Safety

[GRNDP51]

Re: Safety

THANK YOU F1-69 I was waiting for someone to say races and 2012 in the same sentence without "will there be" in front of it. NCAR 2012 AWAITS!!!!

[Arctic Cat]

Re: Safety

It also seems apparent that there are problems with the rigging of a number of P-51s which ought to be reviewed, but that is a separate matter from the course itself.

And this is based on what bit of fact? Are you saying that several P51's are rigged improperly? I agree that ALL planes hould go through a rigourous tech inspection, but your statment makes it sound like there are planes flying with known safety issues, which is not the case.

[Coyote Chris]

Re: Safety

Pete, while I agree with you that mechanical failures can be studied and recommendations made, mechanisms will fail and people are going to make mistakes, be it on a space craft or in a T-6. If someone wants to prize fight and then sue his opponent for a concussion, I have no sympathy for him. If I die cause an airplane hits me at OShkosh or Reno or any airshow, I have left instructions to my wife to NOT sue....I put myself in harm's way. Lawyers kill sports, not accidents. Shakespere was right on his reccommendations as to what to do with lawyers....

Cantaloupe kill more people than air racing....

[AirDOGGe]

Re: Safety

The rigging is fine. The problem is that the airframes were never originally designed nor engineered to go this fast. Some re-thinking of 60+ year old aircraft control surfaces may be needed here.

I wonder if small dampers on the problem tabs, such as those used as steering dampers to prevent wheel shimmy would work? The tabs would still be free to move at a moderate speed and be positioned by the pilot as needed, but restricted from moving at a fast velocity as would occur from aerodynamic flutter.

True enough, but it would seem prudent to move the pylons so that the aircraft are in a straight and level attitude going past the grandstands.

I have considered that, but a study of an overhead view of the site and race course tells me there's not enough room to do so. Homes have taken over the land that would have been needed to extend the main straight further to the left, as seen from the grandstands...

... and you DON'T want to overfly those neighborhoods, especially after the T-6 midair tragedy of '94. Locals would freak!

I still stick with my original idea...move the fans/stands/concessions to the INSIDE of the circuit. Gee-forces alone are always trying to pull aircraft AWAY from the center of the track, correct? Why not take advantage of it?

You can't do anything about protecting event attendants from an errant and wayward un-piloted aircraft out of control, as the GG tragically became, short of cramming everyone into a NASA-style launch control bunker...

...But such a viewer relocation to the middle WOULD improve crowd safety if another mid-air collision happens, or an airframe break-up incident happens somewhere in the future (Think Miss Ashley).

In those terrible cases, hazardous debris is normally hurled OUTWARD, AWAY from the inside of the course (and as it is with the current event layout, potentially towards people).


It's worth considering.

Else, it may be the Devil to think about, but perhaps the event has to move to a safer, less populated location nearby...hope not.

[Propellerhead]

Re: Safety

Move spectators to the inside of the course?

What about maydays dropping a/c on people's heads?

Runway 32/14 and the rarely used 18 are within the course.

[hattend]

Re: Safety

I just don't see where you would put the stands, pits, static display, vendors and parking out there in the unimproved dirt inside the F1/Biplane course.

It was a fluke.

Don Hatten
Go Bear!

[wingman]

Re: Safety

I agree -- it was a fluke. The course and stands are in about the only places they can be. It would cost tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars to build tunnels, pave a couple of hundred acres of dirt, build access roads, etc etc etc. This is a once a year event, and barely hanging on as it is...

Also, one of the great things about the course as it is is that fans can see the whole course, and watch the Racers all the way around. If the stands were in the middle, the Racers would be behind people's backs much of the time.

How many Maydays and incidents have we had in 47 years of Racing, and how many spectator deaths or injuries?? It was a fluke -- pure bad luck that that airplane ended up where it did, rather than somewhere else in the thousand acres of sagebrush that make up Stead.

Plus, the decisions are not ours to make anyway.

Neal

[Exhaustgases]

Re: Safety

How about radio controlled drogue chutes. A member of the team would have the control.

[Bob]

Re: Safety

How about radio controlled drogue chutes. A member of the team would have the control.

That wouldnt have helped with Jimmy, he would have hit the stands or area behind the stands if he was slowed down in any way.

[RBriscoe]

Re: Safety

And this is based on what bit of fact? Are you saying that several P51's are rigged improperly? I agree that ALL planes hould go through a rigourous tech inspection, but your statment makes it sound like there are planes flying with known safety issues, which is not the case.

I have to disagree in several respects.

Flight safety is an ongoing process. It is never done. It is not an immunization.

