$5 Million IndyCar Challenge at Las Vegas

[mountainstar]

Worth listening to what Jody Scheckter has to say:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/15336678.stm

[mountainstar]

Mark Blundell: Not Acceptable

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/15333333.stm

[fieldodreams79]

mountianstar, I am glad you have posted your thoughts as they are similar to mine but much more detailed than my knowledge would have allowed and it took more guts than I have right now to say it.

After sleeping on it, I am pretty mad about this...just seems so senseless.

As a mere fan, my feelings have got to be mild in comparison to others more involved.

[Mr Revhead]

I disagree that it had anything to do with sub standard drivers.
Or the number of cars. Or the design of the cars.

The speeds, yes.
Track design, possibly.
It was a simple racing incident that triggered it. The same sort of thing happens just about every race.
It was just tragic bad luck that cars avoiding the incident in front of them ended up in such a way as to launch Wheldons car. It was also tragic bad luck that he hit the fence they way he did. If he hadn't hit it that way he would probably be ok.

Ground effects only work when on the ground, the moment the car rode over the wheel of the one in front all ground effect would cease to exist and the crash would still have happened.
In fact ground effects would make the cars faster if everything else remained the same.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

I disagree that it had anything to do with sub standard drivers.
Or the number of cars. Or the design of the cars.

The speeds, yes.
Track design, possibly.
It was a simple racing incident that triggered it. The same sort of thing happens just about every race.
It was just tragic bad luck that cars avoiding the incident in front of them ended up in such a way as to launch Wheldons car. It was also tragic bad luck that he hit the fence they way he did. If he hadn't hit it that way he would probably be ok.

Ground effects only work when on the ground, the moment the car rode over the wheel of the one in front all ground effect would cease to exist and the crash would still have happened.
In fact ground effects would make the cars faster if everything else remained the same.

It was a racing accident and both Jody Scheckter and Mark Blundell mentioned that the number of cars were a contributing factor, as have others.

The Dallara isn't a ground effect car and has a flat undertray, making it more prone to taking off than a ground effect car

[Stefvh]

IndyCars should not run on Nascar ovals. I don't like "2-wide" racing at all. Now, i really know why.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Stefvh

IndyCars should not run on Nascar ovals. I don't like "2-wide" racing at all. Now, i really know why.

I think that's a very good point, just look at the problems with Texas when CART raced there.

[Mr Revhead]

Number of cars is debatable, that touch could have happend with 5 cars. Likewise the couple that got together in front of Wheledon.

Ground effects only work in close proximity to the ground. As soon as the front of his car rode up the back of the car in front it would have lost all ground effects.
Remember his car didn't just take off, it rode up the back wheel of other cars. Ground effects would have had 0 effect in preventing that.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

Number of cars is debatable, that touch could have happend with 5 cars. Likewise the couple that got together in front of Wheledon.

Ground effects only work in close proximity to the ground. As soon as the front of his car rode up the back of the car in front it would have lost all ground effects.
Remember his car didn't just take off, it rode up the back wheel of other cars. Ground effects would have had 0 effect in preventing that.

The Dallara isn't a ground effect car, it has a flat undertray, no venturi tunnels or veins to direct the air, like the Lolas and Reynards.

[Mr Revhead]

I know. I am pointing out that even if it did have ground effects it would have not altered the crash in anyway

[Tim Northcutt]

A lot of people have griped about the new chassis design, but with that big butt end on it, that feature is designed to keep a car from climbing the back wheel and getting airborne like Wheldon's did.

[icemachine]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

I know. I am pointing out that even if it did have ground effects it would have not altered the crash in anyway

As I understand it, ground effect tunnels help break up airflow when the front of the car is lifted, preventing the under tray from acting as a giant wing, which results in the lifting the entire car.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

I know. I am pointing out that even if it did have ground effects it would have not altered the crash in anyway

Because of the venturi tunnels etc. the car is pushed down onto the track, stopping the car from lifting and producing more grip. I don't remember seeing Lolasand Reynards taking off like the Dallara does but if there's footage I'd like to see it.

