autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Superspeedways (not autocross)

To: autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Superspeedways (not autocross)
From: Jim Carr <jac@scri.fsu.edu>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 19:07:21 -0500 (EST)
 First, could some of you folks please lose the MIME-encoded attachements?

 Second, since this is off-topic, a single comment on the many articles 
 condensed into a comment on two of them.

 
David Teague <david.teague@wcom.com> wrote:
> 
> > Let's put the blame where it belongs and that is squarely on the
> > shoulders of the superspeedway owners.
> 
> If he had hit the wall teh same way on a road course he probably would have
> died also, that was just a nasty chrash, and with an open cockpit hitting
> the wall like that speed was probablty irrelevant.   ...

 What happens in a crash depends on the safety systems in use and 
 whether they can help in a given crash.  Speed is always relevant, 
 since the energy to be dissipated is the *square* of the speed.
 Many sanctioning bodies make a serious effort to limit speed, either 
 by course design or vehicle rules (restrictor plates, treaded tires).

 As for the cockpit, it seems that F1 learned from the Senna accident 
 (and some later studies) that they needed to raise the rim of the tub 
 in the same way that IRL/CART cars did some time earlier.  They also 
 learned something about pre-crash energy dissipation and IMO Michael 
 Schumacher owes his life to the changes that were made by the FIA.
 
"kart38" <kart38@home.com> wrote:
} 
} I don't believe for a second that it is the fault of people building the
} superspeedways.  I believe it is the fault of bad luck.  

 The bad luck to not have any gravel trap or a tire barrier and energy 
 absorbing structures on that wall?  Sorry, that is not luck.  It is 
 the fault of the track.  And that goes double for a new track.

 The news clip I saw (twice) did not show anything except concrete 
 prefaced by a grass infield.

 Look at the safety provisions F1 requires for the new road course at 
 Indianapolis, and the retrofits they made at a number of long-established 
 tracks after the double-header at Imola.  Those might not have saved 
 Moore in this case, but he would have had more of a fighting chance.

} This is a bad example but there is a
} go-kart street race near where I live and at least two people have died in
} it (drivers).  At the point on the track were one of them was killed they
} are only doing 60 (he ended up getting hit causing him to flip into a light
} pole and a store front window.  After going through a catch fence, by the
} way.)  Just a defense for superspeedways.

 In what way is a design flaw at that local track (if the catch fence 
 won't stop a vehicle going the rated speed at that point, what is the 
 point of having one) a defense of a design flaw at a superspeedway?  



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