What I meant with bad luck was the car flipping over. Not the fact that
there was no sand trap (?!) in the infield. In my opinion gravel would have
insured his car flipped. Gravel works great.....as long as you aren't going
over say 100mph. After that the car just skips like a rock on a pond. If
you saw Shumacher's accident at Silverstone you know what I am talking
about. I think the best thing to do is pave everything between the walls.
Asphalt will slow the car down quicker than grass or gravel and has less
risk of roling the car over. As far as making tracks safer I agree with an
energy absorbing barrier for infield walls (like Indy has in turn 4). My
example with karting was not to point out the serious nature of design flaws
but that you don't have to be going fast to be killed in a racing car. Also
the catch fence wasn't meant to be hit by a 60mph flying object. It was
designed to be hit by a 60mph object on the ground. He had actually flown
over some rows of haybails. It was an accident that couldn't be forseen,
just too odd. The speed is irrelivant (to a point and I think everyone
knows what I mean). Later.
Jason
>"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?
>
>
>
|