Was this mishap a fluke? Many suggest so, but the facts suggest otherwise. Several mishaps have resulted in wreckage falling where it should not. The T-6 mishap, in particular, illustrates the need for ongoing review. They simply are not fast enough that they should be getting out of the race area. The Miss Ashley II mishap, whatever it's actual cause demonstrated the problem of encroachment. Encroachment is a great problem whether the flight activity involves an Air Force Base, Naval Air Station, Civilian Air Port or Air Park or Race Course.

The simple fact of the matter is that many of the P-51s are out of rig for their target air speeds. That is why they require so much trim adjustment at race speed and why placing all that load on a single trim tab was not a recommended practice. The angle of incidence of the wing, at race speed, is the cause of the lift that needs to be balanced by a lot of nose down trim. The net result of this is also drag which reduces potential speed.

I do agree that encroachment makes the matter of course change a difficult one, but one that nevertheless should be evaluated.

Regards

[Pete]

Re: Safety

Pete, while I agree with you that mechanical failures can be studied and recommendations made, mechanisms will fail and people are going to make mistakes, be it on a space craft or in a T-6. If someone wants to prize fight and then sue his opponent for a concussion, I have no sympathy for him. If I die cause an airplane hits me at OShkosh or Reno or any airshow, I have left instructions to my wife to NOT sue....I put myself in harm's way. Lawyers kill sports, not accidents. Shakespere was right on his reccommendations as to what to do with lawyers....

Cantaloupe kill more people than air racing....

I will avoid discussing the vulgarities of lawyers and litigation as my caustic comments would not be appropriate on a respectable public forum like this one.

My point was that this is not a race course issue. Or that life is or should be risk free. Removing box seats, changing the course, etc, won't save anybody from a random trajectory due to an incapacitated pilot or a mechanical failure.

Grandstand in the middle? Nope. Even if that could significantly lower the already (SMALL and ACCEPTABLE) risk, I want to watch the whole race, thank you.

[Desertdawg]

Re: Safety

Great discussion. I'm far from an expert, but there have been some interesting thoughts thrown out here. The stands are ok were they are, as spectators we want pit access.

Ever since they pulled pylon 8 in, the unlimiteds and jets not longer level out along the home pylon stretch. One person suggestion adding "gates" after 8 as a way to force the pilot into a level flight after they round pylon 8?? I would assume the gates would be similar to what they use in the Redbull air show series?

Thats idea has some merit. In auto racing we use chicanes to slow the cars down. In our sport that's not practical, right? Maybe we need to think out of the box. What if, we move pylon 8 back to its original position, then before pylon 8, place large corner entry markers (different one for each class), in auto racing then are used a braking zone markers for corner entry. These markers would establish a "reduced throttle zone" just to scrub some speed off before banking into pylon 8 and ensure that the pilot stays between the inflated "gates".

With all the encroachment, some form of "self emposed" speed reduction will be required for our sport to continue?

[51fixer]

Re: Safety

In Air Racing you typically set the throttle and go. You plan for power settings and the engine and systems are set up that way. If anything you will go to a higher setting at some point if you need but reducing speeds at points on a course isn't practical IMHO.
These A/C are set up to be slick and aerodynamic. It is hard for them to shed energy and slow down. It is also hard to regain energy when lost. That is why the course flown and starts are important.
To add any type of slowing will increase the chance of a mid air when differences in aircraft types, along with the dynamics of how these different types will slow and accelerate. A Tigercat will slow faster than a stock Mustang. They would require different points on the course to start a slow down, a P-51 much further away from the turn than the Tigercat.
The slow and acceleration cycle then might make changes in trim needed but you don't want to retrim during a race.
In a race car wheels touching the ground are the equalizer in the different cars, aircraft don't have that.

[AirDOGGe]

Re: Safety

I agree -- it was a fluke. The course and stands are in about the only places they can be. It would cost tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars to build tunnels, pave a couple of hundred acres of dirt, build access roads, etc etc etc. This is a once a year event, and barely hanging on as it is...

True, but is it does come down to relocating, developing a new site would cost even more most likely (new pavement, structures, resources). At least Stead already has many of the facilities.

As far as room within the course, look at the overhead photo again....everything happening at Reno short of the races themselves occurs on that little black patch of asphalt.

And as far as not seeing the planes on the back side of the course, you'd be trading that for a top view of the aircraft, instead of staring at their belly as they pass by. I'd go for that trade.


Anyway, it's just a thought...

[DA9D5TA]

Re: Safety

There are way too many variables to make changes without introducing unintended consequences.