Imola at 20: What lessons have been learned?

By Simon Wright – Follow me on Twitter @Siwri88

The deaths of Roland Ratzenberger and Ayrton Senna were a huge shock to Formula One and to global sport. The first fatal accidents to drivers in Grand Prix for eight years, and 12 on race weekends meant some serious questions were posed and needed to be answered decisively.

To conclude the IMOLA AT 20 series, I ask the questions and try to answer them too and find what has motorsport as a whole learnt from the tragic events of the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix.

Aftermath

Before that though, the aftermath was one of devastating shock and sadness for the world, especially with what happened to Senna. On a weekend where Nelson Mandela was heading for power as South Africa’s first black president, Manchester United were winning a second straight FA Carling Premiership title and Anne Kirkbride returned to work on Coronation Street following a battle with cancer, the newspaper front pages, radio broadcasts and TV news bulletins were all about the Imola deaths.

In Brazil, the country was left deflated. Not always the happiest place with terrible amounts of poverty and an unpopular government in control, people looked to Senna for inspiration and happiness. Now he was gone and it left his fans on the brink of despair. Senna’s girlfriend of 14 months, Adriane Galisteu was crestfallen. Despite the disapproval of Senna’s family, the pair were madly in love and it is widely believed Ayrton was ready to settle down with Adriane – he saw a future with her that he hadn’t with any of his other relationships.

The funeral of Senna brought Sao Paulo to an absolute standstill. Many of the great of F1, past and present were at the service including Ron Dennis, Frank Williams, Emerson Fittipaldi, Alain Prost and Gerhard Berger. The service on Thursday, 5 May was held after three days of national state mourning. The Brazil football team would go on to win the World Cup final in the USA two months later and dedicated their win to Senna. Meanwhile, a quieter gathering visited Salzburg as Roland Ratzenberger was buried. His parents had only just returned from a holiday in Mexico to their native country on the day their son lost his life.

The FIA quickly dismissed speculation about the cause of Senna’s accident – a case that would eventually go to a messy trial that lasted years. Programmes such as the Channel 4 ‘Going Critical’ series of 2001 were totally inaccurate and didn’t bring the facts a documentary need. Max Mosley did add though that he was certain that a front wing failure was the cause of Ratzenberger’s fatal accident, something that is widely believed to be true.

Monaco misery

The fraternity gathered sombrely at Monaco with Williams and Simtek just fielding one car each. Then in the closing stages of Thursday morning free practice, Karl Wendlinger had a massive crash exiting the tunnel into the Nouvelle Chicane. Wendlinger was knocked unconscious on impact and taken to hospital where he was placed in a deep coma. Deeply distressed, Sauber and their other driver, Heinz-Harald Frentzen went home emotionally drained by recent events. Thankfully, Wendlinger would make a full recovery, although he was never the same as a racing competitor.

More accidents continued to blight the season. Lotus driver Pedro Lamy has a dreadful testing accident at Silverstone, breaking both of his legs when a failure on his car saw him ejected from the seat. Andrea Montermini broke his foot and cracked a heel when he lost control of another Simtek during practice for the Spanish Grand Prix. In Germany, a kamikaze move from Mika Hakkinen to try and take the lead from row four eliminated himself and five other drivers, luckily without injury. Hakkinen was subsequently banned for the next race. In Estoril, Damon Hill narrowly escaped injury when his car flipped over Eddie Irvine’s spun Jordan during qualifying and at Suzuka; a marshal’s leg was badly broken when he was hit by Martin Brundle’s McLaren whilst attending to another car that had crashed at the same spot a lap earlier.

The FIA though were already in the process of pushing new regulations through to ensure a repeat of Imola was unlikely.

The GPDA and FIA act

Following the Imola tragedies, the drivers were rocked. Many questioned their desire on whether to compete again – even championship leader Schumacher wondered whether he should carry on. The Grand Prix Drivers’ Association was reformed on the Monaco Grand Prix weekend. Berger, Schumacher and Christian Fittipaldi would meet with Niki Lauda and the FIA on a regular basis to make immediate changes to circuits. There were some desperate measures in immediate weeks, with temporary tyre chicanes looking clumsy at best on the Barcelona circuit. There were changes to the tracks at Silverstone, Estoril in Portugal and Spa as the commitment Eau Rouge ride was tempered for 1994 by a temporary chicane.

