Is the IRL too dangerous?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Earth
  • 192 comments
  • 22,841 views

Is the IRL too dangerous?


  • Total voters
    172
Hi all, Open Wheel racing hasnt been safe ever since the beginning. F1 used to be very dangerous until Senna died in 1994. Now, a modern F1 car, the Monocoque chassis is very safe, and the driver's head sits very low between to pillars. Indy car should follow this design. If you look at driver deaths over the years, 99% are caused by head injuries. Our good friends know Mark Blundell very well. He said that Dan's head was almost decapitated, or snapped his neck. Also, he couldve just hit his head on the SAFER barrier, or on the catch fence. Indy car driver's heads dont sit down low enough. The 2012 Indy Car will reduce Impact, and all that other stuff, but from what I remember seeing is that the driver's head is still in the same spot. If there is no solution, then thats just the danger of open wheel racing. Us drivers know it, but thats what we love to do. Driving doesnt scare us, not driving does. Dan left doing what all drivers love, and thats racing. I dont want to talk about dieing or anything, but driving my race car to the gates of heaven would be at the top of my list. Sorry for the long post guys!
RIP Dan
 
I found Mario's take very interesting.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011
More heartbreak for Mario Andretti
By Ed Hinton
ESPN.com

These are the latest black days in 44 years of losing friends to the sport Mario Andretti still loves unconditionally. And yet, "It's something you never get used to, I can tell you that," the best-known driver ever, in all of auto racing, said Tuesday in a subdued voice. If anything, "It gets worse ... "

This was a man grieving yet again, devastated yet again, you could tell on the phone, if you'd known him long enough. Decency forbade asking him to count them all.

"There were too many," he said, at age 71.

First, at Riverside, Calif., in 1967, was Billy Foster -- "I would say today he was my closest friend in racing as a driver."

Latest, at Las Vegas this past Sunday, was Dan Wheldon, who had driven for Mario's son Michael in the past and had signed on with the team again for next year.

"No question, it was like losing a family member," Mario said. "It doesn't get any worse than that."

Mario Andretti, quite arguably, has been beleaguered more, longer, by death than any other driver, probably due to the vast diversity of his racing. He won the Daytona 500 in 1967, the Indy 500 in '69 and the Formula One world championship in '78.

The day he clinched the F1 title at Monza, Italy, his Lotus teammate, Ronnie Peterson, was injured, and died late that night. In prototype sports cars, Andretti was a Ferrari teammate of the legendary Pedro Rodriguez, killed in Germany in 1972.

There have been few drivers at the higher levels that Andretti didn't know, and "Nothing is ever the same after you lose a buddy, someone who has touched your life," he said Tuesday.

I sat with him in 1991 at Michael's home, reviewing video of the fatal crash of the humble journeyman NASCAR driver J. D. McDuffie, listening to his outrage at the shortcomings of safety measures at Watkins Glen, N.Y.

We talked at length at the funeral of Davey Allison, who died of injuries suffered in a helicopter crash into the Talladega infield in 1993.

At Homestead, Fla., after promising young Canadian Greg Moore had been killed in a CART race at Fontana, Calif., I heard the outrage again, this anger about a grassy area that allowed Moore's car to skate wildly, flip, roll, and disintegrate. It should have been paved, Mario said.

"They want pretty green grass for the TV shots? Well, then paint the goddamned asphalt green," he growled.

Suffice it to say Mario Andretti never has pulled a punch when he thought there were shortcomings in safety measures.

So he of all experts was credible when he said on Tuesday that this time, Sunday, "The safety aspect worked tremendously, it worked very well, except for one guy. You look at the replays over and over, and there were hard impacts, cars flying all over the place, and Dan was the only real unlucky one, to be flying closer to the wall, and he got into the catch-fencing.

"If he would have got into the SAFER barrier [just below the fence], he would have been brushing himself off and have a cup of coffee later. Look at how hard some of those [other] guys hit, and the worst thing you had was like a broken finger."

Andretti does have a procedural criticism. INDYCAR rules strictly dictate uniform technology in the cars, for parity.

"All along I was somewhat concerned about the fact that the cars are so equally matched by a spec series, and so when they're running on these ovals they can't get away from one another.

"They're inches apart for a couple of hours at tremendous speeds, and the slightest miscalculation can spell disaster.

"Vegas is a beautiful facility, it's perfect in many ways. That makes it too easy for these cars, which have great potential cornering speed, to be three abreast or even four abreast through the corners. As you know, the slightest miscue is what caused it all, and it becomes a chain reaction because they're all together."

INDYCAR has drawn wide criticism for starting 34 cars Sunday, more cars on a 1.5-mile track than the 33 in the Indy 500 at 2.5-mile Indianapolis Motor Speedway.

"Obviously, the more cars, the more of a chance for something like this to happen," Andretti said. "At the same time, you want a spectacle. What makes NASCAR a spectacle on the ovals? You've got 43 cars. Maybe it would be nice for us to have that many cars, but then you've got three times the danger aspect.

"Here, if you'd had 26 cars [a more common field for IndyCar], would that have made a difference? I don't know ... the other part is, to fill a field like that [34], you don't have all experienced drivers. But we've all been inexperienced. How do you gain experience? You gotta be doing it the first time sometime."

No matter the science applied to safety, "I don't think we'll ever be 100 percent safe. Like you're not 100 percent safe when you drive to work. Or, unfortunately, when you're flying.

"But the sport has come a long way."

So this really was a matter of bad luck more than anything left undone by the organization?

"Yeah. I feel very strongly about that. Because if you look at this thing realistically, you examine exactly what happened, that [luck] is what it is. He was dealt a bad card on that round. But for a couple of inches he probably would have been all right."

