Robert Hight's monster fire

[Flying Toilet]

Hi all,

Seeing as Topeka was missing from our screens on Channel 5 last night I thought i would post this incident that Robert suffered.

The Force team are now pushing for a rule change regarding using a back-up car on raceday that has caused some big debate on the US racing forums.

Here is the incident in hand and John Forces rant about safety in the sport.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxxTgOUu3rc

What are your thoughts on using a back-up car on raceday? Will it kill the under budgeted teams? Should they allow it for safety? Should the competitor be disqualified if he touches any wall for safety?

Edited by Flying Toilet on Thursday 7th June 20:21

[MotorPsycho]

way I see it, if you got a spare block, you use it, spare crank you use it, burn up your fire suit got a spare? you use it

so why not spare cars, yea ok smaller budgeted teams couldn't do that but seriously, can they compete with the likes of team Force, Schumacher etc anyway?

definitely should not be using a previously crashed chassis to race with, wouldn't use a helmet again after crashing with it

Edited by MotorPsycho on Thursday 7th June 20:45

[Miss Corrado]

I would agree with using a spare car. It is just too close to call and I would never want a person's life to be in danger because of that rule. It seems idiotic in my mind. Hitting two walls and almost burning to the ground? Hmm!

[Jon C]

Sorry. The car had hit the wall, and it should not have been allowed back into competition untill it had passed tech again. And no, they should not be allowed another car either. Hitting the wall is someones way of telling you that your weekend is over. Just because you have the resources to throw at repairing your car does not mean that you should be allowed to. It was a mighty effort by the crew to completely build a new car around the wreckage in only 75 mins, and I applaud their efforts. But they should not have even attempted it.

[AM]

Jon, I got the impression from Force that they had no intention of running the car "we pulled it round for the cameras......we didn't even want to do a burnout".

One thing to note, as if we needed any proof that these guys have balls the size of basket balls. Hight rode along on the rooof until it stopped rather than jump off it while it was moving, looks to me like he even looked inside the car at one point to check on the fire !

[Bob Jarrett]

I do not normally do forums but I would like to make a contribution here. As most of you know, I am heavily involved with JFR, specially with Robert and I have to say on this occasion I do not agree with Force. Rules are rules and they are to be followed. Bottom line is if Roberts car had been seriously damaged he would have been out and that would have been that. (NHRA rules say you can use a spare car right up to the first round and after that you have to stick with what you have). When you have 20+ guys to work on your car you can achieve a lot but other single car teams would have thrown on the towel straight away. There are so many variables but bottom line is safety. I guarantee with what I saw on ESPN when Robert hit both walls he damaged the chassis and the car was not fit to make another run the way it was, they were just hoping to gain some extra points should Jim Head have fouled out. To go to an extreme with the spare car deal, Imagine this. Capps has 2 complete cars, identical, not hard if you have the budget, he runs the first car in the first round and in the second round he runs the second car while his team are servicing his first car. The 75mins no longer applies to him and so he is easily able to make the next round and Ace can tune up the spare car as soon as he looks at the data and so on through to the final. This is what the NHRA is trying to prevent. That is also one reason why (dare I mention) F1 banned spare cars after the start of the race. The drivers would go balls out for the first corner take out some of the other teams cars and then run back for the spare car. Anyway back to drag racing. If Force does not like the rule he should submit an alternative to the NHRA and let them take all situations into account and then make a decision.

[Flying Toilet]

AM said:

One thing to note, as if we needed any proof that these guys have balls the size of basket balls. Hight rode along on the rooof until it stopped rather than jump off it while it was moving, looks to me like he even looked inside the car at one point to check on the fire !

Andy,

There is a interview somewhere that states that Robert thought the car was in the sand after hitting the walls and unable to see so he got out to bail then realised he was still hauling down the shut down area! So he slipped down a bit and pulled the brake on with his feet. This maybe the reason he was looking down to see the lever.

These guys have balls the size of melons!

