Auto Action article on Sandown Safety

[Hound]

Reading the Auto Action article regarding safety and Sandown, IMHO the safety fencing at Sandown should be looked at. An incident at a driving course recently held at Sandown highlighted that in some areas the armco safety fencing leaves a lot to be desired. A vehicle being driven at a moderate speed ran off the track and through the fence where the viaduct is located at the circuit. The armco gave away because the posts were held in place by wooden pegs driven into the ground. When looking around the circuit more of the fencing was held in place the same way. What would have happened if a V8 Supercar at full tilt had run off in that area - I dread to think. I wonder if AVESCO is aware of the lack of support of the safety fencing at this circuit. It seems Procar is and has some concerns.

CAMS are always touting that they regard safety as an important issue. Why are some circuits made to put in concrete walls whilst others can run a National race meeting with armco fencing posts held in place by wooden pegs. This isn't Australian Standards, this is double standards.

[Hazza]

Were there any issues with Group C cars when they ran the long circuit during the 80s?

[D.R.T.]

I tell you what though, John Davison really got stuck in didnt he.

[Big Trev]

According to rumours, Sandown had a limited life span, so I can't see too much being spent there. It just ain't economically viable to spend money on something that ain't gonna be there in a few years. Minimal/forced spending only.

[pete55]

Jon Davison seems a very angry man in last few weeks. Seems to be sticking his nose into everything. Maybe he is trying to divert attention away from Sandown.

[just a racer]

Has anyone bothered to ring Davo and ask him, rather than point the finger at someone who is trying to keep a motor racing venue alive in the suburbs?
Davo, do what you have to do to keep your fantastic circuit available to us racers and "the fans in the stands".

[Big Trev]

Steady Just, we all support the retention of Sandown. It is a great track, and one of the few that is reasonably easy to get and out from.

However, safety has to be everyones concern. Look at the last V8 Supercar meetings there, there has been issues with Armco. Last year it caused a delayed start to the 500 because someone hit near turn 1 in a previous race, and the year before a Commodore hit it at the last turn before Dandy Road and caused delays in fixing.

Armco is deadset dangerous stuff, it can come off and seriously injure someone. The Armco that is used on roads these days is very different stuff to that being used at Sandown, and in particular they way it is fixed to the ground. Stop at a new section on the road sometime and make a comparison. Concrete walls are far better, but a far more expensive option.

[Matthew Ronke]

Unfortunately the future of Sandown lies with the Turf Club and not Jon Davidson. With Waverly Park across the road being sold for over $100 million and the Sandown land being a larger portion some estimates have the land going for over $150 million. This seems to support the noises around that the Turf Club are moving out and with the Horse Quarantine station they are moving closer to Melb Airport.


The other suggestion around is that they are not moving out but just terminating Jon Davidson's lease. The Turf Club take out the Track licences and are now hiring the venue to Car Clubs for Sprint Days. Sandown is permitted to run 5 Race meetings a year. The V8 Supercar meeting (IMG), Procar Champ Series (Procar), Historic Sandown (VHRR) & 2 State Meetings (MGCC & ASSA) therefore Davidson just Sublets the venue for these 5 Race meetings. The suggestion is that the Turf Club will cut out the middleman and taken on the role of circuit hirer.

But the rumour that everything is moving late 2005 is the strongest around. This would be a great shame for Victoria as it greatest assets is the number of Racing circuit venues available.

[RaceTime]

If you look at this logically, though - is Sandown a 'great asset'?

It is a circuit that no team can test at - this has to be done on the Friday practice day - so if the circuit produces any problems to cars, they have virtually no time to fix it.

There have been grumblings about circuit safety and armco at Sandown now for a number of years. I am aware of at least 2 car clubs that have spoken out about armco safety and the billable cost for repairing minor shunts - and these car clubs then find they are no longer able to hire the track because 'dates are not available' to them any more...

There have been other other grumblings over the last 3-4 years as well in relation to bills received for 'armco repairs' - so clubs themselves are getting wary of running there for fear of finding, weeks after a meeting, a bill turns up to repair something already, supposedly, repaired, with way of verifying. As tothe truth or accuracy of these 'grumblings', only Davison can attest.

So - the question remains - is it such a valuable asset in todays motorsport climate?

[Dirk]

If there was an Australian Standard we wouldn't need this thread. This would mean there would be a standard across the board and they wouldn't get away with "propping up" guard rail.

[Chris - Melb]

There are racing drivers today that are still alive and have two fully functioning legs because they crashed into Armco and not a solid concrete fence.

One of the benefits of Armco is that it distorts on impact, therefore absorbing some of the inertia and protecting the driver (wooden pegs and all). I cannot remember any cases where Armco failing apart in recent years has injured someone.

