Excellent show on about 55 LeMans crash

[bighealeysource]

Hey all,
Know this has been discussed several times but Velocity channel on Direct TV has a one hour show "Deadliest Crash -the 1955 LeMans Disaster". Would imagine Velocity is on other cable or sat providers but I happen to have Direct. It was on last night but imagine it will be repeated several times. Very interesting and excellent period B & W and color footage including the one most of us have seen before of the actual crash. Even after all these years still very sad and sobering.
Regards,
Mike

 

[HealeyRick]

Mike,

I've seen it a couple of times and you're right .. it's very good. Interesting that after all these years, opinions differ as to whose "fault" the accident was. Macklin's Healey seems to come out into the center of the track as Hawthorne dives into the pit. I'm not sure if he had to come out that far because Hawthorne chopped him so close in front or whether Macklin just didn't see Levegh closing so fast. I suppose we'll never know. Even after this tragedy, it took years for racing safety to be significantly improved. "Grand Prix -The Killer Years" is a good follow up to watch after this show.

 

[bighealeysource]

It was interesting as supposedly Mike Hawthorne admitted it was his fault to several of the drivers there after it happened but later recanted. That per one of the them in the interviews, John Fitch - may have his first name wrong but certainly recall his last name over the years. Lance Macklin became very litigious in defending his name and could not blame him for that. One comment was interesting is some think they saw dirt and such thrown up by Mackin's 100S as the Jag driven by Hawthorn slowed down to head to the pits and maybe forced him off the track. Thought Macklin could have been out of control at the time he veered to the middle of the course and get hit by the Mercedes.

 

[pkmh]

Aside from miscalculations in changing lanes, what also compounded the problem, too, was how the track was designed for cars with top speeds of 50 mph during the 1920's, but that race had cars capable of speeds of 190 mph+. The track remained virtually unchanged all those years.

That bit of track was only three car widths wide including the pit stop area, plus there was a slight bend where the accident happened, making the effectiveness of cars to manuever at those high speed obsolete.

 

[Roger]

Aside from miscalculations in changing lanes, what also compounded the problem, too, was how the track was designed for cars with top speeds of 50 mph during the 1920's, but that race had cars capable of speeds of 190 mph+. The track remained virtually unchanged all those years.

That bit of track was only three car widths wide including the pit stop area, plus there was a slight bend where the accident happened, making the effectiveness of cars to manuever at those high speed obsolete.

Your point is valid, however you're a bit unfair to the cars of 1923. The fastest cars could exceed 100mph. The average speed was 55mph, fastest lap 68mph.

 

[pkmh]

Thanks for setting the record straight. Probably miss quoted or interpreted the movies' claims, but good to know cars were faster in the 20's.

The point I was addressing was the accident caused about 200 deaths and was that accident the result of one driver [changing lanes]? It came out in the movie from some of the surviving pros that no blame could be placed, that the driver who attempted to change lanes made, "a simple miscalulation", and "no blame could be made" if I'm quoting it exact.

I am bad with names of the drivers except maybe "Pierre" who died driving the Mercedes, But all other drivers were instructed to "race" and over the limit, if need be. In other words, there was not to be any holding back.

So with that, I'll be frank. I can't imagine all those spectators crowded around like that when cars were capable of racing at such speeds and along a dangerous and narrow path. Total suicide.

 

[Roger]

Wikipedia has a pretty accurate description of the crash. That'll give you the names etc.
There will probably be controversy about the incident for ever - who was to blame, etc. However, undoubtedly the narrowness of the track greatly contributed to the accident.

 

[WaltCasten]

Like on all forums, there has to be (at least) one guy that disagrees. The truth is...I was disappointed in that show.

I thought there was too much time spent, and too much repetition on the Jag vs. Mercedes, Hawthorne vs. Fangio strife. Yes, I think that was important to point out but I didn't think they needed to go over it several times like it seems they did. The period footage helped carry this part but I still think they beat it into the ground.

I also thought there was too much time spent on the interviews with the surviving spectators. Yes, I think being the worst racing tragedy in history that is very, very important and that is was very interesting to hear their story. However, I thought the repetition in that segment took away from their message...I mean, did they really need to show that lady's baby, who was waiting at home for her, multiple times?

Then when it came time for the actual crash, they showed the footage a couple times and no real analysis. I mean, they spent 5-10 minutes of a one hour show on this part. They briefly interviewed three people and one "blamed" each of the three drivers. The interview with Fitch was cool and the other two officials (not exactly sure who they were) was okay. Let's be realistic, these guys were standing in the pits when all this happened.