The FIA also acted quickly. Mosley hosted a highly charged press conference in Monaco to push through new regulations which included changes to the airbox, the banning of pump fuel and more protection around the cockpit for the driver. Further improvements after 1994 have made the sport a much safer environment to compete in. Tethers have been added to each corner of the suspension to stop wheels flying off in accidents and striking the driver’s head. Helmets were made stronger and more robust which saved Felipe Massa’s life when a spring hit him at full speed during qualifying for the 2009 Hungarian Grand Prix.

Crash structures were also brought into place, with all cars designed and built needing to pass demanding crash tests on the side, front and rear of the chassis. Failure to pass these requirements would mean expulsion from the racing circuit. The HANS (Head & Neck Safety) device was made compulsory from 2003 onwards after vigorous testing in America, protecting the driver’s neck in a shunt. Other changes in recent years have included the banning of pointed noses on the front wing, and higher cockpit protection for the driver.

Close calls

Senna’s friend and long-time F1 medic Professor Sid Watkins was put in charge as the Head of Safety, a role he held until his death from a short illness in September 2012. The work that Sid, the FIA and the GPDA did in the weeks and months after Imola has to be credited. It managed to put motorsport back into a safer environment.

Since 1994, there has not been a single fatality at a Formula One Grand Prix meeting involving drivers. That doesn’t mean to say that there haven’t been close calls. They include Robert Kubica’s aeroplane shunt at the 2007 Canadian Grand Prix, the terrifying pile-up at the start of the 2012 Belgian Grand Prix and Mark Webber’s acrobatic flip over Heikki Kovalainen during the 2010 European Grand Prix at Valencia.

Three marshals have sadly been killed since 1994. Italian fire marshal Paolo Ghislimberti was struck by a loose wheel from Frentzen’s Jordan after a five-car crash at the second chicane on the first lap at Monza in 2000. Less than six months later, 52-year-old marshal Graham Beveridge was killed, also hit by an errant wheel from Jacques Villeneuve’s BAR Honda when he crashed in the 2001 season opener in Australia and more recently, Mark Robinson died when he was run over by a recovery vehicle whilst clearing up Esteban Gutierrez’s damaged Sauber after the 2013 Canadian Grand Prix.

Senna’s foundation

In the weeks leading up to his death, Ayrton Senna had been working on creating a foundation to help children in Brazil. In a time of desperate poverty, the aim was to give youngsters in the country a chance with decent health and a good education. Senna cared deeply for those in Brazil. He was their ray of light and he wanted to help out when possible. Three months before his passing, he launched the Senninha cartoon character.

His sister Viviane has carried on the work since his death and it has really made a difference. It started in late 1994 and by the end of 2008; 10 million children and young people in Brazil had received assistance from the programme which has produced educational programmes and the launching of The Connect Yourself Program and The Gran Prix of Journalism. The work that Viviane has put in to achieve the results has been outstanding and her brother would be extremely proud of what she has done to make Brazil a better country.

Closing chapter

This article brings an end to my week long stretch of pieces on Viewing Perspectives. IMOLA AT 20 has been very informative to me and while tough to write, I have found this to be an intriguing project to write and share with my readership circle.

It is great to see the strong safety record since Imola. Sadly, it had to take a tragic weekend and the death of a champion and a rookie to knock the sport out of its complacency it had slipped into. Ayrton Senna was charismatic, ruthless and passionate. Some of his driving actions have been called into question and rightly so. However, he was still a brilliant champion and one of the ultimate best. Roland Ratzenberger was hard-working, determined and a charming presence on the motorsport circuit wherever he was. He had managed to achieve his goal. It was such a shame it was cruelly taken away from him shortly after he had got onto the grid.

Tributes paid to where Ayrton Senna died earlier this week on the 20th anniversary

The 1994 San Marino Grand Prix will always go down as one of the blackest weekends in the history of sport. Lessons have been learnt from what happened and motorsport is now in a much safer place than it ever has been before. I do hope that what was witnessed at Imola 20 years ago will never be seen in the future.

Categories: 1994, Adriane Galisteu, Ayrton Senna, Brazil, FIA, GPDA, Imola, Lessons, Professor Sid Watkins, Roland Ratzenberger, Safety

Imola at 20: Did the rule changes play a part in F1's horror weekend

By Simon Wright – Follow me on Twitter @Siwri88

The fourth instalment of this special week of articles to commemorate the 20^th anniversary of Formula One’s darkest weekend involves a look into the rules and regulations that were enforced on the teams at the start of that fateful 1994 season.

