ChevyMan1972 Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 This just off the press over at NHRA, I think it's great Idea! http://www.nhra.com/content/news/30355.htm Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2highpsi Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Why not lengthen the run offs instead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChevyMan1972 Posted July 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Some of the shorter tracks can't because they dont have enough land to extend. I am sure the insurance costs have some to do with it anyway. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 that sucks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2highpsi Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Makes sence. Safety first, absolutely. It's going to be weird though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Removed Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 I heard this in rumorville about a month ago... They'll figure out how to keep 'm over 300 mph , even at 1000'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaddyBuiltRacing Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Hmm....not sure how I feel about this. From a safety standpoint it makes sense, but from a fan standpoint it sucks, oh well guess its makes those first 60 feet even more important and the r/t just got a whole hell of a lot more interesting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1647545489 Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 meh I'm not a fan. I don't think it would have helped Scott in his case. If his engine had blown at 1000 ft, he still would have been going almost 300 mph and been going way to fast into the kitty litter. It was the lack of a blossomed chute and probably being knocked unconscience that killed him. I think they need to focus on the parachutes and a better netting system at the end of the track. If they can safely catch fighter jets on a aircraft carrier deck, they can catch a car at the end of a track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Ive always enjoyed 1000ft races. It better for the guys who can hit the lights, and speeds dont so outragous that most fast cars can stop with even 1 chute if theres a failure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 meh I'm not a fan. I don't think it would have helped Scott in his case. If his engine had blown at 1000 ft, he still would have been going almost 300 mph and been going way to fast into the kitty litter. It was the lack of a blossomed chute and probably being knocked unconscience that killed him. I think they need to focus on the parachutes and a better netting system at the end of the track. If they can safely catch fighter jets on a aircraft carrier deck, they can catch a car at the end of a track. They dont catch the jets... if the jet misses, they take back off. Thats why they go into full after burner just before touch down. If the jet crashes... well i dont know what they do... but i dont think they have any operational netting right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cordell Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Why can't the NHRA require these cars to run for a short period of time after the race is over? This would force the teams into building them a little less on edge, and make them substantialy less likly to blow up during the race. Just a thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Why can't the NHRA require these cars to run for a short period of time after the race is over? This would force the teams into building them a little less on edge, and make them substantialy less likly to blow up during the race. Just a thought. Because every pass, assuming the engine doesnt blow, costs about $5,000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1647545489 Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 http://i25.tinypic.com/1z1r6nn.jpg Emergency Barricade Net on the Eisenhower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/026937.jpg Emergency Barricade Net on the Eisenhower picture fails but i'll take your word for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1647545489 Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 picture fails but i'll take your word for it. yeah it doesn't like being linked I suppose. I fixed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Removed Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 They dont catch the jets... if the jet misses, they take back off. Thats why they go into full after burner just before touch down. If the jet crashes... well i dont know what they do... but i dont think they have any operational netting right now. they have big nets! (edit:never mind someone posted pics of one) Jim Head is apparently looking at some aircraft stopping systems that show promise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorne Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 I heard this in rumorville about a month ago... They'll figure out how to keep 'm over 300 mph , even at 1000'. The new Subaru Funny car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Removed Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 The new Subaru Funny car. :gtfo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorne Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Shit who cares about drive train loss when you can have AWD MT's tehehehehe I'm joking btw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 they have big nets! (edit:never mind someone posted pics of one) Jim Head is apparently looking at some aircraft stopping systems that show promise. Yea but doesnt part of the reason the nets work is becasue it can spread all that momentum out across the front crossection of the aircraft? A top fueler or funny car has a hell of a lot less front area to absorb that energy... it might just blow right through the net completely. Edit, you may also see some serious injury with a fixed mounted net too... like the same thing that happend to Dale Earnheart... where the brain actully impacts the front of the skull and destroys massive amounts of brain tissue. Those nets on the carrier are on a pulley system with steam rams arent they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mopar Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 i know its safer for them to do so......but i've always wanted to see them push those cars. i think a 3sec 1/4 would be possible if they still ran 100% nitromethane like they used to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Removed Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Edit, you may also see some serious injury with a fixed mounted net too... like the same thing that happend to Dale Earnheart... where the brain actully impacts the front of the skull and destroys massive amounts of brain tissue. Those nets on the carrier are on a pulley system with steam rams arent they? that would be the cable thingy that grabs them!. i think the nets are made like really big rubber bands and im sure they well remake the front of the cars tofor the net! but im thinking the cable system with hook hanging off the bottom of the car would be safer! not sure what they are looking into tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
criitter7 Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 that would be the cable thingy that grabs them!. i think the nets are made like really big rubber bands and im sure they well remake the front of the cars tofor the net! but im thinking the cable system with hook hanging off the bottom of the car would be safer! not sure what they are looking into tho im sure running over a cable at 300 mph would be an awsome idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Removed Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 im sure running over a cable at 300 mph would be an awsome idea jets do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 jets do it Theyre not creating 2000lbs of downforce either I jet is comming down very slowly based on its mass... where as a dragster has effectively doubled its mass. Plus, a jet is only going like 160knots when it lands.. not 320mph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.