24 replies to this topic

[Seat18E]

During the IRL Kentucky race this weekend the fuel hose was essentially ripped apart from Tomas Schekter's Panther car while exiting the pit lane.

The announcers (and probably anyone who caught the incident) mentioned that TS would soon be feeling the heat and sure enough he did - bringing the car to a mild halt at the end of the pit lane and quickly exiting - rolling as if to put out fumes which may have been around him.

After this, he stood there staring at the car.... But what was unfortunate, was the safety crew stood by and pondered their plan of attack - sort of reluctant to approach the car because they were not positive whether or not it was actually on fire. And while I am certain that any willing person could make this determination based on the heat simply emanating from any car, that still does make me concerned as to whether or not using methanol is a good idea - specifically from this incident.

That said I was wondering if there is a history of these sort of incidents - specifically using a fuel which is basically hard to visually detect.

[Don Capps]

Parnelli Jones, making a hasty exit after his car caught fire exiting the pits at Indianapolis in 1964..... or the Rick Mears pit fire....

[JtP]

One of the disadvantages of methanol is that the flames while burning are invisible. The advantages are that methanol is harder to set fire to and the fire can be extinguished easily by water.

Denny Hulme suffered burns to his hands practising for Indy in 1970. He was wearing ordinary leather driving gloves of the period and only realised the car was on fire fro the pain in his hands and seeing the gloves peeling apart on his hands.

[Richard Neale]

Another advantage is it burns rather than explodes !!!

[lanciaman]

Given the position of the car in the pit lane and the dislike that team owners have for hasty or excessive use of powder extinguishers, and their attendant mess, the fire crew may have shown some prudence. Looked like one guy gave it a burst of water, however.

[jgm]

I remember when the 'Indy' cars visited Silverstone in the late 70s. It was a cool day and one of the mechanics decided that his garage could use a little heat. So he took a fuel line off the car and ran some methanol into the bottom of a sawn-off steel barrel. He then nonchalantly tossed a lighted match into the barrel. I stepped back, astonished, and waited for the whoomth! But a nice blue flame simply danced on the surface of the methanol heating the garage perfectly safely.

[lanciaman]

Amongst the eyerolling fantasies in the movie "Driven" was the enormous explosion of fuel floating atop water after one of the car crashes. Methanol doesn't blossom like napalm nor would it burn on water. I think there's a lot of merit to using meth despite the invisible flame.

[Richard Neale]

I believe it's very easy to put a trace element into methanol to make the flame visible. It also smaells and burns much better with 10% Acetone mixed in it !!!!

[TonyCotton]

It's even better with 40% Nitro mixed in

[Richard Neale]

Tony ~ You know I only ran nitro once in my engines, when Tim was co driving and had a chance of a class win!

[Arthur Anderson]

Quote

Originally posted by Seat18E
During the IRL Kentucky race this weekend the fuel hose was essentially ripped apart from Tomas Schekter's Panther car while exiting the pit lane.

The announcers (and probably anyone who caught the incident) mentioned that TS would soon be feeling the heat and sure enough he did - bringing the car to a mild halt at the end of the pit lane and quickly exiting - rolling as if to put out fumes which may have been around him.

After this, he stood there staring at the car.... But what was unfortunate, was the safety crew stood by and pondered their plan of attack - sort of reluctant to approach the car because they were not positive whether or not it was actually on fire. And while I am certain that any willing person could make this determination based on the heat simply emanating from any car, that still does make me concerned as to whether or not using methanol is a good idea - specifically from this incident.

That said I was wondering if there is a history of these sort of incidents - specifically using a fuel which is basically hard to visually detect.

Actually, methanol is probably the safest fuel of all for race cars, in that it does not readily explode or burst into flame, not nearly as quickly or as violently as gasoline. In addition, methanold doesn't create nearly as much heat as gasoline when burning, so this lessens potential burn injuries given today's protective, fire-resistant racing uniforms. Also, I believe that IRL, and perhaps ChampCar as well, specify that a colorant be blended into methanol fuel, which gives it, rather quickly, the ability to create a yellowish haze when burning in the open air--this does make it visible even in bright sunlight. This I believe, is the result of a rash of pit fires in the 1980's and early 1990's, particularly Rick Mears' serious burns.

As for judging from the heat-shimmer rising off a race car once standing, it would be hard, at first glance, to tell if that were fire or simply engine heat rising, those cars do create tremendous heat, particularly from the exhaust headers. However, had it burst into flame, the shimmering cloud would have been instantly noticeable, particulary to emergency crews already alert to that possibility.

For Schekter to have exited the car in that fashion shows that he certainly was aware of the potential dangers, hence the quick stop, quick exit from the car, and rolling on the ground. However, I would think that had he been doused with liquid methanol which subsequently ignited, the mere act of "stop, drop and roll" as we are all taught to do in case of a clothing fire, wouldn't have stopped the fire in his uniform, that would have taken the aid of emergency crews with fire extinguishers.