It is unfair to say what caused the accident that killed Ayrton Senna. However, Senna for one did warn of concern at the changes made by the sport’s governing body that eliminated the electronic war and ensured driver skill returned to the cars. So, Imola at 20 continues with a look into the rule changes and how much of a part they played in the horror show that was the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix.

How complacent were the FIA?

The pinnacle of motorsport is Formula One. Teams come and go, drivers arrive and depart and circuits change and evolve over time. The same can be said for the cars designed to blast around some of the fastest tracks in the world.

The FIA had lost control of the costs that were engulfing teams. Five years before Imola 94, more than 40 cars were turning up at Grand Prix weekends, with only 26 of them to start the main event on a Sunday in 1989. Eight cars were already on their way home by the time pre-qualifying ended at 10am on a Friday morning! By 1994, that number had dwindled to just 28.

Two new teams arrived at the start of that particular season but in the previous four years, Brabham, March/Leyton House, Dallara, Fondmetal, AGS, Osella, EuroBrun, Coloni and Zakspeed had all collapsed as racing teams due to financial implications – whilst the historic Lotus team were in crippling debt and France’s number one team, Ligier needed Flavio Briatore’s help to save them from a similar fate.

Having let standards slip greatly when it came to budgets, sweeping rule changes were introduced for 1994. Electronic driver aids were all outlawed, including ABS braking, traction control and active suspension. Whilst the technological affect was making the sport less than appealing in the early 90s, was too much change at the same time too much?

Narrow escapes

Before Imola 94, Formula One had escaped the turbo era with a belief that it was almost impossible to die behind the wheel of a racing car. After the appalling 1982 championship, where two drivers died and Didier Pironi suffered career-ending injuries at Hockenheim, there had just been one fatality since and that was Elio de Angelis during a private test session in France four years later.

However, that didn’t mean to say there weren’t narrow escapes. Both Nelson Piquet and Gerhard Berger had humongous accidents at Imola on the Tamburello corner in the late 1980s that would claim Senna’s life. Erik Comas, Martin Donnelly and Alessandro Zanardi all cheated death in the early 90s and Riccardo Patrese walked away from this massive crash on the pitlane straight at Portugal’s Estoril circuit (video below) during the 1992 race.

There were a feeling though that the cars could be strong enough to anything thrown at them. This was probably part to luck, part to the hard safety work already in place by Professor Sid Watkins and also because of the electronics in the cars.

The active suspension system in particular when it worked did the job, made you fast and seemed to protect the driver from almost invincibility.

Electronic criticism

The competition became distorted when the clever designers at Williams pioneered the active suspension concept. In 1992, they produced a system that left the rest of the field standing. What it basically did was control each side of the car from four different angles and all the driver had to do was put his feet on the accelerator and brake pedal.

Nigel Mansell won the championship with a record (at the time) nine wins in the season but frankly, you could have put any average racing driver in that car and they would have also won the title by a country mile. By the start of 1993, it became clear that if you didn’t have the active suspension technology, you were basically beaten before the year had even begun.

Concerned about increasing corner speeds and pressure from teams who couldn’t develop such clever technology (McLaren being a prime example), active suspension was banned by the FIA at the end of the 1993 championship. When the car worked, it was fine but an active suspension failure for Zanardi during practice for the Belgian Grand Prix nearly killed him. FIA president Max Mosley’s concerns about the technology’s safety seemed to have been vindicated.

Senna was one of those who voiced his displeasure at this electronic war during his late McLaren days. He was fed up of driving his heart out and getting little reward for it. By the time he was off to Williams, his mind seemed to have changed.

Did traction control have to go?

Whilst the banning of active suspension was the only way forward for the sport at the time, traction control was another matter. Sure, it made an ugly noise when cars were braking into bends and accelerating away from them but making too much change sometimes doesn’t work and is extremely risky. The sense was that it was going to be difficult for the FIA to police this.

After early testing signs, despite being the pacesetter, Senna wasn’t happy and warned observers that this would be a season with a “a lot of accidents.” This was a man who wanted traction aids banned a year earlier but now with the team, who had pioneered such software, seemed to have had his head turned by his new employers.

