Is the IRL too dangerous?

[terrible1fi]

I don't understand how some people are ignoring the fact that running identical open-wheel cars at full speed for 100% of the lap on an oval is an extremely dumb idea. Your forcing cars that are most vulnerable when another open-wheel car is close-by to run close to each other all the time as it's the only possible way a driver can gain a position.

this.

not only are oval races boring (IMO) with the drivers just about flat out the entire time, but they are extremely dangerous, as unfortunately has been proven again today.

I really wish they would just drop all oval tracks and stick to road/street courses.

 

[VNAF Ace]

this.

not only are oval races boring (IMO) with the drivers just about flat out the entire time, but they are extremely dangerous, as unfortunately has been proven again today.

I really wish they would just drop all oval tracks and stick to road/street courses.

Yea, that worked out real well for the Champ Car World Series...

History has shown that an even mix of oval and road/street racing is the only successful formula for open wheel racing in America.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I stand corrected - earlier today, I said an Australian broadcaster had shown footage from on-board Dan Wheldon's car during the morning news. Now, during the evening news, the footage was replayed, and I had a better chance to look at it. It was actually Will Power's on-board that they showed, not Wheldon's. But at over 300km/h and in the middle of a fifteen-car pile-up, it was difficult to read the number; the 12 looked like a 77 (the bottom of the 2 was difficult to see). And it didn't help that they showed Wheldon's on-board moments before the crash, and then cut to Power's with no clear indication that they had changed (since the liveries look similar and both cars became airborne).

As for Wheldon's car, it is now clear that there is no footage of the impact because there is nothing left of that part of the car. I'd be very surprised if they actually found anything more than dust from the rollhoop and camera mounting.

 

[CSLACR]

Earth, you either clearly DO NOT know a thing about IndyCar racing or you're one of those insane Champ Car Fanatics who chant "death to the IRL" even though the war ended almost 4 years ago.

1. It's called the IZOD IndyCar Series now and the sanctioning body is called IndyCar.

2. Paul Tracy raced this weekend at Las Vegas so he clearly didn't refuse to race ovals in an IndyCar.

3. Drivers have gotten killed on road and street courses and dirt tracks too. Racing has always been dangerous and any real race fan realizes that you cannot eliminate injuries or deaths, just improve car and track safety. The only way to eliminate racing injuries and deaths is to eliminate racing altogether.

4. IndyCar already contracted Dallara to build the new 2012 chassis which is designed to prevent cars from going airborne from wheel-to-wheel contact.

I've been an IndyCar fan since the 80s and followed the sport under CART/Champ Car/IRL/IndyCar sanctioning. I, and the majority of IndyCar fans, are glad the sport is unified. Most of us know that shutting down the IZOD IndyCar Series would also mean the death of open wheel racing in America. F1 will only come to America once a year and they won't race on ovals.

The IZOD IndyCar Series is the only major racing series in the world that challenges its drivers to race on a balanced mix of ovals and road/street courses. That challenge is what made the CART IndyCar World Series great and it will make the IZOD IndyCar Series great.

Thank you for the good post.👍

I stand corrected - earlier today, I said an Australian broadcaster had shown footage from on-board Dan Wheldon's car during the morning news. Now, during the evening news, the footage was replayed, and I had a better chance to look at it. It was actually Will Power's on-board that they showed, not Wheldon's. But at over 300km/h and in the middle of a fifteen-car pile-up, it was difficult to read the number; the 12 looked like a 77 (the bottom of the 2 was difficult to see). And it didn't help that they showed Wheldon's on-board moments before the crash, and then cut to Power's with no clear indication that they had changed (since the liveries look similar and both cars became airborne).

As for Wheldon's car, it is now clear that there is no footage of the impact because there is nothing left of that part of the car. I'd be very surprised if they actually found anything more than dust from the rollhoop and camera mounting.

