IRL Driver dies in Homestead shunt

  • Thread starter Thread starter nitro_2005
  • 28 comments
  • 1,093 views
Ya, saw the crash. Horrible. Reminds me of the Alex Zanardi crash, except a lot worse.
 
Ye, that's the same impression I got. I love the Indy 500 but hate the rest of the IRL. I think this Open Wheel Oval Racing stuff may as well be called suicide. I realize death is part of the job, but I think this is ridiculous.


God Rest his Soul, my prayers go out to his family,

m.piedgros
 
Oh my god. I almost cried when I saw the crash. My heart sank...

As sad as it may sound, I am not suprised by his death. I had a feeling that that was it. What a horrible crash.

Thank god for Ed Carpenter, though.

Edit:

I agree about open wheel oval racing. It's so stupid. I counted so many times where I thought Helio was going to wipe out with Wheldon. Formula one is at least a lot slower where there is opportunity to make contact. That, and if there it contact, there is usually a lot of room for slowdown before you smack into a wall at 200mph as with Indy. There should also be penalties if people don't slow down during yellows. That's ridiculous that someone had a huge wreck and people are still doing 200. It should work like pit-lane speed limits; where the cars MUST slow down.
 
Open Wheel racing on ovals is hardly suicide, but improper car design and construction coupled with woefully untested and inexperienced drivers IS.

What's needed, in all reality, is a return to one of the current dirty words in car building - Ground Effects. The safest period in Indy history was a period dominated by ground effect cars that sucked to the track and didn't suddenly lose grip because of dirty air on the bodywork or spoilers.

Ground Effects also allowed for larger, more robust sidepods and encouraged bulkier nosework. When you compare the Indycars of the 80's and early 90's to the spindly flat-bottom cars of today, you see why spins, flips, and ultimately injuries are up, while speeds are not.

Unfortunately, Ground Effects were removed in the interest of "cost control" and "slowing the cars down for safety". This cocktail of misinformation has created a generation of cars that are unstable at 200+ mph and unsuitable for traditional (and traditionally safe) Indy racing.

And if the field was comprised of Gordon Johncock, Al Unser Sr., Johnny Rutherford, Swede Savage, Mike Hiss, Mario Andretti, Dan Gurney, and A.J. Foyt, as it was in the last period of overpowered, bodywork downforce dependent cars (the 1970's USAC period), then we'd also have no worries. USAC had incredibly strict protocols for driver entrance into Indy races. You needed a prior racing record, a year in the "Big Cars" (then called Champ Cars, but since have been called Silver Crown), had to compete in specific big track races in the Big Cars (Trenton or Milwaukee for instance), and then needed to have the PERMISSION of already sanctioned drivers (like Andretti or Johncock) just to take the rookie test.

Lots of hoops to jump through, but it produced consistently competent drivers, as opposed to the current "Buy a Ride" climate.
 
:rolleyes:

I agree about open wheel oval racing. It's so stupid. I counted so many times where I thought Helio was going to wipe out with Wheldon. Formula one is at least a lot slower where there is opportunity to make contact. That, and if there it contact, there is usually a lot of room for slowdown before you smack into a wall at 200mph as with Indy. There should also be penalties if people don't slow down during yellows. That's ridiculous that someone had a huge wreck and people are still doing 200. It should work like pit-lane speed limits; where the cars MUST slow down.

1. I can count how many times that NASCAR gets close to taking each other out with more cars then just Wheldon and Helio at nearly 190mph, a mere 30mph less then what the IRL was running today. Does this mean the IRL is suicidal and/or stupid? No.

2. Formula 1 is on a road course. Completely different style of racing. Don't even think of comparing apples and orange. Also don't assume for a second that they are somehow safer. I could read you the list of recent F1 drivers from the past decade who have sustained injures that forced them to sit out races.

3. All IRL and Champ Car oval courses use SAFER barriers on all inside and outside walls to help reduce the impact from a crash. It is considered one of the best safety innovations of the past decade alongside the HANS Device. In fact, it was invented by the IRL, and is even making it's way to road courses (a similar SAFER barrier was recently put in place at the Paul Ricard HTTT). Yes, ovals don't have run-off. So what? More dangerous? Yes. Unsafe? No. Drivers walk away from their cars after head-on impacts at 200mph. You tell me how that's wrong.

4. Paul Dana had 8 seconds from the time the yellow came out to the time he hit Ed Carpenter. He hit the car at anything from 170mph to 190mph, after running approximately 220mph. Therefore he had to be stopping sometime during those 8 seconds. This means he had, give or take, 6 seconds of reaction time. Now, I'm sure you only saw the video that CNN has plastered up, but other videos show he was in the process of passing another car on the bottom groove at the time of Ed Carpenter's accident. To simply slam on the brakes while alongside another car is not smart. However, did Dana react too slow? Yes. Was it grossly too slow for any driver to be doing? No. Is it something that demands a penalty? No, simply because this is a rare occurance

Drivers ARE required to slow down for a caution. They aren't required to slow down within certain parameters however, only to slow down as safely as possible. The fact that Dana didn't slow down in time is not the fault of the IRL, it's rules, or of the driver ignoring the yellow, just that he made a mistake.

