Ex Top Gear Presenter Richard Hammond in Hospital Following Hill Climb Crash

[Stasha_Sz]

Former "Top Gear" presenter Richard Hammond was air lifted to hospital following the fiery crash of his £2 million electric supercar during the hill climb portion of the Hemberg rally in Switzerland on Saturday. Preliminary reports state that Hammond suffered only a fractured knee and was able to extract himself from the overturned vehicle. No other vehicles were involved.

Hammond, 47, was piloting a Croatian-built Rimac Concept One electric supercar on a closed course when it left the road on a left hand curve and went down an embankment where it overturned and caught fire. The hill climb was being filmed as part of the former Top Gear threesome of Hammond, James May and Jeremy Clarkson's new show "Grand Tour" for Amazon.

Richard Hammond 'airlifted to hospital' after horror crash

 

[WheelieAddict]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that.

 

[Stasha_Sz]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that

I wonder how much of this accident could be chalked up to the lack of engine braking torque that would have been available in a conventionally fueled car?

 

[WheelieAddict]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that

I wonder how much of this accident could be chalked up to the lack of engine braking torque that would have been available in a conventionally fueled car?

Well it is possible he expected engine braking but to be honest looks like he wasn't ready for the corner regardless. Also someone racing needs to know their car so it is still not an excuse. I've raced all kinds of motorcycles and engine braking is much different with various engine configurations, you need to adjust.

It's possible the car had a failure, doesn't look like it though.

 

[BULLDOG]

He's a short limey. It was just a matter of time before he crashed.

 

[westwall]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that.

He wasn't going that fast to be honest. I would guess at between 85 and 95 mph, well within the normal handling capabilities of a modern supercar. He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing. I would love to see the telemetry off of that car.

 

[WheelieAddict]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that.

He wasn't going that fast to be honest. I would guess at between 85 and 95 mph, well within the normal handling capabilities of a modern supercar. He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing. I would love to see the telemetry off of that car.

He was flat out on a straight and came into a tricky section with a curve before a sharp corner where he couldn't mash the brakes to make the turn without spinning out. He came in too hot thats all there is to it.

 

[dannyboys]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that.

He wasn't going that fast to be honest. I would guess at between 85 and 95 mph, well within the normal handling capabilities of a modern supercar. He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing. I would love to see the telemetry off of that car.

A: We don't know what the front/rear brake bias was set to.
B: The "engine braking torque" on electric cars is in fact greater, or can be adjusted to be greater on electric cars compared to naturally aspirated engine powered cars.
I personally know Hammond. He's always fancied himself to be a better driver than he actually is. No offense to him. He jokes about it.
No one will ride in his helicopter when he's flying it! LOL LOL
He's a great guy.
James May is an excellent pilot.
In my small collection I have a 1964 Austin Healey 3000 Mrk 11 with electric overdrive. I won't drive it over 50MPH on a dry road. If it's a wet road it stays in the paddock. Fucking death trap for losing the back end!

 

[Stasha_Sz]

A: We don't know what the front/rear brake bias was set to.
B: The "engine braking torque" on electric cars is in fact greater, or can be adjusted to be greater on electric cars compared to naturally aspirated engine powered cars.

Thank you for the follow up Dannyboys. Very good points you have raised. I have never personally driven an all-electric car, so I will defer to your comments. Should you contact Hammond, please pass on my best wishes for a speedy recovery.

I have, however, driven rallies both as a driver and navigator, and frankly, his approach to that curve was all wrong. I would make it a 60 left-uphill-no cut, and without being able to see the next section of tarmac being understood, I would have angled the car to the left hand side, the inside, then past the apex, let it drift out on the other side of the curve. Hammond was on the outside of the tarmac, no chance to complete that entry. If that was caused by being too hot, or as Westwall noted:

He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing.

that was the cause. I have driven a 911 at speed, and they most assuredly are tail-happy if a turn is not executed properly. Hammond's rear end definitely broke loose first.

 

[westwall]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that.

He wasn't going that fast to be honest. I would guess at between 85 and 95 mph, well within the normal handling capabilities of a modern supercar. He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing. I would love to see the telemetry off of that car.

He was flat out on a straight and came into a tricky section with a curve before a sharp corner where he couldn't mash the brakes to make the turn without spinning out. He came in too hot thats all there is to it.