Armco can cause delays when it needs repairing but it is repaired much quicker than the human body is (not to mention race cars).

When you consider the maintenance and repair costs of Armco, is it really the cheap option compared with concrete fences?

The FIA approves the use of Armco and if you click on the link below you will find that it is partly being used in the construction of the new Bahrain's Formula One circuit.

http://www.gulfconstructionworldwide...p?Article=5367

Sandown is one of the few circuits in Australia that is civilized enough for teams to invite corporate guests to and close enough that they don’t have to pack a cut-lunch to get there!

It is the only permanent Australian circuit where 10,000 people can sit in a grandstand seat out of the sun or rain.

It is the only circuit that is located amongst suburbia. If Sandown was to close down, were would a new circuit be built, if at all? And would it have such great facilities?

Bathurst is only used twice a year and is not available for testing; is it not a “great asset”?

As for Sandown’s “limited lifespan”, I have been hearing those rumours since the 1970’s…

[Dirk]

What about Matthew Colemans accident? Did the guard rail do its job then?

[Chris - Melb]

Did Matthew Coleman escape from that major accident unharmed? I rest my case!!!

[Dirk]

Coming down onto guard rail like when a vehicle is in the air can be quite dangerous. I know if I was racing I would be a lot more comfortable running around in between concrete barriers.

[bartman71]

Originally posted by Dirk
Coming down onto guard rail like when a vehicle is in the air can be quite dangerous. I know if I was racing I would be a lot more comfortable running around in between concrete barriers.

coming down on a concrete barrier is worse

[Dirk]

Coleman wouldn't have been in the air if a concrete barrier had been in place. It was the failure of guard rail that caused the accident. The guard rail is meant to distort but not meant to fall on the ground.

[RaceTime]

Originally posted by Chris - Melb
Bathurst is only used twice a year and is not available for testing; is it not a “great asset”?

As for Sandown’s “limited lifespan”, I have been hearing those rumours since the 1970’s…

Two points - Bathurst a great asset? Sorry to deflate your comment - but a track that is as elitist to motor sport as Mt Panorama is - no, it is NOT a great asset.

Can the majority of motor sport in general race there? No they can't (and this has been detailed numerous times in numerous threads here and elsewhere).

It is only in the last 6 to 8 months that the OWNERS of Sandown Park (not the lessee) has openly stated that they are looking to relocate the entire complex. Now, if you call that a rumour - keep thinking it - never before has the owner of the venue been brought into a 'rumour' - and one which the owners themselves have already stated is fact.

[Chris - Melb]

Racetime, you are obviously a great supporter of “grass roots” racing, which is very commendable. However, just because Bathurst, and to a much lessor extent Sandown, are not overly accessible to that type of competitor doesn’t mean that they are not great assets (the only thing Sandown really lacks is access for private practice).

Motor racing today would not be where it is today if not for the champions and legends that these circuits have created over the years. What would Australian motor sport be like in the future if the tradition of the Bathurst 1000 and Sandown 500 were to permanently end?

No one is going to hit a rock at Queensland Raceway and become a legend!!!

These two great events are the inspiration for many people who decide to enter club level racing.

Anyway, I dare you to walk to the top of Mount Panorama during the Bathurst 1000 holding a placard saying, “Bathurst is not a great asset”.

I must say that I hadn’t heard anything about the possible sale of Sandown, but maybe I don’t mix in the right circles. Could you please point me in the right direction as to where I can find confirmation that the sale rumour is fact? How do they plan to “relocate” such a huge facility?

I have had a fairly long, extensive search on the Internet and found nothing.

There’s a story here that “suggests” the future of the Sandown Greyhound racetrack (note that the same benefits of keeping that racetrack open apply for the car race circuit as well): http://home.austarnet.com.au/showcoat/sandown.htm

Here’s a link that shows the recent redevelopment of Sandown. Odd that they would spend what must be millions of dollars on an asset and then sell it…
http://www.racingvictoria.net.au/pub...2002-07-03.htm

Here’s a nice overview of the result: http://www.melbourneracingclub.net.au/general/sinfo.htm

Here’s another Sandown racecourse that has been beset by closer rumours:
http://www.northwestsports.co.uk/index.php?cPath=3_57

[RaceTime]

Chris - believe it or not I am a supporter of 'motor racing' at all levels. The problem with tracks like Bathurst is that because they are so 'special', they manage to soak up all the publicity and all the available funds - all for the sake of what used to be one race a year, now two.

Don;t get me wrong - Bathurst has its place in Australian motor sport - but that place is the professional level and, as such, it is the Professional level of the sport that should be paying for it NOT - as you call it - the grass roots level.

Because - if you think about it - cut out that grass roots level and in 10 to 15 years time you won;t have anything because there will be nothing worthwhilse coming through the ranks to replace the aging legends of yesteryear...

