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: filtalr  /  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 8 of 9   of  167 replies
NWFAN
July 10, 2018 at 04:40:06 PM
Joined: 12/07/2006
Posts: 2053
Reply

nteresting information, thanks...


Ascot was the greatest of all time..

West Capital wasn't half bad either..

Life is good...

slot car racer
MyWebsite
July 10, 2018 at 07:16:33 PM
Joined: 01/28/2015
Posts: 29
Reply
This message was edited on July 10, 2018 at 10:08:11 PM by slot car racer
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on July 10 2018 at 09:49:28 AM

    I think if you hadn't been in such a rush to insult someone you disagreed with,  you would have figured out like the rest of us did that glhayden is a woman. Reread her post. It's pretty obvious.



These days a marriage does not have to be between a man and a "woman". Maybe what you "figured out" is not so accurate. It really dosen't matter if it is a man or a woman. The person deserved to be scolded if you look at the stuff that was posted. Is this all you can contribute to try to help make racing better and/or safer? 



EasyE
July 10, 2018 at 08:00:02 PM
Joined: 10/29/2017
Posts: 131
Reply

JJ hit the billboards at a very glancing blow didn't look like he hit the billboard hard at all. He did hit the wall at a not direct but fairly strait on impact and there is a sort of an explosion of concrete dust. From the video I've seen there is not doubt in my mind hitting the wall was the problem I think the billboard was a non factor. The video I watched is from the back straightaway just up from the track entrance where he wrecked. It can be viewed on live leaks.com



Murphy
July 10, 2018 at 10:06:29 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 1135
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: slot car racer on July 10 2018 at 07:16:33 PM

These days a marriage does not have to be between a man and a "woman". Maybe what you "figured out" is not so accurate. It really dosen't matter if it is a man or a woman. The person deserved to be scolded if you look at the stuff that was posted. Is this all you can contribute to try to help make racing better and/or safer? 



     Whatever dude. Name calling and homophobic slurs don't make you look any smarter nor does it contribute to making racing better and/or safer.



slot car racer
MyWebsite
July 10, 2018 at 10:23:46 PM
Joined: 01/28/2015
Posts: 29
Reply
This message was edited on July 10, 2018 at 10:34:42 PM by slot car racer
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on July 10 2018 at 10:06:29 PM

     Whatever dude. Name calling and homophobic slurs don't make you look any smarter nor does it contribute to making racing better and/or safer.



"Dude"? For all you know I could be a woman too. By the way, "Dude" is a bit of a slur to some people. But, I'll take it like you ment it as a compliment. Is that the best you can do to help make racing better or safer? Give it another try. But not the same old stuff please. Race In Peace Forever # 41...



Murphy
July 10, 2018 at 10:31:20 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 1135
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: glhayden on July 06 2018 at 03:36:08 PM

I now understand why very few, if any, WoO drivers post on this forum (and also why Johnny Gibson, although he does reply to posts with facts, does not post); it's nothing but a habitation of devils! Case in point: the two preceding replies by one "SAF92", wherein this fool merges two different objects (a billboard and an I-beam) into one. A billboard is, very likely, a sheet of plywood (I'll suggest likely of 3/4-1" thickness), and as the word suggests, is made of WOOD. An I-beam (appropriately named because it is in the shape of an "I", when viewed from the end) is made of STEEL (again, I'll suggest likely of 1/2-3/4" thickness).

A sheet of plywood would (obviously, to a sound mind?) break up upon impact with an object such as a sprint car contacting it at a "high" rate of speed (as evidenced in the video of the crash), as can clearly be seen in the picture; it's broken & separated in the picture posted above.

A steel I-beam, on the other hand, is a very rigid piece of material and to twist and bend one (again, as can clearly be seen in the abovementioned photo) would take a considerable amount of force. I (nor does it appear that any that have posted on this subject) am not an accident reconstructionist; rather I am simply a person with a mind that has the God-given ability to apply simple logic to an observation...something that, I submit, is grossly void of in the mind of "SAF92".

I restate, that were a catch fence in place, Jason Johnson would still be with us. His car hit the I-beam with so much force that it twisted and bent same. That was a voilent collision. Again, case closed.



     At he risk of raising some hackles with some people who can't handle differing opinions..

     I'm not an engineer. In my work I deal with structural engineers and materials. Looking at he photo, here's what I can tell you- The billboard surface itself is made out of plywood. Generally 3/4" plywood is used. The horizontal members in the photo are ordinary 2x4's. If this billboard was at ground level, you could probably back through the plywood and wooden parts with your car at about 20 miles mph and make a thousand splinters of it.

