Risk...acceptable Or Unacceptable?

[ruffdiamond]

The bikes have got more and more powerful but the tracks are exactly the same sizes as they were 50+ years ago so even with air fences there are going to be more crashes, do we really need so much speed that the bikes of today produce to enjoy exciting speedway? I dont think so, maybe less speed and more old fashioned track craft would see less serious injuries and the air fences would perhaps be more effective?

Its ok saying 'slow things down', but racers will still want to go faster and, they'll find a way to do it,,,

[BWitcher]

NO!!

 

If you want to do further research - I would recommend that you read Post 68 (Vince) and 69 (Haydon Hat) two excellent Posts which express mt thoughts and feelings very well.

 

It would be a waste of time me replying to your Post properly - you wouldn't believe me anyway.

 

I will read all of your Posts - but don't bother asking me any questions - I will not answer them. You know why.

 

 

I've done the research, I can't find all these serious injuries on small tracks. You claim there are lots of them.. merely asking for examples.

 

If you can't provide any, that says everything.

 

I've read Vince's excellent post, at no point does he come close to agreeing with your sweeping proclamation that its the small UK tracks that are the issue.

 

The serious injuries seem to be occuring on the bigger tracks, which is logical.

The one thing that worries me is the apparent power of the bikes today

Watching Bomber "take off" at Kings Lynn showed clearly that the machines have become monsters to handle

We've seen Tai, one of the smoothest riders in the world, find his machine leap up underneath him

I seem to recall reading recently that riders couldn't ride other riders' bikes the way they are now set up and the way they handle

And now we have Darcy's crash, caused, by the look of the video, by his bike lifting and carrying him into the back of Laguta

In the "good old days" - yes, I know there have always been bad injuries and fatalities - I remember riders regularly swapping bikes and racing their hardest in the "final of the night " in second halves at Brandon

You wouldn't be able to have that these days

So, something has to be done to "de-power" the bikes so that they are more manageable and safer to ride

 

Tai has never been one of the 'smoothest riders in the world'!

 

He's always crashed a lot throughout his career!

 

Riders lifting has always gone on, certainly since the 1980's when I started attending. Riders looping at the start gate was a fairly regular occurence in the past, you don't see it very often now.

 

One thing the modern bikes don't like is inconsistent track surfaces.

 

As regarding riding other riders bikes, again this isn't a new thing surely? Right back to when I first started going it has always been deemed difficult if you borrowed another riders bike.. not due to the engine setup but the positioning of saddle, handlebars etc.

Edited August 25, 2015 by BWitcher

[Blackadder]

Sometime late last season, I posted that there were, from memory, 26 EL/PL riders whose season had ended early due to injuries.

I have just had a quick look for this season, and I make it about 20 riders who have finished already, and about 19 others who have missed more than 2 or 3 weeks due to injury. That is roughly 1 from each category per team.

It would be nice to know if the SCB ever do season by season analysis of data produced by Incident Reports.

[Humphrey Appleby]

That is a cogent enough point but in practice who does the looking and what are the limits of their brief ? Looking at the power of the bikes would involve technical experts (where would they come from ?

I agree it's a problem to obtain unbiased technical advice, whether from tuners or riders. However, F1 seems to manage, accepting that it has much more money for research.

 

There are motor sports research facilities around that given an explanation of the issues and end result that should be achieved, could probably work out a theoretical specification for an engine and its ancillaries. Obviously that would need to be tested with experienced riders, preferably ones newly retired who should have less self interest.

[Ghostwalker]

 

 

I've done the research, I can't find all these serious injuries on small tracks. You claim there are lots of them.. merely asking for examples.

 

If you can't provide any, that says everything.

 

I've read Vince's excellent post, at no point does he come close to agreeing with your sweeping proclamation that its the small UK tracks that are the issue.

 

The serious injuries seem to be occuring on the bigger tracks, which is logical.

 

Tai has never been one of the 'smoothest riders in the world'!

 

He's always crashed a lot throughout his career!

 

Riders lifting has always gone on, certainly since the 1980's when I started attending. Riders looping at the start gate was a fairly regular occurence in the past, you don't see it very often now.

 

One thing the modern bikes don't like is inconsistent track surfaces.