Yes, as methanol readily mixes with water, water is the quick and nearly perfect choice for preventing a fire from spilled fuel, and also for extinguishing any fire in the car, or on the driver.
It is little wonder, after one sees the films of Indianapolis & Charlotte Motor Speedway in 1964, why first USAC, then CART, finally IRL and ChampCar are adamant in their insistence that only methanol be used.

Art

[Buford]

When I flipped my Sprint Car it started a major fire as it poured fuel out all down the track as it was tumbling. It ended on the right side with the tail pointed downhill to the infield pouring out fuel, which ran down the track and burned. So to the people in the infield and grandstands there was about a 50-yard wall of fire culminating in a huge fireball that appeared to be engulfing the car. However I did not even know it was on fire because it was all behind me and running downhill and all along the track where I had come from. But it was not burning in the cockpit area. Also I could not see anything because my shield was completely covered with mud and I couldn’t get it open. I was the only one there missing the show.

I stayed in the car for a while until I was sure the other cars were slowed down and was just starting to get out when a guy ran up and dragged me out and along the ground. I have told the story before of the fat guy fire fighting fiasco and the dirt throwing and totally inept post crash response, other than by the one hero guy who saved the day.

But the point is, shortly after I was dragged out of the car, the whole thing was enveloped in flames, and it was for a long time. After it was finally put out, we were amazed at the lack of fire damage even though it had been in a big one. The paint on the tail was bubbled up just a little and the leather cockpit trim was a little blackened, but basically you would never have known the car was in a big fire after the white powder was washed off. As mentioned above, the fire was actually up above the car surface, basically burning the fumes of the methanol, kind of like the bar trick, where you put lighter fluid on a finger and light it and it does not burn you for awhile. I was amazed at how it burned and didn't do much damage to the car at all. Oh and at night, you can see the flames. It is only daylight that makes it invisible. At night it makes a very pretty fire.

[Lotus23]

jgm, your story of the methanol used as heating fuel reminded me of a somewhat similar story from my tour in Germany in the late sixties.

Aided by several sergeants, I was in charge of teaching the troops basic fire-extinguisher techniques ("pull, aim, squeeze, sweep"). To add some realism to the exercise, we used a 55-gal drum cut off so it was about 6" deep: set it out in the middle of the tarmac, put a cup or two of petrol in it, set it alight, extinguished it, then repeated the process about 50 times over.

At the end of the day, I still had a little over a gallon of petrol remaining. Several of the sergeants urged me -- as a grand finale -- to pour it all in the pan, then toss a match at it. Like most idiot ideas, it seemed like a good one to me. I figured it would blaze up a good bit, so I stood back and flung the match at it from about 3 feet away...

The resulting "WHOOMP!" could've been heard on the other side of the post. A column of thick black smoke roiled a couple hundred feet into the sky, and the remaining fire extinguishers were rapidly pressed into service -- for real this time!

Later, the Old Man asked me how the training had gone. "No problem, sir!" was my response. He never queried me further, and I certainly volunteered no details!

[marion5drsn]

I have been out of the Navy for about 59 years but I wonder how the Navy men are trained in fire fighting techniques? Better than the Army men I hope! Jet fuel is difficult to light afire but damned difficult to put out once on fire. M.L. Anderson

[MPea3]

Quote

Originally posted by TonyCotton
It's even better with 40% Nitro mixed in

The smell will definitely clear out your sinuses, too!

[Frank S]

Quote

Originally posted by MPea3


The smell will definitely clear out your sinuses, too!

There were a few running nitro-methanol-Castrol R at Monterey. Brought tears to me eyes, they did. Physics and Nostalgia: a potent cocktail.

[VAR1016]

Best aroma I have experienced was from the Mercedes-Benz W125 at the Goodwood Festival a few years ago.

As the car roared past, a number of people simultaneously exlaimed: "Ah! Marzipan"- and indeed that is what I smelled too.

PdeRL

[T54]

Having been involved and represented one of the world's leading driver safety equipment companies from 1982 to 1995, and still consulting with it, I have seen more than one scary fire or crash where the utter ignorance of all concerned was absolutely amazing.

The recent Corvette crash of Dale Jr. at Sears Point illustrate perfectly the dumbness of some drivers: while our company fitted all the other drivers with breathable SFI-10 rated multi-layer suits, balaclavas and Nomex III long underwear, Dale was supplied by his usual Italian contractor with a measly two-layer SFI-5 suit, and refused to wear underwear or a balaclava.
The resultant burns were due in part to the melting nylon safety belts around his unprotected neck and legs, the suit offering little protection against heat transfer.

I compare this to the horrific fire in which Rocky Moran was trapped in a Toyota-Eagle GTP car, which burst in flames while testing. Rocky was trapped nearly 40 seconds in the burning car, nearly asphyxiated by the lack of oxygen as the flames consumed what was available. When freed at last, Rocky' s suit, identical in technology to the one used by the current works Corvette drivers, was seriously charred in many areas, but he suffered no other burns than on his face through his helmet eye port. While he lowered his visor, the heat was too intense.

