trivia question....

[mario]

Apologies for the gravedig, but this just seemed so interesting!

So here are my 3 questions:

1) Who was the first person to be killed in an F1 race?
2) How many tyre companies have been involved in Formula 1? Name all of them
3) How many tracks have hosted the United States Grand Prix?

Hmm, it's an interesting set of questions to bump this thread up with. For the first question, are you referring just to the race, or are you including qualifying as part of the race weekend? I also assume that you are excluding the Indianapolis 500, since in the early years of Formula 1, the Indy 500 was technically part of the World Drivers Championship.

If you include qualifying, the first fatal accident was at the 1954 German GP, where Onofre Marimón crashed his Maserati whilst trying to qualify for the race. If it is during the race itself, that would be Luigi Musso, when he lost control of his Ferrari during the 1958 French Grand Prix at Rheims.

Onto No. 2, and the tyre manufacturers. As far as I can tell, there have been nine different manufacturers: Avon, Bridgestone, Continental, Dunlop, Englebert, Firestone, Goodyear, Michelin and Pirelli, with Goodyear officially still the most successful tyre manufacturer, despite withdrawing from the sport over a decade ago.

Finally, the tracks which have hosted the United States Grand Prix - we have Watkins Glen, Long Beach, Phoenix, Sebring, Riverside and Indianapolis, all of which were held under the title of "The United States Grand Prix", or variants (when Watkins Glen and Long Beach were on the calendar simultaneously, Watkins Glen was called "United States Grand Prix East" and Long Beach "United States Grand Prix West", to distinguish the two). On top of that, there have been races in Detroit, Las Vegas and Dallas, but those races have been named after the venue, not the country.

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

Okay, you guys aced the tyres question!

Indeed, I meant the race in the fatality question. I also excluded the Indy 500 races, and so yes, the answer is Alborghetti. Congrats eagleash!

The last question was something of a trick question however. Yes, all the tracks mentioned did host a race in the US, but I specifically said United States Grand Prix, therefore, its only 5, and those are:

Indianapolis
Riverside
Phoenix
Sebring
Watkins Glen

So a few others:

1. Excluding the Indy 500, who was the first American to win a Formula 1 race?
2. Of all tyre suppliers, only one has failed to win a Championship. Which supplier was it?
3. In what year was the turbo engine first used? And which team introduced it?

[Pieman]

The first person to be killed in an F1 race - it doesn't mention it has to be a driver, so I will say the spectator that was tragically run over during the inaugural Argentine GP in 1952.

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

The first person to be killed in an F1 race - it doesn't mention it has to be a driver, so I will say the spectator that was tragically run over during the inaugural Argentine GP in 1952.

I didn't know that.

And yes, looks like I forgot to say driver instead of person. Looks like I learned something new today!

[eagleash]

The first person to be killed in an F1 race - it doesn't mention it has to be a driver, so I will say the spectator that was tragically run over during the inaugural Argentine GP in 1952.

Well there were 9 to choose from. Whoever was nearest the track I suppose. (Farina Ferrari; actually 1953)

[mario]

Okay, you guys aced the tyres question!

Indeed, I meant the race in the fatality question. I also excluded the Indy 500 races, and so yes, the answer is Alborghetti. Congrats eagleash!

The last question was something of a trick question however. Yes, all the tracks mentioned did host a race in the US, but I specifically said United States Grand Prix, therefore, its only 5, and those are:

Indianapolis
Riverside
Phoenix
Sebring
Watkins Glen

So a few others:

1. Excluding the Indy 500, who was the first American to win a Formula 1 race?
2. Of all tyre suppliers, only one has failed to win a Championship. Which supplier was it?
3. In what year was the turbo engine first used? And which team introduced it?

1. I would guess it'd be Phil Hill (1960 Italian Grand Prix)
2. Avon
3. 1977, Renault (Renault Gordini EF1 V6) - otherwise known as "The Yellow Teapot" for mostly ending its races in a cloud of steam and smoke.

[eagleash]

1) Phil Hill was the first American GP winner. But there have been at least 40 non championship events some with multi runnings so the chances of there being an american winner of one of those......are still quite slim actually.....

2) Avon

3) The obvious answer is Renault in 1977, but I'm trying to think of any unsuccessful attempts earlier as the regs allowed for an equivelancy formula for years.

