da Matta bizzare on track accident at Road America

[Nick Koan]

Deer can fuck up regular cars, I can't imagine what one would do to a Champ Car race car. I mean, that has to be almost like hitting a wall head on in one of those things at 100+ mph. This report has the deer directly hitting his helmet.

Other reports say a brain scan reported a subdural hematoma, and he was unconcious while he was being airlifted. Updates are coming in, and the surgery was successful, but he's still in critical condition.

Da Matta remains in critical condition

By David Malsher Friday, August 4th 2006, 16:23 GMT

Cristiano da Matta continues to recover from the serious head injury he incurred following a high speed shunt at Road America yesterday.

He remains in the critical care unit of Theda Clark Memorial Hospital in Neenah, Wisconsin, and is being constantly monitored.

Da Matta suffered a subdural hematoma - bleeding between the brain and the skull - to the right side of his head.

The 32-year-old Brazilian struck a deer at a 130mph part of the 4.048-mile course. Skidmarks on the track indicate da Matta saw the deer as he came over the crest of the hill approaching Turn 6, and RuSPORT engineers have revealed he had got down to 90mph but could not avoid the animal, which struck his crash helmet.

The RuSPORT car swerved right and had a side-on impact with the concrete wall just after the bridge, and slid along it, crossing the gravel trap at Turn 6 before relatively gently hitting the tyre wall.

The Champ Car Safety Team were on the scene within 40 seconds and found da Matta unconscious.

Da Matta was not taken to the Champ Car Medical Center but was instead airlifted straight from the scene and taken to Theda Clark.

Close friends and colleagues Bruno Junqueira and Oriol Servia are reported to be at his bedside in intensive care and are expected to be joined by Tony Kanaan and Christian Fittipaldi.

[sperry]

Crazy bad shit. Yikes.

[Dean]

Wow, that is terrible...

While I do not presume to know the details of the incident, and certianly can't look out his eyes during the incident, I can use this incident to reinforce 2 things we cover at Audi Club events.

1. Look away from change. You tend to go where you look. Looking at animals, junk falling off a truck, small children running into the street, approaching walls/trees, etc in an emergency situation will only tend to make you end up hitting them. Look where you want to be/go, not at the thing you want to avoid. this is incrediably difficult to do and requires regular practice on and off the track.

2. Turn first, brake later. Unless there is nowhere to go, turning is often a much better method of avoiding something than braking. from 60 MPH, it take over 100ft to stop, but only a car length or two to move a car width to the left or right.

[Nick Koan]

Yeah, with the crest in the hill, it seems like he had probably a second or less to decide what to do. There are probably a million wrong things to do in that incident, and one right way to avoid the deer.

This almost brings out one of my worst fears on course, of an immovable object being on course. Cars, mostly, can't defy the laws of physics and suddenly stop in your path. But a deer wandering across the place is just scary. I mean, think of the horses that sometimes graze close to the edge of RFR.

[Dean]

Again, I am not presuming to say I could have missed the deer, or that he did something wrong. Though the statement that "he had got down to 90mph" is quite interesting/indicative of the action he took prior to the impact. Again, not saying I could have done better/differently.

Just like deer freeze and look at oncoming headlights, us humans fixate on things as well. If anything, this shows us it is possible that it can even happen to seasoned professional drivers who keep their eyes up and ahead for a living.

So next time you get in your car, conciously think about where you are looking.

Are your eyes scanning? left mirror, left close, way ahead, right close, right mirror, way ahead, center mirror, way ahead, repeat... Or are you in kind of a tunnel vision glazed fog staring at the bumper/taillights in front of you...

When you are behind somebody do you conciously look over around, and through them? Do you change lanes to clear/improve your field of vision?

When you walk the course at autocross, do you turn your head and look where you want the car to end up after the next corner/element, or keep your head/eyes straight ahead?

[JonnydaJibba]

Wow, that's scary.

[MPREZIV]

Originally Posted by Dean

So next time you get in your car, conciously think about where you are looking.

Are your eyes scanning? left mirror, left close, way ahead, right close, right mirror, way ahead, center mirror, way ahead, repeat... Or are you in kind of a tunnel vision glazed fog staring at the bumper/taillights in front of you...

When you are behind somebody do you conciously look over around, and through them? Do you change lanes to clear/improve your field of vision?

When you walk the course at autocross, do you turn your head and look where you want the car to end up after the next corner/element, or keep your head/eyes straight ahead?

You know, after many conversations with you on this Dean, I have made a conscious effort to do just so, and be much more attentive to my place on the track, as opposed to directly in front of me. It has helped IMMENSELY with my control over the vehicle. I'm actually driving my car now, instead of simply being along for the ride!

