We’re heading up through Korea towards Seoul on the high-speed train, but today there is a sense of weariness in the party. It was a long night. Not just because we were doing the usual tiring post-Grand Prix routine of crashing out words, but because at around five o’clock in the morning word began to arrive of the huge IndyCar shunt at Las Vegas. At the time I was writing a story for my business newsletter which suggested that Dan Wheldon was on the verge of agreeing a deal to replace Danica Patrick in the Go Daddy-sponsored entry at Andretti Autosport for next year.
The first reports from Las Vegas were confused, as they often are when there is a big accident. In my experience even Media Centres are unreliable places after big crashes. People fears the worst and rumours spread faster than the wildest of fires. With modern technology as it is, Twittle-tattle is a dangerous thing.
Youtube videos of the accident began to appear and one could begin to understand the scale of the incident and to see that the drivers involved had no real chance of reacting to what was happening ahead of them. In most forms of racing there is still time to react, but with IndyCars on flat-out ovals, everyone is travelling at maximum speed – all the time. The cars are all close together, three and even four abreast, and that means that there is virtually no reaction time.
Formula 1 is fast and exciting but, apart from the first laps of races, the fights usually involve two or perhaps three cars, dicing but not stacked up as they are on the ovals. The drivers are usually able to react to what happens ahead of them, but even then there are crashes, such as the one we saw last year when Mark Webber rode over the back of Heikki Kovalainen in Valencia. Watching three or four such accidents happening simultaneously in Las Vegas was stunning.
The thing that shocked me the most was the randomness of it all. Racing drivers never dwell on these things for long. They believe that it will never happen to them. If they did not believe that they would not race the cars as they do. But I am sure that today all of them will be mulling the thought: There, but for the grace of God, go I. And how true that it.
In Formula 1 we are used to seeing drivers walk away from every crash. The safety engineers have done so many brilliant things in the last 15 years that there are even a few misguided folk who believe that danger can be designed out of the sport. That is naive because when racing cars go out of control, no-one controls trajectories, no-one can predict the interplay between cars and parts as they bounce around. A wheel tagged here and a glancing blow there can completely change the effects of a crash. People say there is no luck in motor racing, but that is not strictly true. Luck is always involved when things are out of control.
Think back a few years to 2006 when a piece of flying debris flew into the cockpit of Sebastian Vettel’s Renault World Series car during a crash at Spa and cut deeply into his finger. Surgeons were able to save the finger and Vettel was soon back in action. Think also of Red Bull Racing’s Helmut Marko, who lost an eye in his first race in a decent F1 car back in 1972 when a stone was thrown up and hit him. Think of Felipe Massa who races just as ever he did. An inch here or there makes all the difference. Think of Henry Surtees, killed by a glancing blow of an errant wheel from another car in a Formula 2 race at Brands Hatch, a week after Massa was injured by flying debris in Hungary.
“We all know this is part of the sport,” said Oriol Servia in Las Vegas. “Cars are getting safer, tracks are getting safer so fortunately it hasn’t happened in a long time. We knew it could happen, but it’s just really sad. It’s so tough to understand when somebody is gone that quickly.”
220mph arounda concrete bowl…I’m proud that F1 would never do that as it would clearly compromise driver safety. I guess the Indycar series was willing to just take more risks than F1?
On a side note, I remember reading a while ago about Helmet Marko’s accident and how the actual stone didn’t hurt nearly as much as the subsequent injection directly into his eyeball. Horrific.
Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the current Dallara chassis seven years old? That’s not exactly getting safer Mr Servia.
It is somehow an irony that the – safer – new car due to be introduced next year has been tested by Dan Wheldon. If only it had been introduced in the original timeline (read 2011), this incident may not have happened.
Let’s also hope safety at the track will be improved in IndyCar. Those walls look pretty small in Las Vegas.
Think back on Kenny Bräck ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenny_Br%C3%A4ck ), who did a single crash similar to 6-7 simultaneous crashes of yesterday breaking the g-force record as well as several bones.
He now enjoys his time performing with his band.
“The price of Man in motion is the occasional collision” Carroll Smith..
Just sadly sometimes those collisions are fatal. RIP Dan.