Spoken like someone who has never driven a truly exceptional car. The car has minimal aerodynamic downforce, thus it relies on mechanical grip to get it through those types of turn sequences (which are not that tricky at all), I have a 60 year old GT40 that can take that turn with no issue at around 110-120 mph (I would have to see the road condition to tell for sure) because it has good aero for its age, is incredibly well balanced and the mechanical grip is mind boggling.

Like I said, I feel that the car is mainly to blame for the crash.

 

[westwall]

A: We don't know what the front/rear brake bias was set to.
B: The "engine braking torque" on electric cars is in fact greater, or can be adjusted to be greater on electric cars compared to naturally aspirated engine powered cars.

Thank you for the follow up Dannyboys. Very good points you have raised. I have never personally driven an all-electric car, so I will defer to your comments. Should you contact Hammond, please pass on my best wishes for a speedy recovery.

I have, however, driven rallies both as a driver and navigator, and frankly, his approach to that curve was all wrong. I would make it a 60 left-uphill-no cut, and without being able to see the next section of tarmac being understood, I would have angled the car to the left hand side, the inside, then past the apex, let it drift out on the other side of the curve. Hammond was on the outside of the tarmac, no chance to complete that entry. If that was caused by being too hot, or as Westwall noted:

He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing.

that was the cause. I have driven a 911 at speed, and they most assuredly are tail-happy if a turn is not executed properly. Hammond's rear end definitely broke loose first.

And Hammond LOVES Porches so he should be familiar with that aspect of their handling. That's why I feel the car had a failure of some sort. Hammond obviously had driven that section of road before so I feel that his approach was correct with that prior experience, otherwise, as you say, his entrance into the corner was totally screwed up.

 

[Eloy]

There are compelling reasons for a married man with children not to be so reckless.

 

[westwall]

There are compelling reasons for a married man with children not to be so reckless.

And men and women place themselves in harms way every minute of every day regardless of that fact.

 

[Stasha_Sz]

A: We don't know what the front/rear brake bias was set to.
B: The "engine braking torque" on electric cars is in fact greater, or can be adjusted to be greater on electric cars compared to naturally aspirated engine powered cars.

Thank you for the follow up Dannyboys. Very good points you have raised. I have never personally driven an all-electric car, so I will defer to your comments. Should you contact Hammond, please pass on my best wishes for a speedy recovery.

I have, however, driven rallies both as a driver and navigator, and frankly, his approach to that curve was all wrong. I would make it a 60 left-uphill-no cut, and without being able to see the next section of tarmac being understood, I would have angled the car to the left hand side, the inside, then past the apex, let it drift out on the other side of the curve. Hammond was on the outside of the tarmac, no chance to complete that entry. If that was caused by being too hot, or as Westwall noted:

He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing.

that was the cause. I have driven a 911 at speed, and they most assuredly are tail-happy if a turn is not executed properly. Hammond's rear end definitely broke loose first.

And Hammond LOVES Porches so he should be familiar with that aspect of their handling. That's why I feel the car had a failure of some sort. Hammond obviously had driven that section of road before so I feel that his approach was correct with that prior experience, otherwise, as you say, his entrance into the corner was totally screwed up.

Yes, Hamster is somewhat a Porsche-phile, though I am not sure he ever got over the GT3 being recalled for catching afire. He was however less than thrilled with the Panamera...

 

[westwall]

A: We don't know what the front/rear brake bias was set to.
B: The "engine braking torque" on electric cars is in fact greater, or can be adjusted to be greater on electric cars compared to naturally aspirated engine powered cars.

Thank you for the follow up Dannyboys. Very good points you have raised. I have never personally driven an all-electric car, so I will defer to your comments. Should you contact Hammond, please pass on my best wishes for a speedy recovery.

I have, however, driven rallies both as a driver and navigator, and frankly, his approach to that curve was all wrong. I would make it a 60 left-uphill-no cut, and without being able to see the next section of tarmac being understood, I would have angled the car to the left hand side, the inside, then past the apex, let it drift out on the other side of the curve. Hammond was on the outside of the tarmac, no chance to complete that entry. If that was caused by being too hot, or as Westwall noted:

He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing.

that was the cause. I have driven a 911 at speed, and they most assuredly are tail-happy if a turn is not executed properly. Hammond's rear end definitely broke loose first.

