The Earnhardt Investigation Report finally released

[Joe Fan]

And the broken lap belt still seems to be the what facilitated his death.

Overall, I was impressed with the details of the findings and I feel concur with what was presented as the cause of his death. The broken lap belt was conviningly proven in my mind from demonstrations and from abrasions and broken ribs found in the autopsy report. For those who did not see the presentation, the autopsy report revealed that Earnhardt has abrasions on his upper thigh on his left side but on his right side, the abrasions were lower and more towards the inguinal region. This indicates that he was thrown forward and to the right and seems to back up the broken lap belt since there should have been abrasions on the same place on each side on his legs had the belt system not been compromised. Also, Earnhardt only had rib fractures on the left side on his body, which also indicates that the belt system failed or was compromised on one side.

Now, what caused the broken lap is still subject to debate and Bill Simpson has responded to the report that his belt would have not broken if mounted correctly, as he has maintained all along. However, those close to Earnhardt say that he had used this mounting setup for years with no problems. But Simpson said that he repeatedly told Dale that his mounting method was wrong and not to mount his belts this way.

As far as what caused Earnhardt's basilar skull fractures, I agree with Biomechanics expert Dr. James Raddin's belief that the basilar skull fractures were attributed to the fact that his head struck the steering wheel and not from the head whip alone. I basically stated this on another post. His belief was based upon contusions found on the back of his head, which he believed was consistent with his head being thrown forward and rotated into the steering wheel. Now, it appears to me that a HANS type device has more credibility in preventing these type fractures since they should prevent the head from hitting the steering wheel. However, Dr. Raddin said that he was unusre what the outcome would have been had he worn the device since the lap belt allowed him to be thrown forward further.

Overall, highlights of what NASCAR will do are:

1) The creation of a full-time medical liason to travel to each race that would have knowledge of the medical history of each driver.

2) The institution of black-box recorders.

3) The development of a safety team to be based in Conover, North Carolina that will head and intensify efforts to improve safety in the sport.

4) More research to be performed in the area of belt and restraint systems to help understand and prevent belt separations like this that are known "dumping" under load.

5) More research to be conducted on how the design of the cars can be improved but nothing radical is expected to be done and nothing that is ready to implement now.


6) More research to be conducted on the development of a soft-wall system which started last November.

7) Studies on seat designs is currently ongoing.

Overall, I feel satisified with the report and feel that the outcome of his investigation will be beneficial for steering safety of all motorsports in the right direction. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any quick fixes to a very complicated problem. The fact that was brought forth in this conference that sudden 40mph or greater changes in velocity routinely cause fatalities means that it will be very tough to prevent deaths in high speed motorsports.

[texasfan3]

You're right, Joe, it will be impossible to completely prevent deaths in an inherently dangerous sport like auto racing. I just hope that NASCAR continues it's research into all factors of safety, in order to make the sport as safe as it possibly can be. One of the thing I would like to see is smaller engine displacement in superspeedway race cars, to get some separation between the cars. I think that that is the only way for the drivers to be able to avoid "the Big One".

[Ray Bell]

I doubt that a smaller displacement will reduce the closeness... but it will reduce the speed. But again, not by much...

[texasfan3]

Maybe not, but it would give the drivers more throttle response, and that more than anything would help them avoid the big wreck.

[Joe Fan]

One other point I would like to bring up is the rigidity of the NASCAR chassis and lack of crush space that has been talked about. Larry McReynolds has been one who thought this to be an important factor and area for improvement and I generally agreed from looking at a Winston Cup up close.

However, looking at the slo-mo film footage of a Winston Cup car that was crash tested under the same criteria of Earnhardt's car, I was surprised to see how crushable the car was in this situation and I think that a "Humpy Bumper" (a carbon fibre bumper mounted to the front of the chassis) would be the best way tackle this problem. I also don't think that rigidity is necessarily a bad thing as it is needed to help protect the driver in rolls. A rigid chassis may transfer more forces on to the driver (which is where the humpy bumper comes in) but it should beneficial in preventing the speed of the car from decreased too dramatically. As Dr. Rabbin noted, sudden velocity changes of 40mph or more has a high incidence of fatalities. So, a rigid chassis with a carbon fibre humpy bumper that would absorb and prevent energy from being passed on to the driver seems to be the best option for NASCAR to head towards in the interim.

More importantly, HANS type devices seem to have more relevance of anything brought up as a safety resolution for this problem in my opinion. Although, the maker of the HANS device cannot be guarantee how much energy it can absorb or how successful that it can be in preventing basilar skull fractures from head whip, the non-technical benefits seem to be pretty clear to me. It is not real clear that head whip is what causes basilar skull fractures. I am inclined to believe that a blunt force trauma to the head (ie the head hitting something like a steering wheel as it is thrown forward or backward against the headrest) is what really what causes basilar skull fractures in these instances. So, any device that limits and prevents the driver's head from hitting something, should prevent most of these type fractures and deaths.