Very sad to hear this last night. As it was a roll hoop failure, could you comment on the crash tests required of the current Dallara and more importantly the new low cost version for 2012? Formula 1 has been very strict with the crash tests for sometime, is it similar for Indycar?
Thanks, Brian
Morning Joe, I refused to say “Good” morning.
I’m still sickened by how shocking the accident was and restraining the raw knee-jerk reaction to it all. When luck is running out, how long does it take to say “Enough is enough”??
My thoughts are with his wife and young kids.
We hear that F1 is ahead of other categories in sports by x years in technology and etc…
According to your best guess how does the saftey of the Indycars compare to F1. How many years behind/ahead is it?
You would think iwht a dallara chassis for each car, saftey should be treated as paramount as any lack there of in the name of a few extra tenths shouldn’t matter given everyone has the same chassis.
Beg to differ, Oriol, but there is nothing safe about racing Indy cars doing 225mph on a track designed for much slower and heavier NASCAR touring cars. The high banks are necessary since stock cars have little downforce compared to open wheel cars. It was plain irresponsible to hold a race at that venue, especially stacking the field to ten more cars than normally race at such circuits, mostly with rookie or out of practice veteran drivers. This smacks of “hubris” and at the very least was negligent complacence.
I was deeply shocked and so saddened to hear this news late last evening. I had a friend who was watching it live, and he just caught me online at around 11 pm. Then he started feeding me updates and I saw one picture which both he and I decided never to publish. Wheldon, sitting lifeless in his car…
We had that veruý uneasy feeling for the next two hours and at 1 am Randy Bernard made it official.
Such a black day for racing.
Well written. I am lucky to have lived mostly in a time where safety is prevalent in motorsport, I can’t imagine what it would have been like to follow motorsport in decades past. That makes this event even more tragic. Hopefully the prototype 2012 car that Wheldon helped develop can work towards further safety improvements, and that will be an even greater leagcy than he has already left. RIP Dan.
Just a small nitpick, the Surtees crash was one week before the Massa crash, not after.
As always, great writing, Joe.
Apart from sadness about the loss of Dan Wheldon I also feel anger about the tragedy in Las Vegas. 34 cars on a short oval with lap times of 25 seconds… It was almost programmed to go wrong. It was like sending 50 Formula One cars out on the streets of Monaco (with the main difference that they never achieve speeds of 220 mph there).
Oval racing is more dangerous than road racing, we know that, but you should at least try to reduce the risk and not allow to compete so many cars on such a short track.
I’m sorry Joe, but is this a joke?
Dan Wheldon died because of the injuries sustained from the crash after his car was launched off the back of another car. IndyCar were already making changes to the cars which would have meant that Dan getting launched would have been a whole lot less likely. The wheels at the rear of all 2012 IndyCar’s are enclosed.
http://indycar.com/var/assets_content/track_800x600.jpg
Very poor bog post. VERY poor.
Daniel,
Explain to my why it is poor… Don’t just abuse. Justify yourself.
All I can think of is his wife and children.
There likely will be some talk of the accident perhaps affecting how drivers approach their business. Will they be less cavalier about racing contact, and so on. Personally, I expect the greatest impact will be on the wives and other intimate loved ones. I imagine each racer’s mate must spend half her life telling herself that everything will be OK and that no harm will come to her husband. I expect this tragic event will make life tougher for them in many ways that I cannot fully appreciate.
Do you think we’ll ever see enclosed canopies? Seems like it’d be a safe option all around, plus more aerodynamic.
Racing is always dangerous, but surely the idea of 34 odd cars on a small oval track had to ring alarm bells somewhere. Heck, put forty cars on an F1 track and you’d see accidents too.
“We all know this is part of the sport,” said Oriol Servia in Las Vegas. “Cars are getting safer, ”
Those cars were basically 2003 vintage, hard to believe they were as safe as they should be.
I believe Indy cars are just as safe as F1 cars. No one can predict nor offer protection for every crash scenario. It is my understanding that the top of the cockpit came in contact with the catch fence. It may be time to re-evaluate how catch fences are constructed. This could just as easily happened on a street course. Imagine Webber sliding across the catch fencing in similar manner at Valencia. Improvements are born from each tragedy, but this does not make the loss any easier on family, teammates, friends and fans. Now is not the time to cast irrational words but to stop and look at how to improve safety and evaluate the tracks that Indy car compete at.