From what I saw, what was left of his car could probably be lifted by a single person.
I believe in this crash, for his car, it was absolute worst-case scenario. Meaning that crash could happen 10 more times, without that particular car being so unbelievably destroyed.

 

[Dan_]

I'm not saying its good when people die, but learning from mistakes happens (and works). Sure its better to prevent it in the first place but it's not always possible. When Dale Erndhart died it brought about the HANS device which saved Jimmy Johnson's life recently

I agree with that but you completely missed my point. I'm not overreacting or asking for closure of IRL (which I truly enjoy watching). As long as there is scarily fast motorsport there will be fatalities. Remeber Schumacher's crash in 1999? He crashed against the tirewall at Silverstone, the survival cell was intact but his body wasn't. It's not an oval racing exclusivity, single seaters are in fact more dangerous than other forms of motorsport.

My point resides on the fact that it is impossible to mitigate the risks and create a broader error margin when there is such ludicrous speeds involved. My post wasn't aimed at oval racing per se, though perhaps, I haven't worded it clearly.

 

[boiltheocean]

Consider the Nurburgring vs IRL on Ovals this way.

If a single IRL car was driving around the oval the chances of a crash would be very low, it's not the most challenging of circuits for drivers. If a single Porsche Cup car was driving around the Nurburgring the chances of a crash would be fairly high due to the demanding nature of the track itself.

The problems comes when you introduce other identical cars to these scenarios, when you add more Porsche Cup cars the field is still spread out due to driver skill and the simple fact that you can't go two wide into corners at the Nurburgring. This means that although their is an increased risk due to the unpredictable nature of other drivers the risk of doing yourself any damage still lies in your own hands.

When you add more IRL cars to an already flat out circuit you dramatically increase the risk of a crash due to the only way of being able to pass your opponent is to get as close as possible to them. Slipstreaming bunches cars together and creates a field that constantly has to move in order to avoid running straight into the back of other cars. When you combine the constant re-ordering of track positions with the extremely close racing you create a scenario where the most minor of touches will snowball into huge accidents. The risk of doing yourself damage in a situation like that is out of your own control.

 

[CSLACR]

Consider the Nurburgring vs IRL on Ovals this way.

If a single IRL car was driving around the oval the chances of a crash would be very low, it's not the most challenging of circuits for drivers. If a single Porsche Cup car was driving around the Nurburgring the chances of a crash would be fairly high due to the demanding nature of the track itself.

The problems comes when you introduce other identical cars to these scenarios, when you add more Porsche Cup cars the field is still spread out due to driver skill and the simple fact that you can't go two wide into corners at the Nurburgring. This means that although their is an increased risk due to the unpredictable nature of other drivers the risk of doing yourself any damage still lies in your own hands.

When you add more IRL cars to an already flat out circuit you dramatically increase the risk of a crash due to the only way of being able to pass your opponent is to get as close as possible to them. Slipstreaming bunches cars together and creates a field that constantly has to move in order to avoid running straight into the back of other cars. When you combine the constant re-ordering of track positions with the extremely close racing you create a scenario where the most minor of touches will snowball into huge accidents. The risk of doing yourself damage in a situation like that is out of your own control.

How do you pass someone on any track without getting close to them? Aside from passing while they pit, which can happen on any track.
I'm not sure how the difference in what makes them deadly races has any meaning. One is deadly only when the cars are scrunched together, one is deadly just to race alone, let alone in traffic.

I understand your point, it's been pointed out quite a few times, ovals funnel the cars into traffic, and close racing results in snowball effect crashes.

Yet more people die on the Ring then any other track in the world. Both are dangerous, to call one unacceptable is to call the other unacceptable.
So far nobody had been willing to call racing on the Nuburgring unacceptable, yet many have called racing open wheel cars on ovals unacceptable. See the problem?
A deadly race is a deadly race, no matter the type of car or speed it is driven.