And Hammond LOVES Porches so he should be familiar with that aspect of their handling. That's why I feel the car had a failure of some sort. Hammond obviously had driven that section of road before so I feel that his approach was correct with that prior experience, otherwise, as you say, his entrance into the corner was totally screwed up.

Yes, Hamster is somewhat a Porsche-phile, though I am not sure he ever got over the GT3 being recalled for catching afire. He was however less than thrilled with the Panamera...

Yeah, most Porche owners I know aren't too keen on the Panamera. Very much a ladies car!

 

[Stasha_Sz]

Yeah, most Porche owners I know aren't too keen on the Panamera. Very much a ladies car!

And it has too many doors. Don't even get me started on the Cayenne.

 

[dannyboys]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that.

He wasn't going that fast to be honest. I would guess at between 85 and 95 mph, well within the normal handling capabilities of a modern supercar. He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing. I would love to see the telemetry off of that car.

He was flat out on a straight and came into a tricky section with a curve before a sharp corner where he couldn't mash the brakes to make the turn without spinning out. He came in too hot thats all there is to it.

Spoken like someone who has never driven a truly exceptional car. The car has minimal aerodynamic downforce, thus it relies on mechanical grip to get it through those types of turn sequences (which are not that tricky at all), I have a 60 year old GT40 that can take that turn with no issue at around 110-120 mph (I would have to see the road condition to tell for sure) because it has good aero for its age, is incredibly well balanced and the mechanical grip is mind boggling.

Like I said, I feel that the car is mainly to blame for the crash.

Here's where it seems you and I have a basic fundamentally different way of looking at things.
The "car" is not "to blame for the crash" you idiot!
The DRIVER is ultimately to blame. Hammond didn't know how the car was going to drive!
He made a LOT of assumptions!
He ought to have put in a hundred laps at LEAST to find out what the handling characteristics of the car where before taking that corner, as noted, too fast and choosing the wrong approach to the apex.
Hammond does this sort of thing.
Once years ago he got into a sports car owned by a friend. It was his first time in the car. He drove straight onto the track and into an oncoming car! HE HADN'T TESTED THE FUCKING BRAKE BIAS!!!!!!
Same as "guns kill people". Fucking People kill people.........with whatever they have handy!
Bottom line: Human error is always 100% responsible for accidents.
I used to teach a safety course years ago. No one EVER was able to bring up ANY instance where ultimately it didn't end up being some human had fucked up somehow.
BTW. A meteor hitting a car and causing it to crash is NOT an 'accident'. Nor is a deer jumping in front of a car and ending up in the driver's lap an 'accident'.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Lol, my Dodge RAM would beat all your sissy race cars over an open field, so there!

 

[westwall]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that.

He wasn't going that fast to be honest. I would guess at between 85 and 95 mph, well within the normal handling capabilities of a modern supercar. He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing. I would love to see the telemetry off of that car.

He was flat out on a straight and came into a tricky section with a curve before a sharp corner where he couldn't mash the brakes to make the turn without spinning out. He came in too hot thats all there is to it.

Spoken like someone who has never driven a truly exceptional car. The car has minimal aerodynamic downforce, thus it relies on mechanical grip to get it through those types of turn sequences (which are not that tricky at all), I have a 60 year old GT40 that can take that turn with no issue at around 110-120 mph (I would have to see the road condition to tell for sure) because it has good aero for its age, is incredibly well balanced and the mechanical grip is mind boggling.

Like I said, I feel that the car is mainly to blame for the crash.

Here's where it seems you and I have a basic fundamentally different way of looking at things.
The "car" is not "to blame for the crash" you idiot!
The DRIVER is ultimately to blame. Hammond didn't know how the car was going to drive!
He made a LOT of assumptions!
He ought to have put in a hundred laps at LEAST to find out what the handling characteristics of the car where before taking that corner, as noted, too fast and choosing the wrong approach to the apex.
Hammond does this sort of thing.
Once years ago he got into a sports car owned by a friend. It was his first time in the car. He drove straight onto the track and into an oncoming car! HE HADN'T TESTED THE FUCKING BRAKE BIAS!!!!!!
Same as "guns kill people". Fucking People kill people.........with whatever they have handy!
Bottom line: Human error is always 100% responsible for accidents.
I used to teach a safety course years ago. No one EVER was able to bring up ANY instance where ultimately it didn't end up being some human had fucked up somehow.
BTW. A meteor hitting a car and causing it to crash is NOT an 'accident'. Nor is a deer jumping in front of a car and ending up in the driver's lap an 'accident'.

