RetroFed Forum
Your home away from modern life.
The thorny issues facing F1 over racing, qualifying and safety
Post Reply
AuthorMessage
rss Bot rss@ibbit.at
Joined: 2025-07-12
Quote

From BBC News via this RSS feed

1   Original
Paragone lemmy.world Paragone@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-12-06
#2 · Quote Reply

Fundamentally, they can't make physics obey politics.

No-one can.

So, IF they want to prevent speed-differential-crashes, THEN they need to limit the electric-power available, because it's sooo unpredictable.

That means going to an 80:20 ICE:electric, or 75:25, or something..

50:50 produces deadly-mixtures, & sooner or later people are going to die, as that driver pointed-out.

Mercedes having "bet the farm" on 50:50 cannot be allowed to be more-important than the lives of the people who are where the needless crashes are going to be.

Lives over profits.

Living to race another day, & having fans still-alive so they can attend again in the future, outranks profit-bets made by individual-companies.

That principle should be automatic.

( it's the same principle in aviation, which is why this category-of-problem is something I've been considering for awhile:

I'm for rules-changes which would reduce the death-rate in aviation, even if it makes aviation "more boring".

The death-rate in the barnstorming days was sickening. )

_ /\ _

1
Post Reply
Back to top