The FIA did struggle to control the traction control effect. Accusations of cheating began from an early stage with Senna himself privately concerned that not all of the banned aids had been taken off the Benetton of Michael Schumacher, who had comfortably won the first two races of 1994. He asked his team principal Frank Williams to protest the results, which Frank decided not to do. Nevertheless, Benetton had now become public enemy number one and with Senna voicing his concerns in the build-up to the Imola race to the public, he had got the media on his side.

Michael Schumacher was the early 1994 pacesetter, but were Benetton bending the rules?

Whilst not fully proven, the allegation is Schumacher’s car (pictured above) had a traction control function within its system, behind a blank menu labelled ‘option 13.’ Anyone who saw his unbelievable getaway at the start of the French Grand Prix later in the year had every right to be further suspicious. Ferrari were also accused of cheating when test driver Nicola Larini made a remark a fortnight before Imola about switching off the car’s traction control system in Japan.

Therefore, whilst the FIA had been keen to get rid of all electronics with immediate effect, they only managed to open up a web of allegations, suspicion and criticism by getting rid of traction and launch control.

Did the rules play their part then?

1994 had already begun with a chain of crashes. JJ Lehto injured his neck heavily during a pre-season testing shunt at Silverstone, whilst Jean Alesi missed two races after damaging his back in a similar kind of crash at the Mugello circuit in Italy. Jos Verstappen, subbing for Lehto had been involved in a colossal multiple pile-up in the first race, with one of his Benetton wheels striking Martin Brundle’s helmet and an ambitious lunge on Karl Wendlinger during the race in Aida had seen Michele Alboreto ride over the Sauber’s front suspension.

The danger signs were there before Imola, so did the rules play their part in the weekend that claimed the life of a rookie and one of the greatest drivers of his generation?

Well many believe it played a role, but how much of a factor was it all? It is dangerous to say it was significant but the changes did make the cars far harder to drive which was fine but had made it much more difficult to control when it came to spins and accidents.

Changes were needed to bring driver skill back to the heart of the sport but perhaps too much alteration and the bickering from the teams, both mid-1993 and early 1994 had not helped in the lead-up to the Imola weekend.

The 1994 regulations were among the biggest and most complex of changes in the sport’s history. It is fair to say they weren’t very popular but to ensure the integrity of racing in later years, it was needed. It is a shame that the longer term benefits couldn’t be seen by all.

Categories: 1994, Accidents, Active Suspension, Ayrton Senna, Benetton, FIA, Imola, Rules, Traction Control, Weekend

Testgate - Mercedes lucky to escape severe sanctions

By Simon Wright

The French capital of Paris has recently played host to an international tribunal which could have had major implications on the Formula One season for 2013.

The FIA tribunal virtually cleared Mercedes in 'Testgate'

Petronas AMG Mercedes F1, whose factory is based in Brackley, Northamptonshire were in the dock over an alleged illegal tyre test they had conducted with Pirelli just days after the Spanish Grand Prix in May.  The Italian tyre supplier was also told to face the summons at the FIA International Tribunal (logo pictured).

Discussions, defence and remonstrations were held in a highly charged environment on Thursday, so much so that journalists were not allowed to use Twitter to update fans during the evidence that was given.

On Friday, the verdict was handed down.  Mercedes were found in breach of sporting regulations, and were reprimanded along with being banned from competing in the Silverstone Young Drivers’ Test.

However, they escaped a hefty fine, points deductions or even race bans for what seemingly seems to be gaining a blatant advantage.

So, why did the penalty feel like no punishment at all, and where does it leave the FIA, Mercedes and Pirelli as the sport regroups at Silverstone for the British Grand Prix next weekend.

Background

For those not in the knowledge of why it went this far, it all started after a difficult weekend for both Pirelli and Mercedes at the Spanish Grand Prix.  Mercedes suffered from chronic tyre wear, as their cars dropped from the front row lockout they took in qualifying to a very uncompetitive sixth place for Nico Rosberg and 12^th for Lewis Hamilton. 

Pirelli themselves were heavily criticised (including by yours truly) for tyres that could barely last three laps around Barcelona before they started graining and delaminating on a couple of occasions, including once in the race for Jean-Eric Vergne.  Afterwards, they wanted to do a tyre test and Mercedes agreed to help them out.

While others teams packed up, Mercedes stayed behind at the Circuit de Catalunya, and did a three-day test with their 2013 drivers in a 2013 car.

News of this broke when Rosberg mentioned the test to world champion Sebastian Vettel at the GPDA meeting in Monaco.