 

As regarding riding other riders bikes, again this isn't a new thing surely? Right back to when I first started going it has always been deemed difficult if you borrowed another riders bike.. not due to the engine setup but the positioning of saddle, handlebars etc.

 

I don't know about the UK tracks but 8 years ago Kenny Olsson crashed at Kråkvilan in Norrköping and later died at the hospital.

[New Science]

Sometime late last season, I posted that there were, from memory, 26 EL/PL riders whose season had ended early due to injuries.

I have just had a quick look for this season, and I make it about 20 riders who have finished already, and about 19 others who have missed more than 2 or 3 weeks due to injury. That is roughly 1 from each category per team.

It would be nice to know if the SCB ever do season by season analysis of data produced by Incident Reports.

Maybe the F.I.M should carry out some analysis,they are the ones that control the specification of the bikes

[Vince]

I'm convinced that Bream has it absolutely right in his last post. It's not about the amount of power that is produced but how it's produced. If you choose to reduce power by lowering the capacity limit you would potentially be making that band where the bike is rideable even narrower and therefore 50hp could be a whole lot more dangerous than 75hp. Unlike just about any other motor sport wheelspin is safer than grip.

 

I still think a minimum stroke coupled to a rev limiter would be the way to go rather than worry about hp figures. Maybe give free rein engine wise to the GP but in my mind there is no doubt that long stroke engines with heavier flywheels would make bikes easier to ride and set up.

[Countershaftcounter]

An insert in the carb to reduce the diameter to 28mm is the easiest and cheapest solution to reduce power, (and the easiest to police)

[Humphrey Appleby]

I still think a minimum stroke coupled to a rev limiter would be the way to go rather than worry about hp figures. Maybe give free rein engine wise to the GP but in my mind there is no doubt that long stroke engines with heavier flywheels would make bikes easier to ride and set up.

I wonder if some sort of electronic traction control safety device could be developed, whereby it allows more power if the wheel is spinning, but reduces it if the wheel grips too much?

[Star Lady]

I wonder if some sort of electronic traction control safety device could be developed, whereby it allows more power if the wheel is spinning, but reduces it if the wheel grips too much?

 

I'm female and don't do technical or mechanical, so bear in mind I have no idea what the device you suggest would do, but wouldn't it be easier to simplify the engine rather than develop something extra. Less components to fail or go wrong as well.

 

Of course the biggest problem with anything that will reduce the perceived power is getting the riders to accept it!

[Ghostwalker]

An insert in the carb to reduce the diameter to 28mm is the easiest and cheapest solution to reduce power, (and the easiest to police)

 

As it have been said already, reducing power is itself not a good idea since that is one of the current issues. If you reduce power then the bikes will struggle even more to ride on anything

else then super slick tracks and that would be very boring to watch. The solution would rather be to make sure the bikes have more torque on lower rpms. As it is now the bikes requires more or

less full throttle to function properly. If you don't give enough gas the bikes will lift or stop sliding with crashes as a result.

[Vince]

I wonder if some sort of electronic traction control safety device could be developed, whereby it allows more power if the wheel is spinning, but reduces it if the wheel grips too much?

Unfortunately riders need every ounce of traction at times. Personally I would hate to see any device bought into the sport that took control from the riders.

[SCB]

So we're told it's about grip and getting it when you don't want it. So make the tyres harder but with less grooves. The tyres will provide less grip at all times that way. Also, while we're at it, why can't we have tyres for wet tracks too? Maybe have 3 or 4 types of tyre for different conditions?

Edited August 26, 2015 by SCB

[sparkafag]

There are risks involved in motor sport, but I don't accept they can't be reduced. F1 used to be incredibly dangerous and everyone said it was the decision of the drivers to participate, but the drivers eventually made a stand and it was demonstrated that the sport actually could be made substantially safer.

 

And despite all that it’s just over a month since Bianchi sadly passed away. There are safety measures that can be taken but F1 like Speedway is ultimately a high speed motor sport, you can marginalise risk but you aren’t getting to stop people being seriously injured.

Edited August 26, 2015 by sparkafag

[fatface]

 

Riders lifting has always gone on, certainly since the 1980's when I started attending. Riders looping at the start gate was a fairly regular occurence in the past, you don't see it very often now.

Dead right. Looping at the start happened fairly regularly at one time, now it's so scarce, I'd almost forgotten about it.