     The vertical members are possibly aluminum, but more likely steel. Technically they are I-beams but there are all kinds, sizes, grades and thicknesses of I-beams made. I'd guess that these I-beams are relatively light gauge and more than likely salvaged from some other use. Otherwise, used utility poles would have been used because they are less costly and easily obtainable. Yes, lighter gauge I-beams would easily twist. They were designed to carry a uniform load from above when laid horizntally. These were probably originaly in a roof system, like in a K-Mart store for example. They were never intended to deal with a concentrated load at one point, like the impact of a moving race car.

     Look at the damage to the billboard surface. The car would have hit it with the front to the left at the verticle member and the cage to the right where the plywood is split. An impact hard enough to do the damage it did to the car and driver should have gone on through the plywood & 2x4's. The fact that it didn't suggests that most of the energy of the crash was disipated before the car hit the billboard.

     Based on the photo, the information I've read and the videos I've watched, I'd agree that the culprit was the impact with the wall. I've never been to Beaver Dam so I can't say if I thought that a catch fence would have helped. However, race cars hitting non-moving objects are always scary. There definately should be something in place to keep the cars out of the billboards. 



Murphy
July 10, 2018 at 10:32:07 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 1135
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: slot car racer on July 10 2018 at 10:23:46 PM

"Dude"? For all you know I could be a woman too. By the way, "Dude" is a bit of a slur to some people. But, I'll take it like you ment it as a compliment. Is that the best you can do to help make racing better or safer? Give it another try. But not the same old stuff please. Race In Peace Forever # 41...



See post above. I'm a slow typer.



slot car racer
MyWebsite
July 10, 2018 at 10:53:51 PM
Joined: 01/28/2015
Posts: 29
Reply
This message was edited on July 10, 2018 at 11:22:53 PM by slot car racer
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on July 10 2018 at 10:32:07 PM

See post above. I'm a slow typer.



Ok Murphy, so how do we fix things? Perhaps someone from the WoO should be making safety recommendations to the different tracks they race at or better yet, each track could review their safety issues every year. Local drivers should try to get together to raise their concerns to help prevent stuff before it happens.  Peace brother...



Murphy
July 11, 2018 at 07:28:45 AM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 1135
Reply
This message was edited on July 11, 2018 at 08:42:16 AM by Murphy
Reply to:
Posted By: slot car racer on July 10 2018 at 10:53:51 PM

Ok Murphy, so how do we fix things? Perhaps someone from the WoO should be making safety recommendations to the different tracks they race at or better yet, each track could review their safety issues every year. Local drivers should try to get together to raise their concerns to help prevent stuff before it happens.  Peace brother...



     That's a hard question. When I was in high school- 1977-78- a racer got killed in a sprint car at my home track. It was determined that in a crash his head had contacted the wall on the front straightaway. Here it is 40 years later and with all the safety improvements in the cars and the tracks and the rescue teams, we've had the same thing.

     The main difference between then and now is the wings. Ideally, the wing works like a big cushion when there's a roll-over absorbing alot of the enregy of a crash. If the top of Jason Johnson's cage contacted the wall, it sounds like the wing wasn't between the cage & the wall to cushion that inpact? I've seen cars roll and lose their top wings. Then they start snap rolls and other scary looking maneuvers. Maybe there's a clue about safety in there.

     My observation is that the cages need to be taller. In 1978 the rule at our local track was that there had to be 4" of clearance from the top of the driver's helmet to the top of the roll bars directly above. In 1978 the sprints had 4 major verticle bars in the roll cage. In 2018 they have 8 including the down tubes. They should be and are safer, but they can be improved and they should continually improve just as they have since 1978.

     Off the top of my head, in 40 years they have improved fire suits, helmets, shoes, gloves, arm restraints, seats, belts, roll cages, removable steering wheels, tubing specs, tear-offs, fuel cells, shut-off valves, drivelines, axle tethers, and added wings. That's a lot of improvements. We need to keep going in this direction.



MoOpenwheel
July 11, 2018 at 07:40:27 AM
Joined: 07/27/2005
Posts: 500
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on July 11 2018 at 07:28:45 AM

     That's a hard question. When I was in high school- 1977-78- a racer got killed in a sprint car at my home track. It was determined that in a crash his head had contacted the wall on the front straightaway. Here it is 40 years later and with all the safety improvements in the cars and the tracks and the rescue teams, we've had the same thing.