Open-cockpit cars invite what biomechanical engineers call injuries of intrusion -- that is, foreign objects can get into the car with the driver. Wheldon likely would have survived with some sort of roof over his head.

But to do that, "They might as well have a stock car," Andretti said. "This is the purest form of the sport. This is the way it was born, and it's been running like this for over 100 years. But I think, quite honestly, the cockpit protection is adequate.

"I think what really caused this was the cars being launched. The cars becoming airborne. And if you look at the design of the 2012 car, that very aspect was dealt with."

In open-wheel racing, when the tires of one car come in contact with those of another, "that's a launching pad," Andretti said. "The new car eliminates this flying, by having the rear wheels partly enclosed. At least we've got that to look forward to.

"But we got unlucky on this very last one," this very last IndyCar race featuring completely open wheels. "We had the so-called 'big one.' Like in NASCAR, they talk about the big one at Talladega and Daytona. But at least they have fenders. It's bad enough for them ... "

In recent decades, every fatality at the major levels has brought change, "after the horse is out of the barn," as Johnny Rutherford used to put it. This time, INDYCAR was already at the brink of making the change from completely exposed tires that caused, or at least exacerbated, Sunday's melee.

Still it is one race too late.

And now Mario Andretti is left to mourn yet another of so many friends dead.

At least nowadays the dying is less frequent, what with all the safety science.

"Back in the '50s, '60s and '70s, it was not even cool for a driver to ask for more protection," Andretti remembered.

"Billy Foster was killed just in front of me, before I was ready to go qualify at Riverside. I was the next guy to go out to qualify and my best friend got killed.

"Those are tough ones. ... There were too many. And it gets worse ..."

http://espn.go.com/racing/indycar/story/_/id/7122629/mario-andretti-grieving-yet-again
 
Hi all, Open Wheel racing hasnt been safe ever since the beginning. F1 used to be very dangerous until Senna died in 1994. Now, a modern F1 car, the Monocoque chassis is very safe, and the driver's head sits very low between to pillars. Indy car should follow this design. If you look at driver deaths over the years, 99% are caused by head injuries. Our good friends know Mark Blundell very well. He said that Dan's head was almost decapitated, or snapped his neck. Also, he couldve just hit his head on the SAFER barrier, or on the catch fence. Indy car driver's heads dont sit down low enough. The 2012 Indy Car will reduce Impact, and all that other stuff, but from what I remember seeing is that the driver's head is still in the same spot. If there is no solution, then thats just the danger of open wheel racing. Us drivers know it, but thats what we love to do. Driving doesnt scare us, not driving does. Dan left doing what all drivers love, and thats racing. I dont want to talk about dieing or anything, but driving my race car to the gates of heaven would be at the top of my list. Sorry for the long post guys!
RIP Dan

Well as far as F1 being safer since Senna...we can say yes and no. It hasn't been till this season that F1 has added more tethers to the wheel structure so wheels don't rip off and go flying into other drivers. There is also the issue with cockpits that all open wheel but especially F1 is trying to address, especially after the massa incident and recent close calls.
 
I think the problem with indycar is the way they try to be like NASCAR with the pack racing. It was only a matter of time before disaster struck. It sucks, because Indycar pack racing isn't even that great to watch, NASCAR does it much better. Indycar should go back to when they had good racing in the 80's and 90's. Along with the modern safety features, it would be a lot safer and a hell of a lot more entertaining to watch for race fans.
 
Maybe I'm missing something here, but after all these years all catergory open cockpit roll hoop structures seem to have only evolved in tiny increments. Only in 20 years' time whenever the consensus is that open cockpits and protruding, flimsy, roll hoops with a tiny cross sectional area that shear clean off in an accident will folk look back and think how 'crazy' it was.

The point I'm making is that they (the rule makers/drivers) have all the knowledge, yet are still accepting of the freak accident that, given enough time, will happen.

However, the FIA in the background have been firing wheel and tyre assemblies at Canopy structures similar to what is used on Fighter Aircraft, which has had positive results. Apart from optical issues and the driver having to get out when upside down, it looks like it's the way forward.
 
Why don't they plan to do it somehow like this, the drivers are sitting so low nowadays that it wouldn't take a high structure to protect them and an open top would allow getting out as easily as now. If overturned cars are seen as a problem, increase the height of the airbox accordingly to retain the gap between the canopy and the ground. No closed canopy, just a curved windscreen in front and on the sides (extend it all the way back to the head protectors) of the driver, still open cockpit racing but with noticably added safety.

DickLeehr-Lotus-51c-EG.jpg
 
^
That wouldn't have saved Wheldon though..a canopy like that would help against debris but in an accident like Wheldon's it wouldn't have helped much as the catch fencing ripped apart the top of the car.
 
Well as far as F1 being safer since Senna...we can say yes and no.

It isn't really a matter of "yes and no". It either is safer or it's not safer. It can't be both. It isn't a two-part question to which one can answer "yes" to one part and "no" to the other. It's a single-answer question that gets one or the other.

Yes, it's understood that there's still risks and things that haven't come about until more recently, but that's not the same as "no, it's not safer". If they've improved safety in any way at all then it's "yes, it's safer". You don't have to suddenly eliminate all safety concerns for it to be safer than it was prior to Senna's fatality.
 
It is safer than it was at the time of Senna's fatality. Protection barriers actually work today ( see Perez' crash at Monaco ) and tires won't fly over the crowds. Simple but yet effective improvements.
 
I think the problem with indycar is the way they try to be like NASCAR with the pack racing. It was only a matter of time before disaster struck.

Agreed 100%. It's been said thousands of times now but it is complete fact. Flat ovals and tri-ovals are fine, high banked ovals and tri-ovals need to go. The cars aren't built for such tracks.
 
Back