+1 for keeping your eyes up!

That's horrible to hear about the on track accident. There are so many *obvious* dangers involved in road racing, and apparently a few not so obvious ones as well...

[dknv]

We made the trip to Washington this past weekend, up 395/36/44/89 to I-5, twilight both up and back, and saw alot of deer on both sides of these roads, as well as the stains from kills on the road that were not fully cleaned up. I got really tense driving that stretch. Mark and I talked about what I would do if a deer jumped out in front of me. My thought, going back to the lane toss exercises, was to try to drive around it, although that scenario really depends on what you might be having to drive towards. In our case, the sides of the road fall off in many places, in which case maybe it's better to get hard on the brakes and get yourself slowed down as much as possible before impact, vs. going off an edge and rolling. Hard to know what would be the lesser of 2 evils.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by dknv

We made the trip to Washington this past weekend, up 395/36/44/89 to I-5, twilight both up and back, and saw alot of deer on both sides of these roads, as well as the stains from kills on the road that were not fully cleaned up. I got really tense driving that stretch. Mark and I talked about what I would do if a deer jumped out in front of me. My thought, going back to the lane toss exercises, was to try to drive around it, although that scenario really depends on what you might be having to drive towards. In our case, the sides of the road fall off in many places, in which case maybe it's better to get hard on the brakes and get yourself slowed down as much as possible before impact, vs. going off an edge and rolling. Hard to know what would be the lesser of 2 evils.

I've always been in the "just slow down as much as possible and hit it head on" camp. I'd rather have a clear-cut case of hitting a deer and getting everything repaired by my comprehensive insurance, than swerving, losing control, and crashing the car and having it count as an at-fault accident.

Plus, if you swerve and wreck anyway, it's more than likely going to be a bigger, more dangerous wreck, than just plowing over a deer, assuming the deer doesn't come through the windshield.

It's of course a lose-lose situation, but unless I'm sure I can drive around the deer, I'm just going to ride the ABS as hard as I can and attempt to steer clear rather than attempt a risky lane toss manuver.

[Dean]

Dead is dead... a deer/cow/moose through the windshield is likely going to get you dead at 60MPh or so.

Tree, and cliffs may be more survivable.

Enough of a lane change to miss half the deer might be enough to save your life as well.

Look behind the deer, not in front of it...

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Dean

Dead is dead... a deer/cow/moose through the windshield is likely going to get you dead at 60MPh or so.

Tree, and cliffs may be more survivable.

Enough of a lane change to miss half the deer might be enough to save your life as well.

Look behind the deer, not in front of it...

That's why you get on the brakes and hit the deer at 20 mph.

Ke=.5MVV... reducing the velocity is the most effective way to reduce the energy of the accident. If my choice is a deer head on at 20 and a tree sideways at 60... the answer is obvious. Granted, swerving give you the possibility of hitting nothing, but it's risky.

[Dean]

If there is enough time to get down to 20MPH, there is more than enough time to miss the object.

It's physics time again... braking distance is a square function, not linear...


Roughly speaking it is x² ÷ 20 + x = Overall stopping distance in feet. where X = speed

I think some of these distances are a bit long based on modern tires and brakes, but here goes anyway...
Using some Intarweb data we see that it only takes 40 feet to make an unplanned stop from 20 MPH. and only 20 feet of that is actually stopping. From 60MPH, it takes 240 feet, take away the last 20 feet for your 20 MPH stop, and you need 220 feet to get from 60 to 20.

Hope all the deer are kind enough to step out in front of you 2/3rds of a football field in front of you.

Most of the time braking should be done after making a directional change, but in todays ABS world, you can even steer after you brake. The problem is people don't! They stare at the object they are going to hit pedal jammed to the floor, and arms locked braced for impact.

Turn the F'ing wheeel!

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Dean

If there is enough time to get down to 20MPH, there is more than enough time to miss the object.

It's physics time again... braking distance is a square function, not linear...


Roughly speaking it is x² ÷ 20 + x = Overall stopping distance in feet. where X = speed

I think some of these distances are a bit long based on modern tires and brakes, but here goes anyway...
Using some Intarweb data we see that it only takes 40 feet to make an unplanned stop from 20 MPH. and only 20 feet of that is actually stopping. From 60MPH, it takes 240 feet, take away the last 20 feet for your 20 MPH stop, and you need 220 feet to get from 60 to 20.

Hope all the deer are kind enough to step out in front of you 2/3rds of a football field in front of you.

