|
|
Post by pje on Dec 15, 2011 20:08:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by clm1545 on Dec 15, 2011 22:12:47 GMT -5
Dan was killed because his car went into the catch fence top first. The same thing could have happened to Davey Hamilton, Kenny Breck. Ryan Briscoe, Buddy Rice, Mike Conway, or Will Power in the same crash. They all got lucky, Dan did not. You don't need an investigation to know that ground effect cars traveling at 200+ mph in packs, with drivers of various levels of skill can be danger filled. If RB and co did not know that going in, they are even dumber than I thought.
Take Care
Craig
|
|
rick
Hot Shoe
Posts: 142
|
Post by rick on Dec 15, 2011 23:47:00 GMT -5
Dan was killed because his car went into the catch fence top first. The same thing could have happened to Davey Hamilton, Kenny Breck. Ryan Briscoe, Buddy Rice, Mike Conway, or Will Power in the same crash. They all got lucky, Dan did not. You don't need an investigation to know that ground effect cars traveling at 200+ mph in packs, with drivers of various levels of skill can be danger filled. If RB and co did not know that going in, they are even dumber than I thought. Take Care Craig You can add Tony Renna to that list as well. Cockpit first into the catch fence or fence pillars ultimatley provides a very small suvivabiliy percentage. And in Renna's case he was alone on the track. The thing that is really double-talk in my opinion is that they state that the banking, the cars, the pack racing, and the overly large field were likely contributing factors about the accident at Las Vegas, however they quickly add that 'this could happen at any venue.'  -Rick |
|
|
|
Post by stuboyle on Dec 16, 2011 21:24:18 GMT -5
You can also add Jeff Krosnoff to the list as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2011 22:24:47 GMT -5
Krosnoff's wreck was on a street course though and he flew into something else besides a catch fence. Last major catch fence wreck I can remember was Stan Fox (where the car broke apart just in front of the drivers seat). I think that wreck probably shook up Cheever the most and I have a feeling he was thinking about it in Vegas as the ABC crew waited to give confirmation of Wheldon's death as Cheever got caught up in that Indy wreck. I read once that Cheever said in the post Indy 500 race banquet for the year that Fox got injured that if his proper place that year was to be on the track where he was to make Stan Fox's impact into the wall and fence a little softer, he was glad to have done so (since Stan's car hit Eddie's on its way to the wall).
|
|
|
|
Post by stuboyle on Dec 17, 2011 22:31:46 GMT -5
Krosnoff's wreck was on a street course though and he flew into something else besides a catch fence. I think ultimately it was a fence pole that killed Weldon. Krosnoff hit a light pole which I believe catch fencing was attached to. Either way they were both poles. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2011 23:53:42 GMT -5
I remember an article being posted somewhere on here about the construction of the SMI tracks and the positioning of the posts. The posts on these tracks are facing the track side, whereas at a track like Indianapolis, they are facing the stands. End result, Dan got caught by the post.
And yes, I believe this report was a "soft shoe" dance number.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2011 0:50:21 GMT -5
I know it's politically correct to blame everyone, and yet no one. The way I remember it happened, Dan deserves more blame than anyone is willing to say. It appeared to me that the mayhem had pretty much stopped when after a pause in the action, Dan comes shooting into the picture and runs into the rear of Tracy. It seems to me, unlike some of the other drivers, he had time to react and avoid, or at least lessen his involvement.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuboyle on Dec 18, 2011 8:05:27 GMT -5
I know it's politically correct to blame everyone, and yet no one. The way I remember it happened, Dan deserves more blame than anyone is willing to say. It appeared to me that the mayhem had pretty much stopped when after a pause in the action, Dan comes shooting into the picture and runs into the rear of Tracy. It seems to me, unlike some of the other drivers, he had time to react and avoid, or at least lessen his involvement. The way I viewed it was that once the first car "checked-up", there is delay before the next driver in line realizes this and has to check-up even harder. Each successive car in line has less of a time to react until eventually there is no chance of avoiding an impact. This happens on normal everyday roads. On normal roads you can still blame driver who hit the car from behind because he wasn't maintaining a safe distance. Maintaining a safe distance from the car in front of you is not something you do in racing if you want to keep your job. |
|
|
|
Post by stuboyle on Dec 18, 2011 8:08:03 GMT -5
.. . .
