rec.autos.simulators

by **JShell86** » Thu, 17 Jul 1997 04:00:00

Krosnoff was in Johansson's blind spot (to johansso's right rear).
Johannson was moving to the inside to make a move on Emerson Fittipaldi.
Krosnoff's left fron t tire touched Johannson's right rear. This sent
Krosnoff airborne. His car did a sideways 360 and his head hit flush on a
big tree behind the catch fencing. He had to have been killed instantly.
The corner worker was killed by an airborne wheel.

This accident could have also killed Johansson, if not for someone looking
over him. He rode completely under the chassis and debris and the engine
block was inches away from his head -- I can see why he retired.

For all the people who say NASCAR is better, because they don't drive as
fast. How many of you know people that died in auto accidents. Were they
going anywhere near the speeds that any of these racing cars go. Speed
does not kill. I have had two people very close to me die in auto
accidents (my father and a friend) and neither time was it because of
speed, both were caused by impact. For a person to say that Krosnoff's
speed was the major contributing factor to this accident is to show one's
ignorance.

The top speed at Toronto is 180 mph. They were already in the braking
zone, so I would say that they were probably in the 120 to 150 mph range.
NASCAR drivers drive this fast are you saying that this is too fast.
NASCAR drivers also don't street race. Remember you good ole boys find
that boring. I myself find myself hitting the snooze button whenever there
is a NASCAR race on.

Remember that any type of racing is dangerous. Restrictor plate races have
seen their own carnage. Racing will always take lives and so will driving
on public roads. Don't blame it on the sport; blame it on life.

.

by **TrenT Castanavara** » Thu, 17 Jul 1997 04:00:00

Just from a NASCAR fans point of view I have to state that in both
situation you comment on, the deaths at the track, and regular auto
accidents that kill normal everyday people have alot of differing
factors....everyday people don't have a roll cage, niether did the
racer. NASCAR stock cars are built as cages to protect the driver...I'm
sorry to argue this and please don't think I am heartless...any death in
racing is bad...but IF that wreck had occurred in a stock car..do you
really believe he would have become airborne? let alone killed?

I'm sorry...I don't think so. I Love racing and I can respect anyones
own choice of how to do it...but I still say that it accidents like this
one that make me VERY happy to have fallen in love with stock cars. they
may be slower, and yes it may take less skill to drive them without
touching anyone...but when it comes to safety....you can't even come
close with another type of car.

Racing lost some very special people in that wreck. we'll all feel that
loss for awhile I am sure.

TrenT

--
Driver of the #15 Cincinnati Bengals Pontiac
Track CHampionship Racing Series Admin
N2STRS
NSRA-S Division

DamN The Man!!! SAVE THE WINSTON Sponsorship!!!

CatchMeIfU.........................Can

by **John Loga** » Thu, 17 Jul 1997 04:00:00

> >Them Indycars aren't safe in comparison to any other
> > motersport. Motercycles are safer for cryin' out loud! Oh well. It's
> > just my opinion, I could be wrong.

> Your wrong.

He's right, you're right.

Neither are safe.

--
PolePosition#3- IVGA #4882

The Checkered Flag(NASCAR2):
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/4578/n2sim.html

My Unofficial Dale Earnhardt Fan Page:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/4578/nascar.html

The Dale Earnhardt Fan Ring:
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/4578/dalering.html

"If you don't believe, you don't belong." -- Alan Kulwicki's Credo

by **Richard Moor** » Fri, 18 Jul 1997 04:00:00

Your wrong.

by **TKirby20** » Fri, 18 Jul 1997 04:00:00

Face it. Indycars are rolling coffins. You can't disapate that much
energy going 180 mph. Speed was a factor. If the***pit was stronger,
Krosnoff might have lived. BTW, those single file street races are
boring. The oval races they have are usually a runaway. How many times
have you seen an Indycar race where more than 5 guys have a chance at
winning? NASCAR, it's about 10-15. Yeah, Krosnoff konked his head. So
did Brayton. Them Indycars aren't safe in comparison to any other
motersport. Motercycles are safer for cryin' out loud! Oh well. It's
just my opinion, I could be wrong.

by **Berg** » Fri, 18 Jul 1997 04:00:00

You are. First off, you must not have watched the Cleveland Grand
Prix...second, there is usually only about a 20 car field in an indy
car race(5/20=10/40). And finally...yeah, you are right, they both
hit their heads...as did John Nemechek. You see more injuries, but
less deaths in motorcycles, probably because they can't carry the
great amount of corner speed that an open-wheeled car can.