Most of the time braking should be done after making a directional change, but in todays ABS world, you can even steer after you brake. The problem is people don't! They stare at the object they are going to hit pedal jammed to the floor, and arms locked braced for impact.

Turn the F'ing wheeel!

If braking distance vs. speed is a second order function, and Kinetic Energy is a second order function, then braking linearly reduces the energy in the system before impact. If you have twice as much distance available to you, you can reduce the energy in the system by half. Swerving only reduces the energy in the system by the tiny fraction of speed you bleed off due to tire scrub. You put all your eggs in the basket that hopes you don't hit anything, meanwhile increasing the chance that if you do hit something, it's not w/ the nicely designed front crumple zones, but with the side or the roof of the car.

Like I said earlier, I'd stomp on the ABS and steer away from the impact if possible. But I don't believe in attempting to swerve to avoid the impact. Maybe your definition of swerving is different than mine, but to me swerving is attempting to use 100% of your traction to change direction rapidly, which leaves no traction for braking. I say brake as hard as you can, if there's tire leftover, steer away. Don't swerve.

[Dean]

The key with a tall animal is that you have no crumple zones in your windshield. Even a 100 lb. stationary dear coming through your windshield at 20 MPH without a helmet is likely to seriously wound or kill you. Anything you can do to miss it probably improves your odds of survival.

I'd much rather use those crumple zones & 8 layer B Pillar hitting a tree / rolling over than the deer at the same speed, or even a little less.

And it requires far less distance, and tire friction to move 6 feet left or right than it does to stop from 60MPH, and after you move that distance, you can brake.

This is why Audi club as well as Bondurant, etc. teach "lane toss" or other avoidance maneuvers, because they typically work better than the classic stomp on the brake method.

[Kevin M]

theory vs. application

In theory, I agree with Scott. Hitting a deer/dog/whatever sucks, but sucks less than flipping your car. The guy who had my courier route before me was killed on 80 when he flipped his pickup trying to dodge a deer.

In application, unfortunately, I react with the Dean method. I did a double-lane-change before I even had time to tell myself not to last year when a large dog popped up just in front of me on I-80.. in the rain, in a car setup for autocross, with 400 pounds of crap over the rear axles. Since I didn't die, or even put a tire wrong, I guess this is one of those no-right-answer debates, because every situation will be different.

[MikeK]

The plane takes off!!11!1eleventy!

[GST Mike]

That sucks for the driver of that champ car, if he was coming over the crest he probably had very limited traction to make a correction to his overall angle of attack.

I nailed a deer on 80 right on the Nevada/Utah border about a year ago in my Mazda rally car, all I can say is I was doing about 85mph and it was pitch black a couple of big rigs came on the other side so I was a little light blind (as well as tired had been up since 5am and it was about 2am when I crossed the state line) when I got my vision back I just saw this head and eyes staring at me. I swerved as much as I could towards the shoulder without flipping the car and managed to swipe the deer with my fender/door and A piller (the head hit my A piller, right where the rollcage connected to it).

I think if I had just braked I would have been a goner.

Mike

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by MikeK

The plane takes off!!11!1eleventy!

ThreadWin right there.

Originally Posted by sperry

I've always been in the "just slow down as much as possible and hit it head on" camp. I'd rather have a clear-cut case of hitting a deer and getting everything repaired by my comprehensive insurance, than swerving, losing control, and crashing the car and having it count as an at-fault accident.

Plus, if you swerve and wreck anyway, it's more than likely going to be a bigger, more dangerous wreck, than just plowing over a deer, assuming the deer doesn't come through the windshield.

It's of course a lose-lose situation, but unless I'm sure I can drive around the deer, I'm just going to ride the ABS as hard as I can and attempt to steer clear rather than attempt a risky lane toss manuver.

Intellectually I'd agree with you except this exact thing happened to me right before we moved from SLO and I ended up doing the "risky lane toss" purely out of instinct. I was going from SLO out to the beach on one of the canyon roads at night in the Jeep, came out of a long sweeper at ~60mph, a deer popped out from behind a tree and started running across the road, I got on the braking threshold for a second, realized it wasn't going to stop fast enough, right before impact the deer darted one way and I steered it the other... it missed the LF corner by about 6" as I blew by still going ~35mph. Probably all happened in less than 3 seconds, and I didn't have time to think "you know, I should probably just keep it straight and minimize the chance of me rolling this thing over".

[sperry]

Originally Posted by AtomicLabMonkey

ThreadWin right there.