Very sad. Dan RIP.
Did the roll hoop fail in the catch fencing as the car flew through the air ? If so I would guess that is not how the roll hoop is tested. If the catch fencing is to remain of the same design (post fence post) acting like a car cheese grater at 200mph then the cars should have driver canopies – we have seen some very lucky escapes in recent times with cars in the catch fencing – I would think without a closed cockpit we would have said condolences for McNish – time for new design I think.
Daniel, you comment doesn´t make much sense, I´m afraid. You are talking about the enclosed wheels as something the IndyCar League are planning for next year, that really has nothing to do with the fact that he did indeed got airborne and crashed into the barrier. The car was – I´ve heard somewhere – ripped in half and he succumbed to the injuries. I don´t see how Joe´s post can be perceived different…
Joe, why do you accept posts from people like Daniel?
Anyone who uses the word joke in a post about an accident such as Dan Wheldon’s… Well, it defies me.
There was nothing wrong with your blog. But of course as we have seen recently, so many smart people out there know so much better than you…
I applaud your patience and tolerance.
David Tremayne
Seems to me that the 34 cars on the short track is just too much at those speeds – it would be a non-stop traffic jam the whole race through.
And, I almost don’t want to mention it, but it does make the $5m challenge seem a bit sick now doesn’t it.
Hi Joe,
My issue is that you say this
[quote]The safety engineers have done so many brilliant things in the last 15 years that there are even a few misguided folk who believe that danger can be designed out of the sport. That is naive because when racing cars go out of control, no-one controls trajectories, no-one can predict the interplay between cars and parts as they bounce around.[/quote]
as if to say that there was nothing that could be done to have prevented this accident when it’s entirely possible that if we’d had the 2012 cars racing then all we would have seen was a NASCAR style accident where the cars tend to bounce off each other on the track rather than being chucked up into the fence which just ends up ripping the cars up. The impact subsequent to the accident was pretty much unsurvivable, but could the impact against the fence and wall have been prevented? Dan went into the wall/fence because he rode up on someone’s wheel, if the wheel had been enclosed then it’s entirely likely that he never would have flown, would have had a chance to slow down due to having wheels on the ground and any subsequent impact would have been lessened.
Of course that’s all guesswork, if the wheels were enclosed then maybe the accident would have developed such that more people were killed and not just poor Dan, we don’t know, but is it not reasonable to think that perhaps enclosing the wheels would have made the accident a lot less serious due to the decreased likelihood of cars flying?
Apologies if my post came across as abusive, I had merely come across your blog when someone tried to use it as proof that we needn’t improve safety. Phrases like “They knew the risks” and “They weren’t forced to drive were they?” were used to somehow justify the fact that open wheel open cockpit racing is perhaps not as safe as it could be. I transferred my anger at these statements onto your blog and that was uncalled for.
Thanks for approving my comment and allowing the discussion to flow
Daniel
Daniel,
Now is not the moment to get into this. I think we should mourn Dan and then let the experts do their thing. We cannot comment on things until we know more.
The thing that struck me watching the coverage last night in the aftermath of the accident was the thoughts of the other drivers.
Understandably noone spoke on TV immediately afterwards, but 30 minutes or so after the accident there was a steady stream of interviews. Dario Franchitti in particular suggested that a big accident at that track was almost inevitable, and having watched the race live I can only agree.
The issue wasnt the number of cars on the track, or the relative inexperience of some of the drivers, but simply the track itself. Drivers never have to lift through a lap there, and can take almost any line on the banking. This may make for spectacular racing in NASCAR or other closed-cockpit series, but in Indycar it was just plain scary to be watching.
On lap 7 or 8 there was a near-miss between 2 of the regular drivers when they touched wheels. Luckily both kept control of their cars, however as they raced side by side, inches behind them another 3 cars were side by side. Behind those another 3. Noone would have any time to react if a driver ahead lost control. The commentators had barely finished talking over the replays of this when the big accident came, starting from a not dissimilar incident.