[mario]

1) Phil Hill was the first American GP winner. But there have been at least 40 non championship events some with multi runnings so the chances of there being an american winner of one of those......are still quite slim actually.....

2) Avon

3) The obvious answer is Renault in 1977, but I'm trying to think of any unsuccessful attempts earlier as the regs allowed for an equivelancy formula for years.

Thinking about it, there were a number of famous forced induction cars in the early years - the Alfa 158 comes to mind - but I thought that most of the early cars used superchargers, not turbo chargers. Unless there was some obscure entry along the way, I'd have thought that Renault got there first.

[eagleash]

1) Phil Hill was the first American GP winner. But there have been at least 40 non championship events some with multi runnings so the chances of there being an american winner of one of those......are still quite slim actually.....

2) Avon

3) The obvious answer is Renault in 1977, but I'm trying to think of any unsuccessful attempts earlier as the regs allowed for an equivelancy formula for years.

Thinking about it, there were a number of famous forced induction cars in the early years - the Alfa 158 comes to mind - but I thought that most of the early cars used superchargers, not turbo chargers. Unless there was some obscure entry along the way, I'd have thought that Renault got there first.

Yes I was ignoring the supercharged cars. There was always speculation/rumour about turbo engines prior to Renault's success but I don't think any actually got past the testing stage. Renault turning up with the turbo surprised some people. There was quite a gap before turbos became more widespread. (BMW didn't run till 1982, Ferrari & Hart in 1981).

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

You guys seem invincible!

Well, lets see if these can be answered.

1. Who was left in charge of Tyrrell when Ken Tyrrell left the team?
2. BMW attempted to enter F1 in the 90s how many times? In which years did they try?
3. Originally, Andrea Montermini was going to be partnered by who at Forti 1996?

If you guys can answer these, gosh..

[fjackdaw]

You guys seem invincible!

Well, lets see if these can be answered.

1. Who was left in charge of Tyrrell when Ken Tyrrell left the team?
2. BMW attempted to enter F1 in the 90s how many times? In which years did they try?
3. Originally, Andrea Montermini was going to be partnered by who at Forti 1996?

If you guys can answer these, gosh..

I'm going to take a stab, and say the late Dr Postlethwaite for 1 and Sospiri for 3.

[eagleash]

You guys seem invincible!

Well, lets see if these can be answered.

1. Who was left in charge of Tyrrell when Ken Tyrrell left the team?
2. BMW attempted to enter F1 in the 90s how many times? In which years did they try?
3. Originally, Andrea Montermini was going to be partnered by who at Forti 1996?

If you guys can answer these, gosh..

1) Sir Ken left when Craig Pollock hired someone in preference to Jos the Boss, so Craig Pollock is the obvious answer but I detect a twist to this. In his absence Bob Tyrrell was sometimes in charge.

2) 10 times. All of them. No idea...

3) Pedro Diniz had a contract with Forti in 1995 which had not expired, but left for ummm...Ligier?

[Pieman]

2) The only one I know of was in 1991 or '92 - the prototype designed for BMW (by Nick Wirth) was bought by Andrea Moda.

[mario]

2) The only one I know of was in 1991 or '92 - the prototype designed for BMW (by Nick Wirth) was bought by Andrea Moda.

Thinking about the question, though, it just mentions BMW entering Formula 1 during the 1990's - which implies that it could also refer to BMW entering the sport as engine manufacturer, not as a full works outfit. If I remember well, although BMW didn't start supplying engines to Williams until 2000, the announcement came a few years before that, and BMW had been running a testing program for at least a couple of years beforehand.
So, were there any rumours of BMW entering the sport in the 1990's as an engine manufacturer asides from Wirth's concept car for BMW?

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

Okay, here are the answers.

1) fjackdaw's guess was correct. It was indeed Harvey Postlethwaite, even though Craig Pollock and BAT technically had control over major issues, if not all.

2) The answer is twice. In 1990 with Simtek designed cars (the S921), and they began a works-team experiment in 1996, with the aim of entering F1 in 1997, but ended up working for Williams instead.

