anyone watch "grand prix, the killer years" last night

Doc_Savage

well did anyone watch it?

i'm an engineering graduate and Graham Chapman of lotus has always been a hero of mine! but after watching the programme last night my hero has had a less than stellar reputation, i've read books on him, his cars and his drivers, and the opinions and testaments from all of his team-mates, seems paled now. After seeing the emotion on his mechanics faces telling of how cars were crashed and drivers hurt, and Chapman wouldn't strengthen the cars...

The accepted danger of the races numbed the drivers and teams and some appalling things happened... people burning alive on the track and only one person stopping to help!

this is the scene that ended the programme....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGtW9UgjeVI

pdbhp

Well the attitudes to safety and engineering at the time very vastly different to what we would consider the norm these days, sure even up to the late 90's you could practically stand on the track at Mondello during races.

Yes Chapman made some dangerous vehicles and some silly descisions but it was a time of enormous technilogical and engineering change in all aspects of racing and life.

si_guru

Hindsight is great..

Money always, always comes before safety. Sadly.

Doc_Savage

si_guru wrote: »

Hindsight is great..

Money always, always comes before safety. Sadly.

actually..... speed came before safety, and once big name sponsors came in, the cars got a lot safer... not good to have a man buring to death in a car with your companys names and colours all over it!

the main thing highlighted in the programme was the track safety... which was ridiculous in the nurburgring and at spa in the 60's... around the nurburgring the 60's f1 cars would jump off the track 12 or thirteen times! imagine that today!

si_guru

Doc_Savage wrote: »

actually..... speed came before safety, and once big name sponsors came in, the cars got a lot safer... not good to have a man buring to death in a car with your companys names and colours all over it!

the main thing highlighted in the programme was the track safety... which was ridiculous in the nurburgring and at spa in the 60's... around the nurburgring the 60's f1 cars would jump off the track 12 or thirteen times! imagine that today!

Speed is money in racing right? you win, you get more money thru' sales or sponsorship?

Track safety - good point, but hey... watch some WRC from the 80's when soft, fluffy corporate giant FORD was invloved!

SouperComputer

Colin Chapman, not Graham . Oddly enough I did watch this last night, I have it saved on the media server.

Chapman was especially and particularly ruthless in his quest for success. "simplify and add lightness" was one of his famed terms, as well as "the perfect racecar is one that breaks down just after the finish". Many drivers paid the greatest price for Chapman's aggressive persuit. Many also enjoyed the spoils. His philosophy was in the persuit of speed or more accurately success. It had zero to do with money, that was a bonus of course but in the scheme of things, Lotus' budget was pocket change as far as Ferrari were concerned.
Jumping off the track isnt a problem, unless you are driving a Lotus :-o

Chapman was a genius and legend. Many of his ideas and designs hold true today on the track (Monocoque) and the road (Lotus 7), but make no mistake his F1 cars were particularly fragile. Jim Clark was the perfect driver for these cars. Its been said he would literally come in from a race having almost negligible tire and break wear despite being much quicker. Clark had a very unique finesse that when combined with Chapman was an unstoppable force in terms of outright speed.

Truly amazing times. I still maintain that the ideal F1 car would be a 1967 Lotus 49 with a 1500HP Honda RA167 from the turbo era bolted on the back

When you look at the Roger Willamson video at Zandy '73 and are appaled by the drivers continuing to race, keep in mind that most would assume/hope that the driver is out of the car and not trapped, burning alive. Especially when you see another driver walking around on the track. As a racing driver you have to be able to compartmentalize things like that, otherwise you might as well quit.

Doc_Savage

I'm also a big fan of a lot of the drivers from the group b era of rallying! and yes ford, metro's, peugeots, audi's and lancia's were all bombs on wheels...but that crazy era only lasted what... 4 years? this was going on in F1 from the late fifties to the early seventys... and the nurburgring and spa were actually like forest rally stages...

I don't follow your post completely?

speed = money = safety is what you're saying?

in the 60's it was, speed = money = more speed = more money... it took a lot of deaths for that to change and safety to become a consideration of sponsors!

i think one of us in on about chronological order and the other is on about priority order? i've reread the posts a few times and they've stopped making sense!

