The thing is Iowa is an oval and was probably the best race of the season. Infact the road courses where quite dull due to the dallara, at sonoma it could barely do the corners.

Quote from PMD9409 :

Also, you might want to read Johnson's POV again, because you keep jumping to conclusions of people/situations without comprehending them. Yes, Johnson said no more ovals, but he said with the tracks and cars at their current state. "I have never went 225mph in my life, and they average it". After changes that IndyCar should make, those cars would be no where near that. You need to comprehend something before criticizing it.

"I wouldn't run them on ovals. There's just no need to," said Johnson, whose five championships give him a bit more knowledge of racing than your average fan. "Those cars are fantastic for street circuits, for road courses. I hate, hate, hate that this tragedy took place. But hopefully they can learn from it and make those cars safer on ovals somehow ... Myself, I have a lot of friends that race in that series, and I'd just rather see them on street circuits and road courses. No more ovals."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nascar ... ong-on-?urn=nascar-wp4612

I didn't read anywhere in that article that JJ said "the cars currently doesn't belong on ovals" he said "IndyCar doesn't belong on ovals". Which is a complete blanket statement against oval IndyCar racing. Would he support IndyCar going to ovals if the cars are slower/safer/less downforce? Great... where is that stated in the article? Also if that was the case then what was the point of that article.

The current Dallara chassis is already obsolete. IndyCar's decision to get rid of the old car was made a long time ago before Dan died. "IndyCar in its current form is not safe on ovals". Duh? Isn't that why they are getting rid of the old Dallara? So what's the point of making those kinds of statements to begin with if the old chassis was intended to be scrapped anyway? Unless you want to see IndyCar just move completely away from ovals. Which is what I inferred.

It reads to me that JJ is calling for IndyCar to be road circuit only series. (he flat out stated that he feels that way anyway). That extreme reaction to Dan's death is unnecessary.

Quote from PMD9409 :

So you agree with us, cool, about time. Did you read Fernandez? Did you notice he said people were worried before the race as well? Or is he lying too and just saying that after the fact?

You really contradicted yourself posting that article, just saying.

I agree that the old Dallara is horrid for oval racing in terms of safety. I agree that if IndyCar was still using that old chassis they should stay away from ovals. I agree that oval pack racing should stop in IndyCar. Do I agree that IndyCar should always and unconditionally stay away from ovals? No. Do I think these things are going to be fixed with the new chassis? Yes. Which is why I do not agree with the blanket statement that "IndyCar should stay away from ovals". Since we're not discussing that old chassis (as there's no point since Vegas was its last race), and we're discussing the (theoretically) newer, better, and safer chassis, I disagree that IndyCar should stay away from ovals in general with their new car. Maybe Superspeedways still need to be off the schedule. Sure, but saying that "IndyCar doesn't belong on ovals" is too simplistic, and extreme of an attitude

Quote from PMD9409 :

Yeah it is called go off the ovals until you can build proper cars that have better specs for oval racing. If you can't prevent cars from going completely airborne (freakin Will power is close to 15 feet above the track) then sorry, you shouldn't be racing there.

Which is what they are doing... are we still talking about IndyCar with the old Dallara? What evidence is there that the new ICONIC chassis is going to be as or more unsafe as the old Dallara? So why shouldn't IndyCar run on ovals again?

Quote from Mustafur :

The thing is Iowa is an oval and was probably the best race of the season. Infact the road courses where quite dull due to the dallara, at sonoma it could barely do the corners.

I agree the race at Iowa was absolutely fantastic and Kentucky had such a great finish. In fact, the most boring races this season in IndyCar was at Baltimore, Sonoma, and Motegi Road. Yeah sure... the results mattered but the racing actually really sucked. There was so little passing since the massive old Dallara uses up so much track.

In fact, despite the horrid attendance, the IndyCar oval races has been some of the most exciting this season so I'm not sure where the whole "Indy is so much better on road courses" come from. Based on what I've seen the racing on the road has been fairly boring

Most the people saying this stuff have next to no knowledge about the new dallara nor Indy in general, but it's expected this crash was quite horrific.