It has always been amazing for me to witness the utter ignorance of racing drivers, team engineers and team managers as well as sponsors about the equipment available to protect one major asset of their team: the driver himself. This is especially true of American oval-style racing where the drivers often wear what amounts to zero protection in the form of one or two layers of material I can light with a match.

What scares me even more today is to see the FIA embrace a British laboratory ignorant dictat on the stupidest new rules for F1 helmets, CERTAIN to cause GREATER physical damage to the drivers than the Snell-2000 spec helmets. When politics take over expertise, watch out!
Regards,

T54

[soubriquet]

Quote

Originally posted by T54
What scares me even more today is to see the FIA embrace a British laboratory ignorant dictat on the stupidest new rules for F1 helmets, CERTAIN to cause GREATER physical damage to the drivers than the Snell-2000 spec helmets. When politics take over expertise, watch out!
Regards,

T54

Could you enlighten me (us) please?

Cheers
S

[T54]

Full carbon helmets with polystyrene liners as mandated by the FIA for F1 MAY sustain a greater FIRST impact than the state of the art carbon-belted, aramid-top helmets fitted with polyurethane liners. Not by much: from the Snell-2000 SA standard of a max 300G impact, they may be able to go down to 100G to the magnesium form fitted inside it for the test. But several Snell-2000 helmets can be as low as 125G on first impact, and still sustain a secondary below 200G, and a third under 300G.
This is virtually IMPOSSIBLE with a FIA helmet: if the first impact MAY have beneficial advantages over a Snell helmet, the second impact in the same location will find a totally collapsed liner and will cause its occupant much greater physical damage, way above 300G. This, the FIA and its "lab" do not care.

Furthermore, it is impossible to fit a resilient polyurethane liner to the FIA helmets because the carbon shell is too hard to sustain an impact without transmitting much more of the G-forces to the head, and will more than likely cause much greater damage. Several years ago (1991), the Simpson helmet company had to pull a full carbon helmet off the market and recall all the ones sold for this exact same reason.

The lack of understanding of the actual function of a helmet by the FIA and especially their desire to step away from the long-established and well-proven Snell standard is purely political and has little to do with actual safety. Then again, it is noteworthy to know that all the helmets used in F1 today come with a fat check inside the liner instead of a bill.

T54

[D-Type]

This is worrying.

Weren't Niki Lauda's injuries in his Nurburgring accident compounded by the make of helmet he was wearing for the sponsorship?

[T54]

Quote

Weren't Niki Lauda's injuries in his Nurburgring accident compounded by the make of helmet he was wearing for the sponsorship?

This was in another era when the physical forces involved were not as clearly understood as they are today, so I am not sure that any blame should be placed about his "choice" (plus $$$$ already) of helmet. Suffice to say that nowadays and withstanding the above statement about the utter ignorance of the drivers about their own safety, the "choice" of the drivers about one or another helmet or driving suit is now strictly dictated by which company is submitting the better financial offer. As an example, expect King Michael Schumacher to be wearing one of those glow-in-the-dark Puma suits next year, may be the entire Ferrari team for that matters. The little OMP company cannot compete in this big dollar race, the Puma company has the dough. Also expect other non-safety companies to jump in the arena because they want this for their image, but they have little or no experience in what actually WORKS to protect a driver. The FIA standards are at best minimal, so almost any half-a$$ garment will pass their test...
Never mind the difference in actual comfort, looks and especially, protection. I am afraid that after the AlpineStar deal with Renault, F1 is going down the road to clown school.
Their problem, their life. I can cry in the wilderness all day long, and Dr. Terry Trammel will still be our ally vs. the higher forms of life found in the FIA staff.
Regards,

T54

[soubriquet]

Thanks T54. Illuminating. Makes the Max-FIA safety drive. seem a little hollow.

Cheers
S

[Muzza]

A very important advantage of methanol over other fuels is that it can (of course) be manufactured after renewable sources, such as eucalyptus, corn, sugar cane and other cultures - instead of fossile fuels.

This is, in my opinion, reason enough to have its use spread beyond IRL and Champ Cars.

Additionally, methanol and ethanol generate much, much less carbon monoxide and NOxs per gram of fuel burned or per joule of energy generated than hydrocarbonic fuels.


Muzza
Tree-hugging enviromentalist and racing fan

[D-Type]

I understand they run road cars on ethanol or an ethanol/petrol mix in Brazil. The alcohol is fermented from cane sugar sugar and the cane pulp is then burned to provide the heat to distil it off.

Coming back on topic, I hadn't appreciated the safer firefighting because of methanol and ethanol's solubility in water.

I'm not sure about the solubility of nitro-methane though! Are the infamous fumes from burned or unburnt n-m?