[Mr Revhead]

Yes.
How ever using the back of another car as a ramp will negate that effect a lot.
In this case Wheldons car was tumbling, I do not think the design of the floor had much to do with anything. The speed it was going when airbourne would have

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

Yes.
How ever using the back of another car as a ramp will negate that effect a lot.
In this case Wheldons car was tumbling, I do not think the design of the floor had much to do with anything. The speed it was going when airbourne would have

A flat undertray will assist the car in lifting, the venturi tunnels etc. will disrupt the airflow if the car starts to lift.

[Mr Revhead]

This is going in circles

My key point is they car was launched at speed over another car and tumbled.
So less wing like and more missile like.
It spent virtually 0 time in an aspect for the floor to do anything.
If it had stayed level then yeah the floor would have played a part.
At that speed and that angle of attack there was no option but for it to tumble.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mr Revhead

This is going in circles

My key point is they car was launched at speed over another car and tumbled.
So less wing like and more missile like.
It spent virtually 0 time in an aspect for the floor to do anything.
If it had stayed level then yeah the floor would have played a part.
At that speed and that angle of attack there was no option but for it to tumble.

It is but as I said I don't remember anything like this happening in the CART era, so I'm quite happy to stand corrected. .

[Paradise City]

I see Jimmie Johnson wants Indycar to quit ovals altogether.

Frankly, the media is awash with alarmism and I'm a bit shy about doing anything other than taking the views of the pundits and stakeholders with a pinch of salt just 24 hours after this horror.

[fieldodreams79]

I saw first hand a wreck similar to this one that ended the career of Dr. Jack Miller at Atlanta Motor Speedway and that was over 10 years ago...

OW cars do not belong on HIGH BANKED ovals. They didn't belong on AMS 10 years ago and they didn't belong on LVMS yesterday.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

I saw first hand a wreck similar to this one that ended the career of Dr. Jack Miller at Atlanta Motor Speedway and that was over 10 years ago...

OW cars do not belong on HIGH BANKED ovals. They didn't belong on AMS 10 years ago and they didn't belong on LVMS yesterday.

It certainly didn't work at Texas in 2001.

[christcc2]

Agreed.

[Aloysius]

The problem is we have all forgotten once again that racing is dangerous. Do we try to minimize the risk? Yes, but they cannot and indeed should not be totally eliminated. That is part of what makes motorsports better than anything else. Dan Wheldon's death is no ones fault. He died in massive accident that twenty years ago would have claimed many more lives. The cars are safer, the walls are safer, and 14 drivers walked away uninjured from that crazy wreck. It is the first in race Indycar fatality in more than ten years. Is this an acceptable level of risk for motorsport? I say yes. There is an acceptable level of risk.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by Tim Northcutt

A lot of people have griped about the new chassis design, but with that big butt end on it, that feature is designed to keep a car from climbing the back wheel and getting airborne like Wheldon's did.

They do ruin the looks of the cars, but that is the reason most super mods have run nerf bars for decades.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Aloysius

The problem is we have all forgotten once again that racing is dangerous. Do we try to minimize the risk? Yes, but they cannot and indeed should not be totally eliminated. That is part of what makes motorsports better than anything else. Dan Wheldon's death is no ones fault. He died in massive accident that twenty years ago would have claimed many more lives. The cars are safer, the walls are safer, and 14 drivers walked away uninjured from that crazy wreck. It is the first in race Indycar fatality in more than ten years. Is this an acceptable level of risk for motorsport? I say yes. There is an acceptable level of risk.

Agreed, I think it is an acceptible risk, otherwise the drivers themselves wouldn't race. However what's now needed is sensible analysis, rather than a knee-jerk reaction, to this appauling tagedy.

[Thundersports]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Agreed, I think it is an acceptible risk, otherwise the drivers themselves wouldn't race. However what's now needed is sensible analysis, rather than a knee-jerk reaction, to this appauling tagedy.

Agree.......