 

[Grand Prix]

Well obviously Nurb is a bit crazy to race on as well. I'm surprised it is still being used for racing TBH. Some tracks like Nurburgring, Monaco, Rouen-les-Essarts () are better enjoyed from the comfort of your living room than in the real world. Nurb's a bit narrow for proper racing anyways IMO, for a permanent circuit. But I still respect those that race on it. I respect IndyCar drivers as well, for the racing conditions they have to adapt to.

However, I still think ovals need to be improved. As they are, they work well enough for stock cars. Open wheelers need more than just safety improvements to the cars, I think. They can change the cars all they like, but it ignores the fundamental problems of oval racing, and why they don't work for open wheelers in the first place.

Maybe they could add a little financial incentive for the improvement of ovals with sponsored runoff space, like on some road circuits today? 💡

 

[leepangfu]

I don't follow IndyCar but when I saw the video of the crash it really looked too dangerous in my opinion. Openwheel cars running three wide at top speed. All it needs is one thing to go wrong and it all goes wrong.

But of course any motorsport is dangerous and the people who race in them know the dangers and accept them.

RIP Dan Wheldon

 

[SuperShouden]

The drivers were nervous about the Las Vegas race, as they were hitting 225mph in practice. I personally think 225mph is way to fast. Heck, NASCAR put restrictor plates on their cars at Daytona after the new asphalt was allowing them to hit speeds well about 200mph.

There does come a point where fast is just too fast. That wreck was so crazy it seemed like something out of a movie. I mean, Powers literally flew a good 100 feet in the air. That just shouldn't happen. And these cars didn't get airborne from wheel-to-wheel contact. They got air because they were going so fast, the sides and backs of the other cars acted like ramps.

I have noticed there have been LOTS of flips in IRL lately, and that's when things start getting deadly. All that safety equipment is designed to protect the driver from crashes on the ground. As soon as the car gets airborne, all those safety features are compromised. At least, with a closed cockpit, you have the rollcage and roof to protect you.

It will be interesting to see what IRL does to make these races safer.

 

[boiltheocean]

How do you pass someone on any track without getting close to them? Aside from passing while they pit, which can happen on any track.

I probably worded that a little wrong, the point I was trying to make is that you don't run that close for the entire race on a track such as the Nurburgring (or any other track with corners which force the cars to slow down), it's not physically possible to run cars 3 wide around every corner at full racing speed on the Nurburgring.

One is deadly only when the cars are scrunched together, one is deadly just to race alone, let alone in traffic.

Exactly! One is deadly if you push your car too hard, however you have to make the decision to do that. IRL on oval tracks is deadly because of crashes that you had no role in causing, and have no chance of avoiding.

 

[ZEROX]

I think IndyCars can avoid the flip-fiesta if they install the fin on the engine cover.

I don't know much about aerodynamic but it has prove that it can prevent the car from flipping. McNish Le Mans 2011.

Yeah i know, many of the car do frontal-flip rather than side-flip but hey, it could be worth to do before any tragedy happens again.
Hope IC take note on this.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The ICONIC project was developed to make the cars safer, which includes bodywork surrounding the wheels in order to prevent cars from launching off one another.

 

[Mike Rotch]

Whoever governs Indycar is dreaming of rainbows and leprechauns if they think the 2012 car design - with its thoughtful few inches of metal and carbon fibre "protecting" the rear wheel - will prevent future occurances of today.

It ignores the main cause of the launching cars - the speed differential and the inherent design of open-wheeled racers. That is, exposed rear wheels at one end and a pointy nose and rigid sidepod at the other. Drive the pointy nose or sidepods at speed into the unenclosed rear wheels of another car - protective plate or none - the result will be an airborne car.

Look at Webber/ Kovaleinen and recently Schumacher/ Perez. Body meeting rear wheel with a big speed differential means the launching of a front end upwards and with enough velocity, the car will ride over the rear wheel, becoming completely airborne as we saw today.

