The alarming factors that triggered Bearman’s 50G crash at F1 Japanese GP

The drivers had been saying it loud and clear since the very first test: it was only a matter of time before an accident like the one involving Oliver Bearman and Franco Colapinto occurred at the Japanese Grand Prix, with the Haas driver crashing into the barriers at 50G. The accident was caused by the significant difference in speed between the British and Argentine drivers, which was also a consequence of how the new rules work.

With a fixed amount of recoverable energy per lap, each manufacturer has its own approach to deployment – deciding where and how to use and recharge the battery – which can lead to significant differences between the various teams. This is one of the reasons behind the incident, as Haas and Alpine were operating on different strategies in that section before the Spoon curve.

 In fact, in the previous laps, Alpine had tended to be more aggressive in cutting power and MGU-K, doing so earlier than both those ahead – namely the Racing Bulls, one of the teams with the highest top speeds – and those behind, in this case Bearman.

Differences in energy usage between Alpine and Haas

Essentially, due to the operating performance of the power unit designed to optimise energy usage and recharging opportunities during the lap, the electric motor on Colapinto’s car began providing less support earlier on, to the point where he even had to downshift, thus approaching Spoon with a lower top speed than his rivals, at times by as much as 20km/h.

This was something Bearman had noticed and wanted to capitalise on, surprising Colapinto before the Alpine could unleash its energy to defend itself on the long straight leading to the final chicane. There is also another factor to consider: on the lap in question, the Argentine had failed to stay within a second of Arvid Lindblad ahead of him, meaning he would not have had overtake mode available, limiting his energy recovery.

All these factors combined to highlight just how risky the new rules can be in certain situations. Knowing he had an advantage in terms of energy deployment in that section of the track, Bearman attempted the attack, activating the energy boost that allows the MGU-K’s 350 kW to be used for longer by draining the battery.

This meant that the speed gap seen in previous laps increased considerably, reaching as much as 45 km/h according to FIA data. “It’s not Colapinto’s fault; at that point, he was consistent. It’s just that we were using more energy in that area; even in the previous laps, we had a 20km/h advantage,” explained Ayao Komatsu, Haas boss, after the race. “That’s why he wanted to give it a go. He used the boost, and that created a speed difference of 50 km/h.”

In effect, it’s as if a Formula 1 car were racing against a Formula 2 car, but it’s also somewhat the crux of these regulations. Having such a powerful MGU-K guarantees a clear power surplus, particularly when the defending driver no longer has electric support, but it comes with risks.

In effect, a dynamic emerged in which Bearman was approaching from behind at a significantly higher speed, while up front Colapinto could rely solely on the internal combustion engine, as the electric unit had already stopped delivering power and wasn’t even recharging. Knowing he had to defend his position, the Argentine tried to close the line just as Bearman was setting up the overtake.

A manoeuvre that in other circumstances would still have been considered within the limits, albeit a little late, but what the Argentine could not have foreseen was such a significant difference in speed. As Bearman tried to avoid him, he ended up on the grass, lost control of the car and crashed into the barriers. Fortunately, the Englishman suffered only a grazed knee, with no fractures.

It’s difficult for drivers to anticipate such a large speed difference

“It was really strange, to be honest: I was a bit of an easy target. The speed difference was huge, almost as if I were on an out-lap and the other driver on a push lap. It’s a really peculiar feeling. It’s a corner we take flat out, and he was more than 50km/h faster than me,” said the Alpine driver, who had been warned moments earlier over the radio that Bearman would attempt an attack.

“It gets really risky when the straights aren’t completely straight. When I looked in the mirrors, he was already on the grass and overtaking me, so imagine the difference in speed. At a certain point it gets really dangerous, especially when you don’t really have a sense of how much faster the other car is, because we have no way of knowing. You glance in the mirror once and, suddenly, the other car has overtaken you. You find yourself a bit taken aback by that kind of dynamic.”

Franco Colapinto, Alpine, Oliver Bearman, Haas F1 Team

Photo by: Alastair Staley / LAT Images via Getty Images

Such large speed differentials in a battle had never been seen before, and so it is difficult for the drivers to assess the situation in real time, especially during a duel.

“To call it a mistake [by Bearman] is a strong word. You could say it was a slight misjudgement, but it’s still something that makes an impression, considering the speed differential. Looking at the GPS from the previous lap, it’s entirely understandable, and it was the right decision to try it there, but the gap is huge,” said Komatsu.

“This is the third race under these regulations, so it’s something he’d never experienced before. That’s why I wouldn’t even call it a ‘mistake’. It’s simply an aspect that, as the Formula 1 community, we should be aware of and assess what can be improved to mitigate it, because it could have gone much worse.”

It’s an issue that’s been discussed for some time, because it’s no secret that the boost is far too effective if the other driver has little energy or finds themselves without electric motor support, but the incident is the spark that will push the teams and the FIA’s to take the drivers’ words into account to prevent such huge speed differences.

In a lengthy statement, the FIA has confirmed that it will assess the situation together with the teams: a meeting will be held in mid-April to discuss how to amend the rules, starting with qualifying, but this could become another item on the agenda.

We want to hear from you!

– The Autosport.com Team