Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html

On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:02:21 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry

So Cross the Lexus off the list or Drag racing in Bahrain?

On 3/20/2015 2:02 PM, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry

Not to worry. Some of us liked seeing it.

On 3/20/2015 2:02 PM, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry
That looks so fake.
I find it hard to believe that it happened.
I would understand if it were further down the track, but I doubt it was
going fast enough to have enough lift underneath.

I think it's fake..


--
Jeff

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 22:10:10 -0400, woodchucker
wrote:

On 3/20/2015 2:02 PM, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry
That looks so fake.
I find it hard to believe that it happened.
I would understand if it were further down the track, but I doubt it was
going fast enough to have enough lift underneath.

I think it's fake..

I've seen like crashes, even with NASCAR cars. Performance cars are
designed to create a vacuum underneath. All you have to do is get a
little air underneath and they fly like a kite.

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 22:10:10 -0400, woodchucker
wrote:

On 3/20/2015 2:02 PM, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry
That looks so fake.
I find it hard to believe that it happened.
I would understand if it were further down the track, but I doubt it was
going fast enough to have enough lift underneath.

I think it's fake..

I agree. Do a stop motion at 15 seconds and full screen - there are
no tires on the right side. Especially apparent on the right rear as
the auto rotates. Also, that amount of mass doesn't "float" like the
image does for a second. As you stated, not enough speed.

Jerry O.

Jerry Osage wrote in :

I agree. Do a stop motion at 15 seconds and full screen - there are
no tires on the right side. Especially apparent on the right rear as
the auto rotates. Also, that amount of mass doesn't "float" like the
image does for a second. As you stated, not enough speed.

No, I beleive it's real. I went and googled the team name;
the car is actually pretty much TA/FC class (i.e. it's not any
sort of stock car). It's at about half track when it lifts,
judging by the timing lights on the centerline; probably
about 180 to 200 mph, which is plenty fast enough to lift.
Being a funny car it also is very light, so the floating
is typical behavior...really the only surprise is that the
body didn't come off the frame.

John

On 3/21/2015 8:59 AM, John McCoy wrote:
Jerry Osage wrote in :

I agree. Do a stop motion at 15 seconds and full screen - there are
no tires on the right side. Especially apparent on the right rear as
the auto rotates. Also, that amount of mass doesn't "float" like the
image does for a second. As you stated, not enough speed.

No, I beleive it's real. I went and googled the team name;
the car is actually pretty much TA/FC class (i.e. it's not any
sort of stock car). It's at about half track when it lifts,
judging by the timing lights on the centerline; probably
about 180 to 200 mph, which is plenty fast enough to lift.
Being a funny car it also is very light, so the floating
is typical behavior...really the only surprise is that the
body didn't come off the frame.

John


Last time I was at a drag race (decades ago) the AA fuel dragsters would
lift the front end just from the torque at the start. They just keep
getting faster.

If you've never been a drag race fan, you'd have no idea of the speeds
achieved and how fast you get to them.


Top Fuel Dragster (TF/D). The rail dragsters, or "diggers", are the
fastest class. Among the fastest-accelerating machines in the world,
these cars can cover the dragstrip in less than 3.8 seconds and record
trap speeds over 325 mph. Top Fuel cars are 25 feet long and weigh 2,320
pounds in race-ready trim. Methanol fuel mixed with up to 90%
nitromethane is used.

Typical Funny Cars
Top Fuel Funny Car (TF/FC) Similar to their Top Fuel counterparts but
with a shorter wheelbase and a carbon-fiber body that loosely resembles
a production-based automobile, Funny Cars, or “floppers,” routinely run
in the 4.0s and can exceed 315 mph.

Might want to cross this one off you list.
https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html
Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry, Leon

Not to worry. Some of us liked seeing it. (Ed Pawlowski)
Like moths to a flame?

Ed Pawlowski wrote in
:

Last time I was at a drag race (decades ago) the AA fuel dragsters
would lift the front end just from the torque at the start. They just
keep getting faster.

Yeah, you don't see that so much now because all the fuel
cars have wheelie bars. If the front wheels come up more
than a tad, the wheelie bar hits and unloads the rear tires,
and then you get a big cloud of smoke instead of a wheelstand.