Open Wheel racing on ovals is hardly suicide, but improper car design and construction coupled with woefully untested and inexperienced drivers IS.

What's needed, in all reality, is a return to one of the current dirty words in car building - Ground Effects. The safest period in Indy history was a period dominated by ground effect cars that sucked to the track and didn't suddenly lose grip because of dirty air on the bodywork or spoilers.

Ground Effects also allowed for larger, more robust sidepods and encouraged bulkier nosework. When you compare the Indycars of the 80's and early 90's to the spindly flat-bottom cars of today, you see why spins, flips, and ultimately injuries are up, while speeds are not.

Unfortunately, Ground Effects were removed in the interest of "cost control" and "slowing the cars down for safety". This cocktail of misinformation has created a generation of cars that are unstable at 200+ mph and unsuitable for traditional (and traditionally safe) Indy racing.

And if the field was comprised of Gordon Johncock, Al Unser Sr., Johnny Rutherford, Swede Savage, Mike Hiss, Mario Andretti, Dan Gurney, and A.J. Foyt, as it was in the last period of overpowered, bodywork downforce dependent cars (the 1970's USAC period), then we'd also have no worries. USAC had incredibly strict protocols for driver entrance into Indy races. You needed a prior racing record, a year in the "Big Cars" (then called Champ Cars, but since have been called Silver Crown), had to compete in specific big track races in the Big Cars (Trenton or Milwaukee for instance), and then needed to have the PERMISSION of already sanctioned drivers (like Andretti or Johncock) just to take the rookie test.

Lots of hoops to jump through, but it produced consistently competent drivers, as opposed to the current "Buy a Ride" climate.

1) Today's accident had nothing to do with aerodynamics, speed, or a mistake in car design. It was a rookie mistake. Therefore the whole arguement on ground affects is pointless.

2) Today's cars are not getting faster because the governing bodies are working hard to make them slower. This is why the record speeds for qualifying at the Indy 500 were set in 1996, and noone has gotten close to even matching them since then. The flat bottom cars DID get faster, but then they got too fast, and thus they were restricted. Bigger wings that are designed to generate drag are the reason why speeds are not up, it is not because of a design flaw. Injuries and deaths however are not up (only 3 people have died in the IRL's existance, none have been during an actual race, and two of those were single car incidents). To claim that today's IRL cars are less stable at speed only disproves your arguement that the people driving them are unskilled, added with the fact that injuries are not up.

3) To attempt to compare 1970s USAC cars to 2000s IRL cars is nuts. To even attempt to think that those drivers would instantly perform well in IRL cars is equally nuts, as is it to think that the entire field of USAC drivers in the 1970s were on the same skill level as those drivers. And, to add to that, to think that the USAC cars were in any way comparable in speed to modern IRL cars is laughable. As you said yourself, they considered a circuit like Milwaukee big...

4) Paul Dana had a full year in the Infiniti Pro Series (including 1 win) and a half a season of starts in the IRL in 2005 prior to his back injury that forced him to sit out the other half. He was officially a rookie, but he more then passed to drive these cars.
 
Let me tell you something. That was SCARY what happened to him. It's almost as if P. Dana got hit from the side much like a haymaker from a heavyweight boxer. I'm not trying to overexaggerate, but it was very scary. These cars are light and almost unforgiving. I will say that from a number of IRL crashes, many of them look VERY scary, especially when Kenny Brack smacked the wall at Texas a few years ago. I thought he was dead, but Kenny Brack was still alive. It was unreal.

But no matter how much you enhance safety in a racing series, motorsports is still as dangerous as any sport. Paul Dana, you will be missed by me, GTPlanet, your friends, family, and many fans. When we lose one of our own, a member of our racing family mourns.

We will miss you. :sad:
 
I heard about this on Sky Sports in the morning, from what they said and what's been said on here it sounds like a horrific crash. R.I.P Paul Dana.

One question, do IRL drivers have spotters?
 
Yes, and Dana's spotter had told him the caution was out, and the IRL also uses a system in which yellow lights come on on all the car's steering wheels from a master control that the IRL uses.
 
it is very sad what happened to P. Dana. My thoughts and prayers are with his family. I am sort of a fan of IRL, but am very sorry what happenend to him. I hope no one in NASCAR gets killed.
 
I saw a glimpse of the crash on the TV. I initially thought the driver who hit the wall died but then out of no where came another driver and slammed into the driver who hit the wall. Don't they have spotters in IRL?

I send my condolences but I think we can say for certain the driver who slammed into the car that hit the wall was going way too fast. Surely he must have seen yellow flags.

Speaking of yellow flags, this is an oval track right? Do accidents on an oval indicate a full course yellow or is it only on that part of the track?
 
liam2maps
I saw a glimpse of the crash on the TV. I initially thought the driver who hit the wall died but then out of no where came another driver and slammed into the driver who hit the wall. Don't they have spotters in IRL?

