrance to Stowe. And it no longer matters whether there is a gap between the water level and the high part of the bucket's lip, because as we all know, the water is going to pour out over the lower lip.
So to have a viable reservoir under the track surface like Hangar Straight would require that the entire drain field be excavated below the level where we enter Stowe, which might mean 8mm in depth at the beggining of Hangar Straight.
A 10m deep excavation under the racing surface is less a drain field and more some kind of Underground Dwarf City from a Tolkien Novel. Water falling on the first part of Hangar Straight will not just sit quietly after passing through permeable asphalt. It will do what all things do; assume the lowest energy state and do so in the manner that requires the least energy to achieve.
Which means it is perfectly happy to keep flowing under Hangar Straight until an equilibrium is reached, where it will form a pool. And if this pool reaches a height greater than the racing surface, it will also be perfectly happy to flow right back through our track surface. The literature on this does suggest some options, but these appear to be in the form of a series of under pavement terraces and dams to prevent this unwanted flow.
In other words, we have swapped our bucket for an ice cube tray to compartmentalize the flow, and it all begins to look a bit silly when attempted on a large scale to me at least. The people who do these things treat it as pretty routine. The other solution, track slope across the direction of travel, is the one that needs to be optimized. Using the 2 degree target, a track width of 20m would require a height change of 0.
Well, almost. Because we are still going downhill in the racing direction grade , so the actual flow of water across and hopefully off of the racing surface is in a diagonal direction combining both grade and slope.
And this does matter to us as we want the flow path to be as short as possible, as the longer the flow path, the more water will remain on the track surface at any one time. And it is absolutely required that as much water as possible leave the Hangar Straight before it arrives at Stowe, because things take a particularly nasty turn if it doesn't.
Water allowed to flow the full length of Hangar Straight has two variables; volume mass , and velocity. Which means it has inertia. And when it arrives at the entrance to Stowe it runs smack into an uphill section, which it will attempt to climb until sufficient energy is removed. And if that were all that happened it would be bad, but not nearly as bad as what happens next.
Because all of that water that just scampered up the slope of Stowe now wants to follow the call of gravity right back down the slope just like throwing a brick straight in the air; once the energy you imparted to the brick is dissipated, it will fall back to earth. So now we have a counter-flow, where the water coming back down the slope of Stowe collides with the flow just arriving from Hangar Straight, and things start to pile up on top of each other.
As would the wind. Especially if it were in a direction that impeded the sideways distribution of rainwater off of the Hangar Straight. Sufficient wind energy will certainly stall or even reverse sideways drainage, especially if the slope across the track is weak and feeble. If the sideways drainage is stalled the length of Hangar Straight, then all of that water and it really is a huge volume just washes right down to the entrance of Stowe, with its terminal velocity either aided or impeded by any additional angle of the wind relative to the racing direction.
And we can't discount velocity of the flow. Remember, in almost all the equations used to calculate these things, we square the velocity. And that brings us to unintended consequences.
When all of those horrible ripples that were made by the cars with significant aero packages were removed during the repaving, we might have removed features that acted as flow dampers.
The ripples and other imperfections may well have attenuated the velocity of the water flowing down Hangar Straight, under some conditions, to an extent that was not fully considered when they were removed.
Making the track as smooth as a newborn's bum may have allowed an increase in water velocity right where it was not wanted. If you want to model a simulation of a corner that would be a nightmare to drain, you could do a lot worse than this little patch of Silverstone.
In fact, if you can arrive at the right combination of features that would eliminate water pooling at the entrance to Stowe, I believe you would be well armed to do so anywhere. For a supposedly dull little track from a topology standpoint, the layout is sublime there is an awful lot going on.
And I would love to hear some input from anyone who knows more about the subject than I do, which is a pretty low bar. My only interaction with Civil Engineering types is that they seem to be perfectly competent at making places for my products to take-off and land from, their personal hygiene appears to be adequate, and I would consider inviting one to make a foursome if we were a player short. But I would not introduce one to my sister. I typed up this gibberish to help clarify my own thinking, rather than to offer any real wisdom on the subject if you want wisdom, read Mat Oxley's stuff or Krop's, which is what I do , so sorry for any collateral damage.