Typical Funny Cars
Top Fuel Funny Car (TF/FC) Similar to their Top Fuel counterparts but
with a shorter wheelbase and a carbon-fiber body that loosely
resembles a production-based automobile, Funny Cars, or “floppers,”
routinely run in the 4.0s and can exceed 315 mph.

TA/FC, like the Lexus in the video, run low sixes at
around 270 in the NHRA. I doubt the Lexus would quite
do that, since the team didn't look like they really had
a handle on what they were doing. Still pretty fast.

John

On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 11:38:08 AM UTC-4, John McCoy wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote in
:

Last time I was at a drag race (decades ago) the AA fuel dragsters
would lift the front end just from the torque at the start. They just
keep getting faster.

Yeah, you don't see that so much now because all the fuel
cars have wheelie bars. If the front wheels come up more
than a tad, the wheelie bar hits and unloads the rear tires,
and then you get a big cloud of smoke instead of a wheelstand.


Someone should tell this *electric* drag team about those wheelie bars.

Watch it from the start or FF to 1:00 minute for the real fun.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=TUDX5MmulF0

On 3/20/2015 9:10 PM, woodchucker wrote:
On 3/20/2015 2:02 PM, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry
That looks so fake.
I find it hard to believe that it happened.
I would understand if it were further down the track, but I doubt it was
going fast enough to have enough lift underneath.

I think it's fake..


Well these cars tend to lift their front ends anyway, think wheelie, the
flat bottom of the vehicle catches air and that is that.
But there does seem to be little damage to the retainer fence.

On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 2:41:52 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 9:10 PM, woodchucker wrote:
On 3/20/2015 2:02 PM, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry
That looks so fake.
I find it hard to believe that it happened.
I would understand if it were further down the track, but I doubt it was
going fast enough to have enough lift underneath.

I think it's fake..


Well these cars tend to lift their front ends anyway, think wheelie, the
flat bottom of the vehicle catches air and that is that.
But there does seem to be little damage to the retainer fence.

Damage to the fence can be seen in this video. If they faked it, then they faked it from 2 different angles. I'm thinking it's real.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=1NWibhly_0Q

Here's a still from the other end of the track:

http://tinyurl.com/lexus-drag-crash

http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hph...72449100_n.jpg

Do a Google image search for "lexus is drag crash" (no quotes) for more.

On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 1:04:20 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 22:10:10 -0400, woodchucker
wrote:

On 3/20/2015 2:02 PM, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry
That looks so fake.
I find it hard to believe that it happened.
I would understand if it were further down the track, but I doubt it was
going fast enough to have enough lift underneath.

I think it's fake..

I agree. Do a stop motion at 15 seconds and full screen - there are
no tires on the right side. Especially apparent on the right rear as
the auto rotates. Also, that amount of mass doesn't "float" like the
image does for a second. As you stated, not enough speed.

Jerry O.

Here's a video from another angle. Do a stop motion at 24-ish and then again at 48-ish. Right side tires are clearly visible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=1NWibhly_0Q

If they faked it, they faked it from a couple of different angles and with a couple of different video qualities. They also backed up their fake video with fake followup news reports.

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/NewsD...storyid=396846

I vote "real".

On 3/21/2015 5:11 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 2:41:52 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 9:10 PM, woodchucker wrote:
On 3/20/2015 2:02 PM, Leon wrote:
On 3/20/2015 12:27 PM, Leon wrote:
Might want to cross this one off you list.

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/watch-l...153040074.html


Woops! That was suppose to be in an email.. Sorry
That looks so fake.
I find it hard to believe that it happened.
I would understand if it were further down the track, but I doubt it was
going fast enough to have enough lift underneath.

I think it's fake..


Well these cars tend to lift their front ends anyway, think wheelie, the
flat bottom of the vehicle catches air and that is that.
But there does seem to be little damage to the retainer fence.

Damage to the fence can be seen in this video. If they faked it, then they faked it from 2 different angles. I'm thinking it's real.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=1NWibhly_0Q

Here's a still from the other end of the track:

http://tinyurl.com/lexus-drag-crash

http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hph...72449100_n.jpg

Do a Google image search for "lexus is drag crash" (no quotes) for more.


ok, I'll recind, he is farther down the road then I thought, the damage
to the fence looks real, the severe left trajectory in the air is still
questionable, but that can be an airfoil effect.

