Is Nissan's DeltaWing safe in the light of its Road Atlanta testing crash?

The DeltaWing has passed the mandatory FIA tests, which include the roll-hoops, and the cockpit regulations are the same as those for both single seaters and other open-cockpit LMP cars, so the car is certainly as safe as any others on the track. What tends to help is if other drivers pay attention to where it is on the track and don’t drive into it, or blame the DeltaWing’s driver for being hit…

Of course complying with the mandatory FIA standards is the
first step in safety, as Darren confirmed in his statement above, but you and I
both know those safety standards are fallible and have been developed to
protect drivers and spectators in ‘known’ incidents.

What the video from yesterday’s collision does is draw attention to a number of
vulnerabilities that may require more considered thought. Nissan’s
DeltaWing is currently painted ‘stealth’ black (note the word stealth) and its
front track is considerably more narrow than the rear – this raises the
question over how easy it is to see (compared to other prototype cars) and how
easy it is to judge the space it needs on track, all of which needs calculated
in a split second.

I’m not defending either driver – I see it as an unfortunate racing incident -
but I am questioning whether the ease with which the DeltaWing rolled is
acceptable.

Endurance racing is structured to mix different types of race car, with vastly
different capabilities on the same track and collisions between prototypes and
sports cars is a frequent occurrence. There seems little value
pointing the finger of blame, or using such emotive language (as in Nissan’s
press release) which described the Porsche as ‘assaulting’ the DeltaWing.

Two cars collided out on track in much the same way as they do in every race,
the problem as I see it, comes from the fact that the DeltaWing weighs a
fraction of the 911 and will always come of worse in such a clash.
But let’s never accept single seaters rolling over as OK – we’ve lost too many
talented drivers in this way.

Of course complying with the mandatory FIA standards is the first step in safety, as Darren confirmed in his statement above, but you and I both know those safety standards are fallible and have been developed to protect drivers and spectators in ‘known’ incidents.

What the video from yesterday’s collision does is draw attention to a number of vulnerabilities that may require more considered thought. Nissan’s DeltaWing is currently painted ‘stealth’ black (note the word stealth) and its front track is considerably wider at the rear than the front – this raises the question over how easy it is to see (compared to other prototype cars) and how easy it is to judge the space it needs on track, all of which needs calculated in a split second.

I’m not defending either driver – I see it as an unfortunate racing incident – but I am questioning whether the ease with which the DeltaWing rolled is acceptable.

Endurance racing is structured to mix different types of race car, with vastly different capabilities on the same track and collisions between prototypes and sports cars is a frequent occurrence. There seems little value pointing the finger of blame, or using such emotive language (as in Nissan’s press release) which described the Porsche as ‘assaulting’ the DeltaWing.

Two cars collided out on track in much the same way as they do in every race, the problem as I see it, comes from the fact that the DeltaWing weighs a fraction of the 911 and will always come of worse in such a clash. But let’s never accept single seaters rolling over as OK – we’ve lost too many talented drivers in this way.

The standards are indeed fallible, that much is true – however, an impact such as this being low-speed and low-energy is unlikely to put the driver at harm. I have personally witnessed far worse crashes in single-seaters (which are arguably more prone to driver injury) and indeed in go-karts, from which the driver has walked away unscathed. As a comparison, a Formula Ford single seater which travels much slower than an LMP2 will flip much more readily than was the case here yet it is deemed a safe racing car because when it DOES crash the energy is dissipated. Likewise, Toyota’s TS030 went airborne after a similar crash at Le Mans yet no one claimed that car was inherently unsafe – it did its job and protected the driver as much as possible. Same logic must surely apply in this case. As such, I see nothing inherently unsafe with the DeltaWing design insofar as protecting the driver is concerned.

What is more concerning is the growing evidence (or so it appears) of drivers entering such races with very limited spatial awareness. Were the cars racing at night then there may be some currency in the colour scheme query; however, this was in broad daylight and any driver worth his racing licence should be able to spot a car in broad daylight – particularly when there is visible daylight between them and the other car, as was the case here. Unlike yourself, I am more inclined to blame the Porsche driver (although I concede that is personal interpretation) but he is by no means alone – Anthony Davidson was wiped out in similar circumstances by a Ferrari at Le Mans, and Romain Grosjean’s incident at the Belgian Grand Prix showed hallmarks of similar inattentiveness. The obligation to leave racing room applies both to the overtaking and overtaken drivers, and I feel this point needs hammering home to some within the fraternity. That would do more to prevent accidents such as these than knee-jerk reactions against a new design in my opinion.

Dave, you make many valid points – none of which I disagree with. My interpretation is that Anthony Davidson was travelling considerably faster when he was pitched airborne at Le Mans this year – I guess I wasn’t surprised when that happened, whereas I was when I first watched this crash. But I haven’t seen the telemetry so I may be wrong.

I also agree that any race car can roll, although thankfully I’ve never experienced it myself – I have however broken ribs (several times) when competing in karts – one of those times due to a roll (following impact with another kart).

What concerns me most about this incident is the way it has been ‘clouded’ by blame (Nissan’s press release was titled ‘Nissan DeltaWing Assaulted In Road Atlanta Testing’) , whereas it looked like a pretty common racing incident. The finger-pointing strikes me as a diversionary tactic to avoid speaking about The-Elephant-in-the-Room.

I’d have been more reassured by some introspective reflection to show that Nissan would be looking into the collision as it seeks to continue improving the DeltaWing’s performance in traffic. With such a novel design, that would have been the sensible response, hence the reason why I titled this article “Is it Safe?” For nobody to address that question seems bizzare, since the DeltaWing is still relatively untested.

LOL! The Deltawing “whacked” the Porsche and not the other way around? Sounds like LaSaffre needs a drug test! So what is he saying, that the Deltawing was bullying him off the track so he smashed it in self defense? Weak.

As for safety, the Deltawing would be safe enough racing it’s technological peers, but that Porsche might as well have been a semi truck or an SUV. The difference in mass is so great that a rollover was bound to occur regardless of tire positioning.

I don’t think there’s any doubt that the Porsche collided with the DeltaWing, however if you listen to Gunnar’s interview afterwards (see above) you’ll note that LaSaffre was merely positioning his car for the corner exit and didn’t notice that the fast approaching DeltaWing was in the midst of completing a pass.

You’re also right about the weight difference between the Porsche and the Deltawing, it was like an SUV hitting a city car, but given this is the very nature of endurance racing, shouldn’t the cars be designed for just such a circumstance?

As per my comment below, the Toyota TS030 went airborne at Le Mans after being hit in a similar accident. Should we therefore regard the TS030 as fundamentally unsafe? The logic doesn’t stand in my opinion. The most important criterion in incidents like these is whether the driver walks away from the scene – if they do, the car has done its job. If not, then changes need to be made. Gunnar walked away and the car was back for qualifying, so I do not see where the problem lies.

As I’ve already said, at no time have we suggested the DeltaWing should be ‘regarded’ as unsafe, the question being raised is in direct response to the lack of information (I’ve seen) of any post crash analysis to review any lessons that should be learned.

I don’t agree that as long as the driver walks away, then everything is fine. The DeltaWing is an unconventional design (as we all know) and while I’ve little doubt its crash ‘protection’ (i.e. the passive safety) is up to FIA standards, it was the crash ‘prevention’ (i.e. keeping all four wheels on the ground) that was surprisingly absent from any statements by the team. I certainly found that surprising.