But I do feel the following are valid and please chime in if you feel differently. Drainage at the critical location cannot be effective unless the inflow volume and velocity are controlled i.
If the conditions described in 3 above are marginal, they may tip the balance in very much the wrong way. I believe this was the case at the last go, and I strongly suspect the result was over-compactment of those volumes, which are constrained at completion and therefore cannot release to the correct densities even when the temperatures eventually moderate. I sincerely hope both the opportunity and budget are provided to allow them to do so.
My fear is that the budget will be the main failure point. There will be no real benefit to this, but I am certain the entertainment value alone would be through the roof. Heck, for authenticity we can ship some of our home grown grid girls down under. They are easy to recognize I think you should get your CV in to Senor Uncini pronto.
No tunnel or bridge for access? After all this procrastination and debate I can personally boil my final conclusion down to one word. It is telling that the only minor correction I can make on this otherwise outstanding post is a comment on a language which, as far as I know, Jinx does not speak, yet got incredibly close. That would be " de Engelsen ". And yes, that is unfortunately how the Dutch tend to refer to everyone from the United Kingdom, including the Scots, the Welsh, and the Northern Irish.
Should you, as a British citizen not from England, find yourself in The Netherlands being asked if you are English, I suggest responding by asking if your Dutch interlocuter is German. Be prepared to duck. Actually, I genuinely appreciate any corrections on anything I have posted.
The abillity of this site's readers to check their egos and handbags at the door is what makes this one of the very few places worth reading and your writing makes it my first stop. PS - You need to work on your "churlish". The blows need to land harder than a butterfly with sore feet. Uncini explains at length how difficult it would be to test Silverstone in the rain, but David does a little Googling and finds accounts of the very same problems MotoGP experienced.
So it was knowable that the track had problems with standing water when it rains. Dorna just didn't think or bother to look, and seemingly won't in future.
If you read their various charters, all three play a role in ensuring track safety and in this case, and Philip Island, Indianapolis Motor Speedway and others, they have recently failed the riders, spectators and the sport. It is the governing bodies that determine what safety and facility upgrades are required at existing and prospective circuits in order to maintain or receive a contract to host a race and as such, they should be able to certify which completed upgrades meet quality assurance tests.
If they are not sufficent, they need to identify the issue and ensure its proper completion. How many track upgrades are performed in a single year?
Likely a managable number. Likely few enough to ensure projects are completed correctly. There have been many recent failires in my opinion regarding resurfacing, track design upgrades, etc and in each time it was the venues that were pilloried after a project was not done to ridef specs of which affected the show. They have sufficiently deep pockets to maintain necessary equipment and riders to dispatch to confirm known issues.
They, IMHO, should be responsible for ensuring that work done is performed to their requirements and then push down on local venues when it is not. In the Silverstone scenario, Mike Webb makes good points that testing a facility in the wet would be exceptionally challenging but they were aware of track conditions regarding bumps from Lewis Hamilton after the F1 event in advance of the race and others are quoted as saying the track profile had changed from previous years.
All state that Silverstone should be abke to handle a wer race given it is England. Ot should be tested for accordingly. Long periods of boredom. The wrongdoers The circuit could count on a great deal less sympathy. Nearly there A statement was issued to the teams: there would be a track inspection at 4pm, with the hope of starting a race at pm. Context matters That doesn't excuse the fact that such an important decision was taken in an ad hoc fashion.
Mike Webb Speaks Not long after the impromptu safety commission had disbanded, after deciding to cancel the race, Dorna organized a press conference to explain what had happened. Road vs track The track had been perfect when he had first seen it in March, Uncini said. Missing inspector Should this not have been picked up by Franco Uncini when he inspected the track? The buck stops here. Zaffelli knows. Silverstone, Great Britain. Get well Tito. We are all rooting for you. Uncini continues, saying when he originally came to view the new asphalt, it was in very good condition.
So when did the surface deteriorate? But then, we discovered during the Formula One that the circuit was bumpy. So, it was a degrade from March to July. After the race was cancelled we spoke to the Championship leader to get his feelings after long but race-less day at Silverstone. Ahead of his final Grand Prix appearance before taking a sabbatical in , motogp.
All rights reserved.
0コメント