I send my condolences but I think we can say for certain the driver who slammed into the car that hit the wall was going way too fast. Surely he must have seen yellow flags.

Speaking of yellow flags, this is an oval track right? Do accidents on an oval indicate a full course yellow or is it only on that part of the track?

The IRL has spotters and any accident in an oval race is always a full course yellow (they're also quite finicky about debris on the track, and will throw a yellow for that too).

The IRL's system uses a master switch that, when activated, turns on the yellow lights around the track as well as turning on yellow lights on each driver's steering wheel to make sure he sees them.

Paul Dana's spotter also attempted to contact him to say that there was a caution.
 
nitro_2005
just out of curiousity, is there anywhere I can view the crash. I just want to see what sort of an impact it was, that's all.

You just have to think about it really, a stationary car getting hit by another car going at around the 200mph mark.

It's a hurrendous thought even at that.
:scared:
 
I might not like the Indy Racing League since it split American open wheel racing, but I have the utmost respect for its drivers.

R.I.P. Paul.
 
359, you're mistaken in your USAC history, obviously, because you fail to realize that USAC was the sanctioning body for Indy Car racing from the 1950's on to the formation of CART in 1979. Indy cars in the 1970's had broached the 200+ mph qualifying barrier. Jerry Grant posted the first 200mph lap average in Indy Car qualifying at Ontario Speedway in 1972, and Tom Sneva actually pulled off the feat at Indianapolis in 1977.

sport1_420x273.jpg


True, it's about 20mph slower these days than an IRL lap, but the straightaway speeds were 240mph+ while cornering speeds were down around 160-170mph. That made for some HAIRY handling machines.

Hairy handling machines that required years of experience in cars with similar handling characteristics and similar cornering speeds (the "Big Cars", Silver Crown cars, that I referred to) and required the extensive testing and hoop-jumping for rookies.

Noted open wheel journalist Robin Miller actually said what I tried to say much more eloquently. It's harsh, and it's the entire truth (although he fails to bring up the relative safety of a ground effects car versus bodywork dependence, which I have always strongly felt).

http://www.speedtv.com/commentary/22748/
 
Layla's Keeper
359, you're mistaken in your USAC history, obviously, because you fail to realize that USAC was the sanctioning body for Indy Car racing from the 1950's on to the formation of CART in 1979.

I know very well that USAC was the sanctioning body, and never said anything to oppose that.

Indy cars in the 1970's had broached the 200+ mph qualifying barrier. Jerry Grant posted the first 200mph lap average in Indy Car qualifying at Ontario Speedway in 1972, and Tom Sneva actually pulled off the feat at Indianapolis in 1977.

Therefore, by that logic, in keeping the flat bottom cars, the cars would be going even faster then they do now...

True, it's about 20mph slower these days than an IRL lap, but the straightaway speeds were 240mph+ while cornering speeds were down around 160-170mph. That made for some HAIRY handling machines.

Hairy handling machines that required years of experience in cars with similar handling characteristics and similar cornering speeds (the "Big Cars", Silver Crown cars, that I referred to) and required the extensive testing and hoop-jumping for rookies.

Again, comparing a 1970s IndyCar's handling characteristics to a 2000 IndyCar is ridiculous. To assume that they are as hard to drive now as they were then is not a factual statement.

Noted open wheel journalist Robin Miller actually said what I tried to say much more eloquently. It's harsh, and it's the entire truth (although he fails to bring up the relative safety of a ground effects car versus bodywork dependence, which I have always strongly felt).

And I've read Robin Miller's stuff for many years, including that article, and I honestly don't give a damn what that man thinks. He'll use any excuse to bash the IRL, always has, and always will.

There was nothing wrong with bringing Paul Dana into the IRL.
 
In all honesty, I'm surprised that Carpantier wasn't more seriously injured. You'd think the car being hit would take more damage, but...wow. My condolances.
To The359, the USAC cars were far, far faster than the current IRL cars, and couldn't turn worth a crap comparitively (similar to turbo F1 cars compared to todays), so I would assume that if what Layla's Keeper is saying about rookie entrance is correct that the USAC field was more skilled than the current IRL field in general. Not saying they could drive well in today's cars instantly, but they would probably make fewer mistakes.
 
One driver made a mistake that ended in death. That doesn't mean the entire sport is flawed.
 
The359
One driver made a mistake that ended in death. That doesn't mean the entire sport is flawed.
Who said that? All I said was that the driver pool from back then was probably more talented in general than it is now.
 
Toronado
In all honesty, I'm surprised that Carpantier wasn't more seriously injured. You'd think the car being hit would take more damage, but...wow. My condolances.
Saw the accident on Speed News. If Dana's car was only a few inches lower down the track, both drivers would be dead. I dunno what Dana's injuries were like, but I think they said he slammed into the gearbox of Carpenter's car. Which killed him.

So unfortunate. :indiff:
 
359, I wasn't directly comparing the two. I was just saying...
 
Back