Quote:
Originally Posted by IamNotDavid
(Post 339919)
You didn't make use of additional data, you made $@!^ up. My comparison is perfectly valid. One F1 event is approximately equivalent to 1 Reno event. The timespan is roughly the same. You certainly have not demonstrated otherwise.
|
No, it isn't. One race in F1 including free practice and qualifying totals less than a few hours, Reno which is at least a week long event, has displays as well as racing, however you look at, it totals a lot more than that, so by insisting that the fact it happens only once a year makes no difference and we should measure the time in events, I say why not measure it in days or even hours, if its the time per year that is so important, and we come to different conclusions. My point is, the issue is not as cut and defined as you would have it, clear comparisons cannot be made, and some activities are proven to be more dangerous even than Reno. Why do any of these activities carry on? It is not that people are stupid or that they don't understand the risk. It is something somewhat harder to define.
Reckless, maybe. Reckless is normally associated with youth but in many of these sports you'll notice the competitors are a lot older, due to the fact it takes a considerable amount of experience as well as skill to be able to pass the entrance requirements, let alone qualify or be competitive. Especially so in the case of aircraft racing it would seem. If you truly were reckless there is almost no way you could have survived to take part. No matter though, who they are or how skilled, experienced, young or old, people sometimes get things wrong, whilst doing a great many different things. Sometimes a machine part fails leading to a sequence of events that cannot be averted from that moment forward. Sometimes a sequence of small events over an extended period of time conspire to make a dangerous situation lethal.
People like to go fast is the most obvious simplification of why these dangerous activities continue. People also like to admire the machines that help them achieve it, from inside and out. People like to compete with each other to see, who is the fastest? Whose machine is best, practically, aesthetically, audibly? Is it really important? Maybe not. But the interested mind poses these questions automatically and seeks an answer. Why do people climb Everest? for every 15 that summit 1 dies. People want to push the boundaries and see how far, how fast, and maybe go that little bit further. Its an evolutionary necessity that cannot be permanently subdued.
I realise that my position might seem to imply that I am in some way unfeeling or uncaring about the recent accident, I assure you that I am not. Every single death is a tragedy, from which I hope people will recover with as much haste and ease as is possible. I am sure you are correct in your assessment of the insurance companies direction, David. That is their business after all. I have said all I can say on the matter.