Vettel told his team and as more information came out, Red Bull Racing and Ferrari made a joint protest on the morning of the race around the streets of Monte Carlo, claiming that Mercedes were in breach of the FIA Sporting Regulations, which prohibits in-season testing after the first week in March until the end of the season.

Mercedes claimed they had received permission from the FIA.  Although they claimed to have written documents, the FIA stated this wasn’t the case.  After a stewards meeting after the Monaco Grand Prix, which Rosberg won convincingly for Mercedes, the case was sent to a tribunal on 20 June.

Counter Punch

The teams moved onto Canada, which Red Bull team boss Christian Horner used strong words such as ‘foul’ and even stating Mercedes were guilty of a ‘crime.’  It later turned out Ferrari had done their own tyre test after April’s Bahrain Grand Prix, though this was with a 2011 car and thus were cleared of any wrongdoing.

In public, Horner kept suggesting all they wanted was clarity on the whole situation.  Deep down, his body language suggested he wanted a big penalty applied against one of his team’s major rivals.

Other teams kept quiet.  Lotus were lobbied by Red Bull to join the protest, but refused as they had been unhappy with earlier instances regarding technical decisions in the past year.  

McLaren stayed out of the mess, as they have their own problems sorting out a car that is so bad, Jenson Button and Sergio Perez would probably do better performing in a barbershop quartet!

So the evidence started to unravel at the tribunal hearing.  Mercedes claimed that they had gained no benefit from doing the 1,000km test, and team principal Ross Brawn stated they had verbal permission from regular FIA race director Charlie Whiting to use their 2013 car.

They did admit that by using plain helmets to discard the use of race drivers was the wrong thing to do, and apologised for that and clearly stated that the test was at Pirelli’s request, and it was to solve concerns over tyre safety which have dogged this championship.

The FIA’s response was they had received no written consent from Mercedes to do the test, and were unaware of the situation Pirelli had got themselves into.  Thursday also concluded with Mercedes offering a compromise of being banned for the Young Drivers’ Test to try and negate any potential advantage they had.

Verdict surprise

The general reaction I received from text messages from friends who follow the sport on Friday were one of surprise and disappointment.  Journalists seemed surprised by the leninent action too. 

Most were suspecting of at least a points deduction from the constructors’ championship or even expulsion from that championship for 2013.  This result is perfect for Mercedes – and not only keep Ross Brawn’s integrity intact, it keeps him in a job.

If Mercedes were found guilty, the man who worked so brilliantly with Michael Schumacher throughout his first career, and spearheaded the fairytale Brawn story in 2009 from the ashes of Honda would surely have paid the price at Mercedes.

As reported by BBC Sport, Brawn said: "We have a blemish-free record here and it was very important to Mercedes that the facts of this case were understood.

"It does sometimes strengthen your resolve rather than weaken it but now it's cleared away we can concentrate on the rest of the year,"

In their own statement, the FIA commented: "The FIA wishes that lessons are learnt from this case and from the decision handed down.  To this end, the FIA will make sure, in association with all F1 teams, that its control of the testings' is strengthened." 

No consistency

In the immediate aftermath of the verdict, I thought the whole episode had been a complete waste of everyone’s time and money, and it is not fair for Grand Prix racing.

No matter the reasons of the test, Mercedes used a 2013 car which is strictly against the regulations.  This was even admitted by the tribunal, but the punishment is pretty unfair on the other teams.  Mercedes have done an illegal test – there’s no getting away from it in my view and the book could and well should have been thrown at them.

A race ban was potentially there, although if that was applied – could you have imagined the reaction of the British fans if Hamilton hadn’t been allowed to start his home race next week?  That would have been brave to do in the circumstances, as an appeal would almost certainly have been made.

A fairer penalty would have been a deduction of constructors’ points – at least from the two most recent races after the test, or prohibited to score points in the next three events.  It is a team issue, so the drivers should be cleared and made free to race.

The FIA’s rule-making system is not fair – there is no consistency.  Other penalties such as BAR using fuel as ballast in 2005 and the ‘Spygate’ controversy of 2007 have ended with far more serious penalties.

Mercedes have come out of the whole episode smiling.  Red Bull and Ferrari wanted clarity, and that is something that they haven’t really got I think.  Both seem to have grudgingly accepted the verdict, probably the right thing to do so the fans can concentrate on the racing.