|
|
|
|
Post by 2lapsdown on Dec 18, 2011 9:47:41 GMT -5
Jeff Krosnoff actually hit a tree. As for the report it appears it was prepared in a way that protects anyone from a liability claim. Much like the Earnhardt investigation, although NA$CAR tried to blame Bill Simpson.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by stuboyle on Dec 18, 2011 11:20:22 GMT -5
Jeff Krosnoff actually hit a tree. As for the report it appears it was prepared in a way that protects anyone from a liability claim. Much like the Earnhardt investigation, although NA$CAR tried to blame Bill Simpson. John I've watched it on YouTube a few times in the past day or 2. It sure looks like that skinny grey thing looks like a poll to me  Though, maybe I didn't see the tree if it blended into the surroundings. |
|
|
|
Post by clm1545 on Dec 18, 2011 12:04:25 GMT -5
Guys
My point was, all the drivers I listed had a crash very much like the one that killed Dan. There was no "investigation" because they all survived. All this post crash hoopla was a stupid waste of time and money, generated for the press. It told us nothing that we did not already know. Racing always has been, and always will be, a dangerous sport.
That "perfect storm" exists every time there is a race.
Take Care
Craig
|
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Dec 18, 2011 14:22:07 GMT -5
I know it's politically correct to blame everyone, and yet no one. The way I remember it happened, Dan deserves more blame than anyone is willing to say. It appeared to me that the mayhem had pretty much stopped when after a pause in the action, Dan comes shooting into the picture and runs into the rear of Tracy. It seems to me, unlike some of the other drivers, he had time to react and avoid, or at least lessen his involvement. I've studied the still shots and the video and here's how I saw it. The crashed started with Wade getting loose and JR driving up on him when Wade started to slide. Ensuing checking up and crashing started. Vitor loses control and starts to slide nose towards the bottom. He collects Kimball who is shooting the low line. As he drags Kimball down farther, Viso clips his right rear on Kimballs left front. Dan is following the same line and also clips Kimball (I don't believe Dan ever touched Viso). He goes airborn from this contact and impacts the safer wall when he lands. I believe he was still alive at this point. Behind them Alex Lloyd and Scheckter have checked up. Behind Alex you can see Pippa steer to the high side and go around Alex. Power runs into the back of Alex and launches. When Scheckter checks up PT runs into him and sends Tomas to the bottom. Pippa hits the left rear of PT and she launches. Power lands on JR who is being pushed along the wall by Wade and PT in a smashed up train. I believe Pippa lands on or behind Dan and that momentum sends Dan up to the fence. This last part is hard to tell from video or still shots since its in the shade of the billboards and most of what you can see is just carbon fiber. But I'm confident that he landed at or below wall height when he came down, that is pretty clear from images. motorsport.com has all the images to see to prove what I stated. |
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Dec 18, 2011 14:29:44 GMT -5
I know it's politically correct to blame everyone, and yet no one. The way I remember it happened, Dan deserves more blame than anyone is willing to say. It appeared to me that the mayhem had pretty much stopped when after a pause in the action, Dan comes shooting into the picture and runs into the rear of Tracy. It seems to me, unlike some of the other drivers, he had time to react and avoid, or at least lessen his involvement. The way I viewed it was that once the first car "checked-up", there is delay before the next driver in line realizes this and has to check-up even harder. Each successive car in line has less of a time to react until eventually there is no chance of avoiding an impact. This happens on normal everyday roads. On normal roads you can still blame driver who hit the car from behind because he wasn't maintaining a safe distance. Maintaining a safe distance from the car in front of you is not something you do in racing if you want to keep your job. The checking up part is hard to decipher. Who was trying to shoot the low line and drive past the carnage going on up high? Who decided to just slow down regardless? I think the answer to the first question is that Scheckter and Lloyd slowed down. Viso, Dan, Pippa and Power all decided to drive thru or by it. Viso almost made it but clipped his right rear and he got a ride on the wall by himself. The other 3 got airborn. I'm not sure what decision PT made but he was lucky that he stayed on the ground. The question becomes, should all drivers have slowed when they saw the accident? Obviously Lloyd did. He had a dramatic drop in speed that caught Power off guard. And Lloyd slowed down before both Power and Pippa and he was in front of them. So I believe there was time to make a decision for the two behind him. For Dan I don't think the decision was as definitive as it looked like he could make it thru. I still believe it was the secondary impact that took his life, not the launch and landing. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesharvey on Dec 18, 2011 16:32:46 GMT -5
I kind of hate to bring up another point but I will. Has anyone really compared the experinence of today's drivers on ovals venus those of the '60s and 70s. Marco drives 18 races a year and wouldn't know one end of a midget or sprint car from the other let alone how to set it up. He has limited open wheel experience I can remember Foyt driving midgets, spints, champ cars on dirt and pavement and then switching over to stock cars in both USAC and NASCAR. My point simply is that racers should like to race. Give me a car and I will run it anytime, anywhere. Front engine, rear engine, open wheel or not but I will race what you give me. I want to run 40-50-60 times a year. Ask Steve Kinser how he has run so long and so well and don't tell me they don't know the danger of touching wheels.. If some of the Indy drivers were more racers than figureheads, Dan would still be with us and the others would be better off.