Berg

by **Nick Baltuc** » Fri, 18 Jul 1997 04:00:00

> Face it. Indycars are rolling coffins. You can't disapate that much
> energy going 180 mph. Speed was a factor. If the***pit was stronger,
> Krosnoff might have lived. BTW, those single file street races are
> boring. The oval races they have are usually a runaway. How many times
> have you seen an Indycar race where more than 5 guys have a chance at
> winning? NASCAR, it's about 10-15. Yeah, Krosnoff konked his head. So
> did Brayton. Them Indycars aren't safe in comparison to any other
> motersport. Motercycles are safer for cryin' out loud! Oh well. It's
> just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Anyone race car can be un-safe. Some more than others. But we can be
assured that everday FIA, CART, IRL, NASCAR and so on are finding more
ways to make the sport safer.

Nick

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nick Baltuch

"Does my pointless gibber bore you?"-Me

by **Ace Rimme** » Sun, 20 Jul 1997 04:00:00

>> Face it. Indycars are rolling coffins. You can't disapate that much
>> energy going 180 mph. Speed was a factor. If the***pit was stronger,
>> Krosnoff might have lived. BTW, those single file street races are
>> boring. The oval races they have are usually a runaway. How many times
>> have you seen an Indycar race where more than 5 guys have a chance at
>> winning? NASCAR, it's about 10-15. Yeah, Krosnoff konked his head. So
>> did Brayton. Them Indycars aren't safe in comparison to any other
>> motersport. Motercycles are safer for cryin' out loud! Oh well. It's
>> just my opinion, I could be wrong.

>Anyone race car can be un-safe. Some more than others. But we can be
>assured that everday FIA, CART, IRL, NASCAR and so on are finding more
>ways to make the sport safer.

Well, F-1 does have some accidents which indicate the safety is far better
than 1994. Jos Verstappen suffered a very high-speed crash on
Spa-Franchorchamps last year. Afterwards, the impact turned out to be equal
to Ayrton Senna's crash at Imola. But, Jos survived due to the new higher
***pit sides.

Martin Brundle had his moment at the start of the GP at Australia in 1996.
He got airborned, and his car crashed resulting in a big mess and my initial
reaction was :"OH NO! He can never have survived that one." But he did, he
got out, ran to the pits, and took his place back at the restart. The crash
was quite similar to Krosnoff's fatal acident.

BUT at this moment, the new rule of grooved tires in F-1 seems to be a bad
thing. Anyone wishing to comment on this, should E-mail me or continue on
rec.autos.sport.f1

by **TKirby20** » Tue, 22 Jul 1997 04:00:00

You guys didn't see that Krosnoff's***pit was ripped open huh? His body
was still strapped in. What about Stan Fox at Indy? His***pit was
ripped open too. If those cars have bad front impacts, those guys will
get hurt, maybe worse. I just feel open wheel, open***pit cars are
especially dangerous. You guys remember Rich Vogler? Part of his head
was still in his helmet, as it was rolling down the front straight at
Salem, IN. Ayrton Senna didn't hit his head, a peice of the suspension
peirced his helmet. BTW, motorcycles carry the same, if not more speed in
the corners than some other race cars. Every seen the 500 cc GP
motorcycles? Well, I'm done ranting and raving. Don't get the idea I'm
mad or anything, I'm just trying to get my point across.

by **Brenda and Miche** » Tue, 22 Jul 1997 04:00:00

Boy this thread is becoming a real joke! Hmmm, I wonder why they call
it racing?! Perhaps a nice safe speed limit of 20kph would help...and
maybe super expanding foam in the***pits so drivers won't be hurt.
Do you think the drivers know the risks?...naaah! The fans know what
is best for the drivers.

Mike

by **TrenT Castanavara** » Thu, 24 Jul 1997 04:00:00

> Boy this thread is becoming a real joke! Hmmm, I wonder why they call
> it racing?! Perhaps a nice safe speed limit of 20kph would help...and
> maybe super expanding foam in the***pits so drivers won't be hurt.
> Do you think the drivers know the risks?...naaah! The fans know what
> is best for the drivers.

> Mike

This post is why we cant keep a decent covnersation going...we're not
saying that we know best, we're giving our opinions...can you honestly
look at an indy car or formula 1 car sitting next to say a NASCAR stock
car and say that they are as safe or safer? no, you cant...granted stock
cars dont carry the cornering speeds of the others..but they go just as
fast on the straights...and having been involved in a few wrecks of my
own on the track I am HEARTIly glad that I was in a stock car and not
an open wheel machine....I respect the open wheel drivers
abilities...but I have to wonder about their instinct for self
preservation....