Here's where I disagree with you. A driver practices with a car with all of its drivers aids available and working. He gets used to doing a particular driving sequence based upon those drivers aids working. Then, when he does the run for the umpteenth time, one of those drivers aids fails and he crashes because of that.

Now, this is based on watching a very small section of video. Stasha is absolutely correct that Hamsters approach to the corner is completely wrong, unless you have those drivers aids, and you have practiced that particular stretch of road so are doing an unorthodox attack because of extensive prior knowledge.

If, on the other hand the super car has no drivers aids, and the Hamster was taking that corner for the first time, then yes, absolutely, it is all his fault. Like I said at the very beginning, based on what little we know, and how extensive the Grand Tour preps it's pieces my assumptions are logic based. But, they could be completely off base, I simply don't have all of the facts.

 

[dannyboys]

Hit that corner way too hot. Lucky to live after a fuckup like that.

He wasn't going that fast to be honest. I would guess at between 85 and 95 mph, well within the normal handling capabilities of a modern supercar. He lost mechanical grip in the first corner when he tapped the brakes which unloaded the rear and caused it to oversteer to the left. It basically behaved like a Porche 911 without a rear wing. I would love to see the telemetry off of that car.

He was flat out on a straight and came into a tricky section with a curve before a sharp corner where he couldn't mash the brakes to make the turn without spinning out. He came in too hot thats all there is to it.

Spoken like someone who has never driven a truly exceptional car. The car has minimal aerodynamic downforce, thus it relies on mechanical grip to get it through those types of turn sequences (which are not that tricky at all), I have a 60 year old GT40 that can take that turn with no issue at around 110-120 mph (I would have to see the road condition to tell for sure) because it has good aero for its age, is incredibly well balanced and the mechanical grip is mind boggling.

Like I said, I feel that the car is mainly to blame for the crash.

Here's where it seems you and I have a basic fundamentally different way of looking at things.
The "car" is not "to blame for the crash" you idiot!
The DRIVER is ultimately to blame. Hammond didn't know how the car was going to drive!
He made a LOT of assumptions!
He ought to have put in a hundred laps at LEAST to find out what the handling characteristics of the car where before taking that corner, as noted, too fast and choosing the wrong approach to the apex.
Hammond does this sort of thing.
Once years ago he got into a sports car owned by a friend. It was his first time in the car. He drove straight onto the track and into an oncoming car! HE HADN'T TESTED THE FUCKING BRAKE BIAS!!!!!!
Same as "guns kill people". Fucking People kill people.........with whatever they have handy!
Bottom line: Human error is always 100% responsible for accidents.
I used to teach a safety course years ago. No one EVER was able to bring up ANY instance where ultimately it didn't end up being some human had fucked up somehow.
BTW. A meteor hitting a car and causing it to crash is NOT an 'accident'. Nor is a deer jumping in front of a car and ending up in the driver's lap an 'accident'.

Here's where I disagree with you. A driver practices with a car with all of its drivers aids available and working. He gets used to doing a particular driving sequence based upon those drivers aids working. Then, when he does the run for the umpteenth time, one of those drivers aids fails and he crashes because of that.

Now, this is based on watching a very small section of video. Stasha is absolutely correct that Hamsters approach to the corner is completely wrong, unless you have those drivers aids, and you have practiced that particular stretch of road so are doing an unorthodox attack because of extensive prior knowledge.

If, on the other hand the super car has no drivers aids, and the Hamster was taking that corner for the first time, then yes, absolutely, it is all his fault. Like I said at the very beginning, based on what little we know, and how extensive the Grand Tour preps it's pieces my assumptions are logic based. But, they could be completely off base, I simply don't have all of the facts.

Hammond was driving the two million dollar car for the first time. He had NEVER taken a SINGLE practise lap in that car on that road course.
Google it!