Is it the nature of the beast - open wheeled racing? Yes, it is and Indycar shouldn't delude themselves that a protective cover that isnt a rigid body panel ala a "Caparo" rear wheel cover is going to make much difference.

The rear issue for me, is the catch fencing which seem, based on a few vids posted, does little more then rip a car to shreds, seemingly with enough force to discard the roll bar. The sooner the fencing is remedied, the sooner the odds of a repeat of Dan's misfortune will be cut.

As for airborne cars, one would think there is some flappy technology that could deploy ala NASCARS to stop it, but its the nature of the beast, as I said. Speed differentials are the problem, whether by track design, overfilled fields or being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[Sharky.]

The rear issue for me, is the catch fencing which seem, based on a few vids posted, does little more then rip a car to shreds, seemingly with enough force to discard the roll bar. The sooner the fencing is remedied, the sooner the odds of a repeat of Dan's misfortune will be cut.

The real irony in my eyes is exactly this, the catch fencing. Something designed to keep spectators safe is very dangerous (and often lethal, as demonstrated today) for the competitors!

But then you also need to consider that a tintop will come out of a catch fence significantly better off than an open-cockpit vehicle, so to say what happened at LV was a direct result of the catch fencing would be a swing and a miss. The main problem that most people have touched on is how easily the cars get airborne - with a flat bottom and no under-car aero device, if air gets under there you're going on a very scary ride. At a very high speed.

Measures need to be taken to ensure that cars don't act like ramps in the event of a rear-end collision and if a car does get airborne it doesn't fly 50 feet in the air. Obviously the 2012 design attempts to rectify the former by way of the rear wheel covers, but from what I can tell it'll have the exact same aeroplane physics as the '11 cars should it manage to leave the track. The car body needs to generate sufficient downforce to keep the cars on the track should the front and rear wings lose all aero, which I think is half of the problem; I'm no expert on Indycar aerodynamics but I'm sure if you took the wings off, the cars have dangerously low downforce - if any at all. The car bodies should be designed to generate a substantial percentage of the car's total downforce so if the front and/or rear wings lose downforce there's still something doing its best to keep the vehicle grounded.


Then of course there's the sheer lunacy of racing three-wide at tracks designed for ton-and-a-half stockcars at speeds 20% higher!

 

[hornet_burnout]

When the front of a car touches a wheel spinning at high speed, it'll be propelled up, and the nose and bottom will also be reeled in (top of the wheel is moving forward) producing that effect.

Covering the back wheels with a bit of tin that will be easily ripped off in one of these accidents won't solve the flying bit IMO. Forcing the nose into the ground in case of an accident will.

 

[Mr. S]

Every kind of racing is dangerous - it's the idea behind it. Whilst we're losing drivers to the sport sometimes, it's not like they're forced to drive.

I'd like to quote Bruce McLaren, yet again.

"To do something well is so worthwhile that to die trying to do it better cannot be foolhardy. It would be a waste of life to do nothing with one's ability, for I feel that life is measured in achievement, not in years alone."

 

[Pupik]

These Dallara chassis have been brittle pieces of crap at high speeds.

I've been following racing for many years, and I understand that energy deformation is part of what a race car is supposed to do in an impact, but there shouldn't be three cars catching fire, and several cars taking flight in a multi-car accident.

Another problem is that the cars are equally matched, with the same constructor and engine supplier, so they're going to run in tight packs compared to F1 racing.

Hopefully the new design will be a lot safer.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Yeah I agree with Bruce, long lives can be meaningless and short lives can be filled with glory.

But I'm more for the Jackie Stewart/Niki Lauda approach. Guys need to be fast. Risks are part of the job. But stupidity isn't. And pack racing above 200 MPH in OPEN WHEEL cars is just ... stupid. If not criminal.

 

[JimmyTheHat]

As for Wheldon's car, it is now clear that there is no footage of the impact because there is nothing left of that part of the car. I'd be very surprised if they actually found anything more than dust from the rollhoop and camera mounting.