I'm in on real now.


--
Jeff

woodchucker wrote in
:

ok, I'll recind, he is farther down the road then I thought, the
damage to the fence looks real, the severe left trajectory in the air
is still questionable, but that can be an airfoil effect.

This is getting way off on a tangent, but going to the left
like that is common when cars fly. If you can find video
of the Mercedes at Le Mans a few years back, they did the
same thing. I suspect it's a gyroscopic effect due to the
rotation of the internals of the engine.

John

"John McCoy"
wrote in message
woodchucker
wrote in

ok, I'll recind, he is farther down the road
then I thought, the
damage to the fence looks real, the severe left
trajectory in the air
is still questionable, but that can be an
airfoil effect.

This is getting way off on a tangent, but going
to the left
like that is common when cars fly. If you can
find video
of the Mercedes at Le Mans a few years back,
they did the
same thing. I suspect it's a gyroscopic effect
due to the
rotation of the internals of the engine.

John

More likely driveline torque. As the pinion
gear drives the ring gear, one rear wheel
gets an increase in load while the opposite
wheel gets unloaded enough to act like this.
The wheel more lightly loaded will have less
friction than the other allowing slippage.

"Phil Kangas" wrote in news:men8ei$nc1$1@dont-
email.me:


"John McCoy"
wrote in message
woodchucker
wrote in

ok, I'll recind, he is farther down the road
then I thought, the
damage to the fence looks real, the severe left
trajectory in the air
is still questionable, but that can be an
airfoil effect.

This is getting way off on a tangent, but going
to the left
like that is common when cars fly. If you can
find video
of the Mercedes at Le Mans a few years back,
they did the
same thing. I suspect it's a gyroscopic effect
due to the
rotation of the internals of the engine.

John

More likely driveline torque. As the pinion
gear drives the ring gear, one rear wheel
gets an increase in load while the opposite
wheel gets unloaded enough to act like this.
The wheel more lightly loaded will have less
friction than the other allowing slippage.

That would make sense if the wheels were on the ground.
However, the cases I'm thinking of (including this case
with the Lexus drag car) the car didn't start turning
until it was in the air, all four wheels off the
pavement.

That pretty much forces it to be either an aero effect
or a gyroscopic effect.

John

"John McCoy"
wrote in message
"Phil Kangas"
wrote in
email.me:


"John McCoy"
wrote in message
woodchucker
wrote in

ok, I'll recind, he is farther down the road
then I thought, the
damage to the fence looks real, the severe
left
trajectory in the air
is still questionable, but that can be an
airfoil effect.

This is getting way off on a tangent, but
going
to the left
like that is common when cars fly. If you can
find video
of the Mercedes at Le Mans a few years back,
they did the
same thing. I suspect it's a gyroscopic
effect
due to the
rotation of the internals of the engine.

John

More likely driveline torque. As the pinion
gear drives the ring gear, one rear wheel
gets an increase in load while the opposite
wheel gets unloaded enough to act like this.
The wheel more lightly loaded will have less
friction than the other allowing slippage.

That would make sense if the wheels were on the
ground.
However, the cases I'm thinking of (including
this case
with the Lexus drag car) the car didn't start
turning
until it was in the air, all four wheels off the
pavement.

That pretty much forces it to be either an aero
effect
or a gyroscopic effect.

John

It's aero at that point. Try swinging a piece
of cardboard into the wind.. ;)}

"Phil Kangas" wrote in news:menj16$44l$1@dont-
email.me:

It's aero at that point. Try swinging a piece
of cardboard into the wind.. ;)}

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:10:07 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

"Phil Kangas" wrote in news:menj16$44l$1@dont-
email.me:

It's aero at that point. Try swinging a piece
of cardboard into the wind.. ;)}

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John take a half filled ballon with air, squeeze it in your hand about
a half a dozen times. I will bet you will never get the same shape
twice. Flip that car six times and you probably won't get the same
crash.

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 2:13:19 PM UTC-4, Markem wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:10:07 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

"Phil Kangas" wrote in news:menj16$44l$1@dont-
email.me:

It's aero at that point. Try swinging a piece
of cardboard into the wind.. ;)}

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John take a half filled ballon with air, squeeze it in your hand about
a half a dozen times. I will bet you will never get the same shape
twice. Flip that car six times and you probably won't get the same
crash.

