Photo: Dean Mouhtaropoulos (Getty Images)
The motorsport world held its breath over the weekend when Jack Aitken, a substitute driver for Williams who competed for Emil Frey Racing in the Spa 24 Hours last Saturday, suffered a serious fall as he exited the ascending Raidillon right-hand corner.
Aitken’s Lamborghini hit the inner tire barrier to the left of Raidillon, was stranded in the middle of the track, and then hit by two other cars at high speed. He was lucky enough to get out of the incident with fractures in his collarbone and a vertebra and a bruised lung. Aitken was hospitalized, as was Davide Rigon, another driver involved. They are both recovering and appear to be in good health, all things considered.
It was a terrible episode, as is common with accidents at Eau Rouge and Raidillon. Anyone who watched would have immediately thought of Anthoine Hubert’s fatal accident in 2019, which also left Juan Manuel Correa with broken legs and a spinal injury. Kevin Magnussen was lucky enough to go from a big one in 2016. Alex Zanardi was so badly injured in his 1993 Eau Rouge fall that he missed the remainder of the F1 season, and eight years earlier rising star Stefan Bellof was killed in the same location during the 1985 Spa 1000km.
These corners are, if not some of the most sacred in racing, because of the same daring, heartbreaking nature that makes them so dangerous when things go wrong. After last weekend’s incident, Alfa Romeo F1 reserve driver Callum Ilot tweeted “Enough is enough” and that changes had to be made to prevent more life-threatening wrecks.
G / O Media can receive a commission
He also shot back at a rando who, as far as I can tell, has absolutely no skin involved:
And so that no one criticizes Ilott for not sketching out exactly the changes he would prefer, he proposed rational, measured potential solutions in response to the thoughts of Porsche works driver Kevin Estre:
Formula 1 is now returning to Spa after the three-week summer break. F1 Race Director Michael Masi was asked to share Ilott’s comments by. ponder Motorsport.com. Masi replied, among other things, that the track is “safe from the FIA’s point of view:”
“Some work has been done in different areas at Spa,” said Masi. “But the spa racetrack has a current grade of 1” [the FIA licence required for F1 use.]
“There are a few changes and improvements compared to last year, but I think the way it is, from the FIA’s point of view, it is safe.
“Neither of us likes to see major incidents and I’m just glad that the drivers are doing relatively well. I saw a few media reports today and they are good and healthy which is the important part. You have a recovery ahead of you, but that’s the big picture there. “
The problem with this answer is that Masi was not asked if Spa as a whole adheres to the FIA Class 1 safety protocol, because of course it does. Otherwise the route would not be on the calendar. This answer evades the question. I have no idea what Masi and his colleagues actually think about safety at Eau Rouge and Raidillon, but I imagine part of the problem is that even if the FIA should make changes, they might not have time to implement and certify them before F1 visits at the end of August.
And so we are treated here with the diplomatic answer with no answer. Which is even more worrying than the deliberations of armchair experts like the guy Ilott responded to in that second tweet above. You know – the kind of verbal shrugging arguments like “the drivers know what they signed up for” or “if they think so, maybe they should stick with sim racing”. The guys who think there’s no point in striving for safety improvements because there’s always going to be some risk to motorsport. When a driver dies doing what he loved, there is simply nothing to be done about it.
Ironically, it’s not that Ilott suggested leveling the corner or adding a chicane or replacing it with a direct one; he just wants to see the barriers that surround him distorted, adjusted or displaced. After the deaths and injuries we’ve seen, these are extremely reasonable requests if they could actually help alleviate the problem. And hell, if they did, everyone wins – fewer drivers could die, and boomers on Twitter don’t have to whine about changes to some nooks and crannies that they’ll never actually drive in real life. Unless they still will because they always do.
The whole thing reminds me of the “controversy” surrounding the introduction of the halo a few years ago. It’s amazing to think of a device that is now generally celebrated because it likely prevented a handful of serious head injuries, has been reviled by some for ruining an open-wheel racer’s classic lines, as if aesthetics are more sacred than human life. Likewise, nowhere in the world should a corner be improved in the interests of security. Perhaps Eau Rouge and Raidillon will stay as they are for this month’s F1 race, but I hope Ilott’s comments will be taken seriously in the off-season.
The post No corner, not even Eau Rouge, should ever be above safety first appeared on monter-une-startup.