     The main difference between then and now is the wings. Ideally, the wing works like a big cushion when there's a roll-over absorbing alot of the enregy of a crash. If the top of Jason Johnson's cage contacted the wall, it sounds like the wing wasn't between the cage & the wall to cushion that inpact? I've seen cars roll and lose their top wings. Then they start snap rolls and other scary looking maneuvers. Maybe there's a clue about safety in there.

     My observation is that the cages need to be taller. In 1978 the rule at our local track was that there had to be 4" of clearance from the top of the driver's helmet to the top of the roll bars directly above. In 1978 the sprints had 4 major verticle bars in the roll cage. In 2018 they have 8 including the down tubes. They should be and are safer, but they can be improved and they should continually improve just as they have since 1978.

     Off the top of my head, in 40 years they have improved fire suits, helmets, shoes, gloves, arm restraints, seats, belts, roll cages, removable steering wheels, tubing specs, tear-offs, fuel cells, shut-off valves, drivelines, axle tethers, and added wings. That's a lot of improvements. We need to keep going in this direction.



What about my thought on making the top of the cage bigger in all directions?  You wouldn't necessarily have to change from the hip rails down much.  But angle from there up out on each side and make the whole thing taller.  You'd likely need additional bracing here and there.  The idea is the further your head is from the tubing the less likely for your head to hit something.  It would be radical change to something that hasn't changed much since downtubes were added but I'd think it would have to be safer.  

 



slot car racer
MyWebsite
July 11, 2018 at 11:22:29 PM
Joined: 01/28/2015
Posts: 29
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: MoOpenwheel on July 11 2018 at 07:40:27 AM

What about my thought on making the top of the cage bigger in all directions?  You wouldn't necessarily have to change from the hip rails down much.  But angle from there up out on each side and make the whole thing taller.  You'd likely need additional bracing here and there.  The idea is the further your head is from the tubing the less likely for your head to hit something.  It would be radical change to something that hasn't changed much since downtubes were added but I'd think it would have to be safer.  

 



Someone correct me if I am wrong please. It has been tried before I am quite certain. The problem with making a roll cage bigger is that tubing is more likely to bend in an impact if it is longer. Best to let the designers and fabricators try implenenting their new designs based on knowledge and expierence gained over the years. If it was that simple I believe it would be used in race car construction today. Actually modern roll cage designs are a huge improvment over what was standard equipment in the past. Thankfully the designs keep getting better and better and have no doubt saved many race drivers from injuries. 



slot car racer
MyWebsite
July 12, 2018 at 12:05:08 AM
Joined: 01/28/2015
Posts: 29
Reply

Is anyone working on a wing restraint system to keep the wings from comming loose in a wreck? Could this be worth persuing?



Murphy
July 12, 2018 at 07:36:41 AM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 1135
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: slot car racer on July 11 2018 at 11:22:29 PM

Someone correct me if I am wrong please. It has been tried before I am quite certain. The problem with making a roll cage bigger is that tubing is more likely to bend in an impact if it is longer. Best to let the designers and fabricators try implenenting their new designs based on knowledge and expierence gained over the years. If it was that simple I believe it would be used in race car construction today. Actually modern roll cage designs are a huge improvment over what was standard equipment in the past. Thankfully the designs keep getting better and better and have no doubt saved many race drivers from injuries. 



    Technically that is correct. It's like building a bridge, the longer the span the more stress put on the materials. The answer would be to use strong tubing. It could be bigger diameter, thicker walls, or higher test steel.

     In 40 years I believe we've also seen an improvment in materials science and materials testing. There would now be better ways to, for example, build a chassis with some differing roll cage options and test how they would hold up in different crash scenarios. It would be a lot like the videos that are out there of tests done with a crash test dummy in a sprint car chassis driving straight into a concrete wall at simulated speeds.

     When this discussion came up before-I think when Gravel's cage bent or broke- there was discussion that changing the way the cage was built would affect the chassis performance, therefore racers wouldn't do it because it slowed down their cars. I thought that was bogus until I remembered a legendary racer about 30 years back saying he'd race without a roll cage if they would let him and if it made the car faster. Yikes!

     One other area of car construction that I always wonder about is the nerf bars. (In my area, a nerf bar is the term used for the "bumpers" on the front, back and sides of a sprint car.) What's used now looks to be about as strong as the frame on a $9.99 single use bag lawn chair. If the nerf bars has a little more size and strength to them it might help when 2 cars come together, especially if one of them is stopped.