Especially since it will be shaped differently after each crash. ;-)

On 03/23/2015 07:10 AM, John McCoy wrote:
"Phil Kangas" wrote in news:menj16$44l$1@dont-
email.me:

It's aero at that point. Try swinging a piece
of cardboard into the wind.. ;)}

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John

My old '66 442 would try to turn left and the left side would lift when
I got on it.


--
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-Winston Churchill

Doug Winterburn wrote in news:5510637d$0$58050
:

My old '66 442 would try to turn left and the left side would lift when
I got on it.

Yeah, that's the torque reaction Phil was talking about
several posts upthread.

John

Markem wrote in
:

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:10:07 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John take a half filled ballon with air, squeeze it in your hand about
a half a dozen times. I will bet you will never get the same shape
twice. Flip that car six times and you probably won't get the same
crash.

Except that, as I noted many posts back, when race cars
fly they almost always turn to the left. If it was
random, as you suggest, it should be close to 50-50
either side.

John

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 3:26:40 PM UTC-4, John McCoy wrote:
Markem wrote in
:

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:10:07 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John take a half filled ballon with air, squeeze it in your hand about
a half a dozen times. I will bet you will never get the same shape
twice. Flip that car six times and you probably won't get the same
crash.

Except that, as I noted many posts back, when race cars
fly they almost always turn to the left. If it was
random, as you suggest, it should be close to 50-50
either side.

John

Could it be the extra weight of the driver, steering wheel and other apparatus on that side of the car?

When we used to race Soap Box Derby cars (where the driver is centered in the car) we weren't just concerned with front-to-rear weight distribution, we also worked hard to balance the car side-to-side and eliminate cross-bind.

A 255 lb car that weighs in with 60 lbs on each front wheel and 67.5 on each rear wheel is OK. One that weighs in at 62L-58R in the front and 65.5L-69.5R in the rear is balanced side-to-side, but it's seriously twisted (AKA cross-bind). That's never good.

I don't know if drag car or track car teams get involved with side-to-side weight distribution or cross-bind. Do they? (I think they must.)

DerbyDad03 wrote in
:

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 3:26:40 PM UTC-4, John McCoy wrote:
Markem wrote in
:

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:10:07 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John take a half filled ballon with air, squeeze it in your hand
about a half a dozen times. I will bet you will never get the same
shape twice. Flip that car six times and you probably won't get the
same crash.

Except that, as I noted many posts back, when race cars
fly they almost always turn to the left. If it was
random, as you suggest, it should be close to 50-50
either side.

John

Could it be the extra weight of the driver, steering wheel and other
apparatus on that side of the car?

Well, that's a good point.

I don't know if drag car or track car teams get involved with
side-to-side weight distribution or cross-bind. Do they? (I think they
must.)

I think drag cars are probably set up balanced right-left.
Oval track cars are setup with extra left side weight (*).
Road course cars, like the Le Mans cars are definately set
up with an even right-left weight.

(* on pavement, at least. Dirt cars are often set up heavy
on the right side).

John

Markem wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:10:07 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

"Phil Kangas" wrote in
news:menj16$44l$1@dont- email.me:

It's aero at that point. Try swinging a piece
of cardboard into the wind.. ;)}

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John take a half filled ballon with air, squeeze it in your hand about
a half a dozen times. I will bet you will never get the same shape
twice. Flip that car six times and you probably won't get the same
crash.

I have to disagree. The balloon goes balistic because there is no real
structure to its walls. It will react to the depressurization differently
every time. The car on the other hand is very rigid in its structure and
will react some to differing air flows but to a much lesser extent than a
balloon . There's just no comparing the reaction of a balloon to that of a
car.

--

-Mike-

DerbyDad03 wrote:

Could it be the extra weight of the driver, steering wheel and other
apparatus on that side of the car?

Probably to some small extent, but likely not to any significant extent.
You have to remember that these guys work very hard to balance the weight
distribution and the friction applied to both wheels on the track. This is
very important to their performance. Years ago we used to see Rails twist
along their axis as they went down the track, and even (to a lesser degree)
funny cars. Today - we don't see as much of that. Even with the tremendous
torque these guys develop, we don't see that same degree of twist. Even
distribution of weight and force is very important to these guys.

