Hinchcliffe says IndyCar Domed Skidplates will ruin Indy 500 (Update)
 |
| Art St. Cyr |
Art St. Cyr, Honda Performance Development president, has echoed the sentiments of James Hinchcliffe to motorsport.com in expressing worries over car stability when running domed skids.
St. Cyr told Motorsport.com: "It is true that after last year's debacle at the 500, we were looking at how to make the cars safer. And I believe it was our partners [Wirth Research] who brought up the idea of the domed skid.
"It had been a successful solution in sportscars and it had been done before in IndyCar. It depends on who you ask if it was successful on the last generation of IndyCar.
"So yes, Honda did support the idea – we did CFD data and we did windtunnel data. But what we didn't do was a physical test, and when we did do a test with the setup that we had, it created an instability in the car."
St. Cyr said that while the principle of the domed skids was good, he preferred to be guided by the evaluations of "two of our most experienced and respected drivers."
"When the car spins, the domed skid produces more downforce," he said, "but what's safer? That or to have a car that's less likely to spin?
"So although people say, ‘Honda were for this,' yeah we were – based on data and simulations. But after putting actual butts in actual driving seats, there are major concerns. Both Ryan [Hunter-Reay] and Hinch [James Hinchcliffe] say the ride-height and consequent instability give you the feeling that the car's sitting on top of the track instead of being forced onto it with downforce.
"We're looking at this solely from a stability perspective. There were cars that had stability issues last year, and we don't want to introduce something that can cause the same problems.
"We are all for safety, and like I say, yes, the CFD and wind tunnel data show these domed skids work in the way they are supposed to. But we've done race simulations that show side effects that cause us to hesitate."
He said, "I want to make the 100th Indy 500 the show it's supposed to be. I don't want the month of May to be dominated by talking about domed skids!"
 |
| James Hinchcliffe lambastes IndyCar |
04/05/16 James Hinchcliffe told motorsport.com IndyCar's new underbodies for superspeedways are solving a problem that doesn't exist – and perhaps even creating new problems.
Ed Carpenter, Ryan Hunter-Reay and James Hinchcliffe have tested domed skids already and the Schmidt Peterson Motorsports driver is convinced that the Verizon IndyCar Series has gone in the wrong direction – and unnecessarily.
He told Motorsport.com: "It's bad, real bad. You can look at all the windtunnel data you want, but at the end of the day the reality on track is sometimes very different.
"We're going to be producing less downforce in the corners and that's going to destroy the racing at Indianapolis where there is already only one lane in the corners."
"The fact domed skids are even being considered is asinine," he remarked. "They're arguing safety, which is very bold considering we haven't had a 90-degree rollover since the DW12 came out. If you put this car in a windtunnel at 90 degrees, you have to be going 300mph for it to blow over.
"So to my mind, they're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist and creating a new one by making the cars less stable in dirty air and therefore less raceable."
"To get the ride heights that you need to run domed skids, you need to max the suspension of the pushrods, which makes them potentially way weaker.
"Well, as you can imagine, at the minute I'm a little bit sensitive to what can happen in the event of suspension failures at superspeedway velocities."
"I don't care what anyone says to you on the record," he said. "Off the record, every single driver will tell you domed skids will destroy the racing. And yet not one of us is worried about the potential safety of the old skid plate, because the 90-degree slide and flip problem simply doesn't exist."
"It feels like you're running in the dirty air created by a lot of traffic, even when you're running by yourself," he said. "That's how bad it was.
"I went into Turn 1 and the car wanted to turn right. There's a bump there that I didn't even know existed. The front end just took off on its own path, and you had to predict when it was going to turn. You make an input in the steering and try and time it for when the front end is gripped enough to make the turn.
"It basically feels like you're in a four-wheel drift – and this is Fontana we're talking about, which has one of the largest radius corners of any of our ovals."
"It's the same problem we had when we cut holes in the floor," he observed. "By making the underside less efficient, you're more reliant on top-side bodywork downforce, which is obviously what gets affected most when you're in dirty air.
"So not only will you now have less downforce running on your own because of the raised ride-height, you'll have even ‘more less' relatively speaking when you're running in traffic."
"For safety's sake, we're trying to prevent cars taking off as they slide through 90 degrees – which is insane because they don't do that anyway – but risking putting more guys in the fence as they try to follow each other.
"They're creating a much bigger problem than the one they're trying to solve. And it's mind-boggling, absolutely mind-boggling, that they don't see it and that these discussions have even made it this far."
"It's a decision that is reversible, yes," he said. "It takes nothing for us to go back… except for IndyCar to admit, ‘OK, we're going back.'
"I just hope they can and will. This is the 100th running of the Indy 500, so it could be the most-watched race in IndyCar history. If these domed skids have to come in, then fine… but leave it until Texas or Pocono, or if Fontana comes back next year.
"Whatever, man. Just do not risk ruining the great racing we've had at the ‘500' when the eyes of the world are on us."