On another day, on another track 2 cars could touch, 1 would go towards the barrier and there would be room for other drivers to avoid them. It happens in every oval race. In the Indy 500 for example most of the cars spend most of the race single file. At Las Vegas the field was more tightly grouped at the time of the accident than it had been over the start line. Cars were 3 or 4 wide from the very first lap.
Davey Hamilton may not be the highest profile driver that started the race, but he spoke the most sense of those I heard afterwards. Those running Indycar would do well to listen to him, and the other drivers. Almost everything about this race was poorly thought out from the start.
David Tremayne,
I’m not quite sure why the word joke has angered you so. I clearly did not aim it at Dan Wheldon. What happened is a tragedy and should in no way be laudged at or joked about. I merely disagreed with Joe’s take on things and voiced my opinion.
If Joe were to merely take submissions from people who agreed with him all the time then that would make having a comments section rather pointless. I for one applaud Joe’s willingness to engage in a dialogue with people on here. If I am wrong then at least Joe has given me the freedom to express my opinion and be wrong in public
Daniel
I think Joe’s piece already highlights that whilst open-wheel racing is dangerous (probably alongside motorbikes), with so many variables of trajectory, speed, secondary impacts and so on, it would be impossible to factor in every risk. These young men (and a few women) know they are risking their lives, they are rewarded handsomely and we the fans respect their abilities and bravery.
In this particular instance, I agree with those responses which think this was an accident waiting to happen. Did the organisers factor in the number of cars travelling at high speed in a confined space? Only they can answer.
Joe, thanks again for a thoughtful piece offering insight into an avoidable tragedy.
Thanks for giving people the opportunity to add their comments and reflections.
Whilst I understand David T’s sentiment, I applaud your tolerance in allowing people such as Daniel to express their ignorance in such an offensive and disrespectful manner.
However, I don’t understand his comments at all and so will disregard them; as will probably everyone else on the sad day for Motorsports.
Bringing up the examples of Vettel and Henry Surtees are not relevant to this discussion, they weren’t racing in the series considered to be the top echelon of the sport. The top echelon has to lead the way in every facet of racing, be it skill, speed, technology or safety. I get that you’re trying to call for some balance in how we think about motorsport and that danger can never be completely removed, I still get the feeling that IndyCar isn’t as safety conscious as it should be. F1 has made great strides in safety in the last 15 years, and IndyCar hasn’t kept up, for one reason or another.
Abhijeet,
You have missed the point.
Thank you Joe for this post. Accidents like this really do wake us from our human habit of thinking it won’t happen to us, it won’t happen in our time, etc.
I was watching live yesterday and It was really horrble to see the wreakage caused. Only a few laps earlier Tagliani was racing another car really close, it could have easily happened then.
We can only hope people learn from this event (for a while), and do try to do as much as can be done to avoid such things from happening
Rest in Peace Dan Wheldon, my thoughts are with his family and friends to cope with the horror of it.
Joe, it seems to me that this “comments” section has turned into more of a “forum” than anything else.
Stepehn I assume you mean David Tremayne? not me.
It is easy to let emotions to run out of check when someone dies. Jumping to answers and blame pointing does not make it any easier.
I to am guilty of the above.
It’s part of the sports. And it doesn’t mean we shall now reduce the danger.
It’s part of the sports. And it doesn’t mean we shall not reduce the danger.
I came here to read (and appreciate) Joe’s thoughts and wisdom as we all mourn Dan Wheldon’s tragic accident. I can’t help but wonder at the gall of someone who would choose this place to introduce us to his own bumptious commentary at a moment such as this. R.I.P. Dan Wheldon.
Nice post, Joe, thanks. Spot on.
My thoughts are with the Weldon family today, and with the entire Indycar community.
I think its natural to look for blame when something like this happens. However, I think this is an unfortunate racing incident. Some times bad things happen. Look at Robert Kubica: a horrendously violent high impact crash in Montreal & I think he sat out for a week, in a rally car, with far less speed & power… well, the final result remains to be seen. For another example, look up the death of Greg Moore – single car oval accident.
