HoseHeads.com | HoseHeads Classifieds | Racer's Auction
Home | Register | Contact | Verify Email | FAQ |
Blogs | Photo Gallery | Press Release | Results | HoseheadsClassifieds.com


Welcome Guest. Already registered? Please Login

 

Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead


Records per page
 
Topic: When will safety catch up with the high speeds??? Email this topic to a friend | Subscribe to this TopicReport this Topic to Moderator
Page 3 of 8   of  156 replies
racefanigan
June 27, 2018 at 10:25:12 AM
Joined: 07/31/2007
Posts: 230
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: SAF92 on June 27 2018 at 10:20:38 AM

Why do people think a catch fence would've helped jason johnson? The most vicious impact was with the broad facing concrete wall before lauching into the air. If there was a catch fence there all it would have done is stopped him more abruptly. The impact with the billboards wasn't nearly as violent and I'm assuming the billboards acted similar to what a catch fence would've. What I don't know is if the billboards caused the safety crews to take longer to get him out of the car which may have been a problem. In my opinion a catch fence is more there for fan safety or those outside of the track. Drivers walk away from violent flips without catch fences all the time. The bad wrecks occur when the car comes to an abrupt stop/start... I.E. collision with concrete wall or coming to a stop and being hit by a moving car.



I think what people are getting at with that, is that maybe if there was a catch fence there, another part of the car may have contacted the catch fence first before the cage hit the wall, and it could have had a totally different outcome. It looked like the car hit the wall with the back of the cage, maybe even the top of the cage, so In my head I guess, maybe the tank or wheel or something would have caught a fence first, preventing the wall impact. Maybe not, I dont know. It is an unfortunate situation and set of circumstances.



kossuth
June 27, 2018 at 10:31:50 AM
Joined: 11/02/2013
Posts: 529
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: revjimk on June 27 2018 at 12:02:58 AM

Any track that brefuses to install proper safety features doesn't deserve to run....simple 



You have to also be measured and calculated in what you do. Some safety things obviously are must haves (ambulance, fire, no out turned walls etc) for sure. But if you start forcing something that is going to be super expensive and have little impact on 95% of the crashes that happen and only .001 of those that fall in that 5% are fatal so do you make that investment if the improvement is going to cost you a million dollars?  

 



Keyboard Jockey
June 27, 2018 at 10:32:24 AM
Joined: 04/16/2014
Posts: 430
Reply
This message was edited on June 27, 2018 at 10:33:47 AM by Keyboard Jockey
Reply to:
Posted By: racefanigan on June 27 2018 at 10:13:32 AM

Why do we have to wait for them to make a rule? Why don't you have your chassis builder build you taller cars regardless? What I think is pretty Piss Poor, is the fact that everyone wants all these changes, but yet nobody wants to be the guinea pig on any of these changes, and truthfully I am not any better. Everyone is waiting for the rules to change before they make changes, and if they don't, they won't. Doesn't make sense to me. If people really want change, make the change regardless of rules. 

If safety really is the number one factor, rules shouldn't matter.

In no way, shape or form am I directing this solely towards you, but your post is just one of the many that I see everywhere where people say "If they change the rules...." blah blah. Lets just make the change and hope everyone follows, if not, thats their problem, not yours.



I don't take your comment personally directed at me, no worries. I do have my chassis builder build my cars with taller cages. I would like them even taller too! Go to a race and watch the guys roll on to the track and pay specific attention to where the top of their helmet sits and the cage is, better yet go to a race where it's a low buck sprint car class. Guys have their helmets protruding the top of the cage and they weld halos on top. There are sanctioning bodies that allow that. Would a 6 inch taller cage prevented this accident? I truly dont know, but I would like to think it could have made a difference. If someone can prove that it would have made it worse I'll respectfully take back my suggestion. 




heinen81
June 27, 2018 at 10:32:49 AM
Joined: 07/02/2013
Posts: 91
Reply

Its so frustrating to see everyone start yelling to "add more bars" "add thicker wall tubing" "make the cages stronger" and stuff like that. You start doing that, and making cages too rigid, and now more injuries start occuring on the typical rollovers. Now all that energy is transfered  to the driver and not the deformation of the tubing to absorb that energy. When you slam down that hard on a concrete edge, which is essentially a shear at that point, to the front of the cage, your helmet doesn't have to physically make contact with the wall to produce life threatening brain injuries. You can keep the head and neck from whipping forward now, but nothing will stop your brain from crashing forward. In this specific case, and having been at that track countless times, including when Semmelmann was killed... it was 100% having an exposed concrete wall in which a car could easily land on, and had in the past. You put a catch fence flush with that wall edge, a cage never gets close enough to that shear point, and the fence absorbs a brunt of the impact. Yes, it throws you back on to the track, but I would rather take my chances there. Freak things will always happen no matter how safe these cars can be, but a second time a car lands on that same front edge of the wall resulting in death, isnt a freak accident its negligence on the part of the track. I am shocked it wasnt adressed through the IRA when Scott was killed solely due to that wall previously. They saw the cause and never took the time to address a solution, and now look.

