hotrod
Nitro Member
If you think about it...if you were sliding down that right wall at a survivable speed, you would be better off with a curved wall than a 90 degree wall.
Nitromater
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Jim Head interview.
- Thread starter The Counterfeiter
- Start date
If you think about it...if you were sliding down that right wall at a survivable speed, you would be better off with a curved wall than a 90 degree wall.
Bobby
Nitro Member
it aint' curved if you're in the left lane.
The design can't be meant for 200mph funny cars.
hotrod
Nitro Member
What part of this do you not understand? If not for the curved wall, the next stop is a grove of trees, then a ditch and then a two lane highway and then another ditch and then more trees...lots of trees. The only other options are a 90 degree wall or trees...as mentioned. There is the one other option now that I think about it. They could do what they do at Columbus and close the highway at the end of the track during the race and level out the land to the highway and beyond. What do you wanna bet that we see something like that by next year?
I think he understands just fine, there shouldn't be a wall, trees, an embankment, or a ditch diectly behind the sand trap. the same thing that is in columbus, should have been at E-town years ago. Along with more than just 100' of sandtrp
No problem Bob. After having a fellow sportsman racer in my own class almost die due to piss poor containment at the top end of a track (NHRA owned) earlier this year, and watcing NHRA do nothing but replace the dry rotted net, I really question whats going on at the upper levels of management. If a stocker was able to defeat the containment at one of the longest tracks on the series, NHRA had to know that Scott's accident, and therefore end result, was a foreseeable event. With the NJ .gov crew doing an investigation, there will be nothing swept under the rug here. Not trying blame anyone, but this was not outside the realm of possibility and some thought should have gone into preventing it.
People like to complain about New Jersey's regulation of racing but it does have its benefits.
Jim
unfortunetly you may be correct. Lets all hope and pray that something good comes out of this, and that Scott's death was not in vein
Thurston
Nitro Member
I know somebody out there knows this. If they shorten the track to 1000' at 280 to 300 MPH how much more TIME would a driver have to react to a bad situation and slow the car down in the extra 320' before reaching the end of the shut down? Or another way to ask this question is at 300 MPH how many feet per second does a car travel.
I think a catch cable/rope like they use on an aircraft carrier is an excellent idea. Just don't know how hard the cable/rope would be on the cars as they drover over them at normal shutdown speed. Per haps they could put them about a car length or two before the sand trap.
I think a catch cable/rope like they use on an aircraft carrier is an excellent idea. Just don't know how hard the cable/rope would be on the cars as they drover over them at normal shutdown speed. Per haps they could put them about a car length or two before the sand trap.
Fuel FC Fan
Nitro Member
Just a thought.
If they can't find more Real Estate at the top end of some of these shorter tracks for providing a safer barrier at 300 mph due to roads or highways, trees and other permanent objects.....then why not move the Timing Towers back a few hundred feet? They would provide more bleachers for the fans and maybe put in some other nice track features while doing so.
I'm not talking about all the NHRA tracks, just the ones that drivers feel are too short while trying to shut her down at 325.
Like Head said, a lot of these tracks were built back when cars were going 200.....not 325.
If they can't find more Real Estate at the top end of some of these shorter tracks for providing a safer barrier at 300 mph due to roads or highways, trees and other permanent objects.....then why not move the Timing Towers back a few hundred feet? They would provide more bleachers for the fans and maybe put in some other nice track features while doing so.
I'm not talking about all the NHRA tracks, just the ones that drivers feel are too short while trying to shut her down at 325.
Like Head said, a lot of these tracks were built back when cars were going 200.....not 325.
First of all, my deepest prayers for the Kalitta Family.
But i have been lurking around here for the last few days and every one wants to blame the track or the shutdown area. But in looking at the video has anyone given thought to the fact that Scoot may have suffered grave injuries for the actual detonation of the motor through the lights? It does not appear as though he was trying to stop the car at all. No doubt there needs to be a better system, but i do not think all aspects are being discussed.
