shorter top fuel race distance?

[Marshall Grice]

http://www.nhra.com/content/news/30355.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This has to be a repost, but I must have missed it. Looks like the NHRA is a little suprised by Kalitta's crash.

[John Coffey]

Since a Top Fuel dragster covers the last 320' in about .65 seconds I don't understand how this is going to add any safety. Sounds like a knee jerk reaction to a problem that needs a lot more thought. All its going to do is put a lot of asterisks in the record books for 2008. The champs get to stand on the podium and say, "I'm the champion for the 2008 NHRA 'Coming Up Short' season!"

[Bob Beamesderfer]

Announced last week for Top Fuel and Funny Cars. As JC said, it's pointless.

[Marshall Grice]

apparently the reasoning is that the teams have data saying that most engine failures occur after the 1000' mark. They're taking the engine failure as the somewhat obvious root cause of the crash. So until the investigation can determine if this type of complete engine failure (not just a head poping off or a supercharger poping off) or the effects (melted chutes, lack of downforce after body loss, etc) can be prevented they're trying to reduce the possiblity of this type of engine failure happening again.

[Casey Brier]

I vote they keep it a 1/4 miles race. it's just right. that’s the way its been since the start, and the 1320 should stay at 1320. no one says "whats that thing do in the 1,000". 0-60 and 1/4 miles times, It's American.

I also think they should enforce rules to make the engines more reliable. if this means bringing the Nitro content way down, then fine. they could also lower boost a bit. I am sure there are many way to make the engines not explode after the 1,000 foot mark. heck they pretty much do it now. they’re right on the edge, so de-tune then just a little and poof, your now just UNDER the limit.

then of course deploy some better sand traps, once again this weekend they had an alcohol funny car with a chute failure skip right over the cute little sand trap they had. luckily this track had a nice grass field after the sand, but why oh why was the damn grass there?! why not just make the sand pit longer... they had the room.

Maybe they should make a rule that says the front tires need to be a bit wider so the front brakes have more rubber to help stop the car...... now that I think about it, do they even have front brakes? well if not, put some front bakes on and make the front tires a bit wider. make it so the car does a half way decent job of slowing its self with no body. (I am sure there is more to this then I see or else it would be done already, but point being if they find a way to get the braking systems to work better, they wont HAVE to rely on the chutes as much and this could help)

better brakes, catch nets, longer sand traps, better chutes, more reliable engines, they will all play key i making this sport safer, but making it a 1,000 foot race is just not right, nor will it solve a run away car. (yes it might help with engine failure, but it still will not help in a runaway situation)

just my .02

[John Coffey]

At the speeds over 100mph sand traps are ineffective. Vehicles just skip across them and adding rows or furrows makes the skipping last longer. FIA determined this way back in 1995 and has been working with track owners to replace sand traps with pavement. This probably isn't the right solution for NHRA, but we can all see that sand traps are not working either.

Boost and fuel limits sound like the most effective solutions.

[Casey Brier]

it would cost a fortune, but maybe some uphill shutdowns are in order. like Vegas. anyone ever been there, the shut down is ridiculously long AND uphill.

Having gravity help is one of the only ways to have the car slow down and NOT require any driver or mechanical intervention. No it wont stop a 300 MPH car, but it should get it down enough that the sand can do its job.

I don’t know, I am not the expert, but it seems that there are other ways to make this safer without making it a 1,000 foot race, though making the race shorter is the most cost effective and immediate actions. Adding the uphill to new tracks is easy enough to do, but rather impossible at tracks already built. It really would cost a fortune.