Autobayng News Team
After noting “the contribution of high closing speeds in the accident” involving Oliver Bearman and Franco Colapinto in the Japanese Grand Prix, the FIA stated it would consider potential changes to its new rules during April.
The cancellations of the Bahrain and Saudi Arabian grands prix handed F1 a valuable and unexpected opportunity to evaluate its new 2026 regulations package. While several aspects of the rules have been criticised, Bearman’s crash propelled concerns over safety to the top of the agenda.
As F1 drivers pointed out before and after the crash, the potential consequences of a collision between cars with a significant difference in speeds is huge. Had Bearman not successfully swerved to avoid Colapinto, his car could have been launched into the air making his crash much more dangerous.
Past examples of such a crash include the worst tragedy in motor racing history: the disaster at the 1955 Le Mans 24 Hours. It claimed the life of over 80 people, including driver Pierre Bouillin, who raced under the name Levegh.
Levegh’s Mercedes was launched into a densely packed crowd of spectators opposite the pits at the Circuit de la Sarthe. The crash occured as he pursued rival Hawthorn, who was heading for the pits. Hawthorn overtook the Austin-Healey of Lance Macklin, then braked sharply to slow for the pit lane. Macklin swerved to avoid Hawthorn, but his car was struck by Levegh’s.
The death toll was so appallingly high due to the many ways in which motor racing was far less safe 70 years ago than today. In particular, there was little to protect the spectators from a flying car.
However this type of crash has long been among those drivers which fear the most, for obvious reasons. A car launched into the air will decelerate little until it hits something and the danger to driver and crowd is obvious, even with today’s stronger cars and barriers.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
It may seem alarmist to draw this kind of comparison. But consider the depth of reaction which has come from those who understand the dangers best of all: the drivers.
In recent years we’ve grown accustomed to hearing past drivers claim the modern sport has become softer or even excessively safe compared to past seasons. Recall the criticism which greeted the development of the halo a decade ago.
This makes it all the more surprising to hear some past drivers warning that the sport has become more dangerous. Eddie Irvine, among those who questioned the need for the halo before it was introduced, was deeply concerned by Bearman’s crash and likened it to a fatal crash he witnessed while racing at Suzuka in 1992.
Or consider Martin Brundle, who after his experience at Suzuka in 1994 warned for years of the dangers of allowing recovery vehicles onto a live track. He saw his fears justified in the worst possible way through the 2014 crash which ultimately claimed the life of Jules Bianchi.
Brundle articulated just how seriously the FIA must take the challenge it faces: “If a car flies into the crowd now and they haven’t done something, shown some due diligence on this, then the FIA will be in for the high jump.”
Today’s drivers recognised the risks before the season began. “We are going to have a big accident,” predicted Lando Norris. “Depending on what drivers do, you can have closing speeds of 30-50kph, and when someone hits another driver at that speed you are going to fly and go over the fence and do a lot of damage to yourself and maybe to others, and that is a pretty horrible thing to think about.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
His forecast of the speed difference involved was borne out by Bearman’s crash. In the same race, Norris admitted he unintentionally overtook Lewis Hamilton at times as their cars’ power units conserved energy at different points on the track.
It took a crash on the scale of the Le Mans disaster to begin changing attitudes towards safety in motorsport, at a time when it hadn’t been a serious consideration. The loss of life was so terrible the sport had to take action.
The crash led to the cancellation of four of that year’s grands prix. Switzerland banned motor racing within its borders until 2022 and Mercedes withdrew from motor racing for decades.
But while little thought was given to the matter of safety in the fifties, that is not the case today. A single fatality or even serious injury would be regarded very differently if F1 was regarded to have ignored obvious warning signs beforehand.
There have been suggestions F1 will avoid making drastic alterations to its rules because it wants to see more changes of position in races, which high speed differences between cars create. But as Carlos Sainz Jnr pointed out in Suzuka, F1 has had its warning and must heed it, regardless of the impact on the racing.
“I was so surprised when they said ‘no, we will sort out qualifying and leave the racing alone because it’s exciting’,” he said. “As drivers, we’ve been extremely vocal that the problem is not only qualifying, it’s also racing.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
It is now down to those who devised F1’s new rules to fix the problem they have caused. It remains to be seen how far the changes will have to go in order to have the desired effect.
“These regulations include a number of adjustable parameters, particularly in relation to energy management, which allow for optimisation based on real-world data,” the FIA noted after Suzuka. But while it may have the capability to go far enough, will it show the willingness?
Video: 1955 Le Mans disaster
Warning: The video below contains graphic content.
>> Find out more and sign upGo ad-free for just £1 per month
Comment
- F1 got lucky three ways. But now it has a difficult and urgent problem to solve
- Verstappen’s overreaction shows he knows he cost himself the 2025 title
- F1’s sticking-plaster fix for Qatar tyre failures is an embarrassment
- The FIA’s stewards grabbed the chance to correct their mistake – unlike last time
- “Does it matter” if a driver deliberately crashes into a rival? There’s only one answer