Quote from lizardfolk :

"I wouldn't run them on ovals. There's just no need to," said Johnson, whose five championships give him a bit more knowledge of racing than your average fan. "Those cars are fantastic for street circuits, for road courses. I hate, hate, hate that this tragedy took place. But hopefully they can learn from it and make those cars safer on ovals somehow ... Myself, I have a lot of friends that race in that series, and I'd just rather see them on street circuits and road courses. No more ovals."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nascar ... ong-on-?urn=nascar-wp4612

I didn't read anywhere in that article that JJ said "the cars currently doesn't belong on ovals" he said "IndyCar doesn't belong on ovals". Which is a complete blanket statement against oval IndyCar racing. Would he support IndyCar going to ovals if the cars are slower/safer/less downforce? Great... where is that stated in the article? Also if that was the case then what was the point of that article.

The current Dallara chassis is already obsolete. IndyCar's decision to get rid of the old car was made a long time ago before Dan died. "IndyCar in its current form is not safe on ovals". Duh? Isn't that why they are getting rid of the old Dallara?

It reads to me that JJ is calling for IndyCar to be road circuit only series. (he flat out stated that he feels that way anyway). That extreme reaction to Dan's death is unnecessary.

Read the bold.

Quote :

I agree that the old Dallara is horrid for oval racing. Since we're not discussing that chassis (as there's no point since Vegas was its last race), and we're discussing the (theoretically) newer, better, and safer chassis, I disagree that IndyCar should stay away from ovals in general with their new car. Maybe Superspeedways still need to be off the schedule. Sure, but saying that "IndyCar doesn't belong on ovals" is too simplistic, and extreme of an attitude

Which is what they are doing... are we still talking about IndyCar with the old Dallara? What evidence is there that the new ICONIC chassis is going to be as or more unsafe as the old Dallara? So why shouldn't IndyCar run on ovals again?

I agree the race at Iowa was absolutely fantastic and Kentucky had such a great finish. In fact, the most boring races this season in IndyCar was at Baltimore, Sonoma, and Motegi Road. Yeah sure... the results mattered but the racing actually really sucked. There was so little passing since the massive old Dallara uses up so much track.

In fact, despite the horrid attendance, the IndyCar oval races has been some of the most exciting this season so I'm not sure where the whole "Indy is so much better on road courses" come from. Based on what I've seen the racing on the road has been fairly boring

1. New car was faster on the oval, due to aero upgrades.
2. The front end is completely open. To think it can't catch air is just being naive. Car's go easily airborne when hitting the side of another car. A rear bumper isn't enough, no matter how you look at it.
3. Kentucky wasn't at all that exciting until the final 15 laps.
4. Baltimore sucked because they had a retarded chicane right before the finish line.
5. There's nothing wrong with small ovals, the problem is that small ovals don't want to return. Iowa does, so keep them all you want. If another small oval can be found, woohoo. Then just get the final one to be Indy. The rest should be all road races until they can get a more proper car.

Quote from PMD9409 :

Read the bold.




1. New car was faster on the oval, due to aero upgrades.
2. The front end is completely open. To think it can't catch air is just being naive. Car's go easily airborne when hitting the side of another car. A rear bumper isn't enough, no matter how you look at it.
3. Kentucky wasn't at all that exciting until the final 15 laps.
4. Baltimore sucked because they had a retarded chicane right before the finish line.
5. There's nothing wrong with small ovals, the problem is that small ovals don't want to return. Iowa does, so keep them all you want. If another small oval can be found, woohoo. Then just get the final one to be Indy. The rest should be all road races until they can get a more proper car.

Speed can be easily fixed , as they can limit the boost pressure from the turbo.

And besides if they go ahead with this no rear wing, barely any tracks will be full throttle(especially Indy)

Quote from DeadWolfBones :

No, it doesn't.

