rec.autos.simulators

Sad.

If this keeps up, the sport we all love could be banned. I sure hope
not. I almost wonder who's next?

Later,

Tony Long
C***te, NC

Just my two cents.

btgoss

Agreed.  One only has to compare the attitude of NASCAR with that of
F1 to see that something is really wrong.  There is a really dense
article in September's Formula 1 Magazine (not F1 magazine) on the
extensive study done on measuring and restraining head movements
during accidents.  A cursory reading of that by even a layman like me
makes me wonder if NASCAR intends to do anything at all with the data
that is already out there, much less do any study of it's own.  Kind
of sad, actually.  

Runoffs are the answer (if the car doesn't hit anything, the driver
never dies), but unless you design this into the track when it is
built, its almost impossible to do afterward since it involves moving
the grandstands. The stopgap answer is deformable barriers (motorcycle
road racing has come a long way in the area), but they cut into track
space on an oval where NASCAR drivers already come within inches of
the current wall. Moving the racing line down 8 feet for a
hydro-barrier would result in a lot of screaming people.

Nothing is going to get "banned" like the original poster said, but
until the fans and drivers won't tolerate it anymore, changes are
going to be incremental, with band-aids like the HANS device.

Tim

Again, I agree.  The only problem, as you've pointed out, is that the
entire US oval scene is based around the arena concept, and any
changes may ruin the essence of that type of racing.  So,
realistically, it cannot and will not be done.  Unless....unless the
drivers themselves, in conjunction with the fans and sponsors, simply
refuse to race unless incremental changes are introduced.  Humpy sees
this coming, I think, and you have to give him credit for trying.  

Again pointing to the F1 scene, we all witnessed what happened at
Monza when Michael tried to persuade the drivers to take it easy in
the first couple of chicanes.  And, the more elderly among us remember
the meetings that were held in 1994 between the drivers after
Ratzenberger was killed, before the race.  

I guess the thing that really strikes me is that the FIA does two
things that NASCAR does not (or does poorly):  1.  Study the physics
of accidents with respected scientists and doctors, and makes changes
to the cars and equipment as necessary, and  2.  Makes track changes
immediately if they sense problems (this includes minimum safety
standards for the tracks).  Tracks that cannot or will not come up to
***are dropped.  They also have a huge input on designing new
tracks, and designing safety features while they are under
construction.  Did we see that at Ky Speedway or Kansas?

When you look at the F1, you see Sid Watkins in his safety car, who
not only is available immediately, but also checks the track.  You see
no practice or race without the helo being able to fly (does NASCAR do
this...?)  You see tire barriers, which they have continued to improve
over the years.  You see runoffs (off topic to NASCAR).  More
importantly, you see progress....evolution....a search for something
better, safer.  You don't see fear to change, blaming suppliers
(particularly galling to me), keeping the status quo until somebody
starting complaining.  The whitewash of the Earnhardt case is a
perfect example.  

I guess the real problem I have is the refusal or reticence to change.
The FIA sure doesn't have all the answers, but they try.  

Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
F1 hcp. +16.36...Monster +360.54...

Never argue with an idiot.  He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

I didn't realize the helicopter was necessary to F1 for a race.  But, since
NASCAR doesn't run ovals in the rain, this wouldn't be an issue...

Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
F1 hcp. +16.36...Monster +360.54...

Never argue with an idiot.  He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

There's a very good article on barrier types on the web, hopefully someone
here will remember the link.  Concrete is still the best barrier when the
the car is more or less parallel to the wall, and belt covered tyres are the
best when the impact is more towards perpendicular.  I think the problem
with the ovals is when the cars hit the walls at an angle due to being
bumped, or lose control or whatever.

The fact remains that for NASCAR at least, improvements to the safety design
of the cars themselves *is* possible, and should be mandated (crumple zones
etc) and is something which can be done at a significantly lower cost than
basically abandoning every oval track in America, surely.

cheers
John

  F1 has and will had it's share of "interesting" incidents/whitewash
accusations too.  Whether true or not, Senna comes to mind off the top.

    Just my .02, I like both forms of racing.

-John

As for Senna, you are right.  But, I think that the case was much more
thoroughly examined (much of it, admittedly, because of the trial)
than the Earnhardt case.  I've heard an awful lot of NASCAR fans
dissatisfied with the level of examination, the lack of experts, and
the length of time it took to come up with a "conclusion."

I too like both forms of racing, as well as many others.  But, I'm not
a NASCAR fanatic.  Those folks are the ones who should be really
raising a stink, not about the danger of their sport, but the lack of
care their sport has towards the safety of its drivers.

On Sat, 6 Oct 2001 16:36:27 -0600, "John Pancoast"

  -John

er, that should read "I", not "we"........a bit presumptuous :)

-John

Agreed, ovals need to have a major rethink of the concrete barrier. We
all know tyres are great for cushioning the blow, but will "grab" the
car if it is a glancing blow. Concrete allows the car to slide when it
is a glancing blow, but have no impact cushioning.

What is needed is a combination of the two. A tyre barrier with a
surface that would allow the car to slide along it. Maybe sheet metal
or something similar. What would prevent this is the cost. Concrete is
cheap, and circuit owners aren't interested in spending money when
they aren't required to.

Rafe Mc