 

 



revjimk
June 27, 2018 at 10:35:06 AM
Joined: 09/14/2010
Posts: 7595
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: kossuth on June 27 2018 at 10:31:50 AM

You have to also be measured and calculated in what you do. Some safety things obviously are must haves (ambulance, fire, no out turned walls etc) for sure. But if you start forcing something that is going to be super expensive and have little impact on 95% of the crashes that happen and only .001 of those that fall in that 5% are fatal so do you make that investment if the improvement is going to cost you a million dollars?  

 



A) Its not about dollars & cents. How much $$ is a human life worth?

B) I can't see catch fences being "super expensive"



racefanigan
June 27, 2018 at 10:36:33 AM
Joined: 07/31/2007
Posts: 230
Reply
This message was edited on June 27, 2018 at 10:37:51 AM by racefanigan
Reply to:
Posted By: Keyboard Jockey on June 27 2018 at 10:32:24 AM

I don't take your comment personally directed at me, no worries. I do have my chassis builder build my cars with taller cages. I would like them even taller too! Go to a race and watch the guys roll on to the track and pay specific attention to where the top of their helmet sits and the cage is, better yet go to a race where it's a low buck sprint car class. Guys have their helmets protruding the top of the cage and they weld halos on top. There are sanctioning bodies that allow that. Would a 6 inch taller cage prevented this accident? I truly dont know, but I would like to think it could have made a difference. If someone can prove that it would have made it worse I'll respectfully take back my suggestion. 



I 100% agree, I have a taller than a "Standard" tall cage car too from when I raced in 2015, however I am 6'1 torso tall so a 2 inch tall car only gives me 1 inch of head room. I would like to think that a taller car could have prevented the accident, also, however in all reality, until one sees photos of the cage to dictate what actually happened, it is hard telling, and I doubt that day comes anytime soon.




kossuth
June 27, 2018 at 10:38:49 AM
Joined: 11/02/2013
Posts: 529
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: heinen81 on June 27 2018 at 10:32:49 AM

Its so frustrating to see everyone start yelling to "add more bars" "add thicker wall tubing" "make the cages stronger" and stuff like that. You start doing that, and making cages too rigid, and now more injuries start occuring on the typical rollovers. Now all that energy is transfered  to the driver and not the deformation of the tubing to absorb that energy. When you slam down that hard on a concrete edge, which is essentially a shear at that point, to the front of the cage, your helmet doesn't have to physically make contact with the wall to produce life threatening brain injuries. You can keep the head and neck from whipping forward now, but nothing will stop your brain from crashing forward. In this specific case, and having been at that track countless times, including when Semmelmann was killed... it was 100% having an exposed concrete wall in which a car could easily land on, and had in the past. You put a catch fence flush with that wall edge, a cage never gets close enough to that shear point, and the fence absorbs a brunt of the impact. Yes, it throws you back on to the track, but I would rather take my chances there. Freak things will always happen no matter how safe these cars can be, but a second time a car lands on that same front edge of the wall resulting in death, isnt a freak accident its negligence on the part of the track. I am shocked it wasnt adressed through the IRA when Scott was killed solely due to that wall previously. They saw the cause and never took the time to address a solution, and now look.

 

 



Exactly what I’m getting at. You have to be measured and calculated in what you do if anything to the cars and the tracks. You might take something and improve survivability in 5% of the crashses but caused additional danger in the other 95%.  Nobody wants to see drivers get hurt but you have take all as much of the emotion out of it and look at the entire thing as a whole and make a determination after analyzing actual data vs a bunch of internet know it alls



heinen81
June 27, 2018 at 10:58:58 AM
Joined: 07/02/2013
Posts: 91
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: kossuth on June 27 2018 at 10:38:49 AM

Exactly what I’m getting at. You have to be measured and calculated in what you do if anything to the cars and the tracks. You might take something and improve survivability in 5% of the crashses but caused additional danger in the other 95%.  Nobody wants to see drivers get hurt but you have take all as much of the emotion out of it and look at the entire thing as a whole and make a determination after analyzing actual data vs a bunch of internet know it alls



