From: eektl@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Kenneth Leong)
Subject: Re: Adelaide: Senna-Mansell crash
Organization: James Cook University
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 92 06:46:47 GMT

In <1ds5bnINN1g3@huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au> bvandepe@iti.org (Brenton Vandepeer) writes:

>mrp@ITD.Adelaide.EDU.AU (Mark Prior) writes:

>>In article <1dk3psINN65t@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, cf947@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Chun-Hung Wan) writes:
>>|>
>>|> Does someone have the full story on how these two drivers crashed.  I did
>>|> watch the race but I'm still not too clear on the reasons for the crash.
>>|> As far as I know, Senna's reason was that Mansell outbraked him.

>>I wasn't down that end of the track but according to the press Mansell
>>claims that Senna deliberately rammed him where as Senna claimed that
>>Mansell braked sooner than normal and that because he was running so
>>close to Mansell he couldn't stop (or get out of the way). The FISA
>>officials supported Senna's view of the incident.

>>Looking at the tape of the race I too would support Senna's view.

>My only objection to this view is that Senna was some 2 to 3 car lengths behind Mansell when Mansell began to break. Mansell did appear (at least to me) to
>break early, but not rapidly, before the hairpin. Senna seemed to close the
>gap rapidly to Mansell and did not appear to attempt to brake until
>collision was unavoidable at which point his car did seem to get a bit
>sideways. He (Senna) did say after the race that his rear brakes locked &
>hence he could not avoid Mansell. Probably true, but braking after closing
>that sort of gap at that speed differential would be impossible. No wonder
>his rear brakes locked. Mansell estimated that he was struck by Senna with a
>speed differential of about 50 to 60 mph. Watching the replay, it would
>appear that Senna had a substantial amount of time to avoid the collision as
>he closed the gap to Mansell.

>I for one do not believe that Senna deliberately collided with Mansell at
>that early stage of the race (lap 19 of 81). I do, however, believe that
>Senna suffered the appreciable amount of brain fade usually associated with
>certain backmarkers of recent years. The accident must have been,
>maliciously or not, Senna's fault.


Formula 1 cars do not have brake lights. Therefore it wouldn't be Senna's
fault in colliding with Mansell. Senna was just doing his best in trying
to pass Nigel Mansell, and the incidence happened due to the
circumstances at that time. When you realize someone in front is braking
and you're only 3 car lengths behind, how would you avoid a collision
with a speed differential of 100km/h? Senna had to be extremely close to
Mansell in order to have any chance of getting past him around the
corner. If Senna failed to get past, then he would have had to do the
chase after the superior Maclaren again and would have to wait for the
rare chance of Mansell to be slowed by backmarkers again to try another
overtake tactic. Senna as a race driver has said previously that his job
is to drive at your limit and if you see the chance to win, take that
chance and consider the outcome later. Of course many would disagree
with this attitude, but it works.         
If Senna gets a car to match the Williams next year, he would do really
well considering his superior driving skills. But then again, most of
the other drivers, if given a superior car would do well also,
especially Schumacher.

Kenny, eektl@marlin.jcu.edu.au 



>>Mark.
>>--
>>Mark Prior                              Phone : +61 8 228 5680
>>Information Technology Division         Telex : UNIVAD AA89141
>>University of Adelaide                  Fax   : +61 8 223 6245
>>GPO Box 498 Adelaide S.AUSTRALIA 5001   E-mail: mrp@ITD.Adelaide.EDU.AU
>--

>Brenton Vandepeer, University of Adelaide, South Australia.

>email: bvandepe@physics.adelaide.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.autos.sport