More or less, I meant that could be how the wreck started, I think it was a red car up near the front who lost it like in that video.

Quote from Mustafur :

Speed can be easily fixed , as they can limit the boost pressure from the turbo.

And besides if they go ahead with this no rear wing, barely any tracks will be full throttle(especially Indy)

But those are contradicting points. You have the rear wing part correct (I'm guessing they'd use a spoiler?), but they want to increase the power. Reason is so they have to slow down (more) in the corners. If they go on with it, not only will it be somewhat safer (incidents on the straight still could be risky), but it should provide better racing.

Tracks like Texas, Atlanta, Las Vegas should pretty much never come back. Tracks like Kentucky, Kansas, Chicagoland, Fontana, and Michigan all have a chance because the banking is lower and with the decrease in downforce it could provide proper racing. The base pictures for the ICONIC car still show more work needs to be done before they can fully say "This car is much more safer on ovals". It's safer if you are backing into a wall, or getting hit from behind, but everything infront of the rear tires is still all exactly the same.

@Ray: You are talking about two completely different configurations of Vegas. Plus the guy who lost it last weekend wasn't on his own, there was help involved. Stewart's car snapped all on its own.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... ature=channel_video_title

- Charlie Kimball seems to think that this car is much safer. Lets hope so

Argubly Dan would of suvived had they used the iconic as instead of hitting tracts wheel and bouncing over the car he would of crumpled into it, probably cussing injury to Tracy as well but it may of stopped him flying over the car. Same applies to powers crash as well.

You could say that, but I couldn't fully agree with you. The car would still go airborne as he moreso hit the side of the car than the rear of the car ahead of him (can't believe I looked up the video to see that, told myself not to, oh well). Running into the side of the cam still has the small front end of the ICONIC car going up. And if the wheel to sidepod doesn't do it, then both front wheels colliding definitely will. It wouldn't have sent him in the projectory he went, so you could say it might save his life, but in the end the car would still be barrel rolling in mid air and no one can ever predict where it will end up.

The new car is a good start, but I still believe much more work needs to be done to the front of the car for safety reasons.

Quote from NSX_FReeDoM :

Am I the only one who finds all these racing drivers who are now saying "Vegas was a recipe for disaster" quite annoying?

I am sorry but if you think Vegas is such a dangerous track then why didn't you do something about it before? From what I have read, this track has been filled accidents over the years. Why wait til someone get killed to say it?!

+1

Quote :

But [Chris] Powell insisted that he was not told of any such concerns prior to the event.

"When drivers have concerns, I think 99 percent of the time those concerns are expressed to the sanctioning body," said Powell. "If those concerns were expressed in this instance, certainly it was not to me."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/95517

http://indiana.sbnation.com/ra ... that-indycar-should-leave

Quote :

"I don't think Jimmie Johnson knows what he's talking about. He's never drove one, and he's pretty stupid to make a statement like that. You could say the same about stock cars. I've drove both, and I've been hurt real bad in both."

Thank you Mario and AJ...

Quote from Bmxtwins :

More or less, I meant that could be how the wreck started, I think it was a red car up near the front who lost it like in that video.

The red car up front lost it because he made contact with another car.

The FIA announced today that they help IndyCar to analyse the accident. Also they want to help IndyCar to work on improving the safety standards and to optimise the ICONIC car.

This was published in the German media together with the announcment of Dan's furneal.

Quote from lizardfolk :

http://indiana.sbnation.com/ra ... that-indycar-should-leave



Thank you Mario and AJ...

+1 for Mario and AJ from me too

All those people doing armchair analysis of that whole thing, while not giving a shit about the series earlier than last week... Kinda makes me sick.