--

-Mike-

On 3/23/2015 3:48 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:

Could it be the extra weight of the driver, steering wheel and other apparatus on that side of the car?


Ever notice in the old days, the right rear tire wore out first? Put
the car in drive, put left foot on brake. Push gas pedal to the floor.
Release brake when light turns green. We learned that cars went to the
left back in high school when we first started to drive and street race.

Non-car guys used to think the right rear was the drive wheel because
they knew nothing of torque and how it twists the car and the drive
train gets power.

Traction control and ESC took the fun out of street racing.

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 6:07:37 PM UTC-4, Mike Marlow wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:

Could it be the extra weight of the driver, steering wheel and other
apparatus on that side of the car?

Probably to some small extent, but likely not to any significant extent.
You have to remember that these guys work very hard to balance the weight
distribution and the friction applied to both wheels on the track. This is
very important to their performance. Years ago we used to see Rails twist
along their axis as they went down the track, and even (to a lesser degree)
funny cars. Today - we don't see as much of that. Even with the tremendous
torque these guys develop, we don't see that same degree of twist.



Even
distribution of weight and force is very important to these guys.



Just like it is to us in serious Soap Box Derby racing. We didn't have to deal with engine torque, but the torque on any given bolt or screw could introduce the dreaded cross-bind and slow the car down.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:


Ever notice in the old days, the right rear tire wore out first? Put
the car in drive, put left foot on brake.

No, no, no! The left foot goes on the clutch! No wonder you couldn't shift
fast...


Push gas pedal to the
floor. Release brake when light turns green. We learned that cars
went to the left back in high school when we first started to drive
and street race.

Oh for the glory days... That's why it was so easy to beat you guys with
the automagic trannys back then...



Traction control and ESC took the fun out of street racing.

Preach that thought brother!

--

-Mike-

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:58:05 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

Markem wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:10:07 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

"Phil Kangas" wrote in
news:menj16$44l$1@dont- email.me:

It's aero at that point. Try swinging a piece
of cardboard into the wind.. ;)}

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John take a half filled ballon with air, squeeze it in your hand about
a half a dozen times. I will bet you will never get the same shape
twice. Flip that car six times and you probably won't get the same
crash.

I have to disagree. The balloon goes balistic because there is no real
structure to its walls. It will react to the depressurization differently
every time. The car on the other hand is very rigid in its structure and
will react some to differing air flows but to a much lesser extent than a
balloon . There's just no comparing the reaction of a balloon to that of a
car.

That would be when you squeeze da balloon. But they should have
invested in some wheel bars. The blow over was predicatable.

Markem wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:58:05 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

Markem wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:10:07 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

"Phil Kangas" wrote in
news:menj16$44l$1@dont- email.me:

It's aero at that point. Try swinging a piece
of cardboard into the wind.. ;)}

Could be. I'm a bit at a loss as to why aero would cause
it to always be a turn to the left.

John take a half filled ballon with air, squeeze it in your hand
about a half a dozen times. I will bet you will never get the same
shape twice. Flip that car six times and you probably won't get the
same crash.

I have to disagree. The balloon goes balistic because there is no
real structure to its walls. It will react to the depressurization
differently every time. The car on the other hand is very rigid in
its structure and will react some to differing air flows but to a
much lesser extent than a balloon . There's just no comparing the
reaction of a balloon to that of a car.

That would be when you squeeze da balloon. But they should have
invested in some wheel bars. The blow over was predicatable.

Agreed that wheelie bars would have been helpful but that is a completely
different matter from the comment I replied to.

--

-Mike-

Markem wrote in
:

But they should have
invested in some wheel bars. The blow over was predicatable.

Yeah, I'm surprised their class rules didn't require them. Had
that been an NHRA-sanctioned track they would have been.

John

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:27:10 -0500
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

Might want to cross this one off you list.


would guess that didn't turn out well for the driver and that
fence wasn't improving safety much

did the driver survive, that's a frightening crash


need to put an gyro in there and when we start toward vertical
shut off the gas

if it had wings it'd be called an STOL*
well at least STO








*short take off & landing