3) Hideki Noda. Montermini was meant as the replacement for Diniz, but the team didn't really have a first driver for 96', though you could say it was Badoer as he got all the top stuff. But yes, Noda had been linked to Forti for around 2 months, and was said to have even signed a contract, though something went wrong at the last moment (Money i believe), so Forti went for talent with Luca.

That's all from me. I want to answer some now.

[mario]

Okay, here are the answers.

1) fjackdaw's guess was correct. It was indeed Harvey Postlethwaite, even though Craig Pollock and BAT technically had control over major issues, if not all.

2) The answer is twice. In 1990 with Simtek designed cars (the S921), and they began a works-team experiment in 1996, with the aim of entering F1 in 1997, but ended up working for Williams instead.

3) Hideki Noda. Montermini was meant as the replacement for Diniz, but the team didn't really have a first driver for 96', though you could say it was Badoer as he got all the top stuff. But yes, Noda had been linked to Forti for around 2 months, and was said to have even signed a contract, though something went wrong at the last moment (Money i believe), so Forti went for talent with Luca.

That's all from me. I want to answer some now.

Interesting - I didn't know that BMW wanted to enter a works team in 1997. I guess, though, that will explain why the tie in with Williams started at about that time, when the works option presumably fell through. OK, so time to turn the tables and ask a few questions myself.

1. In 1978, James Hunt was not having the best of fortunes with Mclaren's current car, the M26. However, at the French Grand Prix, held at the Paul Ricard circuit, he finished in 3rd place, having started from 4th on the grid. What is he supposed to have said about his car after the race?

2. What was the first Formula 1 car to use the engine as a load bearing element (i.e. integrated with the chassis as a structural member)?

[eagleash]

1) ********* bathplug **********

2) Lotus 49: Edit Lotus 43 with the BRM H16 engine!

[mario]

1) ********* bathplug **********

2) Lotus 49: Edit Lotus 43 with the BRM H16 engine!

No and no, I am sorry to say.
Regarding No.1, Hunt was a lot more eloquent on the first point, as well as more cutting.
As for No. 2, you have done well to spot that the earlier Lotus 43 used the H16 engine as a load bearing member. They were not the only ones either - the BRM P83 used the H16 in a load bearing configuration too. However, for No. 2, the car that I am thinking of dates back even further then the Lotus 43, so you'll have to keep on hunting...

[eagleash]

1) ********* bathplug **********

2) Lotus 49: Edit Lotus 43 with the BRM H16 engine!

No and no, I am sorry to say.
Regarding No.1, Hunt was a lot more eloquent on the first point, as well as more cutting.
As for No. 2, you have done well to spot that the earlier Lotus 43 used the H16 engine as a load bearing member. They were not the only ones either - the BRM P83 used the H16 in a load bearing configuration too. However, for No. 2, the car that I am thinking of dates back even further then the Lotus 43, so you'll have to keep on hunting...

Nope. Can't be bothered.

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

1. In 1978, James Hunt was not having the best of fortunes with Mclaren's current car, the M26. However, at the French Grand Prix, held at the Paul Ricard circuit, he finished in 3rd place, having started from 4th on the grid. What is he supposed to have said about his car after the race?

2. What was the first Formula 1 car to use the engine as a load bearing element (i.e. integrated with the chassis as a structural member)?

1) "The car is a piece of bathplug, but I'm so bathplugging awesome that I was able to bathplug win the race. I didn't win? Well bathplug!" In other words, no idea!

2) No idea as well. Lets take a stab. Lotus 25?

[eagleash]

The 25 was almost certainly the first fully stressed monocoque, & the BRM P61/261 used some stress technology. It was also said that the Porsche 718 did so too, but I've seen that disputed. I've always understood that the Lotus 43/P83 was the first to fully stress the engine.

[mario]

Well, I shall give you the answers to those questions I posed, since you might find them interesting.

1. At the 1978 French Grand Prix, Hunt is supposed to have said "Not bad for an antique" when asked about his car. (Design work on the M26 started in 1976, but by 1978, the car was not even that competitive compared to conventional designs, let alone the ground effects Lotus 79.)

