Talk:1955 Le Mans disaster/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:Le Mans 1955 crashed car remains.jpg

Image:Le Mans 1955 crashed car remains.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 18:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

It's working now. Perhaps a transient problem or hosting change... Mojoworker (talk) 17:33, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 1955 Le Mans disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1955 Le Mans disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:38, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1955 Le Mans disaster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:36, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Funny

Funny, how you don't even find one mention of the disaster on the official lemans pages...Lukas 05:59, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

1999 incident

The 1999 Incident does not belong on this page, it is completely irrelevant and should be removed. --The Animal 03:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment on the cause and withdrawal

Removed the following statement by 194.78.209.209 from the main article. This belongs in the talk page for now. 

(this is not completely accurate... The Jaguar had very powerful disc brakes, while the Austin had drum
 brakes and couldn't cope with the the situation. Hawthorn is not to blame here, the fault lies in the 
 fact that very fast and powerful cars were mixed with slower ones)"

Likewise: (ENeville 06:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)) 

(this happened 6 hours after the accident. Neubauer declared to Mercedes in Germany it was useless
 to withdraw 6 hours later, they should have withdrawn immediately or not... . Germany declared
 there was no victory to gain in this situation as the war was still fresh in everyone's memory. It needs
 to be said that Jaguar made no publicity for their 1955 Le Mans victory)


Article title?

This is a slightly difficult article to title, not having a truly formalized name in my experience, but I think that "1955 Le Mans disaster" is more natural and what people would sooner look for than the current. Any thoughts? ENeville 17:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Since (date, event) is more consistent with naming conventions for both races (e.g. as used in Le Mans 24h races) and disasters (e.g. as used in List of disasters), I moved the article to 1955 Le Mans disaster. ENeville 18:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Clarification needed

(1) "... Mercedes-Benz announced that they would no longer participate in motorsport, a self-imposed ban that lasted for several decades." - Can anybody give an exact year/date when Mercedes-Benz returned to motorsport?

Not true. Mercedes withdrew from circuit racing, but actually had a very successful rallying program in the later 1950s and into the 1960s. Alfred Neubauer's successor Karl Kling (yes, he was competing for D-B at the time of the accident) won a couple of events himself. The motorsport department was very much a going concern long after 1955. As for a precise date for their return to circuit racing this is a little tricky. There were certainly factory-sanctioned touring car entries in the 1980s, and semi-works involvement from the 1990s, prior to full factory teams late in the decade. Similarly for sports cars. Sauber effectively ran the "factory" sports car effort in the later 1980s, but there was a huge input from the company. This tacit support makes dating their return very imprecise, and probably not at all encyclopedic. Pyrope 15:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

(2) "The remaining 300 SLRs would be given to privateers, although they would eventually retire from racing within the next few years." - This is slightly unclear. I changed "privateers" to "private owners" ("privateer" means "pirate"). However, who is "they" who would retire from racing? Presumably this means that the remaining 300 SLR automobiles were retired from racing. Can somebody who's sure about this please fix? -- 201.50.248.179 14:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Privateer in a motorsport context actually means "private entrant". It is a widely used and properly recognised term, but I admit that it might be confusing for those unfamiliar with it. As far as I am aware, the factory held on to all of its cars after witdrawing from circuit racing, so the privateer question is moot in any case. Pyrope 15:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Alleged copyright violation

On 21 May 2007 a copyright violation notice was placed, with the url: http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/1955_Le_Mans_disaster Cursory inspection shows that this is a Wikipedia mirror, that they have copied our content under the GFDL rather than us copying theirs, and I have therefore removed the violation notice. Grobertson 14:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

What's a marque?

"Competition among Mercedes, Jaguar, Ferrari, Aston Martin, and Maserati was close, with all the marques fighting for the top positions early on" So what's a marque? --AW 14:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

In a straightforward term, its French for make/brand name, there is a wikipedia entry for it, click on where its bluelinked. Willirennen 15:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
It wasn't linked in the article, so I just did. --AW 17:40, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

1955 Was A Bad year For Auto Racing

Today, Auto Racing in my mind is much safer than 1955. in that year, there were no safe walls,no Hans device, no head restrictors to save a drivers life. 1955 featured at least one fatal important crash in 4 separate days, of course it claimed the lives of James Dean and Bill Vukovich, it also took the lives of other drivers at Langhorne Speedway, and that infamous day at Le Mans in 1955. I'm so glad Auto racing is much safer, better and more excitement than that bad year in 1955. User:Joey Chesnavich 10:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that, and I'm sure that there isn't anyone who would disagree with you. However, please be aware that article talk pages are for discussion of the article's content and construction, and are not a chatroom or general discussion board. Pyrope 17:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Levegh in 1952

I was just wondering whether anyone had a citation for the rather odd assertion that "He had been leading because he did not have to take up any time by switching drivers"? In those days the time taken for refuelling would have provided ample time for two drivers to switch, as the cars were open, they didn't wear seat belts, and this was long before the days of individually moulded seats. I find it very hard to believe that not switching drivers was the reason Levegh was leading, if it is true that he was. Pyrope 12:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