[Flying Toilet]

Bob Jarrett said:

I do not normally do forums but I would like to make a contribution here. As most of you know, I am heavily involved with JFR, specially with Robert and I have to say on this occasion I do not agree with Force. Rules are rules and they are to be followed. Bottom line is if Roberts car had been seriously damaged he would have been out and that would have been that. (NHRA rules say you can use a spare car right up to the first round and after that you have to stick with what you have). When you have 20+ guys to work on your car you can achieve a lot but other single car teams would have thrown on the towel straight away. There are so many variables but bottom line is safety. I guarantee with what I saw on ESPN when Robert hit both walls he damaged the chassis and the car was not fit to make another run the way it was, they were just hoping to gain some extra points should Jim Head have fouled out. To go to an extreme with the spare car deal, Imagine this. Capps has 2 complete cars, identical, not hard if you have the budget, he runs the first car in the first round and in the second round he runs the second car while his team are servicing his first car. The 75mins no longer applies to him and so he is easily able to make the next round and Ace can tune up the spare car as soon as he looks at the data and so on through to the final. This is what the NHRA is trying to prevent. That is also one reason why (dare I mention) F1 banned spare cars after the start of the race. The drivers would go balls out for the first corner take out some of the other teams cars and then run back for the spare car. Anyway back to drag racing. If Force does not like the rule he should submit an alternative to the NHRA and let them take all situations into account and then make a decision.

Welcome to the forum Bob!

A very well thought out post, thanks for sharing your thoughts/opinions.

[iffy]

welcome to the forum bob,
i hope spuff can do a good number on his new car bob,and the car looked wicked!!

Ian.

[MotorPsycho]

Bob Jarrett said:

IImagine this. Capps has 2 complete cars, identical, not hard if you have the budget, he runs the first car in the first round and in the second round he runs the second car while his team are servicing his first car. The 75mins no longer applies to him and so he is easily able to make the next round and Ace can tune up the spare car as soon as he looks at the data and so on through to the final

That is a brilliant point, hadn't thought of that, so maybe the second car could only be used if the no1 car is damaged beyond use, ie; hit a wall etc

[Tet]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know why outer boundary violations are only relevant in qualifying at NHRA events? I thought the idea behind it was that it showed you weren't in control of the vehicle, which is why the runs are discounted. But surely you're just as out of control if you do it in eliminations?

[Time Machine]

I thought it was that they only counted prior to the finish line, regardless of eliminations or qualifying?

[iffy]

Time Machine said:

I thought it was that they only counted prior to the finish line, regardless of eliminations or qualifying?

Spot on!

[Tet]

Hmmm... I sure I read somewhere that they didn't count in eliminations. Ho hum.

[Nitrohaulic]

Bob Jarrett said:

I do not normally do forums but I would like to make a contribution here. As most of you know, I am heavily involved with JFR, specially with Robert and I have to say on this occasion I do not agree with Force. Rules are rules and they are to be followed. Bottom line is if Roberts car had been seriously damaged he would have been out and that would have been that. (NHRA rules say you can use a spare car right up to the first round and after that you have to stick with what you have). When you have 20+ guys to work on your car you can achieve a lot but other single car teams would have thrown on the towel straight away. There are so many variables but bottom line is safety. I guarantee with what I saw on ESPN when Robert hit both walls he damaged the chassis and the car was not fit to make another run the way it was, they were just hoping to gain some extra points should Jim Head have fouled out. To go to an extreme with the spare car deal, Imagine this. Capps has 2 complete cars, identical, not hard if you have the budget, he runs the first car in the first round and in the second round he runs the second car while his team are servicing his first car. The 75mins no longer applies to him and so he is easily able to make the next round and Ace can tune up the spare car as soon as he looks at the data and so on through to the final. This is what the NHRA is trying to prevent. That is also one reason why (dare I mention) F1 banned spare cars after the start of the race. The drivers would go balls out for the first corner take out some of the other teams cars and then run back for the spare car. Anyway back to drag racing. If Force does not like the rule he should submit an alternative to the NHRA and let them take all situations into account and then make a decision.

Is anyone saying that the rules shouldn't be followed unless and until they're changed, if they're changed?John is saying that he disagrees with the rules as they are. Rules are made by people and they should be changed if people have a better idea.

I don't agree with allowing everything but the bare chassis to be switched between rounds. Seems arbitrary to me. Who's going to decide what "hit" to the wall is hard enough to disallow a chassis and what isn't? Even a new SFI inspection might not reveal stresses. I don't see how the A-arms would have still been straight in that car.

Under the current rules, one greedy or uncaring owner might try to force a driver to run an unsafe car. I want whatever I think is the best net result in any situation.

I'd say if you don't know how to tune one car, two isn't going to guarantee you an advantage. I've always been under the impression that you can't build two cars and get them to act exactly the same.