Track Design?
10-01-2009, 05:30 PM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Track Design?
After reading Dean's post a couple of weeks ago about an accident he was involed in as an instructor, I have a couple of questions.
I have only driven on 2 different tracks, both have at least one negative camber corner and one had two rises; one rise immediately followed by a negative camber corner and one by a heavy breaking zone. Why?
In either case, the lay of the land didn't require these elements to be included in the design. It seeems to me to include things in the design that intentionally upset the car's stability, is bad design at best and dangerous at worst. I know it can test a driver's ability to keep the car under control, but to do this with walls involved, as in Dean's case, is not necessary. Can you not test a driver's skill without putting them in excess danger?
I'm rather new to tracking and there could be perfectly reasonable explanations, I just don't know what they are.
Comments please.
I have only driven on 2 different tracks, both have at least one negative camber corner and one had two rises; one rise immediately followed by a negative camber corner and one by a heavy breaking zone. Why?
In either case, the lay of the land didn't require these elements to be included in the design. It seeems to me to include things in the design that intentionally upset the car's stability, is bad design at best and dangerous at worst. I know it can test a driver's ability to keep the car under control, but to do this with walls involved, as in Dean's case, is not necessary. Can you not test a driver's skill without putting them in excess danger?
I'm rather new to tracking and there could be perfectly reasonable explanations, I just don't know what they are.
Comments please.
Last edited by dfinke23; 10-01-2009 at 05:34 PM.
10-01-2009, 05:41 PM
#2
Le Mans Master
You've never been to Watkins Glen... talk about high speed and negative camber with big walls.
I think these turns should definately be on a road courses, as a well set up car and good driver make all the difference in getting through them quickly, but there is no excuse for walls that are too close to the track.
Heck, I drove a new track Monticello for the first time and I think the barriers were closer than at the Glen and that is a new track!!!
I've always said, it would be a dream to drive on a real F1 grade course with football fields of gravel and run-off.
I think these turns should definately be on a road courses, as a well set up car and good driver make all the difference in getting through them quickly, but there is no excuse for walls that are too close to the track.
Heck, I drove a new track Monticello for the first time and I think the barriers were closer than at the Glen and that is a new track!!!
I've always said, it would be a dream to drive on a real F1 grade course with football fields of gravel and run-off.
10-01-2009, 08:27 PM
#4
Former Vendor
It's really important for a new driver to learn where to push and where not to. Our home track, I give up 2 seconds a lap on turn 2. It's just not worth it at my level.
Randy
Randy
The following users liked this post:
NSFW (06-19-2020)
10-01-2009, 09:09 PM
#5
Racer
You've never been to Watkins Glen... talk about high speed and negative camber with big walls.
I think these turns should definately be on a road courses, as a well set up car and good driver make all the difference in getting through them quickly, but there is no excuse for walls that are too close to the track.
Heck, I drove a new track Monticello for the first time and I think the barriers were closer than at the Glen and that is a new track!!!
I've always said, it would be a dream to drive on a real F1 grade course with football fields of gravel and run-off.
I think these turns should definately be on a road courses, as a well set up car and good driver make all the difference in getting through them quickly, but there is no excuse for walls that are too close to the track.
Heck, I drove a new track Monticello for the first time and I think the barriers were closer than at the Glen and that is a new track!!!
I've always said, it would be a dream to drive on a real F1 grade course with football fields of gravel and run-off.
10-01-2009, 09:59 PM
#6
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Oct 2007
Location: Northwestern Connecticut
Posts: 2,615
Received 154 Likes
on
114 Posts
St. Jude Donor '10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-'20-'21-'22-'23-'24
The left hander after the start finish was a bit intimidating too, off camber exit, over a rise, with all sorts of skid marks heading to the wall/woods!
