Summit Point DE Fatality - Page 3

JST · 07-02-2014, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinecone

Hyper Drive participants do get a short classroom session.

And most only do one session, so never get fast enough to be a problem.

I don't see Turn 7, there is a barrier off to the right to keep cars from ended up in the paddock. And I can't see that he could get enough speed towards the left to cause that much damage. Turn 7 is a quite slow speed corner, that most early apex leading to the front end heading to off track. But I guess that is how it happened.

No, I think what he did was boot it coming out of the corner and break the rear end loose (drifting, yo), and then spun so that the passenger side hit the trees on the inside of the track.

Pinecone · 07-03-2014, 07:57 AM

Yes, I read the comment by the witness on Jalopnik.

But that corner is not that fast, and the energy vector is towards to the other side of the track. Hard to see how there was enough speed to the inside of the turn to cause that much damage.

Hm, another GM recall on deficient side impact protection?

Theo · 07-11-2014, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinecone

Hm, another GM recall on deficient side impact protection?

Holden you mean?

Pinecone · 07-13-2014, 03:04 PM

Still GM, just GM of Australia.

Sharp11 · 07-14-2014, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinecone

Yes, I read the comment by the witness on Jalopnik.

But that corner is not that fast, and the energy vector is towards to the other side of the track. Hard to see how there was enough speed to the inside of the turn to cause that much damage.

Hm, another GM recall on deficient side impact protection?

A lot of people said that about the infamous Dale Earnhardt crash - physics is funny that way ...

*clyde* · 07-14-2014, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharp11

A lot of people said that about the infamous Dale Earnhardt crash - physics is funny that way ...

That's not my recollection. What I remember is a lot of people saying the Earnhardt crash we all saw a million times from a million angles didn't look hard enough to cause the injuries it caused.

Terry is saying that he is having difficulty reconciling the amount or type of damage sustained by a vehicle in a crash he did not witness with what he knows about the location of the crash and the details he has hear.

They are two different things without much connection.

Pinecone · 07-16-2014, 11:18 AM

The Earnhardt crash also had the cumulative effect of a number of crashes over the years on his body.

Not a huge impact, but the angle and possible pre-existing neck damage all came together.

And Clyde yes, massive damage to the car with a spin to the INSIDE of the turn. Nor normal.

Sharp11 · 07-17-2014, 01:13 AM

I disagree, wrt the Earnhardt crash, there was enough force from a seemingly relatively benign (as far as NASCAR crashes go) impact, to kill him. The "connection" in the OP is there was enough force in a seemingly relatively benign throttle induced spin to cause massive damage and a fatality.

Yes, the car in the picture (in this thread) seems to have sustained a lot more damage than would seem possible given the report, but since none of us were there and we don't know exactly what happened, Terry's speculation is just that, speculation. Whether it was because of a "just right" point of impact, or an angle where the car has a structural weakness, or the effects of the velocity of the car whipping around, anything is possible ... as seems to have been the case.

It's also possible (and probably likely) witnesses, as they often do, got it wrong.

bren · 07-17-2014, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharp11

It's also possible (and probably likely) witnesses, as they often do, got it wrong.

Yeah, everyone was probably just turned around - or maybe they were standing on their heads - when they thought they saw it go off the inside of the track. Hah

JST · 07-17-2014, 08:24 AM

I appreciate Ed's point about the lack of witness credibility, and Pinecone's point about the corner. But the physics of it are pretty simple--post apex, about the only way to go off toward the *inside* of a track is to spin. Since GTOs aren't really known for having a lot of lift throttle oversteer, the most plausible explanation in my mind is that he booted it overenthusastically out of the corner, the back end got away, and he didn't know how to recover.

Since I wasn't there, that's obviously speculation. But it's the theory that fits the available evidence best.

07-03-2014, 07:57 AM	#22
Pinecone Carmudgeon Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Maryland Posts: 2,717	Yes, I read the comment by the witness on Jalopnik. But that corner is not that fast, and the energy vector is towards to the other side of the track. Hard to see how there was enough speed to the inside of the turn to cause that much damage. Hm, another GM recall on deficient side impact protection? __________________ Terry Carraway 2002 Topaz E46 M3 2000 Dakar M Roadster 1995 Alpine E36 M3 LTW 1990 Red/White Spec Racer

07-13-2014, 03:04 PM	#24
Pinecone Carmudgeon Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Maryland Posts: 2,717	Still GM, just GM of Australia. __________________ Terry Carraway 2002 Topaz E46 M3 2000 Dakar M Roadster 1995 Alpine E36 M3 LTW 1990 Red/White Spec Racer

07-16-2014, 11:18 AM	#27
Pinecone Carmudgeon Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Maryland Posts: 2,717	The Earnhardt crash also had the cumulative effect of a number of crashes over the years on his body. Not a huge impact, but the angle and possible pre-existing neck damage all came together. And Clyde yes, massive damage to the car with a spin to the INSIDE of the turn. Nor normal. __________________ Terry Carraway 2002 Topaz E46 M3 2000 Dakar M Roadster 1995 Alpine E36 M3 LTW 1990 Red/White Spec Racer

07-17-2014, 08:24 AM	#30
JST 195 Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 24,609	Summit Point DE Fatality I appreciate Ed's point about the lack of witness credibility, and Pinecone's point about the corner. But the physics of it are pretty simple--post apex, about the only way to go off toward the inside of a track is to spin. Since GTOs aren't really known for having a lot of lift throttle oversteer, the most plausible explanation in my mind is that he booted it overenthusastically out of the corner, the back end got away, and he didn't know how to recover. Since I wasn't there, that's obviously speculation. But it's the theory that fits the available evidence best.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pic of the race car at Summit Point	Nick M3	Car Talk	17	08-24-2006 10:18 PM
Summit Point, tomorrow….	Nick M3	Car Talk	27	06-25-2004 05:59 PM

07-17-2014, 01:13 AM	#28
Sharp11 Vicarious Twitterer Join Date: May 2005 Carmudgeonly Ride: 06 330 cic ZHP Location: CT Posts: 7,566	I disagree, wrt the Earnhardt crash, there was enough force from a seemingly relatively benign (as far as NASCAR crashes go) impact, to kill him. The "connection" in the OP is there was enough force in a seemingly relatively benign throttle induced spin to cause massive damage and a fatality. Yes, the car in the picture (in this thread) seems to have sustained a lot more damage than would seem possible given the report, but since none of us were there and we don't know exactly what happened, Terry's speculation is just that, speculation. Whether it was because of a "just right" point of impact, or an angle where the car has a structural weakness, or the effects of the velocity of the car whipping around, anything is possible ... as seems to have been the case. It's also possible (and probably likely) witnesses, as they often do, got it wrong.