|
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Dec 18, 2011 16:39:03 GMT -5
Very valid point. I'm not sure midgets, sprints or champcar experience would help the current crop much but they certainly should have more rear engine aero experience on ovals imo. I had dinner with a former Indycar driver from the 70s/80s while in Vegas and he places the blame on the owners for taking checks from inexperienced mediocre talent drivers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2011 21:12:34 GMT -5
As specked-out those cars were, I think a trained monkey could have piloted one of those sleds on a 1.5 mile oval. Everybody before that race was commenting how easy it was to get up to speed on that track. IMO Dan died as a result of pack racing due to the whole formula being too similar. Driving experience wouldn't hurt for some in that field, but trying to go 'back in the day' to rationalize this debacle is crazy. In the hey-days of Foyt & Mario, cars could separate and race. The "unfair advantage" would allow that. Today's formula IMO breeds disastrous wrecks because of the pack. Get back to a formula that showcases driving talent and the pack-effect will go away.
|
|
|
|
Post by trevor83 on Dec 18, 2011 22:23:31 GMT -5
I'm curious what you attribute Jeff Krosnoff, Scott Brayton, Tony Renna, Greg Moore and Gonzalo Rodriguez deaths to? Dan was the only fatality in the 'pack racing'. The others were by themselves or strung out as many are calling for.
I don't disagree with you about letting driver talent shine. But I did find many of the previous oval races rather boring. Kinda like watching a road course except with four left turns.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2011 0:23:06 GMT -5
Ban them damn wings and let them race/drive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calvin on Dec 19, 2011 0:54:30 GMT -5
Ban them damn wings and let them race/drive. I'm no engineer I just went to school with some, but I think it would change things up if they did something like that........but I dont see it would make very much difference on an oval track if they had wings or not. Wings on an oval car is almost just a cosmetic part of the car........If it wasn't for CART telling Tom Sneva to put his rear wing back on during 1984 Michigan 500 practice, we might not even have wings on the cars now. These cars have so much mechanical grip that the wings are used for lift now. Just look at the qualifying at Indy in the past few years the rear wings are set at a negative degree! |
|
|
|
Post by stuboyle on Dec 19, 2011 3:35:01 GMT -5
I'm curious what you attribute Jeff Krosnoff, Scott Brayton, Tony Renna, Greg Moore and Gonzalo Rodriguez deaths to? Dan was the only fatality in the 'pack racing'. The others were by themselves or strung out as many are calling for. I don't disagree with you about letting driver talent shine. But I did find many of the previous oval races rather boring. Kinda like watching a road course except with four left turns. I'm thinking Scott Brayton and Greg Moore would have survived today because of safer barriers. Didn't Brayton die during qualifying? So that's not pack racing. I think Rodriguez was by himself during practice. Laguna Seca, right? Actually, I think the past few races at Texas I've been to have not been as tight as in the past compared to the days when Sam Hornish was running. They just don't run side-by-side, 4 or 5 cars deep as Texas like they used to. The outside line just isn't as quick because I think that line has gotten bumpier. When I think about it, the number of cars that have gotten airborne seems to have increased dramatically. This seemed to start with Kenny Brack and then you had Mario Andretti practicing at Indy and it goes on from there. I don't know if its just bad luck or there is something about the Dallara that contributes to it. Also, lets not forget that Tony just recently launched over Helio at Baltimore. The only Reynard or Lola I recall launching into the air is Krosnoff. |
|
|
|
Post by stuboyle on Dec 19, 2011 3:44:29 GMT -5
Ban them damn wings and let them race/drive. I'm no engineer I just went to school with some, but I think it would change things up if they did something like that........but I dont see it would make very much difference on an oval track if they had wings or not. Wings on an oval car is almost just a cosmetic part of the car........If it wasn't for CART telling Tom Sneva to put his rear wing back on during 1984 Michigan 500 practice, we might not even have wings on the cars now. These cars have so much mechanical grip that the wings are used for lift now. Just look at the qualifying at Indy in the past few years the rear wings are set at a negative degree! You forget over the years that they made high banks for stock cars because they didn't have down force. You never ran formula cars on high-banked tracks. There was no need for it. |
|
|
|
Post by mrindy77 on Dec 19, 2011 8:24:00 GMT -5
Marshall Teague, 1959, Daytona.....we just never learn and continue to ignore history. Indy cars should not be on high banked ovals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2011 9:15:09 GMT -5
<Didn't Brayton die during qualifying?> Brayton die during week his great pole run.
Beat to you!
