autox
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: spin control and laying blame

To: "autox@autox.team.net" <autox@autox.team.net>
Subject: RE: spin control and laying blame
From: Dale Botkin <dale@botkin.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 10:33:16 -0600 (EST)
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999, Tom Gentry wrote:

> <<But a designer with at least half a brain (and that includes
> everyone reading this!) can look at a long straightaway that ends
> abruptly in a hairpin turn placed 10 feet away from a concrete wall
> and think to him/herself, "Somebody might hit that.  Maybe that's not
> such a good idea."  >>
> 
> Then again, as a driver, I would teke that concrete wall into
> consideration and brake a little early, maybe take that hairpin at 90%
> instead of 100%+.  Yes, it would be nice if the course designer gave
> me some "mistake" room so I could explore the limits.  It's still my
> choice, but it should be obvious to every driver that on that
> particular corner a mistake is expensive.

Yes, it should be quite obvious.  And any sane driver would compensate for
it.  But that's assuming 100% perfectly functioning equipment, 100% of the
time - no wiggle room for brake fade, sudden tire deflation, or a hundred
other things that can take you more than 10' off course.  That's why there
are rules about how close you are supposed to get to fixed
objects and/or warm bodies.

If what you're saying is true, why bother with those pesky tire walls and
hay bales around F1 courses?  And those NASCAR and Indy car drivers must
be totally incompetent, since they need concrete walls and fences to
contain the flying parts.  My point is that not all off-course incidents
are the result of driver error, and it is very much the responsibility of
the course designer and those who review and approve the course to allow
for those incidents.

> I'm not saying that the above is an example of good course design,
> only that if a driver hits that wall it's still the drivers fault...
> totally.  No blaming the course designer, the sanctioning body, the
> tire manufacturer, the site owner, or an iceberg.

And I submit that if there is an injury or substantial property damage 
that could have been prevented had safe design practices been followed,
the course designer and sanctioning body (at least) share in the
responsibility.  

> Bottom line... driver responsibility.  I will also point out that some
> drivers are idiots, and even worse, some are idiots with lawyers.  
> That is the real reason for course designers to be careful.

I disagree.  While driver responsibility is an important factor and is to
be encouraged at all times, the *real* reason for course designers to be
careful is to prevent property damage, injury and death, any of which will
ruin an otherwise good day.

Dale



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>