My hunch is several folks who read this will think I might have driven off the edge of the sanity cliff with this headline that comes from the blog written before this one. Well, at least not yet my friends...and here is why.
In referring to Mike Fedorcak's crash of 1985, where he was critically burned, one of the factors that contributed negatively to his situation was that his helmet was damaged in the crash. Apparently it hit something behind him...a bar or some other structure. It is not hard to imagine a blow severe enough to structurally damage a helmet is hard enough to knock you unconscious, and it did. Being unconscious make it really tough to do anything...sometimes even to breathe...and even tougher to escape a flaming racecar. Current full-containment seats not only restrict head and neck movement, it helps keep other things that could be harmful away from your head and neck from the back and sides...good seat=no bars to hit.
In my years of researching racing accidents, I have found the "Law of unintended consequences" is commonly in play. Nikki Lauda had no idea a poorly designed and fitted helmet could indirectly cause him severe burns in his 1976 Formula 1 crash. Current full containment seat technology clearly did not exist in 1985 or Mike might have been using it. THAT TECHNOLOGY EXISTS NOW...PLEASE USE IT.
Go out of your way to meet Mike Fedorcak...he is a racer in every sense of the word...he understands the importance of a high-quality firesuit...and a good helmet...and all the other things racing safety advocates talk about...and will tell you the same thing...USE THEM!
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Damn it, racing safety matters!
Once in awhile, you get that "big wind" that stirs you to the bones and makes you almost manic in your fervor for whatever...it is that way for me concerning racing safety. Most days I can get through the days without getting carried away...today is not one of those days!
Last Thursday, I met with a friend I have not seen for quite awhile...Mike Fedorcak of Yoder, IN...yep, he is THAT guy, who sold Tony Stewart one of his famed Munchkins midgets. Mike is a racer...through and through. I was there to consult with Mike about a racing safety project I am working on...we got talking about his near fatal fire of over 20 years ago...what went well and what did not...I will spare you the details now, perhaps another blog entry. Let me summarize with this... #1 using full containment seats prevent burns! #2 wearing a good firesuit matters! #3 using a water -based extinguishing agent, especially with an additive matters! #4 training and practice for safety teams matter! #5 what we do well, or do poorly, matters!
Mike was severely burned in a nasty crash...he has the scars to prove it...17 surgeries and a different perspective on a number of issues later, Mike still races occasionally and owns a fabricating business...and cares about the things I mentioned above.
WHAT WE DO IN RACING SAFETY MATTERS! NEVER DOUBT IT.
Last Thursday, I met with a friend I have not seen for quite awhile...Mike Fedorcak of Yoder, IN...yep, he is THAT guy, who sold Tony Stewart one of his famed Munchkins midgets. Mike is a racer...through and through. I was there to consult with Mike about a racing safety project I am working on...we got talking about his near fatal fire of over 20 years ago...what went well and what did not...I will spare you the details now, perhaps another blog entry. Let me summarize with this... #1 using full containment seats prevent burns! #2 wearing a good firesuit matters! #3 using a water -based extinguishing agent, especially with an additive matters! #4 training and practice for safety teams matter! #5 what we do well, or do poorly, matters!
Mike was severely burned in a nasty crash...he has the scars to prove it...17 surgeries and a different perspective on a number of issues later, Mike still races occasionally and owns a fabricating business...and cares about the things I mentioned above.
WHAT WE DO IN RACING SAFETY MATTERS! NEVER DOUBT IT.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Tiered approach to fire suppression
Fire suppression in racing should be considered as being in layers of coverage and protection. The two most basic approaches involve the use of hand-held extinguishers and larger, vehicle-based systems.