Don't quite understand what you mean here....the images from the camera are recored live as they are taken. Footage would exist up until the point when the camera was destroyed, which would be probably when he hit the wall/fencing.

There is no footage 'saved' by the mounted camera on the car

I would guess they are not releasing it until the investigation is completed. Senna's footage was never released.

 

[Blaze_409]

This is a testament to the strength of the Audi R18 (albeit closed top). Same situation(albeit a couple mile an hour slower).

ill be interested to see what happens......i suggest no moer Vegas race......And what happens in vegas does NOT stay in vegas.

 

[GOTMAXPOWER]

This is a testament to the strength of the Audi R18 (albeit closed top). Same situation(albeit a couple mile an hour slower).

ill be interested to see what happens......i suggest no moer Vegas race......And what happens in vegas does NOT stay in vegas.

But the Audi had no roof impact, it hit on the side then spun around lowering the force as it slowed

 

[DrKronin]

How do you pass someone on any track without getting close to them? Aside from passing while they pit, which can happen on any track.
I'm not sure how the difference in what makes them deadly races has any meaning. One is deadly only when the cars are scrunched together, one is deadly just to race alone, let alone in traffic.

I understand your point, it's been pointed out quite a few times, ovals funnel the cars into traffic, and close racing results in snowball effect crashes.

Yet more people die on the Ring then any other track in the world. Both are dangerous, to call one unacceptable is to call the other unacceptable.
So far nobody had been willing to call racing on the Nuburgring unacceptable, yet many have called racing open wheel cars on ovals unacceptable. See the problem?
A deadly race is a deadly race, no matter the type of car or speed it is driven.

Comparing one cherry-picked track to an entire class of tracks, when no series races on both, is clearly an apples/oranges comparison.

The question we're collectively trying to answer, I believe, is whether or not, all other things being equal, ovals are more dangerous than road courses. The best source of evidence for answering that question would come from a series that races more or less the same cars with more or less the same drivers on both road courses and ovals in the same season. With Indy, we have that series. Unless I'm forgetting something, every driver that has died in Indy since reunification has done so on an oval, and none have died on road courses. Now, the sample size is not satisfactory, but it is still a infinitely more useful comparison than the strawman "all ovals vs. nurb" you keep hawking.

If you want to make a generalized statement (and one which you claim is evidence-based) to the effect that road courses are just as dangerous as ovals, I feel that your only source of useful evidence would have to involve a series that races extensively on a variety of both. Any effort short of that faces the impossible task of trying to account for myriad external variables having nothing to do with the question at hand.

I see a lot of "all racing is dangerous" talk, and this is true, but this sentiment implies that there somehow isn't a safety difference between different forms of racing, when clearly, there is. I think the evidence in the last 15 years of Indy racing suggests that ovals, at least in the narrow context of Indy's style of open-wheel racing are, in fact, more dangerous than road courses. Maybe they don't have to be. Maybe some changes to the cars or rules could resolve this discrepancy. I don't know. All I know is that we have very little useful evidence, but what little we have is damning.

 

[Masi_23]

I think the catch fencing is the one that dealt the most damage.

They should just go strictly road racing (or just dump the mile and a halfs). Hone NA talent so we could have another American in F1.

I miss CART

 

[MustangRyan]

All forms of racing are inherently dangerous. That's just the nature of the sport. The drivers, their families,owners, regulators, and fans all know it, even if they don't want to consciously admit it before accidents like these occur.

A large accident was almost assuredly going to happen with so many cars running so close together at such high speeds for an extended period of time, especially given the relatively large disparity between the drivers in both talent and oval track experience. That just meant it was going to be hard to finish the race unscathed, not that it was likely someone was going to lose their life.

However, what happened yesterday was an absolute tragedy, caused by a confluence of unfortunate circumstances that resulted in a worst-case scenario, the open top of the vehicle striking a solid barrier.

