Prock's run tossed? (1 Viewer)

[LasVegas87]

So was Prock's Q3 run tossed out? The dragracecentral notes say the speed was tripped, but the incrementals seemed legit for a 3.67 run. He shows 12th with a 3.74. R1 against BForce. Yikes.

 

[Scoe]

Yeah. They tossed it. Gotta suck to be on the receiving end of a malfunction that you have no control over. You go from out qualifying your teammate to drawing them.

 

[Chili]

So was Prock's Q3 run tossed out? The dragracecentral notes say the speed was tripped, but the incrementals seemed legit for a 3.67 run. He shows 12th with a 3.74. R1 against BForce. Yikes.

I’m no math expert and every run is a little different. Comparing it to other numbers from the same session its real close to Schumacher who ran 3.69. Not sure there is enough evidence to toss it but it must seem fairly obvious to the ones that make that decision.

 

[twostep]

Jimmy Prock stated (during the Sunday show) that the 3.67 wasn't accurate, either. Data from the car showed it was about .03-.04 too quick and the actual pass was 3.70 or so. I don't think NHRA would have tossed the run over a speed discrepancy alone but ET - yes. Remember back in the day when a reflection showed Courtney Force's FC running about 10mph faster than what it actually did? The run was something like 3.92@338mph. The ET was determined to be accurate; they disallowed the speed as far as any sort of record goes and the ET stood as her qualifying number.

 

[unclebob]

I think it was DRC mentioned the 393 mph was a little to hard to believe !

 

[Nunz]

I think it was DRC mentioned the 393 mph was a little to hard to believe !

Was there a tailwind?

 

[Mike]

The clocks in the tower typically have the ET at the 940' cone (the first speed cone). To cover the last 60 feet at 330MPH takes .123 seconds. At 393MPH it would take .104 seconds. One question I had is how did they determine the 1000' cone was triggered early versus the 940' cone maybe triggered late. That can somewhat be answered by backing up to the 660' cone and determining if the 940' time was abnormally quick. If it wasn't, then it can be assumed the 1000' was triggered early. I didn't see the 940' ET so I can't comment on which way it happened. At an estimated 330 MPH one or the other was triggered @ 110 inches of vehicle travel early or late. Situations like this are why I believe they should have high speed cameras at the finish line as a backup to determine winners in the event of a timing failure.