2. Now, the Lotus 43, along with the BRM P61, were amongst the first rear engined cars to use the engine as a structural element. However, there was a front engined car which got there first; Vittorio Jano's Lancia D50, introduced for the last race in 1954.
It was raced in 1955, but Lancia had hit financial trouble, and could not afford to run the cars at every race. Although reliability problems meant that they finished no races, the car was very competitive, and some suggest it might have been superior to the Mercedes W196 (they started once on pole, and once in second, with just three race starts).
The car would become a winner, but in different hands; at the end of 1955, the car was sold to Ferrari, who were struggling at the time with uncompetitive cars. They stripped out some of the more radical design features (although they did also make the car more reliable), and lured Fangio across to drive for them. It worked: in 1956, Fangio narrowly beat Moss to the World Drivers Championship.

[fjackdaw]

What do Pedro Lamy, Jacques Villeneuve and Franck Montagny have in common?

[F1000X]

What do Pedro Lamy, Jacques Villeneuve and Franck Montagny have in common?

The Peugeot 908 HDI-FAP. They've all competed in one at Le Mans.

[fjackdaw]

What do Pedro Lamy, Jacques Villeneuve and Franck Montagny have in common?

The Peugeot 908 HDI-FAP. They've all competed in one at Le Mans.

It's a Formula 1 question. Clue - it's not about anything they've done or achieved, something far more superficial than that.

Edit - these are the only drivers I can think of that this applies to, though it may briefly have applied to Sebastian Vettel this year or last.

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

What do Pedro Lamy, Jacques Villeneuve and Franck Montagny have in common?

They've crashed (or crashed by) their teammate.

Or something..

[eagleash]

Well, I shall give you the answers to those questions I posed, since you might find them interesting.

1. At the 1978 French Grand Prix, Hunt is supposed to have said "Not bad for an antique" when asked about his car. (Design work on the M26 started in 1976, but by 1978, the car was not even that competitive compared to conventional designs, let alone the ground effects Lotus 79.)

2. Now, the Lotus 43, along with the BRM P61, were amongst the first rear engined cars to use the engine as a structural element. However, there was a front engined car which got there first; Vittorio Jano's Lancia D50, introduced for the last race in 1954.
It was raced in 1955, but Lancia had hit financial trouble, and could not afford to run the cars at every race. Although reliability problems meant that they finished no races, the car was very competitive, and some suggest it might have been superior to the Mercedes W196 (they started once on pole, and once in second, with just three race starts).
The car would become a winner, but in different hands; at the end of 1955, the car was sold to Ferrari, who were struggling at the time with uncompetitive cars. They stripped out some of the more radical design features (although they did also make the car more reliable), and lured Fangio across to drive for them. It worked: in 1956, Fangio narrowly beat Moss to the World Drivers Championship.

The P61 stressed the monococqe but not the engine? The P83 did stress the engine.
Annoyingly I knew that about the Lancia D50; but had completely forgotten it until this morning! Well it is over 40 years since I read it.

[mario]

Well, I shall give you the answers to those questions I posed, since you might find them interesting.

1. At the 1978 French Grand Prix, Hunt is supposed to have said "Not bad for an antique" when asked about his car. (Design work on the M26 started in 1976, but by 1978, the car was not even that competitive compared to conventional designs, let alone the ground effects Lotus 79.)

2. Now, the Lotus 43, along with the BRM P61, were amongst the first rear engined cars to use the engine as a structural element. However, there was a front engined car which got there first; Vittorio Jano's Lancia D50, introduced for the last race in 1954.
It was raced in 1955, but Lancia had hit financial trouble, and could not afford to run the cars at every race. Although reliability problems meant that they finished no races, the car was very competitive, and some suggest it might have been superior to the Mercedes W196 (they started once on pole, and once in second, with just three race starts).
The car would become a winner, but in different hands; at the end of 1955, the car was sold to Ferrari, who were struggling at the time with uncompetitive cars. They stripped out some of the more radical design features (although they did also make the car more reliable), and lured Fangio across to drive for them. It worked: in 1956, Fangio narrowly beat Moss to the World Drivers Championship.

The P61 stressed the monococqe but not the engine? The P83 did stress the engine.
Annoyingly I knew that about the Lancia D50; but had completely forgotten it until this morning! Well it is over 40 years since I read it.

Forgive me, you are right - I made the mistake because the P83 replaced the P61 at the end of the 1966 season. Yes, the P61 did have a stressed monocoque, but used a sub frame to support the engine. The P83 which replaced it, though, did use the engine as a structural element.