TrenT

--
Driver of the #15 Cincinnati Bengals Pontiac
Track CHampionship Racing Series Admin
N2STRS
NSRA-S Division
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
DamN The Man!!! SAVE THE WINSTON Sponsorship!!!

CatchMeIfU.........................Can

by **Anthony Mitchel** » Fri, 25 Jul 1997 04:00:00

> Krosnoff was in Johansson's blind spot (to johansso's right rear).
> Johannson was moving to the inside to make a move on Emerson
> Fittipaldi.
> Krosnoff's left fron t tire touched Johannson's right rear. This sent
> Krosnoff airborne. His car did a sideways 360 and his head hit flush
> on a
> big tree behind the catch fencing. He had to have been killed
> instantly.
> The corner worker was killed by an airborne wheel.

> This accident could have also killed Johansson, if not for someone
> looking
> over him. He rode completely under the chassis and debris and the
> engine
> block was inches away from his head -- I can see why he retired.

> For all the people who say NASCAR is better, because they don't drive
> as
> fast. How many of you know people that died in auto accidents. Were
> they
> going anywhere near the speeds that any of these racing cars go. Speed

> does not kill. I have had two people very close to me die in auto
> accidents (my father and a friend) and neither time was it because of
> speed, both were caused by impact. For a person to say that Krosnoff's

> speed was the major contributing factor to this accident is to show
> one's
> ignorance.

> The top speed at Toronto is 180 mph. They were already in the braking

> zone, so I would say that they were probably in the 120 to 150 mph
> range.
> NASCAR drivers drive this fast are you saying that this is too fast.
> NASCAR drivers also don't street race. Remember you good ole boys find

> that boring. I myself find myself hitting the snooze button whenever
> there
> is a NASCAR race on.

> Remember that any type of racing is dangerous. Restrictor plate races
> have
> seen their own carnage. Racing will always take lives and so will
> driving
> on public roads. Don't blame it on the sport; blame it on life.

> .Good post.

by **Duncan Mclo** » Fri, 25 Jul 1997 04:00:00

Speed

>> does not kill. I have had two people very close to me die in auto
>> accidents (my father and a friend) and neither time was it because of
>> speed, both were caused by impact. For a person to say that Krosnoff's

>> speed was the major contributing factor to this accident is to show
>> one's
>> ignorance.

Above edited for brevity..

You need a class in Physics. Speed is the largest factor in figuring impact
force!Without speed there is no impact! Would your loved ones been killed
had they and the other party been sitting still??? Only if a third party with
speed were to hit them... .... I suggest it was you showing your ignorance.

by **myke** » Sat, 26 Jul 1997 04:00:00

> Speed

> >> does not kill. I have had two people very close to me die in auto
> >> accidents (my father and a friend) and neither time was it because of
> >> speed, both were caused by impact. For a person to say that Krosnoff's

> >> speed was the major contributing factor to this accident is to show
> >> one's
> >> ignorance.

> Above edited for brevity..

> You need a class in Physics. Speed is the largest factor in figuring impact
> force!Without speed there is no impact! Would your loved ones been killed
> had they and the other party been sitting still??? Only if a third party with
> speed were to hit them... .... I suggest it was you showing your ignorance.

Check your physics book again.

Put your back to a wall.

If I fire a grain of sand at you at 60 mph it's not going to do much
damage.
But a huge bolder a 1 mph can kill you.

"damage" = mass x speed (and alot of other things)

mykey

by **Koz** » Sun, 27 Jul 1997 04:00:00

> > Speed

> > >> does not kill. I have had two people very close to me die in auto
> > >> accidents (my father and a friend) and neither time was it because of
> > >> speed, both were caused by impact. For a person to say that Krosnoff's

> > >> speed was the major contributing factor to this accident is to show
> > >> one's
> > >> ignorance.

> > Above edited for brevity..

> > You need a class in Physics. Speed is the largest factor in figuring impact
> > force!Without speed there is no impact! Would your loved ones been killed
> > had they and the other party been sitting still??? Only if a third party with
> > speed were to hit them... .... I suggest it was you showing your ignorance.

> Check your physics book again.

> Put your back to a wall.

> If I fire a grain of sand at you at 60 mph it's not going to do much
> damage.
> But a huge bolder a 1 mph can kill you.

> "damage" = mass x speed (and alot of other things)

> mykey

If you really want to get technical,

Force = Mass x Acceleration

--
Shawn Kosloff
Team Marriott Legends Racing/MALCAR
http://www.lamere.net/hss/koz.htm

rec.autos.simulators

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts

Krosnoff: Just the facts