Re Sandown - I can't give you specific links - but the view of the AJC has been reported in the Melbourne Papers over the past 6 months - Herald-Sun and Age - once reported there they found their way into threads on here.

Basically the AJC is having numerous problems at Sandown - environment, houseing, noise, quarantine etc and are looking to relocate the track in a more amenable spot ie one without houses built right onto the track fence line. This is something they are looking at over the next 5 years or so - but it si still an 'urgent' project.

Also consider the value of the land within the track precincts - many figures have been given - from $20-3 mill up to $150 mill. If they can reach anything near that upper figure for the land, it wouldn't matter what they spent on it in recent years (all of that, anyway, would be able to be written off or depreciated).

[spook]

Big Trev - It is a fallicy that concrete walls are expensive. The development of technology to produce extruded walls in the last ten years mean you can now build a 900mm high wall with 600mm wide base with 1 on 10 sloping face for around $100/metre.

Triple high guardrail costs in the order of $120/metre.

It is also a fallicy that concrete walls cause greater injury - the faces are 1 on 10, so upon impact a vehicle is lifted into the air, absorbing a large component of the kenetic energy. Concrete walls do not grab the vehicle either, as they don't distort under impact. Guardrail deflects, the gaps open, and the posts grab/slice anything that pokes through the gaps - ouch.

When it comes to maintenance and repairs there is just no comparison.

[RaceTime]

Until a truck manages to go straight into a concrete barrier, pushing it back by 1.5 to metres (Winton top end some years ago)!!

But then again - if that had been guard rail - no comparison - it would have simply gone straight through (example is the V8 BRutes accident at Wakefield Park last year...)

[spook]

Concrete walls should never be placed where a head on impact can occur without a gravel bed in front to reduce the impact speed to a suvivable impact.

Tyre buffers against the wall are useless in high speed head on impacts as they simply deflect the car vertically and it will most likely fly over the top of the wall.

The proposed Australian Standard will addresss all these issues and give professional guidance in all aspects of track primary safety.

You must remember that guardrail is designed to deflect, which is fine on a public road where the average driver has limited primary safety features in his car. On a racetrack the guardrail is there to contain the racing to the racetrack, and not allow the cars to get into the paddock or spectator areas while racing. So when guardrail deflects it lays back and stays that way - causing great difficulty for a quick repair.

Racecars have higher levels of primary safety - roll cages, proper seats & harnesses so they assist the driver in surviving a higher G impact than you would expect in a road accident.

[RaceTime]

This was a one off - the truck, instead of turning right, kept on goin - across approx 20 m of ground with the throttle stuck fully open....it was a fluke and one of those you can't predict. From memory was Rodney Cricks Volvo (ut my memory is hazy on that! Shut up!!!)

The point is that had it been guard rail, it would not have stopped the truck.

[Chris - Melb]

Spook, You are correct in saying modern race cars, particularly sedans, now have safety items such as roll cages, proper seats & harnesses. However it is the stiffness of current sedans that has taken away crumple zones that road cars enjoy.

The roll cage in the Mondeo that Greg Hansford was driving at Phillips Island protected him from the other car intruding into the cockpit but I believe he died from the impact because he was hit side-on and the forces could not be dissipated. Of course it is pretty hard to have much of deformable structure between the driver and the side of the car. I remember a few years ago that the HRT’s response to this issue was to move the driver’s position more inboard.

The point I am trying to make is that the softer the barrier the better. You can’t just rely of the safety features of the car itself.

I am not saying Armco is perfect but neither is concrete. I remember witnessing the noise and impact of Alan Newton destroying his Elfin MS7 into the Armco at the end of the back straight at Calder in the 1980’s. Anyone who was there that day would have to agree that he would not have survived if it had been a concrete fence. He must have been going an amazing speed with the throttle jammed wide open but did not go through the fence. He was airborne and would have flown over any sand trap that would be there today.

You suggest that Armco should be confined to road use, well I think that the people at the FIA would know far more about safe race track design than either you or I and they would not approve its continued use if they thought it dangerous, not to mentions CAMS.

Racetime, I don’t think there are too many racetracks in Australia that are designed with truck racing in mind. Sandown does not conduct truck racing so it is an irrelevant issue in this case.

How did that V8 BRute driver at Wakefield Park fair after the crash?

[Dirk]

Originally posted by Chris - Melb
You suggest that Armco should be confined to road use, well I think that the people at the FIA would know far more about safe race track design than either you or I and they would not approve its continued use if they thought it dangerous, not to mentions CAMS.

And all the new circuits that are being built are using primarily armco No they aren't, concrete my friend, yes armco in the correct places maybe but concrete all the way. There is no armco at the Albert Park is there?