I write with some thoughts on D.S. J.’s challenging thoughts on safety.
I he very first thought arising is, is it necessary? Surely it is inevitable that when tine dances on a “razor’s edge” one may fall off? One enters the sport fully aware of this and therefore the death of a driver is not so catastrophic as it seems. But we do make matters worse With Armco and one lethal rule in Formula One regulations. It is compulsory to carry a battery On board and when a crash comes, this acts as a detonator to the petrol fumes leading to a conflagration. Safety tanks etc. are futile when this lethal combination of petrol and energy from battery react. Further, the present-day GP car is on a very delicate equipoise. Something like Armco only makes matters worse when things get out of control the car only goes more out of control.
A more serious objection to the safety craze is that it is conducive to a lowering of standards, both of driving . less precise despite “technical improvement” and in the quality of circuits used, the non-use of classic tracks for Formula One races breaking the continuity with the early days.
The Yanks have a word for it “no nut is more dangerous than the nut behind the wheel” could we replace “race-track” for “nut” and we won’t be far from the truth?
Clandy, Co. Londonderry. P. G. Gormley