Still, I thought that you might like the question about the Lancia D50 - for the time, it was a fairly advanced and experimental design, but sadly hampered by the financial problems that Lancia faced at the time. As Ferrari showed the following season, once the reliability problems of the car were sorted out, it was a pretty good car (probably much better then the cars Ferrari were turning out at the time, thanks to Enzo's obsession with engine power over handling and aerodynamics).

On a side note, although the design philosophy of the Lotus 43 and BRM P83 lead to most later cars being designed with the engine acting structurally, that hasn't always been the case. The one exception were the Inline four cylinder engines in the turbo era - particularly the BMW and Zakspeed engines - which were semi stressed (in other words, they reverted to using a sub frame to support the engine), due to a lack of torsional stiffness. Now, I know that Ferrari had voiced a few concerns about the 2013 engines lacking torsional stiffness if they switch back to I4's, so I wonder if we might see one or more cars with a sub frame again?

[DonTirri]

What do Pedro Lamy, Jacques Villeneuve and Franck Montagny have in common?

They have a pink stripe in their helmets

[fjackdaw]

What do Pedro Lamy, Jacques Villeneuve and Franck Montagny have in common?

They have a pink stripe in their helmets

Yes! Or, less specifically, the colour pink - not necessarily a stripe.

[eagleash]

What do Pedro Lamy, Jacques Villeneuve and Franck Montagny have in common?

The Peugeot 908 HDI-FAP. They've all competed in one at Le Mans.

It's a Formula 1 question. Clue - it's not about anything they've done or achieved, something far more superficial than that.

Edit - these are the only drivers I can think of that this applies to, though it may briefly have applied to Sebastian Vettel this year or last.

That's not a Formula 1 question, unless they wear a different helmet in other categories.

[fjackdaw]

That's not a Formula 1 question, unless they wear a different helmet in other categories.

Ah yes, what I meant to say was that it was nothing to do with other categories - I only know what helmet colours they wore in F1, and I think some drivers do sometimes have different colours elsewhere maybe.

[TomWazzleshaw]

Here's a somewhat hard one which is in several parts:

At the 1998 Japanese Grand Prix Damon Hill was given an instruction from the Jordan team.

A. What was the instruction?
B. How many times was it sent to him?
C. How did this instruction and his response have an effect on the world championship?

[Aerospeed]

Here's a somewhat hard one which is in several parts:

At the 1998 Japanese Grand Prix Damon Hill was given an instruction from the Jordan team.

A. What was the instruction?
B. How many times was it sent to him?
C. How did this instruction and his response have an effect on the world championship?

A. Move over!
B. Many times!
C. No effect whatsoever!

(This is not on any sources whatsoever)

[TomWazzleshaw]

A. Move over!
B. Many times!
C. No effect whatsoever!

You're pretty much right on the first part and half right on the second part. (I only posted the question after watching the 1998 Japanese Grand Prix on youtube)

[eagleash]

No idea....1998....

Hakkinen won the title, & it was the year SCH stalled at the start.

He was asked not to hold SCH up, but wasn't particularly co-operative (!) & SCH who should have stopped for tyres earlier, punctured? Thus HAK clinched the title?
Guess 4 times.

[TomWazzleshaw]

He was asked not to hold SCH up, but wasn't particularly co-operative (!) & SCH who should have stopped for tyres earlier, punctured? Thus HAK clinched the title?
Guess 4 times.

Pretty much got it all in one. And it was only 3 times.

The tyre let go after he ran over debris from the Takagi/Tuero collision long after he leapfrogged Damon in the first sequence of stops.

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

I for one, am happy that Damon held up Schumi...

[coops]

I for one, am happy that Damon held up Schumi...

And history will always record that Damon Hill was the first driver to win for Jordan F1!!

That actually meant more in 1998 when we didnt know that the second driver to win would also be the last.

[Tealy]

I for one, am happy that Damon held up Schumi...

And history will always record that Damon Hill was the first driver to win for Jordan F1!!

That actually meant more in 1998 when we didnt know that the second driver to win would also be the last.

Off topic but haven't 3 drivers won for Jordan? I'm thinking Hill, Frentzen and Fisichella (That race in '03 when Raikkonen was the winner on the podium but moved down afterwards).