Murphy
July 13, 2018 at 11:22:53 AM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 1135
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: slot car racer on July 12 2018 at 12:05:08 AM

Is anyone working on a wing restraint system to keep the wings from comming loose in a wreck? Could this be worth persuing?



    I think that's an angle worth pursuing. We've all seen crashes where the wing stays on and acts like a parchute causing the car to sort of flop around. Unfortunatly we've also seen crashes where the wing gets ripped off and then things get ugly.



glhayden
July 17, 2018 at 06:44:56 PM
Joined: 12/07/2004
Posts: 101
Reply

Related image

Nervous...Lernerville tonight. No catch fence (other than front straightaway, in front of the grandstands). Especially concerned with outside of turns 3 & 4, should a car get over the berm. I understand that this a very old & established track and this is a major race on the schedule, but safety as far as the track seems, appears to be woefully lacking/neglected. 



slot car racer
MyWebsite
July 19, 2018 at 12:29:11 AM
Joined: 01/28/2015
Posts: 29
Reply
This message was edited on July 19, 2018 at 12:47:24 AM by slot car racer
Reply to:
Posted By: glhayden on July 17 2018 at 06:44:56 PM

Related image

Nervous...Lernerville tonight. No catch fence (other than front straightaway, in front of the grandstands). Especially concerned with outside of turns 3 & 4, should a car get over the berm. I understand that this a very old & established track and this is a major race on the schedule, but safety as far as the track seems, appears to be woefully lacking/neglected. 



Not so fast! I have not been there myself so someone correct me if I am wrong. From a video or two It appears there is a substantial run off area all around the racetrack except the front straightaway as you have pointed out. Lernerville may actually be the safest racetrack around. The billboards in the photo are set back quite a distance from the actual racetrack. I think you might owe Lernerville an apology!



Paintboss
MyWebsite
July 19, 2018 at 08:09:03 AM
Joined: 12/02/2004
Posts: 1622
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: slot car racer on July 19 2018 at 12:29:11 AM

Not so fast! I have not been there myself so someone correct me if I am wrong. From a video or two It appears there is a substantial run off area all around the racetrack except the front straightaway as you have pointed out. Lernerville may actually be the safest racetrack around. The billboards in the photo are set back quite a distance from the actual racetrack. I think you might owe Lernerville an apology!



To the common person they look pretty far back! Unless your in the sprint car flipping towards them at 80 miles per hour, then they probably look pretty close!



slot car racer
MyWebsite
July 19, 2018 at 02:31:46 PM
Joined: 01/28/2015
Posts: 29
Reply
This message was edited on July 19, 2018 at 04:46:50 PM by slot car racer
Reply to:
Posted By: Paintboss on July 19 2018 at 08:09:03 AM

To the common person they look pretty far back! Unless your in the sprint car flipping towards them at 80 miles per hour, then they probably look pretty close!



What would you estimate a safe distance might be for a race car flipping at 80 MPH? 100 feet perhaps, as it appears to be (in videos)? Anyone have a knowledgeable opinion of this particular racetrack? Are you saying Lernerville is not a safe racetrack? To my knowledge it is generally (commonly) accepted that a racetrack with run off area is considered safer and prefered over one that does not. 



Murphy
July 19, 2018 at 04:34:42 PM
Joined: 05/26/2005
Posts: 1135
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: glhayden on July 17 2018 at 06:44:56 PM

Related image

Nervous...Lernerville tonight. No catch fence (other than front straightaway, in front of the grandstands). Especially concerned with outside of turns 3 & 4, should a car get over the berm. I understand that this a very old & established track and this is a major race on the schedule, but safety as far as the track seems, appears to be woefully lacking/neglected. 



     On Google maps the billboards measure 80 feet back from the top of the corner in 3&4. There is a also a concrete wall at about 60' back. The pits look to be behind that a ways. With the open corners and some runoff space it looks a lot safer than a lot of tracks.



slot car racer
MyWebsite
July 19, 2018 at 05:03:56 PM
Joined: 01/28/2015
Posts: 29
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Murphy on July 19 2018 at 04:34:42 PM

     On Google maps the billboards measure 80 feet back from the top of the corner in 3&4. There is a also a concrete wall at about 60' back. The pits look to be behind that a ways. With the open corners and some runoff space it looks a lot safer than a lot of tracks.



Thanks Murphy. Stuff happens sometimes no matter how safe we try to make things. But, we all try to make racing safer. Be safe everyone...





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.

© 2018 HoseHeadForums.com Privacy Policy