I realize this is getting long here but... no mention of the French authorities investigation, no mention of them impounding NOJ 393 for a year. No mention of what Mike Hawthorne or Lance Macklin said afterward, no mention of if Fangio ever said anything (I think he was right behind Levegh when it happened). No pictures of NOJ 393 or explanation of how the Mercedes was launched in the air. Speaking of pictures of NOJ 393, given the timing of this show and their focus on drama...why not tell the story of NOJ 393 after this tragedy and show pictures of it in its current dilapidated state. I think a picture of the car with it's smashed out gages and crumbling leather would have added a lot to the very brief "aftermath" portion of the show.

I could go on and on (actually I have gone on and on ;-) but I think you get the idea.

Later,
Wally

 

[HealeyRick]

Wally, you make some excellent points. Documentaries such as this generally have to appeal to a greater audience than just racing fans so tend to have more of the melodramatic elements than a clinical analysis of the accident. And how could we not expect differences in assigning responsibility for the disaster. It's difficult to get two witnesses to agree to what happened at a fender-bender in your neighborhood and now we're adding racing speeds, opinions coming from witnesses all over the track, driver, team and nationality rivalries and the fact that it all took place in an instant. Paul Frere did an analysis which you can access by registering at this site:

Here's his conclusions: https://www.mike-hawthorn.org.uk/home.php

"No. One cannot burden any of the involved drivers with the responsibility. Hawthorn's manoeuvre was correct and he could have no idea of the fact that Macklin was not becoming aware of his braking for the pits and acting accordingly.

One cannot accuse Macklin of not anticipating that the normally much quicker Jaguar would suddently go slower. That he was paying much more attention to events behind him than those in front could be taken as a positive point on his part.

And the case of Levegh has great similarity with Macklin's. At most, one could accuse the Frenchman of paying too much attention to his rear; since Fangio's Mercedes was not faster than his, it would not be substantially obstructed by his on the straight. He (Levegh), on the other hand, had the much slower Austin-Healey in front of him, which he must overtake within the next 200 to 300 metres. However, if Levegh were concentrating too much on the approaching Fangio, it was undoubtedly with the best intention.

In any case, it is wrong to burden the guilt for this catastrophe on Mike Hawthorn and one has, after unemotional investigation of the facts, also appreciation of the decision of the racing manager of Jaguar at that time, 'Lofty' England to let his cars remain in the race after the withdrawal of Mercedes.

Paul Frere. "

 

[pan]

Interesting to read comments about the 1955 Le Mans disaster. I have to admit to a fascination for this race, not through ghoulishness, but as a long time fan of Motor Sport. I am constantly amazed to realise that the sport survived such a catastrophe & the loss of 88 lives in one single race.
There are also several books on the subject. Christopher Hilton's "Le Mans '55, The Race That Changed the Face of Motor Racing" published in 2004 is the most recent. Another is Mark Kahn's "Death Race, Le Mans 1955" published in 1976. Kahn's work is notable for it's extensive profile of Lance Macklin.
Paul Frere's description mentioned above has one glaring error. He suggests that the Mercedes Benz of Levegh was launched into the air by the sloping tail of the Austin-Healey saying that this part of NOJ 393's bodywork was modified for Le Mans. This is not so, the 100S featured the same shape in this area as a standard 100.
As you may know, NOJ 393 was recently sold at auction and I am proud to say that it is now in Australia, being restored for the new (European?) owner.
Alwyn Keepence.
Queensland, Australia

 

[zblu]

Good to see you here again Pan, looks like you have evicted the gremlins finally.

 

[HealeyRick]

Paul Frere's description mentioned above has one glaring error. He suggests that the Mercedes Benz of Levegh was launched into the air by the sloping tail of the Austin-Healey saying that this part of NOJ 393's bodywork was modified for Le Mans. This is not so, the 100S featured the same shape in this area as a standard 100.

Alwyn Keepence.
Queensland, Australia

Wonder if he was thinking of the Sebring Streamliners?

 

[glemon]

I enjoyed the show and learned a few things, I had always heard that the area where the crash occured was inherently unsafe, but seeing the footage, pictures, and diagrams of the high speed narrow straight with a kink, coupled with the pits, coupled with crowds of people nearby really showed that the set up was a major incident waiting to happen.

The cars back then were starting to get pretty fast as they had started to learn about aerodynamics, but didn't burden the cars top end with any downforce (and drag) inducing wings or spoilers, so they could go fast but with the tires, brakes and aerodynamics of the day couldn't stop or turn so well.

I didn't hear the theory that part of the problem was underestimating the speed and ease at which Macklin's Healey, essentially to 100S spec be then, could be passed, causing Macklin to have to slow and swerve, etc. I don't know if there is anything to that or that is just some Healey bravado thrown into the analysis of a complex incident.

I do agree with some of the other posters that I would have like to have seen a little more analysis and little less of the spectator survivors in the show.

Amazing that they continued the race (although I somewhat understand the reasoning behind the decision) and that there was so much carnage that there was never a definitive body count.