Not to mention a catch fence would have prevented a car, with a presumably compromised cage at this point, from SAILING DIRECTLY INTO ROWS OF BILLBOARDS AND STEEL I-BEAMS. To me, this is just unreal a five year old had to lose his dad this way, after a family just lost theirs 4 years ago in a similiar fashion and nothing was done.



kossuth
June 27, 2018 at 11:04:39 AM
Joined: 11/02/2013
Posts: 529
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: revjimk on June 27 2018 at 10:35:06 AM

A) Its not about dollars & cents. How much $$ is a human life worth?

B) I can't see catch fences being "super expensive"



I hate to say it like this but yes it is, in every facet of our man made lives.  Why don’t commercial aircraft have ejection seats?  Why isn’t your street car equipped with a 5 point harness?  Why aren’t we required to wear helmets inside our street cars?  Hell, why is it legal in half the states in the country to ride a motorcycle without a helmet?  

Everything we use and do with man made items is engineered with a certain life risk involved.  It’s all around you and sit there and throw a statement out there like (what’s a life worth) is pretty interesting given I’m pretty damn sure there are more people killed in this country per capital in street vehicle accidents vs racers and racing accidents. 

Im not saying something shouldn’t be done but you have to take off the blinders and look at the situation from a wholistic standpoint.  And I was mentioning a catchfence just an example, could be anything. I have honestly no idea what standard catch fence costs or what it’s construction should entail.  The point I was attempting to make is if a upgrade is prohibitively expensive and if it offers little return on safety do you still do it?  




blazer00
June 27, 2018 at 11:13:29 AM
Joined: 06/10/2015
Posts: 2420
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: racefanigan on June 27 2018 at 10:25:12 AM

I think what people are getting at with that, is that maybe if there was a catch fence there, another part of the car may have contacted the catch fence first before the cage hit the wall, and it could have had a totally different outcome. It looked like the car hit the wall with the back of the cage, maybe even the top of the cage, so In my head I guess, maybe the tank or wheel or something would have caught a fence first, preventing the wall impact. Maybe not, I dont know. It is an unfortunate situation and set of circumstances.



In fact, the car hit the concrete wall while upside down, and with the front end-engine-cowl clearly above and beyond the concrete barrier. That in itself was a freakish position and the worst possible timing for the car to be in such a position. The front/top of the cage took the brunt of the impact directly to the concrete. Had there been any type of catch fence or wall in place above the concrete, the front end of the car would have made contact with that extended portion first....no doubt reducing the severity of the impact immensely, imo of course. But, that is how the crash unfolded.  



19 Posse
June 27, 2018 at 11:37:44 AM
Joined: 12/24/2012
Posts: 364
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: racefanigan on June 27 2018 at 10:13:32 AM

Why do we have to wait for them to make a rule? Why don't you have your chassis builder build you taller cars regardless? What I think is pretty Piss Poor, is the fact that everyone wants all these changes, but yet nobody wants to be the guinea pig on any of these changes, and truthfully I am not any better. Everyone is waiting for the rules to change before they make changes, and if they don't, they won't. Doesn't make sense to me. If people really want change, make the change regardless of rules. 

If safety really is the number one factor, rules shouldn't matter.

In no way, shape or form am I directing this solely towards you, but your post is just one of the many that I see everywhere where people say "If they change the rules...." blah blah. Lets just make the change and hope everyone follows, if not, thats their problem, not yours.



Being the guinea pig most likely means you made your car slower by adding these changes...gotta stay competitive...

in reality...its going to take the sanctioning bodies and  major speedways to lead this change...when and IF it makes sense...



Rick Eaton
June 27, 2018 at 01:24:22 PM
Joined: 12/02/2004
Posts: 77
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: JonR on June 26 2018 at 05:33:14 PM

Guard rails are not the answer.   In fact, the reason that so many tracks installed concrete walls because of all of the problems with guard rails.  The first problem is that they do not do a good job of stopping cars.   They bend, they break, cars get through the guard rail.   To solve the problem of the guard rails bending and breaking, people started to make the down post out of stronger material.   What makes a great down post......an old railroad tie.   Take all of the potential issues with a concrete wall and now concentrate it to a 6-inch by 6-inch post.   Now, instead of worrying about the top halo contacting the wall, you are worrying about any part of the car contacting the post.   Now instead of a blunt object you have an object that can impale the driver from any angle that the car lands on the post. 