Russ
|
|
|
|
Post by herk56 on Dec 19, 2011 10:18:25 GMT -5
I haven't jumped in on this one yet, but I have to agree with jamesharvey. Waaayyy too many of the drivers in all forms of racing are just that, drivers. They are NOT racers. The midget, sprint and other short oval racing that all the top drivers used to do on their way up taught them how to RACE, not just drive a car really fast. I grrew up watching big-block modifieds at Five Mile Point, a banked 1/4 mile dirt oval, almost a circle. To just survive a 30 lap weekly feature there, and be competitive, was a real feat with those over-powered cars, esp. in the 70's with the tires of the day, Those guys learned to RACE hard AND survive to the finish, which didn't mean spining anyone out or taking foolish risks. They ran hard, yes, but they had respect for the consequences of unnecesary or unwise moves. Too many of the current crop of drivers are just "point & steer" pilots. They don't worry about the risks they take since safety has progressed so much. When your (expletive deleted) is truly on the line, you tend to think a little differently. We just got unlucky on this one, I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often with the the way things are now.
Brian
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2011 12:51:18 GMT -5
Herk is right about today's drivers having no fear. They ride around in their survival capsules with little fear of doing any real sheet time. But there is no point in discussing this. We are not going back to the '60s with safety.
What I meant about banning wings, has a lot to do with bringing out the skill of the drivers. I can remember a few years ago several mediocre drivers at Indy were complaining that they could not go completely around the track without lifting. Hell a brick can do that. Let's make the cars radio controlled if all we have to do is steer.
One of my car owners always said that I had an educated (expletive deleted). I think that was a complement. Mario, Ward, and AJ learned car control because of the ability of thier cars to overpower traction limits. Talent was the ability to race at a constantly changing traction limit. Remember the pre WWII cars with many hundreds of hp and only a few inches of questionable rubber on the track? That took skill, understanding, and balls. I would reduce today's tire widths also. Then we'll weed out the wealthy posers from the racers. When Wheldon couldn't get a ride but Mika Duno can, something is very wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by herk56 on Dec 19, 2011 13:20:09 GMT -5
Changing the cars to be more "driveable" (read: require skill to drive) is a great idea but without the risk the current drivers will just crash them and replace them. With the (almost) total safety and (almost) unlimited budgets, I think that approach will just trash a lot of cars and create more cautions. I agree we will never go backward with safety, but I also feel the missing risk is a big reason why many of us "old-timers" have little interest in current racing. If I were to race again today, I would of course use all available safety equipment, but if the opportunity arose to drive a car identical to the ones I used to drive wearing the same "safety" equipment used back then, against other cars and drivers outfitted the same, I would do it in a second. Did any of the current drivers start their careers wearing an already old snowmobile open-face helmet and cotton Borax-treated (probably only once) driving suit? Of course not, but some of us did! Were we crazy? Should we have known better? Maybe, but I for one had a blast and would do it again.
Brian
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2011 15:44:58 GMT -5
As cold as it sounds I think fate had as much to do with Dan’s death as anything. Remember 14 drivers walked away relatively unharmed and some of those went airborne and hit the fence too just not top first. Once you are in the air you are just a passenger, aero packages mean nothing. Look at the last Mercedes to race at Le Mans. No other cars in sight when Woooosh airborne and into the woods!
Going into the Corkscrew is about the last place you would expect a fatality yet it happened. Even driving or flying to a race venue is a deadly game as has been proven all too often.
It is tragic but stuff happens no matter what you do to the cars. How goes the saying... Speed Kills!
Us animals are really quite fragile so, watch out taking that bath tonight! Those tubs are treacherous.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by stuboyle on Dec 23, 2011 16:37:15 GMT -5
As cold as it sounds I think fate had as much to do with Dan’s death as anything. Remember 14 drivers walked away relatively unharmed and some of those went airborne and hit the fence too just not top first. Once you are in the air you are just a passenger, aero packages mean nothing. Look at the last Mercedes to race at Le Mans. No other cars in sight when Woooosh airborne and into the woods! Going into the Corkscrew is about the last place you would expect a fatality yet it happened. Even driving or flying to a race venue is a deadly game as has been proven all too often. It is tragic but stuff happens no matter what you do to the cars. How goes the saying... Speed Kills! Us animals are really quite fragile so, watch out taking that bath tonight! Those tubs are treacherous. John The "inherent flaw" in the design is the open cockpit. The longer you go without a fatality creates a false sense of security. I kind think of the space shuttle as a similar example. They had a bunch of missions before the Challenger accident. At the end of the day they couldn't make the Shuttle safer than about one accident in 80 or 100 launches. |
|
Though, maybe I didn't see the tree if it blended into the surroundings.