My point is yes, there could have been less drivers on the grid & maybe the track is not ideal for these cars, but to call the accident avoidable is not right. It was an accident, a terrible accident. Indycar will learn from it & will become safer in the long run.
An Indycar chassis is slightly safer than an F1 car. They pass the same crash tests, including the rollover structure. However, Dallara added an extra carbon element to enhance the roll hoop beyond FIA regulations a few years ago. When the FIA increased the side impact test, Indycar mandated the addition of Zylon panels to raise the car to meet current standards. Furthermore, F1 teams try to make their cars as light as possible – just able to pass the crash tests, often at the 2nd or 3rd attempt. The Indycar weighs 50% more, and much of this goes into structural strength of the chassis. Indycar added crash data loggers to aid research into crash safety, and F1 adopted these shortly after. Indycar also provided crash test cars and funding to the University of Michigan, which led to the development of the SAFER barrier – a spring loaded wall which replaced the solid concrete previously used on ovals.
In any given impact, I would rather be in an Indycar than an F1 car. It is the nature of oval racing that high speed crashes are much more likely, making the sport more dangerous than F1.
It is a tribute to the safety of the current cars that only one driver was seriously hurt in yesterday’s accident.
Lee,
I have no idea how one can say such a thing.
I have a question Joe. Watching the film of the tragedy, I saw several cars burst into flames on impact – some with the wall bit, if I’m not mistaken, at least one where cars hit each other.
What I’d like to understand better is why this is. I get that a concrete wall is different to a tyre wall, and that the impact speeds are higher. I also have some knowledge that F1 cars have some sort of foam technology inside the gas tank to minimise leaks. Is the same technology used in Indycars and if yes, why so many fires?
Thanks
Ross in Bali
> joesaward
>
> Daniel,
>
> Explain to my why it is poor… Don’t just abuse. Justify yourself.
****
> joesaward
>
> Lee,
>
> I have no idea how one can say such a thing.
Joe,
I appreciate your challenge to Daniel. I should think the same spirit would apply to your reply to Lee.
I am not sufficiently knowledgeable to evaluate the veracity of Lee’s comments, so I am not saying he’s correct or incorrect. However, he did support his conclusion with what may be facts. I have no clue as to the basis of your challenge to what he said. Can you elaborate?
p.s. My request is simply for information on the specific issue he addressed. I do not wish to participate in a tribal contest that pits F1 vs. IndyCar over the issue of which series cares most about their drivers. We can find points of serious criticism for each series by referring to their current and ongoing behavior. However, I will not go further down that road at this time as it seems inappropriate to the black day that has touched us all.
Ross in Bali, I think the fires you were seeing were oil fires. All racing cars have a flexible rubber fuel cell, and it is, to my knowledge, unheard of for one of these to break open. In a large impact, it is possible for either oil or fuel lines to be ruptured, and for a small amount of fluid to catch fire. When you see a large flash it is normally because the oil tank (situated between the engine and gearbox) has been broken. Indycar fuel (Ethanol) doesn’t look like that when it burns.
We do seem to have seen a lot of fires in IndyCar this year. Simona DaSilvestra suffered burns to her hands at Indy, and Pippa Mann had quite bad burns to her little finger yesterday. I wonder if it is possible to contain the oil in a bag similar to the fuel cell.
Maybe I have missed the point, but this is IndyCar’s 6th fatality since ’96. If F1 had such a record after the events of ’94, there would be massive outrage.
“Dan went into the wall/fence because he rode up on someone’s wheel, if the wheel had been enclosed then it’s entirely likely that he never would have flown, would have had a chance to slow down due to having wheels on the ground and any subsequent impact would have been lessened.”
“Of course that’s all guesswork…
…but is it not reasonable to think that perhaps enclosing the wheels would have made the accident a lot less serious due to the decreased likelihood of cars flying?”
Daniel, has anyone ever told you that you have quite the skill for pointing out the obvious? Bravo!
Lee,
All in all, I agree with your recent comment about the fires.
However, I believe they use a mix of 2% gasoline and 98% ethanol, with the gasoline in the mix to make any flames easier for rescue crews to see and extinguish.
I don’t know if this means anything concerning the flames we recently saw.