Thread: Scott Kalitta crash

Tweet

Congrats to NHRA---Driver safety in the fuel classes has to be the top priority, not an afterthought....

Poor move in my opinion...I know many of you think this is a good idea, but imgine football where they can't tackle so they can avoid injury, or hockey with no checking, or Tiger Woods at putt putt golf instead of a real course.

NHRA's philosophy: Ready, shoot, AIM! If the NHRA was truely concerned with safety, they'd advise all the teams and spectators to stay at home because they have a much higher chance of getting injured or dying on the way to the track than they do at the track.

I'm quite sure most of you won't like my analysis, but they have enough trouble attracting people to this sport, it will be even harder now.

I doubt it will make much difference to the average fan. There will be fewer oil downs which will make the program run much smoother. The biggest gripe I hear from the bleachers is the down time for oil downs. It will cut down on the parts carnage making it more affordable for the teams to compete. Yes there are many teams out there running on the financial edge (not all are funded with a blank check). They will still be running 300+ under most conditions, but will have a little more room to stop.
I think the positives will far out weigh the negative once people get a baseline for the new times & speeds. There is 1,000 ft. data now, so comparing records shouldn't be a problem.

Originally Posted by 737Pilot

Poor move in my opinion...I know many of you think this is a good idea, but imgine football where they can't tackle so they can avoid injury, or hockey with no checking, or Tiger Woods at putt putt golf instead of a real course.

NHRA's philosophy: Ready, shoot, AIM! If the NHRA was truely concerned with safety, they'd advise all the teams and spectators to stay at home because they have a much higher chance of getting injured or dying on the way to the track than they do at the track.

I'm quite sure most of you won't like my analysis, but they have enough trouble attracting people to this sport, it will be even harder now.

I tend to agree and I sure hope this is short term. NHRA should quit holding national events at tracks that don't have adequate shut down area. I have never understood why there are two events at Pomona and Las Vegas but only one at tracks like Indy, Topeka, and Phoenix.

Originally Posted by NTFDAY

I tend to agree and I sure hope this is short term. NHRA should quit holding national events at tracks that don't have adequate shut down area. I have never understood why there are two events at Pomona and Las Vegas but only one at tracks like Indy, Topeka, and Phoenix.

I can understand why two at Pomona.....NHRA held its first official race in April 1953, on a slice of the Los Angeles County Fairgrounds parking lot in Pomona, where they remain today.

Originally Posted by ceh383

I can understand why two at Pomona.....NHRA held its first official race in April 1953, on a slice of the Los Angeles County Fairgrounds parking lot in Pomona, where they remain today.

I can understand Pomona, I was there in '62.

well if you think that the all mighty 1320' feet is more important than keeping the drivers who entertain you safe. then the nhra doesnt need fans like you. IMHO.

Originally Posted by gassersrule_196

well if you think that the all mighty 1320' feet is more important than keeping the drivers who entertain you safe. then the nhra doesnt need fans like you. IMHO.

Where were you the run before Scott got killed? Protesting the 1320', I'm sure Or how about last week? Why was it so safe to run 1320' last week, but not next? This won't solve anything. Last week in Norwalk, they had an Alky Funny car go completely throught the sand trap.....and he doesn't go 300 mph. So taking out 320' isn't gonna prevent anything.

Originally Posted by gassersrule_196

well if you think that the all mighty 1320' feet is more important than keeping the drivers who entertain you safe. then the nhra doesnt need fans like you. IMHO.

Scooter, there's more to it than just running to 1000'. Brandon Bernstein scaled the wall at less than a 1000', Eric Medlen was killed at less than a 1000', and John Force almost bought the farm again at less than a 1000'. Sad to say I've witnessed a few serious crashes and deaths at drag strips down through the years starting with Don Garlit's major fire at Detroit in '59. Almost all of them led to safety improvements of one kind or another, but a short track with concrete barriers or trees at the end the track is NOT conducive to safety and those tracks need improvements or need to be shut down.
IMHO opinion the tracks with concrete launches and transition to asphalt cause more problems than they are worth. It is almost impossible to create a smooth surface at the transition which in turn causes tire smoking, engine backfires, blower explosions and ultimately fires and out of control cars and it's damned hard to control a Funny when you can't see where you are going.

I'm fairly disappointed in the decision particularly as this goes into effect at my home track... I'll be attending the Mile High's next week. We all were pretty excited to see how the big dogs would run on our new (all concrete) track surface with integrated cooling at the short end... we were expecting to see new Bandimere track records for the fuel categories as we had seen for the TAD and TAFC races a few weeks ago. Now any times we see will be nearly meaningless... put an asterisk next to any results we see next week

I'm all for safety but I'm not happy with this situation...

Oh well...

-Chris

You probably know that NHRA has tried putting all kinds of limits on the cars, to reduce speeds, and that clearly is not working. Limiting the length makes more sense. You may be able to find more horsepower...but you would still be limited by traction and distance. It's more foolproof way of accomplishing the goal.

I am one of many who suggested this "shorter race distance" to NHRA. I grew up going to the 1/8th mile drags. They were every bit as exciting as the 1/4 mile events! One thing I never liked about the longer track was that once the cars were downtrack, it was too hard to see who was ahead, any way! Beside that, the last 300 feet is only a fraction of a second, at those speeds.

This would give a longer shut off area, reduce breakage, pull the speeds down to about 300, and just makes sense. I did not however suggest 1/8th mile, as this would limit the speeds that NHRA wants fans to talk about. I suggested 1000 feet, or 1/5th mile (1056).

I think that once you go to one of these races, you will not see much difference in the racing. The experience of watching these monsters is much more than 4 seconds. There is the hype from the announcer, the fireup, burnout, staging, starting line game, then the race, and the talk afterward. I for one will not miss that fraction of a second, and maybe one of my favorite drivers will live longer.

With any human endeavor that involves speed accidents and unfortunately deaths are inevitable, Running the pro fuels classes at 1/8 mile would, IMHO opinion, be no different than NASCAR restrictor plate races.

Im agree with HRP, are you really gonna notice any difference? And from my spectator experience, most in the stands will never see a change. Yeah you still have the diehards, but at least halve these days do not know what the tree is, much less how many feet they run.

The decision was unanimous by PRO that includes the Drivers who are the ones putting their lives on the line. That is good enough for me.

Originally Posted by pro70z28

The decision was unanimous by PRO that includes the Drivers who are the ones putting their lives on the line. That is good enough for me.

I don't have a problem with that, I just don't think it will solve the problem.