If you think watching a track crew repair a catch fence is a slow process, you should watch them repair the guard rail.   It is a much slower process.   Also, concrete walls are relatively smooth.   A repaired guard rail is not.   

I still believe a concrete wall with a retaining fence is the best solution.   If you have a catch fence, the drivers stay in the track and do not go hitting other objects or hitting the top of the wall.  I do agree that a plain concrete wall with no catch fence is a problem.   We have had enough evidence of that to know this is true.   However, we also have a lot of expereince with a good catch fencing keeping the car in the park, and off of the retaining wall. 

  

 



Ascot had tires on top of the wall.  I'll try to add a pic here but if you google Ascot Park crashwall you can fid an image on Google.

ascot007x.jpg (322×211)




blazer00
June 27, 2018 at 03:29:15 PM
Joined: 06/10/2015
Posts: 2420
Reply
This message was edited on June 27, 2018 at 03:31:50 PM by blazer00

I believe the reason race tracks used concrete walls in the beginning was because they required less maintenance. And in nearly every instance, catch fences were used in conjunction with the walls to keep the cars and disintegrating parts of cars from getting in to the fan areas. The herendous crash at LeMans in 1955 brought that need to the attention of the entire world wide racing community. A  focus on the seperation of race track and fans was soon being implemented at race tracks around the world. And in the case of the short track ovals, 360 degree use has become more common for the placement of catch fences or high fences in general. And because of the unforgiving rigidity of concrete, metal guard rails seem to be the answer for the base of the walls at least as a mnimum.



MoOpenwheel
June 27, 2018 at 03:50:29 PM
Joined: 07/27/2005
Posts: 637
Reply

The guardrails at Knoxville have taken some might big hits.  Have they ever had one come apart?

Bigger roll cages would have to be safer.  The further away the tubes are from your head the less chance of one getting to it.  Maybe keep the hip rails about the same but spread the down tubes about a foot at the top and make the top rails 3-4" taller.  It would probably need some more braces here and there.  But It would give quite a bit more room around your head.  It would look odd at first.  I'd like to see a drawing of something like that.  



Murphy
June 27, 2018 at 04:56:14 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 3262
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Keyboard Jockey on June 27 2018 at 10:32:24 AM

I don't take your comment personally directed at me, no worries. I do have my chassis builder build my cars with taller cages. I would like them even taller too! Go to a race and watch the guys roll on to the track and pay specific attention to where the top of their helmet sits and the cage is, better yet go to a race where it's a low buck sprint car class. Guys have their helmets protruding the top of the cage and they weld halos on top. There are sanctioning bodies that allow that. Would a 6 inch taller cage prevented this accident? I truly dont know, but I would like to think it could have made a difference. If someone can prove that it would have made it worse I'll respectfully take back my suggestion. 



     The rules from Black Hills Speedway in 1973 when I started going to the races stated that sprint cars had to have a minimum of 4" of clearance from the top of the driver's helmet to the top of the cage above, and the bars in the halo above the driver's head had to have approved roll bar padding. 45 years later we apparantly have to relearn that lesson.




StanM
MyResults MyPressRelease
June 27, 2018 at 06:24:15 PM
Joined: 11/07/2006
Posts: 5548
Reply
This message was edited on June 27, 2018 at 06:27:10 PM by StanM
Reply to:
Posted By: kossuth on June 27 2018 at 11:04:39 AM

I hate to say it like this but yes it is, in every facet of our man made lives.  Why don’t commercial aircraft have ejection seats?  Why isn’t your street car equipped with a 5 point harness?  Why aren’t we required to wear helmets inside our street cars?  Hell, why is it legal in half the states in the country to ride a motorcycle without a helmet?  

Everything we use and do with man made items is engineered with a certain life risk involved.  It’s all around you and sit there and throw a statement out there like (what’s a life worth) is pretty interesting given I’m pretty damn sure there are more people killed in this country per capital in street vehicle accidents vs racers and racing accidents. 

Im not saying something shouldn’t be done but you have to take off the blinders and look at the situation from a wholistic standpoint.  And I was mentioning a catchfence just an example, could be anything. I have honestly no idea what standard catch fence costs or what it’s construction should entail.  The point I was attempting to make is if a upgrade is prohibitively expensive and if it offers little return on safety do you still do it?  



Interesting analogy about why don't commecial aircraft have ejection seats.  I would add that any flight deck veteran can relate incidents of pilots punching out and slamming head first into the island structure or getting tangled in their chute and pulled under by debris when ejecting into the water.  In other words ejection seats are not a sure thing yet the flaws I mentioned have never caused anyone to question their use.  Ejection seats work most of the time and have saved many lives but occasionally things go wrong.

