Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

F1 Fans: anyone see Webbers aerial display today?


TheSaint

Recommended Posts

Damn! The combination of F1 and aerial in the title drew me in. Good thing the driver is ok. You can see that the safety features of the car/track/wall worked perfectly here, it could have been much worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you read Webber's Wiki page, you'll find that he flipped his Mercedes twice in the preparation for the 1999 24 Hours of LeMans during practice and qualifying. The announcers remarked on it when he flipped today. I couldn't find video for that, but if it was anything like this video taken during that LeMans race... (same year, sister car to Webber's, same aerodynamic defect, different driver on the same team)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said - the pods the drivers sit in are basically bullet proof. They're designed to withstand crashes like that - all the aerodynamic stuff on the car crumples like paper, but the pod the driver sits in is ridiculously tough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

196 mph

Those cars can withstand that pretty easily. And he didn't go 196mph and just stop. He was going MUCH slower when he hit the wall.

You always hear the "I can't believe he wasn't hurt" from announcers and such. But they say it every single time, and almost every time, they aren't hurt. Or at least have less than serious injuries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those cars can withstand that pretty easily. And he didn't go 196mph and just stop. He was going MUCH slower when he hit the wall.

You always hear the "I can't believe he wasn't hurt" from announcers and such. But they say it every single time, and almost every time, they aren't hurt. Or at least have less than serious injuries.

That car was going at least 120mph when he hit the guard rail. Probably faster. That is a very hard sudden impact, even for an F1 car that is very safe. Those are the kind of impacts that can be the worst.

I don't always agree with the FIA, but It's been nearly 20 years since an F1 driver was killed in an accident(Ayrton Senna '94). So the FIA has done a great job in regards to safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That car was going at least 120mph when he hit the guard rail. Probably faster. That is a very hard sudden impact, even for an F1 car that is very safe. Those are the kind of impacts that can be the worst.

I don't always agree with the FIA, but It's been nearly 20 years since an F1 driver was killed in an accident(Ayrton Senna '94). So the FIA has done a great job in regards to safety.

The car was definitely going over 100 when it collided with the wall, but that really isn't a big deal with a wall that has that much give and can send the force to a very wide area. Especially with how well built the cars are these days.

But maybe I just don't know anything. :biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...