Doc_Savage

LIGHTNING wrote: »

And watch as the Chassis on the Lotus gets twisted like spaghetti from the torque of that Honda engine Great post though, I am a big fan of Lotus in general if only more car companies followed in his idea of lightness.

the engine block was part of the chassis though! that was one of his genius things!

and where the hell did i get graham? oh.... monty python!:pac:

dcr22B

For those who missed it, it's on BBC4 on Saturday evening @ 9pm

SouperComputer

IMO, In the 60's and 70's ingenuity trumped money, many many times over. My point is that those times are not like today in that regard and I think some people are getting confused by not quite understanding how different the "business" of Grand Prix was back then (Not that I'm an expert mind you!). Especially when someone mentioned sponsorship. That didnt really come into play until later in the form of another Lotus thing called "the flying fagpackets". The budgets of BRM, Cooper and Lotus were a joke compared to Ferrari, Honda and Maserati at the time, Yet they still took the fight to them. You don't see that in F1 these days (as much)
Oddly enough I was re-reading a book on race car suspension this weekend too. Weird.

Come to think of of it, Graham Chapman was indeed a legend too. Just for different reasons!

Doc_Savage

and without the pushes in technology, no motorsport would be in the same place it is today!

the three most ingenious cars of all time came in relative quick succession, and all in the flying fagbox era; the 6 wheeled tyrell, the brabham fan car, and the ground effect lotus... i could name all the main sponsors and i wasn't even born when they came out!

all they had in the era that the documentary was set was lightness... and the safety went out the window...
wings were hilarious looking when they first appeared, and some driver made a statement in an interview that they were dangerous and should be banned, which was a shrouded dig at chapman.

f1dan

Just finished watching it now, that footage of Roger Williamson burning alive was horrific. The fact that none of the other drivers stopped though still shows that even after all the work to improve safety that winning was still more important.

Doc_Savage

Jackie Stewart saying that the drivers were numb to it after it happening every other week was no comfort! Still shocked the hell out of me!

Sparks43

LIGHTNING wrote: »

I know it was more a tongue in cheek statement I have a great book of Race Car suspension and there are some great pieces about 70`s F1 setup and some good interviews with legendary designers like Murray etc I must dig it out.

If you can get the isbn number of the book so i could find it i would appreciate it

I am not an engineer but i love techy bits and pieces

rua1972

This documentry is on youtube. I watched it a few weeks ago. How times have changed.
I once read about Zandvoort that the firefighters weren't alowed to go against the traffic, they had to do a whole lap to get to the scene. The scene they could see from the point they were placed on track.
I don't mind seeing a crash, but my first concern is always with the driver. Like Massa's crash in hungary, i just look at the helmet as long as it is moving i feel okay.
There is also a docu on youtube about cosworth's F1 turbo engine from '86. You can see in that one that times really have moved on in F1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbB1qwhKaaE

SouperComputer

Tune To Win by Carroll Smith is the must have of any racecar engineering book collection IMO. It does get heavy in parts, but its explained well.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tune-Win-Carroll-Smith/dp/0879380713

tunguska

f1dan wrote: »

Just finished watching it now, that footage of Roger Williamson burning alive was horrific. The fact that none of the other drivers stopped though still shows that even after all the work to improve safety that winning was still more important.

An absolute calamity that day, keystone cops stuff. David Purley was the only one who emerged with his dignity and honour still intact. He became my all time hero that day. It was interesting that Jackie stewart wasnt quizzed about his own version of events at Zandvoort in 1973 in the documentary. I know it was said that the other drivers claimed they thought it was Purley's car which was overturned and on fire but watching that footage its hard to understand how anybody could not tell that something was seriously wrong. Purley is standing in the middle of the road waving cars down and in obvious distress. Why would he do that if it was his car on fire? I know Purley himself didnt accept the explanation given as to why the other drivers didnt stop. Jackie Stewart won that race, but does anybody know what he said after, the explanation he gave as to why he didnt stop and help Purley free Roger?

SouperComputer

Again, I doubt most of the drivers drove past in the knowledge that someone was trapped under the car and burning. I think it more likely they saw Purley and assumed he was the driver of the car. Sure, Purley's car was parked further back but I still think in a situation like that, especially as a racing driver in the 70's your mind is going to look for a reason to tell you that everything is OK.