I'm not going to get on here and be an arm chair saftey expert and I have no choice but to trust that the powers that be will be taking any steps they deem necessary.  I'm still having a hard time squaring this whole thing and decided to sit out the Outlaws for the first time in years on the 6th & 7th.  I'm not making any kind of statement by doing so and will likely watch the Friday show on Dirtvision as my subscription is good through the 7th.

In my case I've seen my share of tragic accidents involving fast machines in my flight deck days.  I had to suck it up and show up at my post for the next launch but that was an entirely different matter than having that kind of potential with my entertainment.  I always have mananged to square it in my mind so I'm sure that I'll be back after a short break.

I think the main point I'm trying to make is that each individual has to reconcile this with themselves in a situation like this.  I've heard of many stories and even known people who ended up walking away from the sport after seeing something like this.  I wouldn't criticize anyone who witnesses something like this for their personal decision.

The venting on boards like this is in many respects an expression of grief and shock.  We're all pretty hard core fans or we wouldn't be on this board and people are speaking up because they care and for a lot of us this is the only way we can discuss what happened with like minded fans. 


Stan Meissner

brewer1s
June 27, 2018 at 07:13:57 PM
Joined: 05/31/2014
Posts: 237
Reply

In my opinion it wasnt that the car wasnt built safe enough in this case it was the low concrete wall and the billboards that were right behind the concrete wall which had steel beams supporting them and one of them was bent! Catch fences should be a must for anyone wanting to run sanctioned races and woo races at the very least at their track. Just my opinion but alot of these tracks need to do more to make things safer like knoxville has.     



singlefile
June 28, 2018 at 03:12:39 AM
Joined: 04/24/2005
Posts: 1341
Reply

I don't mean to be flippant or dismissive. It is always a terrible thing when a driver loses his life, especialy when it is such a quality person as well. But there are always going to be freak accidents. The answer to the queston posed in the title of this thread is "Never." In the very early days of the Indy 500, people didn't think the human body could withstand going 80 miles per hour.

When Dan Wheldon was killed a Las Vegas in 2011, Mario Andretti observed that people had been lulled into a false sense of security in recent years. Racing was dangerous in the 1960s, (and the 1930s and 1910s) and is still dangerous today.




Dryslick Willie
June 28, 2018 at 04:15:35 AM
Joined: 12/17/2009
Posts: 2235
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: singlefile on June 28 2018 at 03:12:39 AM

I don't mean to be flippant or dismissive. It is always a terrible thing when a driver loses his life, especialy when it is such a quality person as well. But there are always going to be freak accidents. The answer to the queston posed in the title of this thread is "Never." In the very early days of the Indy 500, people didn't think the human body could withstand going 80 miles per hour.

When Dan Wheldon was killed a Las Vegas in 2011, Mario Andretti observed that people had been lulled into a false sense of security in recent years. Racing was dangerous in the 1960s, (and the 1930s and 1910s) and is still dangerous today.



Thanks there Captain Obvious!   It's been state by several on here that sprint car racing is still going to be dangerous no matter what is done.    That doesn't mean that safety can't still improve.   I don't think NASCAR has had a fatality since Earnhardt.   Did Indy Car sit on their hands over the years and improve the cars?   I remember the days when Indy Car drivers got severe leg injuries from nose impacts.    They've made that much better haven't they?     Sprint car tracks can still do things to improve safety.  



NWFAN
June 28, 2018 at 04:27:06 AM
Joined: 12/07/2006
Posts: 2347
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Dryslick Willie on June 28 2018 at 04:15:35 AM

Thanks there Captain Obvious!   It's been state by several on here that sprint car racing is still going to be dangerous no matter what is done.    That doesn't mean that safety can't still improve.   I don't think NASCAR has had a fatality since Earnhardt.   Did Indy Car sit on their hands over the years and improve the cars?   I remember the days when Indy Car drivers got severe leg injuries from nose impacts.    They've made that much better haven't they?     Sprint car tracks can still do things to improve safety.  



#1


Ascot was the greatest of all time..

West Capital wasn't half bad either..

Life is good...



Post Reply
You must be logged in to Post a Message.
Not a member register Here.
Already registered? Please Login





If you have a website and would like to set up a forum here at HoseHeadForums.com
please contact us by using the contact link at the top of the page.

© 2024 HoseHeadForums.com Privacy Policy