As long as you have an open cockpit design, the risk, no matter how small, will always be there for a worst-case scenario, high-speed contact involving a driver's exposed helmet. Just because a freak occurence hasn't happened lately in F1 or on a road course doesn't necessarily mean that they are inherently safer. They have just been more fortunate.

Felipe Massa could just as easily have been fatally struck by flying debris and Dan Wheldon's car hit the fence in any other direction other than top-first, and we would be having the same debate about the safety of an open cockpit of an F1 car.

Don't judge the IRL more harshly just because Wheldon wasn't as lucky as Massa.

Dan Wheldon knew the risks when he strapped in yesterday. He decided that he felt safe enough to go out there and pursue his passion. He just got extremely unlucky.

 

[snowxdadx3]

All forms of racing are inherently dangerous. That's just the nature of the sport. The drivers, their families,owners, regulators, and fans all know it, even if they don't want to consciously admit it before accidents like these occur.

A large accident was almost assuredly going to happen with so many cars running so close together at such high speeds for an extended period of time, especially given the relatively large disparity between the drivers in both talent and oval track experience. That just meant it was going to be hard to finish the race unscathed, not that it was likely someone was going to lose their life.

However, what happened yesterday was an absolute tragedy, caused by a confluence of unfortunate circumstances that resulted in a worst-case scenario, the open top of the vehicle striking a solid barrier.

As long as you have an open cockpit design, the risk, no matter how small, will always be there for a worst-case scenario, high-speed contact involving a driver's exposed helmet. Just because a freak occurence hasn't happened lately in F1 or on a road course doesn't necessarily mean that they are inherently safer. They have just been more fortunate.

Felipe Massa could just as easily have been fatally struck by flying debris and Dan Wheldon's car hit the fence in any other direction other than top-first, and we would be having the same debate about the safety of an open cockpit of an F1 car.

Don't judge the IRL more harshly just because Wheldon wasn't as lucky as Massa.

Dan Wheldon knew the risks when he strapped in yesterday. He decided that he felt safe enough to go out there and pursue his passion. He just got extremely unlucky.

I agree with this post completely, with the highlighted text in the above post being the key...

 

[JimmyTheHat]

However, what happened yesterday was an absolute tragedy, caused by a confluence of unfortunate circumstances that resulted in a worst-case scenario, the open top of the vehicle striking a solid barrier.

I don't agree with you that is was "a confluence of unfortunate circumstances that resulted in a worst-case scenario".

If you think of Senna's accident, that same impact could have happened over and over with the driver being fine. It was the metal going through the helmet which was so unfortunate.

But this Las Vegas crash? 15 cars were taken out, with 3 or 4 airborne, 3 or 4 on fire.....you could say it was amazing that there was ONLY one death.

There was nothing 'by pure chance' about this. It was INEVITABLE.

If the race had passed without a big incident, now that would've been truly extraordinary.

 

[Furinkazen]

34 cars on track is too much. Hell they run 33 just about at Indy. Vegas is not the widest track and to be honest a large wreck was inevitable.

 

[GOTMAXPOWER]

34 cars on track is too much. Hell they run 33 just about at Indy. Vegas is not the widest track and to be honest a large wreck was inevitable.

I'm surprised it took so long to happen to be honnest, Tagliani was rubbing wheels a few laps before with somebody because there were so many cars and such little space, when it did there was nothing to do but pile into the back of it.

On a slightly different note Wheldon's race was a great tribute for a great driver, to pass 10 cars in almost the same number of laps showed how good he was.

 

[Northstar]

34 cars on track is too much. Hell they run 33 just about at Indy. Vegas is not the widest track and to be honest a large wreck was inevitable.

It was indeed too many cars(they should have stuck with the usual limit of 26).

I actually recall fans mentioning how that many cars was going to cause problems in Robin Miller's Mailbag column on SPEED.com last week. They were sadly correct in their concerns.