Pirelli's named has been tarnished in F1 2013 and rightly so

As for Pirelli (tyres pictured), they've lost total control of the tyre situation in the sport.  Why they don't have their own test car is bewildering.  They had one last year, with former F1 pilots Lucas di Grassi and Jaime Alguersuari doing tyre testing.  Why have they not got one this year?  No matter if it is a financial problem, this is their mess and Formula One is in a difficult place.

With Bridgestone not willing to supply tyres again until the recession ends, and Goodyear and Continental recently stating no interest in a return, the FIA’s determination to hound Michelin out of the sport at the end of 2006 has come back to haunt them.  

We are now stuck with a tyre supplier who might have spiced up the racing, and ensured pitstop strategy is a factor again rather than a complete non-event, but has taken things totally to the other extreme.  The scenario is not good.  Pirelli will probably extend their contract, largely because the FIA has no other options and that is their own fault for what they did to Michelin after the tyre fiasco at Indianapolis in 2005, even after Michelin admitted their guilt and did all they could to reimburse disgruntled supporters at the time. 

The International Tribunal was a total waste of everyone’s time.  Mercedes have escaped virtually scot-free from doing something completely prohibited by the current rules, and whilst we can now try to get back to ‘racing,’ although that is a strong word to use in 2013 considering the crazy tyre management we’ve often seen, I get the feeling more questions have been raised by the verdict rather than the answers we were all looking for.

Categories: 2013, Britain, FIA, Mercedes, Paris, Pirelli, Ross Brawn, Silverstone, Tribunal, Twitter

Remembering Sid

Professor Sid Watkins - 6 September 1928 - 12 September 2012

Wednesday night brought some sad news to the world of motorsport and especially Formula One.

The great medic, Professor Sid Watkins died in a London hospital aged 84 after a short illness.

The first indication of his passing came on Twitter at around 9pm, although it took some 90 minutes for official confirmation from a viable source.

Sid was trending on Twitter throughout the evening and the tributes came flowing in for him from motorsport illumines like Rubens Barrichello, Ron Dennis and Sir Frank Williams.

The head of safety

All the tributes spoke of his greatness as a doctor, his fondness as a man and the way that he revolutionised safety in Formula One.

Watkins started out as a medic in the sport in 1978 and stayed on as the prime doctor for all Grand Prix events until 2004.

Until last year, he was the Head of Safety at the FIA and was still an honorary member on the board this year.

He was at the British Grand Prix back in July, perhaps not looking as perky as he used to be but still fighting fit and showing his real passion for motorsport. 

His death therefore came as a real shock to me.

The Professor built up great relationships with many of the drivers.  He was the first on the scene on that horrific weekend at Imola in 1994 to attend and save Barrichello’s life.

Sadly, both Roland Ratzenberger and the great Ayrton Senna perished later that weekend. 

After Ratzenberger’s fatal crash, Watkins revealed in his book Life on the Limit, published in the 1990s what he said to the distressed Senna at the crash site.

He said: “Ayrton, you’ve won three world championships, you’re the quickest driver and what else do you need to prove.  Why don’t you quit and I’ll quit and we’ll go fishing together.

Senna’s response was: “Sid, I can’t quit.”

His campaign was fruitful

24 hours later, the three-time world champion crashed fatally at the Tamburello corner.

In the phenomenal Senna movie, Watkins said: “We got him out of the car and got an airway into him and it became clear to me that this was going to be a fatal head injury.

“Then, he sighed and his body relaxed.  And I’m not religious but it felt to me as if his soul had departed.”

Watkins campaign for safety has seen not a single fatality in Formula One since 1 May 1994.

He attended to Martin Donnelly when he was lying in the middle of the Jerez circuit in Spain like a mangled puppet after the Irishman was thrown from his Lotus in 1990.

He also saved the lives of Erik Comas and Karl Wendlinger, who both suffered head trauma accidents and his quick-thinking saved Mika Hakkinen’s life after his crash at Adelaide in 1995.

Hakkinen went onto win two world championships and had much to be thankful for.  Sid Watkins had many friends and no-one could say a bad word about him.

Formula One will miss him and he will be profoundly missed by his family.  He was a charming, kind and honest man who was great at his job.

Without Sid Watkins desire to keep Grand Prix racing safe, motorsport would be in a far poorer place than it is today.

RIP Sid

Categories: 1978, Ayrton Senna, FIA, Formula One, London, Medical, Professor Sid Watkins, Rubens Barrichello, Safety, Twitter