Intellectually I'd agree with you except this exact thing happened to me right before we moved from SLO and I ended up doing the "risky lane toss" purely out of instinct. I was going from SLO out to the beach on one of the canyon roads at night in the Jeep, came out of a long sweeper at ~60mph, a deer popped out from behind a tree and started running across the road, I got on the braking threshold for a second, realized it wasn't going to stop fast enough, right before impact the deer darted one way and I steered it the other... it missed the LF corner by about 6" as I blew by still going ~35mph. Probably all happened in less than 3 seconds, and I didn't have time to think "you know, I should probably just keep it straight and minimize the chance of me rolling this thing over".

If you had been Soccer Mom USA #1 on your cell phone, you'd probably be dead. People w/ actual car control experience get away with stuff like lane tosses that the general public use to contribute to the single accident SUV roll-over death rate.

That said, I don't consider my car control skill Schumacharian enough to attempt to toss the car around a moving deer and expect to get lucky and miss the thing, while avoiding all the other potential obstacles that might be about. I still contend, full ABS, steer away, don't swerve.

'Course, who knows what I'd actually do. Instinct is unpredictable. I just might yank the e-brake, pirouette around the deer, reach out the window while sliding by backwards, slap the deer on the back of the head, yell "WTF!? MATE!", and then J-turn back on my way while giving the deer the finger and "Happyness in Slavery" blaring on the stereo.

[dknv]

Originally Posted by sperry

'Course, who knows what I'd actually do. Instinct is unpredictable. I just might yank the e-brake, pirouette around the deer, reach out the window while sliding by backwards, slap the deer on the back of the head, yell "WTF!? MATE!", and then J-turn back on my way while giving the deer the finger and "Happyness in Slavery" blaring on the stereo.

omg, that would make a hilarious video game manuever!

[sperry]

Originally Posted by dknv

omg, that would make a hilarious video game manuever!

I have about 4,000 hours of Crazy Taxi experience.

[Dean]

Driving is not purely instinct, IMHO it is mostly a learned skill, but most peaople have not been taught the right skills/responses.

I'm not talking soccer moms with no training, I am talking about what do professional, and enthusiast organizations teach. The answer is lane toss because it works. I have run literally thousands of students through many severe lane tosses each, and never once seen a spin or true loss of control at about 25-40 MPH.

We teach it so people have the mental and muscle memory to not be surprised by the weight shift of the car, to give them confidence in their and their car/tire's ability to make such a maneuver and to not lift off the gas while performing it. Unfortunately, most parents/driver's ed courses and/or common belief is that braking is the best thing to do in a crisis.

Physics says it isn't. Tires are amazing tools, and the amount of friction required to lane shift to avoid somehting is minuscule compared to stopping the same vehicle from any typical road speed.

Is it 100% effective in every situation, no, but it combined with other skills such as increasing visual awareness, smooth inputs, "looking ahead", etc. has statistically shown to improve driving skills/accident avoidence enough to some insurance companies that they will give you a brake on your insurance if you have received this sort of instruction/training.

And as I said, I would rather rely on those crumple zones and rollover protection than tempt fate with the body mass of a large animal vs. 2 laminated sheets of glass.

I hope to never come into the situation where I need it, but I hope that if I do, I can make the right directional changes to keep that animal from coming through the windshield.

[Kevin M]

Originally Posted by Dean

I have run literally thousands of students through many severe lane tosses each, and never once seen a spin or true loss of control at about 25-40 MPH.

That's good, but there's a small difference between those speeds and the 65-75 everybody is doing on the freeway, not to mention the fact that most people aren't driving vehicles that match the performance of what the average person brings to a track day.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by BAN SUVS

That's good, but there's a small difference between those speeds and the 65-75 everybody is doing on the freeway, not to mention the fact that most people aren't driving vehicles that match the performance of what the average person brings to a track day.

Huh? Lateral traction and driver skills have little to do with speed... Yes, I might have seen loss of control at higher speeds, but probably not by the end of the excercise. Added speed does not aid in the learning of the techniques. We can achieve the same G loads at lower speeds by confining the distances the motions occur in and incraease safety at the same time. At those speeds, we typically have the lane toss setup with only 2 car lengths or so for the lane change.

And the vast majority of cars at Audi events in the groups that do excercises are mostly stock on street tires.

I don't care about "most people" who don't know how to drive, I am talking about people who do, and have the skills/training.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by sperry

'Course, who knows what I'd actually do. Instinct is unpredictable. I just might yank the e-brake, pirouette around the deer, reach out the window while sliding by backwards, slap the deer on the back of the head, yell "WTF!? MATE!", and then J-turn back on my way while giving the deer the finger and "Happyness in Slavery" blaring on the stereo.

I actually laughed out loud at my desk reading that one.

MikeK ThreadWin - revoked

sperry ThreadWin - granted