In
the wake of the tragic St. Louis race, the NHRA recently implemented
some rules changes designed, one can assume, to make the Fuel categories
safer.
As a competitor, obviously I want racing to be as safe as it possibly
can be and I've always made the extra effort with my own safety
equipment to give myself the best possible protection against a
fire or an accident.
It's important to support the NHRA as much as possible when they
come up with regulations and rules designed to enhance safety. Sometimes,
though, it's very hard to agree with their decisions, including
this one.
Part of the new rules that were announced this past week will include
reducing Nitro percentage from 90 to 85 percent. One can only assume
that this is designed to slow the cars down, a decision that I personally
strongly oppose. I don't believe speed was the cause of Darrell's
accident because it was only at 320 mph. in fact, I had the same
part fail once in Dallas in 1992 at half-track at the time running,
I believe, 240-something mph.
 |
| Almost everyone I've talked to this
week agrees that a much more effective change would be to simply
take away downforce from the Top Fuel Dragsters. |
The issue is downforce - in particular the design of the Top Fuel
Dragster. Almost everyone I've talked to this week agrees that a
much more effective change would be to simply take away downforce
from the Top Fuel Dragsters. The cars would automatically slow down
and the load on the tire would be reduced. I hope that when I get
to Denver someone from NHRA will explain to me why this decision
has not been taken. I'm sure they have a good reason. I can't wait
to hear what it is.
As Don Prudhomme said in a teleconference last week, we're basically
running race cars that were designed 20 or 30 years ago (a chassis
made out of 4130 chromoly tubing). I agree with Don that the advanced
technology that is commonplace in open-wheel racing (IRL, CART,
Formula 1) should possibly have a place in our sport. A carbon monocoque
chassis or tub in both a Funny Car and a Dragster would no doubt
make the car quite a bit safer.
That there would be a learning curve involved in getting these cars
to perform consistently to me is a minor issue.
My teammate Gary Scelzi has said many times his reason for switching
from Top Fuel to Funny Car was safety. You only have to look back
10 or 15 years at the accidents that have occurred to understand
the safety record of Funny Cars versus Dragsters. I'm not saying
that funny Cars are 100 percent safe because, after all, we're going
300 mph with the engine in front of us.
Back in the old days the opposite was true, but thanks to the advances
in technology implemented by the NHRA, the danger posed by fires
is greatly reduced. Funny Cars are now considered considerably safer
than Dragsters. The part that initially failed on Darrell's car
has failed on mine about eight times in my career. Knock on wood,
but never did that result in a
crash. It looks like it is a problem that is specific to Top Fuel
Dragsters. If the Dragsters have a problem with safety I find it
completely unfair to penalize Funny Cars with performance-limiting
rules when they seem fine as they are.
Unfortunately, politics might be at play here because it's possible
then that Funny Cars might be able to run faster than the Dragsters
and I don't think the powers that be at the NHRA would be very willing
to let that happen. It's sad that politics so often get in the way
of common sense and good racing.
The bottom line, though, is that Top Fuel Dragsters depend on the
rear wing for stability way too much. If the wing comes off a Dragster
there's a 99 percent chance it's going to crash. To me that's a
pretty scary thought. Conversely, when the spoiler breaks on a Fuel
Funny Car the ride can get a little hairy, but a good driver should
be able to not crash.
When our Matco Tools car ran what at the time was the fastest-ever
speed at Indy in 2001, at 325 miles an hour, the spoiler actually
broke at about 800 feet. The car made a sudden left turn, but we
were able to correct and keep our foot down for what was the first
run ever over 325 mph. On two or three more occasions that year,
we had spill plates break in half and rip off, greatly unloading
one side of the car, but we didn't crash. It's obvious that the
cars that depend too much on downforce for stability can be in big
trouble when they suddenly lose that downforce, and the cars that
don't depend on downforce as much are still somewhat controllable
when downforce is suddenly taken away.
 |
| Darrell Russell was a tremendous
person and his death is a big loss to the sport and for many
of us personally. I think about him every day and I think about
his family and the pain that they are going through. The sport
will carry on as it always does, but it can never forget Darrell
Russell. |
In the past, many teams have tried to develop different forms of
ground effects that would create downforce. In the Funny Car class
the NHRA has written rules outlawing the use of any sort of underbody
ground effects. Why, I don't know. It's possible that a Dragster
utilizing ground effects for downforce would most likely not need
to depend on the rear wing so much.
Common sense would tell you that such a situation might possibly
be safer, although I'm not an engineer and therefore can't give
a definitive opinion. I do know that many crew chiefs feel that
Top Fuel Dragsters rely way too much on the rear wing and many have
suggested to me personally that a good idea would be to reduce the
amount of downforce created by the rear wing on the Dragster. Instead
of reducing Nitro percentage maybe a smaller wing would be a better
place to start.
I can only ask the engineers who are part of the task force to research
every possible aspect of what can be done to help make this sport
safer.
I am glad to see NHRA establish the task force to address issues
of safety. I was under the assumption that from the mid-'90s the
PRO had a tech committee that worked hand in hand with the NHRA
on issues such as safety, whether it pertained to technology on
the race cars or the race tracks themselves. I don't know what happened
to the committee, but the fact that they now have a task force is
good news.
I find it somewhat telling that the task force specifically does
not have any representation from drivers, because in the release
it said it was made up of NHRA officials, crew chiefs and car owners.
The drivers are the ones who take all the risks and therefore they
should have an equal opportunity in discussing future rules and
regulations.
Darrell Russell was a tremendous person and his death is a big loss
to the sport and for many of us personally. I think about him every
day and I think about his family and the pain that they are going
through. The sport will carry on as it always does, but it can never
forget Darrell Russell.
|