But i have been lurking around here for the last few days and every one wants to blame the track or the shutdown area. But in looking at the video has anyone given thought to the fact that Scoot may have suffered grave injuries for the actual detonation of the motor through the lights? It does not appear as though he was trying to stop the car at all. No doubt there needs to be a better system, but i do not think all aspects are being discussed.
At some tracks -- I believe E'town is one of them -- there is not room to move the timing towers back.
Jim
Old Sg
Nitro Member
If racing was shortened to 1000' then there could be an addtional 320 ft. of sand trap. with multiple catch nets spaced 100' apart. The nets need to be higher also.
The chutes need longer fireproof shroud covers as to keep the chutes working the way they were intended and out of the fire.
Getting the cars stopped even if the driver is unconscious should be a primary objective and certainly possible.
330 mph = 484 ft/sec
300 mph = 440 ft/sec
250 mph = 366 ft/sec
200 mph = 293 ft/sec
Even at 200 mph thats a football field in one second.
Sean D, shondoo
Nitro Member
I haven't watched the footage for a few days, but from what I recall, I thought the a$$ end of the car was bouncing pretty good just before entering the sand, which tells me he was on the binders hard. Could it still have been bouncing from clear back when the percussion happened? I guess so, but I just don't remember.
Sean D
Thurston
Nitro Member
I wasn’t sure how if felt about the 1000’ thing but it makes a lot of sense, by shorting the track to 1000’ you could then split the difference and add 160 to 200ft more shutdown and then use the remaining 120 to 160ft. to extend the sand trap and add an extra catch net. Also by going to 1000' the speeds would be less and add to the cumulative effect of the extra shutdown and trap area.
Sure wish a track operator/owner (not NHRA) would add to this discussion. I would like to hear thier view point on all this.
Sure wish a track operator/owner (not NHRA) would add to this discussion. I would like to hear thier view point on all this.
onfire
Nitro Member
Sean....there was no bouncing at all. That's what I was looking for. The tires never really came out of their "growing" stage.
Late..........Mitch
Alan
Nitro Member
I would prefer to keep the racing at 1/4 mile, but would I watch 1/8 mile or 1000 foot? Of course I would.
But I would prefer that tracks make changes to their shutdown area. Just a couple ideas, that others have also hit on:
1. Taller catch nets, perhaps double what they are now.
2. Water barriers
3. Soft walls
4. Make sure that the sand sits below the asphalt, so the cars drop down and dig in.
5. Elevate the sand as the trap goes further back.
Just my thoughts, and that's it.
And why is it that there are people on the board that seem to think that fan's opinions don't mean **** because they have never been behind the wheel? Because someone hasn't driven, they are not as saavy as those that have? That is crap to me. Maybe in some cases an educated fan might have a better perspective on some subjects than those that drive. But someone certainly should not be insulted or told that they don't know jack becuase they have never wheeled a car down the 1320.
But I would prefer that tracks make changes to their shutdown area. Just a couple ideas, that others have also hit on:
1. Taller catch nets, perhaps double what they are now.
2. Water barriers
3. Soft walls
4. Make sure that the sand sits below the asphalt, so the cars drop down and dig in.
5. Elevate the sand as the trap goes further back.
Just my thoughts, and that's it.
And why is it that there are people on the board that seem to think that fan's opinions don't mean **** because they have never been behind the wheel? Because someone hasn't driven, they are not as saavy as those that have? That is crap to me. Maybe in some cases an educated fan might have a better perspective on some subjects than those that drive. But someone certainly should not be insulted or told that they don't know jack becuase they have never wheeled a car down the 1320.
Last edited:
Not only will 1000 ft. tracks provide more stoping room but more importantly if they leave the cars the same ie: rear gear ratios, rev limit, cu in, blower overdrive and so on then the cars will not be under the same stress as they would be at 1320. Not all but most equipment failures occur in the final 320 feet and equipment failure has got to be reduced. Equipment failure before1000 feet or half track rarely results in injury. If it only resulted in additional shut down room then 320 feet more probably wouldn't be worth the effort.
paoldtimer
Nitro Member
Just wondering...wouldn't this make the car tend to nosedive and flip endoverend??
