Is there interest in doing a final Kyoto 400? I missed it this year, because of big life changes, and I'm still going through some, but I will have time to have one last Kyoto 400 on Saturday, November 7th at 16:00 UTC.
Qualification would take place the same time the previous Saturday at the same time (and the time of record would be a four lap average following a warm-up lap. Two attempts would be permitted, but only the final attempt would be counted.
Reply if interested. There will not be a poll posted for this.
Thanks for doing what you did, Justin. Thank you for being such a great person, and thank you for the giving that you did even after having passed away.
The racing community aches, but we will move forward as you would have wanted us to.
(I posed similarly elsewhere, but didn't want to be the first one on here)
IndyCar oval racing is different than what it was prior to 2012, but it's certainly more dangerous than what it was prior to the aero kits.
Basically, it boils down to IMS owning the series and IMS not wanting speeds to be higher than at IMS at other tracks (like Fontana for example). For this reason they have mandated certain higher down force kit components at places outside of IMS.
It's a shame really.
Reguardless, I don't think that particularly contributed to this incident, although it may have helped avoid it. I blame the amount of single car spins on lack of practice time at Pocono with the new kits. They only had two practice sessions for a total of three hours.
From the start of the race everybody was struggling to add down force or remove it, because they were not sure where it needed to be until halfway through the race. Typically, the teams have a really good idea of where the down force levels need to be at an oval unless the conditions have changed. This time, the conditions hadn't changed much if any.
Multiple grooves makes three and four wide racing - that is where the issues happen. Ask Sato and Power if they thought three wide was safe - they had nowhere to go. Drivers will fill the available space. If there is space for three or four cars then it is filled, reducing the speed at the front and making a bigger draft for those that follow; aka pack racing.
I think you're confusing grooves and track width. A two groove raceway could be as wide as Fontana so there is plenty of tarmac, just not "raceable" tarmac.
It's not simply the track that dictates the grooves; it's also the cars, principally though the amount of downforce.
I was replacing track width with groves, but I don't think the groves mattered much. If anything it was good that all of the real estate available in the corners was able to be raced on, because that allowed the cars to remain as they were on the straight without needing to file down into the corners (this is more likely to cause a crash in my opinion than actually racing side-by-side.
Regardless, everybody fought to be directly behind the car that was in front of them, even if there were two cars following one.
I agree with what you said; downforce should be reduced. However,I liked the pack racing to a degree. If the pack could be thinned out I would greatly enjoy the racing, and I would feel comfortable with the safety. Let's make it harder to keep up with the pack, but let's not get rid of it. Let's make them lift more in the corners and make cornering matter a little more.
Pack racing is a concern at those speeds, Rappa makes a good point about the spotters. If they were that quick but only had one or two grooves to run in then that's much easier.
A smidgen less downforce, sufficient to make the drivers a factor in lap time would help reduce the chances of pack running.
Also, can anyone explain why there is still grass on speedways and superspeedways?
Not so much a concern at those speeds, but in an open cock-pit at these speeds.
I think the multiple groves makes it safer because it gives competitors more room to move around to avoid an incident once it has started. A less wide race track would be more conducive for big pile-ups with multiple cars well behind the incident and, thus, at a much greater difference in speed.
Also, the grass is not at all needed, but all of the tracks (or basically all of the tracks) are owned by NASCAR (International Speedway Corporation, which was founded by the founder of NASCAR, and owned by the France family still). NASCAR wants the aesthetic appeal, and IndyCar barely turns a profit for these tracks, so their concerns are hardly noted at all.
IndyCar is just happy to be allowed to race on these ovals, so their safety concerns would lead to a cancelation of all future races at that venue rather than changes being made by the track.
If IndyCar would become more popular, this would change, but until then, nothing will.
For those poor souls who missed it, or those of you like me who enjoy watching it again (it was that exciting), IndyCar uploaded the full race to YouTube: