JamesFeinberg wrote:
I didn't think there was anything wrong with the finish at Danville. I wasn't a big fan when I first walked it but it turned out to be just fine.
The finish in Huntsville was a little more hairy but you are leaving out a few key details. Firstly, the STS2 Miata incident was mostly caused by a worker who put a cone out of place from a previous hit. 3 cars came through the finish after the misplaced cone and they were traveling at least 10mph (if not more) faster than they would have been had the cone been in its proper place.
The first person through there was Andy Hollis and he immediately parked his car next to the timing trailer to get the situation fixed. Just as he was stepping into the trailer, the 3rd Miata came screaming through there and got out of shape. It surprised the driver (I talked to him at length about it the next day) and he just couldn't get the car under control. Granted, it could have happened even with the course set up properly but it wouldn't have been nearly as bad and the driver wouldn't have been as caught out by the extra speed that the finish wasn't designed for.
The other issue plaguing the finish there was a big strip of new asphalt that was laid down over some new drain lines. Many people were commenting on it during course walks and it was an issue for RWD and/or stiffly sprung cars. That strip wasn't there when the course was originally designed and they probably should have changed it but it just didn't happen in time. FWD and softer cars really weren't upset by the strip as accelerating over that section just caused a slight push.
Those extra details make a big difference in the "story" and should not be overlooked IMO.
Jim
Jim, First I was commenting on a trend that may have hidden repercussions that need to be considered IMHO.
Second, The out of place cone at HNT is a red herring again IMHO, if a car is capable of negotiating a feature at a given speed, say 30 MPH, then if it approaches that feature at 40 or 80, it will still need to be whoa'd down to 30 just the same. Moving the cones after the accident didn't change the approach speed it just made the finish feature require less radical steering inputs (and a slightly higher speed) which were less likely to leave the car in an uncontrollable attitude thru the finish, thus making the finish safer. The more radical the manuever requires, the less margin for speed error there is. When coupled with a high speed approach like we had Sunday (we were beating the rev limiter to death) the likelyhood of overshooting that speed multiplies exponentially. Most mortal drivers can judge say a 3 mph difference in speed while cruising around 30 MPH than they can at 60 MPH.
It is much harder yet to judge a small speed difference at the end of threshold braking from 55 MPH down to walking speed. Not everyone at an AX drives a rollerskate that can shoot thru a keyhole.
Bottom line is IMHO contrary to popular design, a tight radical maneuver at the finish to a course where there is the least amount of room for error does not make a finish safer. There are better and safer ways to control finish speeds.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