10-01-2009, 10:05 PM
#7
there are always those nicely banked, gently curving nascar tracks if that's your thing....
the walls are neccesary - they protect spectators, cars on the other sections of the track and can actually prevent really bad accidents by stopping the car before it goes off to really bad places. i would rather brush a wall as a shallow angle than fly off downhill into the trees or even worse, into a paddock with parked cars and spectators!
off-camber corners are great - they allow you to experiment with traction limits at lower (and safer) speeds.
the walls are neccesary - they protect spectators, cars on the other sections of the track and can actually prevent really bad accidents by stopping the car before it goes off to really bad places. i would rather brush a wall as a shallow angle than fly off downhill into the trees or even worse, into a paddock with parked cars and spectators!
off-camber corners are great - they allow you to experiment with traction limits at lower (and safer) speeds.
10-03-2009, 01:17 AM
#8
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: San Mateo CA
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you're right! why don't they eliminate the corners altogether and just race in a straight line!
wait, even better, let's just put the cars on side-by-side dyno's, best man wins!!!
wait, even better, let's just put the cars on side-by-side dyno's, best man wins!!!
But you know that
10-03-2009, 08:22 AM
#10
Race Director
The Glen is awesome, I love it
I did Nurburgring this year which is the original bad azz dangerous track
Its like a giant, scarier Glen
Its a lot narrower than modern tracks, has its bumpy bits and very little run off. Most of it has cliffs that either go down or rise up on either side and lots of trees. You go off and you wont be happy
Tracks are meant to challenge drivers in old tracks like the Ring and the Glen this was more important than safety back then
Modern tracks are very different, they can be challenging but not as challenging as the old monsters. They also have acres of run off and are much, much safer. Also the new tracks are designed for modern high downforce cars which didnt exist back in the 20s when the Ring was built
I did Nurburgring this year which is the original bad azz dangerous track
Its like a giant, scarier Glen
Its a lot narrower than modern tracks, has its bumpy bits and very little run off. Most of it has cliffs that either go down or rise up on either side and lots of trees. You go off and you wont be happy
Tracks are meant to challenge drivers in old tracks like the Ring and the Glen this was more important than safety back then
Modern tracks are very different, they can be challenging but not as challenging as the old monsters. They also have acres of run off and are much, much safer. Also the new tracks are designed for modern high downforce cars which didnt exist back in the 20s when the Ring was built
10-03-2009, 11:30 AM
#11
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: San Mateo CA
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to lament those awful corners with close-in walls as well, but after crashing a half dozen times (I'm a slow learner) I have a better understanding of both mine and the car's limits and just dial it back, and enjoy the challenge.
10-04-2009, 02:21 PM
#13
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
I guess I need to clarify. My point was why put walls next to parts of the track that upset the car when it is not necessary, in areas where no spectator protection is needed and there are no dangerous off-track elements to protect the drivers from?
10-04-2009, 04:41 PM
#14
Race Director
If they do that on a new track, which is unlikely, its just bad design
10-04-2009, 04:46 PM
#15
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2003
Location: Raleigh / Rolesville NC
Posts: 43,084
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes
on
25 Posts
many times that is just the way it is. ie no run off room
If you want a NEW bad design track look at Starke Fl
Watch for the WALLS
Or even Mid-Ohio and Joey Hands BMW accident. No walls, no spectators, only a berm to protect a ditch
If you want a NEW bad design track look at Starke Fl
Watch for the WALLS
Or even Mid-Ohio and Joey Hands BMW accident. No walls, no spectators, only a berm to protect a ditch
Last edited by AU N EGL; 10-04-2009 at 04:49 PM.
10-04-2009, 08:45 PM
#16
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: San Mateo CA
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
usu. tracks can't improve the runoff areas due to lack of funding. hell, even laguna seca almost went under a few years ago. thankfully motogp and some interested parties gave it a rebirth.
06-20-2020, 06:22 AM
#18
Racer
If you are on the west coast, Willow Springs offers plenty of runoff. I wouldn't want to see the car after it happens, but you have far less of hitting something...
It's also a fairly simple layout/design, so it doesn't take as long to learn the line. Not saying I'm fast at it, but it was far easier to learn than others....
It's also a fairly simple layout/design, so it doesn't take as long to learn the line. Not saying I'm fast at it, but it was far easier to learn than others....
Last edited by PSU_Vette; 06-20-2020 at 06:24 AM.