You're quite right, it does look odd. If driver swaps were never more frequent than re-fuels there would have been no reason for the two to ever be non-coincident? Or was this governed by fuel tank capacity? 1952 24 Hours of Le Mans shows no co-driver listed for Levegh - so was he a team of one that year? For what reason? The BBC documentary simply states that Levegh had previously competed several times, ".. almost winning single-handedly in 1952". Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
My understanding of the Levegh situation in 1952 was that he had detected an engine problem - a broken big-end bolt - early in the race and feared that his co-driver would lack the sensitivity to drive the car without causing the engine to let go. Eventually, probably from sheer exhaustion, he muffed a gear-change and the crankshaft broke. I've read that Tony Lago carried the bolt in his pocket for years. Mr Larrington (talk) 14:53, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Nice story! Where did you read it? Pyrope 01:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Levegh's co-driver in 1952 was supposed to be René Marchand The359 (Talk) 01:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
From memory the story of the big end bolt came from Chris Nixon's Mon Ami Mate, which covers the accident, and its background, in considerable detail. Mr Larrington (talk) 14:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Well with nobody coming up with a citation for that rather odd statement, I have removed it. Pyrope 18:43, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Location

For people who aren't familiar with the Le Mans or auto racing in general, it would be helpful to where Le Mans is. I don't see the location mentioned anywhere in the article, or in the 1955 24 Hours of Le Mans general article. It's a pretty glaring oversight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.210.170.48 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 13 March 2007

Le Mans is the name of the city where the annual car race takes place. Dimadick (talk) 07:54, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

23 hours?

The guy raced for 23 hours? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.118.200.136 (talk) 15:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

  • Yes. The Le Mans race is a 24 hour endurance race. Carsinmotion 05:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
A reference to Levegh in '52. He was the owner and refused to let his copilot drive. Then he supposedly missed a gear shift, overrevved and split his blocksuffered a broken crankshaft[1], forcing him from the race while he was in the lead. Andyvphil (talk) 15:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Sources

The official LeMans site says Hawthorn finished SECOND in 1955 [2]. (Levegh's result is "Retirement", LOL.) Is there an explanation for this? Andyvphil (talk) 18:32, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

80 spectators?

it seems rather exceptional for a two car crash to kill 80 people. this should be elaborated on a bit. Joeyramoney 18:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

According to the live report, which is cross-referenced at the bottom of the article, 82 people were killed. You have to remember there were hardly any safety measures in those days.

  • The account of over 80 is true. It's not like there were retaining walls, catch fences, etc. along the track. People were literally just ammased along the side of the circuit. This accident is widely known in the racing world as a turning point in all of auto racing. It sparked AAA droppping out of racing, and the actual banning of motorsports in some European countries (Switzerland, for one). This is a notable event that does stand alone and should be worthy of its own article. Doctorindy 17:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
While it seems odd in these modern times not to have an accurate count of victims, I have read various reports with differing or pointedly unspecified numbers (all over 80, though). In the interest of accuracy before a false sense of precision, I think any specific number (82, 83, whatever) should be specifically cited. ENeville 19:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
The casualties of the disaster fell mainly into 2 groups. (a) Those killed by the Mercedes when if first went into the crowd. The car was in the air at head height, with obvious results on the spectators who happened to be in the flight path (b) Those that were killed by the flying debris from the Mercedes after it hit the concrete tunnel entrance. A few were killed by the bonnet of the car flying off. Many more were killed by the front axle with the wheels still attached flying off into the packed grandstand (this was the main cause of the deaths, about 50 casualties). You can clearly see this on the available film footage. Lec CRP1 10:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
The Mercedes was never at head height, except when its bouncing trajectory took it through head height. (There was in any case no one "head height" -- people standing on various improvised trestles seem to have been those most likely to be lopped off.) It cleared a 1 meter berm at the end of the straightaway and hit a low concrete wall adjacent to a tunnel under the roadway. This detached the front axle and engine and the airbrake (and/or maybe the bonnet - This is so far the only article I've seen that mentioned the bonnet, still less gave it that much importance. It was way too light to do as much damage as is attributed to it. The engine and front axle were much more capable of causing decapitations when traveling at speed.). The bulk/rear of the car somersaulted, landing on the earthen barrier, and exploded.
Anyway, the explosion seems to have injured a few. And Macklin's car killed one. But it was the engine, front axle, and other debris detached but not much slowed by impact with the tunnel structure, not the rear 3/4 of the Mercedes, that killed almost everytone who died. Andyvphil (talk) 15:18, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Here's the bonnet: [3] at 35:05, amid what appears to be a detailed discussion of the injuries... in French. Andyvphil (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Uncertainty about the number of deaths is almost universal in situations of this type. First, some people are declared dead on the scene. Also, different groups of people are reporting the casualties (police, various hospitals, management of the venue), and confusion results. Soon afterwards, more victims are declared dead in hospital. Over the next few days/weeks, more die of injuries received. It's not unusual for one or two people to linger for months before succumbing. So, depending on which news source we refer to and which deaths we want to consider as "caused by the accident", the casualty count could vary. -- 201.50.248.179 14:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
  • If you look at the first picture in the article the people are just standing on the side of the road. It's pretty believable. Carsinmotion 05:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
According to the BBC4 documentary (broadcast 16 May 2010) the official police enquiry into the event, which may have provided more precise casualty figures, is still subject to French secrecy laws and thus still unavailable. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
On the BBC web-page for the video there is currently a mis-match between the written summary and with what the programme narration states, which is: "Even today there is still no confirmed death toll. Estimates range from 80 to 120 dead. Not sure how these can be resolved. I don't know if Paul Skilliter and Tony Bailey's "Mike Hawthorn - Golden Boy" provides any firmer figure. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:53, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1955_Le_Mans_disaster/Archive_1&oldid=1142393398"