E: taken from here, amusing rant on Johnson's quote:

Quote :

I’ve read a lot of stupid stuff in the media regarding Vegas and the big wreck. One of the dumbest is from Jimmie Johnson saying IndyCar should stop racing on ovals. I sent you a picture of pack racing on a 1.5-mile oval at probably 40 mph. It’s horse racing. Accidents can happen when one jockey bumps another. I googled jockey deaths and lost track of how many have died while racing in the last 10 years. Maybe horses should only race on road courses.

Quote from TFalke55 :

The FIA announced today that they help IndyCar to analyse the accident. Also they want to help IndyCar to work on improving the safety standards and to optimise the ICONIC car.

This was published in the German media together with the announcment of Dan's furneal.

What does the FIA have to do with this anyway? As far as I know they're not sanctioning IndyCar or any other major American racing championship.

Quote from GreyBull [CHA] :

What does the FIA have to do with this anyway? As far as I know they're not sanctioning IndyCar or any other major American racing championship.

Perhaps they should be involved. No need for them to sanction or draw up rules, but why not share data and expertise on safety?

Agreed ^^^

I'm all for the FIA helping on the safety end if Indy Car officials invite them, but I rather like my Indy car rules with the exception of placing the tires around the car for them to stop between. I find that rather dangerous myself due to making the cars unable to change their pit entry angles. (under yellow flag conditions with a packed pit road.. Kentucky showed that it can be rather dangerous).

Even if they wanted to, the FIA couldn't just take over running the IICS. There's a little known rule that when a series is both an FIA member and in its home country, it does not have to abide by FIA rules.

Which is just as well frankly. I have this inane fear the FIA would **** up Indycar racing as we know it and make it F1-like.

Quote from GreyBull [CHA] :

What does the FIA have to do with this anyway? As far as I know they're not sanctioning IndyCar or any other major American racing championship.

IndyCar is not interested in being run by FIA, and FIA is not interetsed in running IndyCar. However they partner up to analyse what has happened and to work out stuff to increase IndyCars safety. And don't forget, that the majority of IndyCar events are part of the FIA calendar

DW77 chassis would be a nice name aswell.

Also, Jimmy Spencer (from NASCAR who doesn't know) chimes in on all of this.

http://nascar.speedtv.com/arti ... cer-how-we-in-nascar-cope

Quote :

Jimmy Spencer wrote:
I can’t close without expressing my disgust with the “ambulance chasers” who have come out this week. I’ve heard from so many different media outlets wanting to interview me about Dan’s death, but the problem I have with these requests is they’re coming from media outlets who do not cover racing the rest of the year. Where were these guys when IndyCar arrived in Las Vegas for their championship weekend? Where were they when something positive happened in the series during the course of the season? The practice of covering racing only when someone dies makes me sick. It shows disrespect for our sport, our fans, and most importantly, the ones we lost.

He's right about the media. I don't know how much you guys have seen it, but it's been all over here, and most of the time they can't get their facts straight. Makes it impossible to watch for true fans of racing.

The mainstream media stir for Wheldon's death was especially bad because many major news outlets were in Vegas for the Republican Debate.

They only picked up the story because they were nearby.

Quote from PMD9409 :

He's right about the media. I don't know how much you guys have seen it, but it's been all over here, and most of the time they can't get their facts straight. Makes it impossible to watch for true fans of racing.

Media attention on the mainstream channels passed relatively quickly, but likewise some of the papers here didn't get the facts quite right which has lead to a lot of misinformation and speculation by people who don't know about Indy Cars.

Also like DW77 as a name.

Quote from PMD9409 :

DW77 chassis would be a nice name aswell.

Nah... DW98 would be better IMO. DW77 sounds a bit macabre considering that he hasn't had any achievements or anything with that number... It was only the one he had for his last 2 races, that's all.

Big +1 to Jimmy Spencer anyway, although I'm yet to see a mention in mainstream medias over here(I was a bit surprised it didn't come yet, as Dana's death made it to some of the news in 2004. However it wasn't treated in a very respectuous fashion IIRC, they were a bit like "hang on everyone, have a look at this spectacular crash from the US; the guy died, scary eh?":really.