If you seen the film footage in the presentation of Johnny Benson door slapper, a simple side impact appeared to be rather violent to the driver. This contact caused Johnny's goggles to be thrown off and the degree of movement of his head was surprising, almost shocking really as his head completely bent the side head support. It makes you appreciate the forces of simple crahses.

The idea of the driver's head hitting objects in the car is what is causing most of the deaths seems to be reinforced with crash of John Nemechek. John Nemecheck's death was not due to basilar skull fractures, but from impact to the b-pillar. It basically spilt his brain almost completely in half down the brainstem from what I have heard from someone close to that situation. The outcome of this crash was the creation of the "Nemechek Strap" by Bill Simpson that basically was a small webbing device that is mounted above the driver's head and by the window, and this device prevents the driver's head from hitting this part of the roll cage.

Now, should NASCAR automatically mandate HANS type devices? No, maybe in a year or two but I concur with NASCAR that these devices need to be developed more for stock car use and most of the drivers are wearing these devices now anyway. Tony Stewart and Jimmy Spencer were the only drivers that weren't wearing one of these type devices last Sunday at Michigan. Drivers seem to be concerned about how quickly they can get out of a car that is on fire with the device. So far, they are getting out fairly quickly but what about an unconscious driver, will safety crews be able to detach these devices quickly if they have to pull a driver from a car?

[Ax Slinger]

And still no discussion of soft walls. I forget who it was, or what series it was, but recently I remember seeing a car go head on into a soft wall at high speed, and the driver getting out and dancing on the roof of the car afterwards.

[Joe Fan]

TimB, there is discussion going on about soft walls but NASCAR doesn't seem to be as proactive as Charlotte track owner Humpy Wheeler, because Humpy already has installed soft walls on some of his inside retaining walls at that track.

I don't know the reasoning why more track owners haven't followed suit, perhaps it is related to money, but there appears to be issues regarding how beneficial a certain type of soft wall can be for both open wheel and stock cars. This is now more important since both type of cars often run at the same tracks today. This is definately an issue because some types of soft walls are believed to make impacts more dangerous for open wheel cars because the pointy noses of their cars have dug into some types of soft walls, causing the rear of the car to be violently whipped around.

The incident you have described above seems to be the Jimmie Johnson BGN crash at Watkins Glen last year. The armco barriers there were not fitted with soft walls, but styrofoam blocks. Styrofoam blocks are great on road courses and seem to do the trick rather inexpensively, but they create clean-up problems on oval tracks. Fans want increased driver safety but they also don't want to sit for six hours to get a race completed.

I would say that soft walls seems to be an area that should be explored more because it can potentially benefit both stock car and open wheel racing together, if one uniform one can be developed for both types of racing.

[floid2000]

Adam Petty,Kenny Irwin,Dale Earnhart.......and Nascar is going to do a study,mount black boxes,appoint a panel,and advance thier medical capabilities almost into the 20th century,WOW ! mighty impressive Nascar.

[Ax Slinger]

Yeah... Don't forget Tony Roper too. He may have driven a truck, but it was still NASCAR.

[zealot]

I'm glad to see NASCAR finally moving into the 20th. (let alone 21st.) with their safety. But it's a shame it took Dale's death to do it.

Can you imagine what Kyle Petty must feel like? His son dies, and hardly a word is said. Dale Earnhardt dies, and NASCAR plunges into it's most in-depth safety investigation ever. The Intimidator may have had more experience, but was his life worth more than Adam Petty's? Or more than any of the other drivers who have given their life for the sport in the recent past? Yes, it's good to see NASCAR finally do something (although it's next to nothing), but really, you have to wonder, what took so long?

I really put part of the blame on the drivers. For some reason, they seem especially passive. You look at the CART situation in Texas. If that same thing had happened in NASCAR, I can almost guarantee you all 43 cars would have started the race right on time. In F1, the drivers have had a voice in safety issues ever since Jackie Stewart started campaigning for more precautions. But in NASCAR, you hardly hear a mumble (although I was glad to hear Jeff Burton recently). Until they stand up, I'm afraid the "good ol' boys" at NASCAR headquarters will just keep using the drivers to line their pockets and keep the stands full, no matter the dangers.

[R]

Originally posted by Joe Fan
The armco barriers there were not fitted with soft walls, but styrofoam blocks.

Just an aside note, but isn't this basically the same thing? Styrofoam is what is currently regarded as the "best" type of soft wall, I think.

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by R


Just an aside note, but isn't this basically the same thing? Styrofoam is what is currently regarded as the "best" type of soft wall, I think.

Essentially yes, but when I see the term soft walls used, it is usually referring to a manufactured piece that is built specifically to be attached to concrete walls like what they have used at Indy.

[R]

OK, thanks Joe.