[CanAm]

I was just chatting with my dad about these DEs I've been doing, and he expressed the usual parental concern about safety. I share his concern about safety (I hope we all do!), but I assured him that it's safer than it looks, with the risk of car damage being far higher than the risk to the driver.

That assurance is based on what I've seen and heard anecdotally, but does anyone have any actual data on accident, injury, and fatality rates, ideally broken down based on specific tracks, run groups, organizations, etc.?

It would also be useful to know how DE risks compare with risks of driving on the road.

Part of my job involves road design, with safety of course being a key design consideration, so the topic of DE safety is of professional interest for me also.

[Trak Ratt]

Most of our DE "lessons" have been in the $2.5 - $5K range But all were reasonably safe.

Know an instructor that broke his arm (in a couple of places) when his stu rolled her 996
Have a friend that rolled his car bad enough that every panel on the car (including roof) were bent
Another that had his car T-boned by an other in T-2
Seen plenty with backend damage... penty with front end damage... some with both
A couple of fires, some blown engines, bent wheels and brocken windshields


But all drovers and pasengers were resonably "safe"

[Potomac-Greg]

You might want to search for actual studies. I assume big groups like SCCA or NASA have studied incident rates. Anecdotally, I'd say less than 1% of cars have any contact incidents (tire wall, etc.) and based purely on internet babble, it seems that there's usually a fatality every year or two nationwide. And the fatalities generally involve very high performance street cars. You have the ability to govern your own safety based on car and equipment selection. And of course there is no way to measure how many accidents are avoided by the positive influence of HPDEs.

[BlackTalon]

Originally Posted by Irfan

That assurance is based on what I've seen and heard anecdotally, but does anyone have any actual data on accident, injury, and fatality rates, ideally broken down based on specific tracks, run groups, organizations, etc.?

Okay, this one killed me. Who on earth would have the time/ resources to compile all of that? And why would they want to? (that is the type of exercise insurance companies do, and since most DE drovers are not insured they would not have much data) And would the DE organizations even be willing to divulge their data? And what the fuch would you do with that data if it existed????

Seriously, if you knew that the Blue Group in PCA Potomac had a higher risk then the Green Group, would you plead to not get promoted out of Green? Or would you avoid SP Main if you knew it had more accidents then VIR, WG and MO?

[CanAm]

Originally Posted by Potomac-Greg

And of course there is no way to measure how many accidents are avoided by the positive influence of HPDEs.

I made the same argument to my dad as well. While DEs certainly entail more risk than say tennis, the resulting improved driving ability improves safety on the road. In fact, I now drive considerably more cautiously and defensively on the road because I feel like I'm surrounded by drivers who have very little driving ability, and worse, they don't realize it.

[CanAm]

Originally Posted by BlackTalon

Okay, this one killed me. Who on earth would have the time/ resources to compile all of that? And why would they want to? (that is the type of exercise insurance companies do, and since most DE drovers are not insured they would not have much data) And would the DE organizations even be willing to divulge their data? And what the fuch would you do with that data if it existed????

Seriously, if you knew that the Blue Group in PCA Potomac had a higher risk then the Green Group, would you plead to not get promoted out of Green? Or would you avoid SP Main if you knew it had more accidents then VIR, WG and MO?

If organizations aren't collecting that sort of data, they should be, because the value of safety programs has to be judged based on empirical data. Same way that safety of new candidate medicines in clinical trials is judged based on data.

PCAP clearly has more stringent safety standards than TD. And I heard someone at a TD event claim that TD is just as safe as PCAP without being as anal. Is that true? Do PCAP's higher standards instead actually improve safety? Who can say without data?

And yes, I do manage my track safety based on perception of risk. For example, if I hear that people tend to crash more often at T9 of WG, I'll slow down there and apex later. And if I hear that a particular track has a higher accident rate, I might still go there, but will dial it back to be safer.

BTW, in addition to road design, a couple of my other areas of specialization are risk analysis and forensic investigation ...

[LPM911]

where's the guy eating popcorn emoticon when you need it ???

[cmartin]

TD, is that you?

[CanAm]

Originally Posted by cmartin

TD, is that you?

TrackDaze

[BlackTalon]

Originally Posted by Irfan

If organizations aren't collecting that sort of data, they should be, because the value of safety programs has to be judged based on empirical data. Same way that safety of new candidate medicines in clinical trials is judged based on data.

Many of the clubs DO collect their own data, but not all to the level you are hoping. So what organization should be tasked with collecting full, comprehensive data from any and all clubs who run DEs? We gonna mandate a new gubberment agency? Neither FHWA nor DOT oversee privately owned tracks. And who determines if Group 1B from BSR's FATT program = Blue Group from PCA Potomac and xxx group from NASA? Who funds the data collection and analysis portion of this endevour? And who distributes/ hosts the data?

PCAP has their data, and the Safety Officer usually presents it once or twice a year to the particpants at DEs. It's broken down by tracks, run groups and turns. But there are more influencing variables there that become apparant once a dialog starts. If you send a nice email to the current Safety Officer (Dan Dazzo), I'll bet he would be willing to share the last round of data analysis with you.

Originally Posted by Irfan

PCAP clearly has more stringent safety standards than TD. And I heard someone at a TD event claim that TD is just as safe as PCAP without being as anal. Is that true? Do PCAP's higher standards instead actually improve safety? Who can say without data?

Who knows. What are you measuring against? Total track minutes? Average speeds? Somehow taking into account track loading? How are you accounting for weather, which can have a huge impact on the number of incidents in a weekend? PCAP's 'higher safety standards' tend to be more stringent tech requirements, lighter loading in novice run groups, and more time w/ an instructor in the car with you. Some items there are hard to cross-compare just looking at how may offs a certain run group had at a certain track.

Originally Posted by Irfan

And yes, I do manage my track safety based on perception of risk. For example, if I hear that people tend to crash more often at T9 of WG, I'll slow down there and apex later. And if I hear that a particular track has a higher accident rate, I might still go there, but will dial it back to be safer.

As an engineer, I would think you would be more interested in knowing WHY people tend to crash there, and then figure out how to manage that risk. Not sure simply 'dialing it back' is always the answer. Maybe they turn in too early. Maybe they lift off the throttle when they should not. But rest assured, many others have figured out how they CAN take that turn without dialing it back nearly as much, and if you puss out too much in front of one of them you could royally fuch them up.

Originally Posted by Irfan

BTW, in addition to road design, a couple of my other areas of specialization are risk analysis and forensic investigation ...

Ohhhhkay, and...???? Forensic investigation is very open-ended there... Not sure if this is meant as an explanation for all your over-analysis, or a way of saying you know what the real deal is while others do not? FWIW, I'm a civil/ structural engineer, and I do a lot of 'forensic investigation'. But I'm not really sure what that adds to this discussion so I did not mention it earlier.

Look, you are still new enough at this that you have a ton of questions and are still trying to figure out a lot of things. It's natural, but kinda easy to get too extreme with it. Not many who attack it at the level you are attempting actually stick with it for more then a couple seasons. There is a danger in over-thinking things. Honestly, these DE programs have been around for many years, and continue to improve year by year. Focus on learning to read/ feel the car and learning how to stay ahead of it, and how to react to emergencies. That is what will make you a good driver and enable you to minimize risk. And if you are adverse to risk, you really should think twice about sticking with this hobby, as no matter how careful you are, you will at some point find yourself in an emergency situation due to a mechanical failure or due to someone else's actions. And all the track analysis in the world will not be able to help you -- you will need to rely on a different skill set.