I don't have the technical expertise to suggest ways that the bikes can be made safer. So I will leave that to the experts.

What I will say is that losing control of the bike is actually a major feature of the sport - indeed of all off road motorsport - and you are never going to elimininate that unless you eliminate the sport itself.

Maybe I am seeing something different to other people, but in most races, at least one rider loses complete control at one point during a race doesn't he (even if it is just momentarily and he doesn't fall off)?

 

I'd say it's actually rarer for all four riders to complete an immaculate error-free four laps than not. This has always been a feature of the sport and surely always will be whilst riders race on an off-road surface in close proximity to each other.

 

Perhaps one of the most famous World Final races ever Penhall v Olsen in 1981 saw both riders lose control simultaneously on the last lap. I don't recall anyone having a major issue with it. Quite the opposite, it's an ingredient of what make the sport so unique and special.

 

I am not saying let's make the bikes even harder to control or not to look into areas where we can make racing safer. But I think we need to acknowledge that speedway racing is no smooth ride and you are never going to change that - that's part of the sport's DNA.

Edited August 26, 2015 by falcace

[Chris Brown]

I remember after Ales Drymls crash. We were all waiting for the news he'd passed away, nobody would say it but we all expected it. Thats how bad his situation was. However, he recovered and rode again. Todd Wiltshire at one time was told he'd not ride again but he ignored that and went on to ride again. Thats just two riders I can think of who had really nasty injuries and went on to ride again. If it was that dangerous they'd not got back on a bike.

 

Darcys crash was him crashing into the rider in front of him, you'll never stop that.

 

And when they gave him a 1 in 10 of survival so did I. But like many riders even that was not enough to say that enough was enough. These guys are junkies when it comes to riding bikes fast and despite anything that id done they will continue to want to go faster

 

I remember Steve Purchase saying to me when he was running Oxford that he believed that at the time if you gave the riders the choice of an air fence or £5 a point they would pretty much all have gone for £5 a point. They do not think they will crash or to be honest you would not do it would you ?

 

The sport is surely on one hand safer now than ever with the protection from helmets and racewear that has developed immensely over the years and air fences that have surely saved many horrendous injuries but the strive for speed will always mean that the riders are ahead of anything that is being done to improve safety.

 

Has air fences generally led to riders doing things they would not have done without an air fence ? Possibly, only they can tell you but whatever is done to make it safer, the riders will by their nature continue to push the boundaries of their performances which will surely counteract the safety improvements to some degree

 

Not sure what the answer is really

[Ben91]

There are more safety measures now, the sport is safer than it once was without a doubt however there will always be the risk of injury/death in motor sport of any kind and the participants know the risks, they always have.

 

If more can be done, it should be done. The criminal thing in my opinion is that silencers are seemingly being made to satisfy noise restrictions, however they are allegedly putting riders lives at risk. If tracks have to close down for noise reasons that is sad indeed, but I'd rather see a track close than a rider killed on track any day.

[New Science]

There are more safety measures now, the sport is safer than it once was without a doubt however there will always be the risk of injury/death in motor sport of any kind and the participants know the risks, they always have.

 

If more can be done, it should be done. The criminal thing in my opinion is that silencers are seemingly being made to satisfy noise restrictions, however they are allegedly putting riders lives at risk. If tracks have to close down for noise reasons that is sad indeed, but I'd rather see a track close than a rider killed on track any day.

Spot on

[Vince]

So we're told it's about grip and getting it when you don't want it. So make the tyres harder but with less grooves. The tyres will provide less grip at all times that way. Also, while we're at it, why can't we have tyres for wet tracks too? Maybe have 3 or 4 types of tyre for different conditions?

It's always going to be difficult to come up with a tyre solution as they need to be consistent and as soon as you provide less grip they will soften the engines further to compensate and it wouldn't be long before you were back to square one. That's not to say tyres couldn't be part of an overall plan.

 

The different tyres for conditions is unlikely because the numbers wouldn't be high enough to interest any manufacturer at a sensible cost.

[keepturningleft]

Compared to this, speedway is tiddlywinks.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/05/31/isle-of-man-tt-the-worlds-most-dangerous-sporting-event-3816587/

 

I urge everyone to read the article as I'm certain the sentiments expressed from the road racers apply equally to the mindset of speedway riders.