I must confess, I have a prejudice toward water-based extinguishing agents. While it is the only water additive I have used recently, I have developed a great deal of confidence in Cold Fire. Mixed in various ratios with tap water, it dramatically increases water's ability to absorb heat and when dispersed on a fuel spill, it chemically interferes with the fuels ability to burn. I think that water-based agents decrease contamination, prevent re-ignition by removing heat sources, and in cases where the driver is actually involved in the fire, it can reduce burn injuries by using the agent to pull heat out of their uniform/clothing. I personally know of a driver who incurred additonal burns from rescuers unavoidable pressing his hot firesuit and FR underwear against his skin while removing him from his car...water would likely reduce if not eliminate that type injury. Water based agents also improve visibility and breathability...if you have been involved in discharging dry chemical, you know what I am talking about! I can not imagine using dry chem in a cockpit around a driver who likely is hypoxic and scared...I like breathing...breathing dry chemical is bad...been there, done that.
Whether your hand-helds are dry chemical or water-based, they are the backbone of your attack. Having hand-helds deployed around the track in non-vehicle responses can dramatically decrease response time to incidents. Getting folks to the scene quickly and, of course, safely, is huge. Decreasing the time from first ignition to first agent generally decreases the issues getting it extinguished. The longer it burns, the hotter it gets, the harder it is to get it out.
We need to also focus on training for responders with hand-held bottles. I believe there is no replacing live fire training. It does not need to be a conflagration...and it does need to use appropriate safety measures throughout. Annual skill training and periodic refreshers go a long way to make every bit of effort and resources meaningful.
The second layer of suppression, and I actually consider it as secondary, it a vehicle-based suppression system. This system is your "trump card"...what you go to when it gets tough. It does not mean that you do not think of deploying your "big gun" until it is beyond hope. On the contrary, I am a firm believer in pulling the hand line from your vehicle-based system any time you arrive at a crash scene and the driver is not out of the car or is not making his/her way out of the car. It is much easier to re-roll a line than to explain how a driver was endangered while you have a great fire system unused on your truck.
What should that vehicle-based system consist of...an interesting question...and one to be considered in another column. Any feedback you have on vehicle-based fire systems would be appreciated. Either leave it here or email to: racesafe@gmail.com.
I must confess, I have a prejudice toward water-based extinguishing agents. While it is the only water additive I have used recently, I have developed a great deal of confidence in Cold Fire. Mixed in various ratios with tap water, it dramatically increases water's ability to absorb heat and when dispersed on a fuel spill, it chemically interferes with the fuels ability to burn. I think that water-based agents decrease contamination, prevent re-ignition by removing heat sources, and in cases where the driver is actually involved in the fire, it can reduce burn injuries by using the agent to pull heat out of their uniform/clothing. I personally know of a driver who incurred additonal burns from rescuers unavoidable pressing his hot firesuit and FR underwear against his skin while removing him from his car...water would likely reduce if not eliminate that type injury. Water based agents also improve visibility and breathability...if you have been involved in discharging dry chemical, you know what I am talking about! I can not imagine using dry chem in a cockpit around a driver who likely is hypoxic and scared...I like breathing...breathing dry chemical is bad...been there, done that.
Whether your hand-helds are dry chemical or water-based, they are the backbone of your attack. Having hand-helds deployed around the track in non-vehicle responses can dramatically decrease response time to incidents. Getting folks to the scene quickly and, of course, safely, is huge. Decreasing the time from first ignition to first agent generally decreases the issues getting it extinguished. The longer it burns, the hotter it gets, the harder it is to get it out.
We need to also focus on training for responders with hand-held bottles. I believe there is no replacing live fire training. It does not need to be a conflagration...and it does need to use appropriate safety measures throughout. Annual skill training and periodic refreshers go a long way to make every bit of effort and resources meaningful.
The second layer of suppression, and I actually consider it as secondary, it a vehicle-based suppression system. This system is your "trump card"...what you go to when it gets tough. It does not mean that you do not think of deploying your "big gun" until it is beyond hope. On the contrary, I am a firm believer in pulling the hand line from your vehicle-based system any time you arrive at a crash scene and the driver is not out of the car or is not making his/her way out of the car. It is much easier to re-roll a line than to explain how a driver was endangered while you have a great fire system unused on your truck.
What should that vehicle-based system consist of...an interesting question...and one to be considered in another column. Any feedback you have on vehicle-based fire systems would be appreciated. Either leave it here or email to: racesafe@gmail.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)