Why hasn't the Daytona circuit bus stop been paved?
I read a driver profile a few months ago about in which he talked about COTA, I think it was, and said the paint around the circuit is textured and gets rougher and grippier as you get further off line. I assume the same is true for courses like Yas Marina. The idea is to add traction and aid a car in returning to the course or stopping, lessening the chance of having an off and getting into the kitty litter or a barrier. Sounded like a swell idea to me.
Daytona's bus stop is a constant trouble spot. Sometimes it's grass and dirt that has to be cleared, sometimes cars swap ends or get bumped on entry and end up in the infield barrier. Whatever happens the result is cautions and race delays for cleanup.
Is it naive to ask why the track operators don't pave the bus stop area? Some cars end up in the garage after skidding across the low-grip grass when it seems like they would have had a better shot at getting stopped on pavement. It's tough for teams to end up with damage after their cars turn into excavators or sand is spread around by apex clipping.
Seems like it would be in everyone's interest to keep the cars racing. I know IMSA and USC aren't responsible for track improvements and it would be up to the operator. Just wondering if they've ever asked, I guess. Surely this is isn't cost-prohibitive though. What am I missing?
Personally I think the point is to stay on the paved part, or pay the stupid tax associated with an off.
The problem is that the stupid tax in this case adversely affects everyone else. I.e., your off dumps sand/dirt/grass all over the racing line and berks up the corner for everyone for a good number of laps thereafter. Not to mention the grass becomes very slick when wet and can make an accident worse, and the transition from dirt/grass back to pavement can cause some violently negative outcomes (broken suspension bits, shock to driver's back, even an airborne car), especially if curb-cutters have been making divots at the apex area.
I'll agree with the OP, if someone hasn't yet, we should write in a suggestion letter to either the series or the track management. Track alterations can be pricey and a pain, but this one would be minor and would be a plus for safety (and that's always good for PR).
Not a crazy question. When I get back, I'll see if I can get a real answer for you.
I could not be sure, but I think it could have something to do with stock cars running at over 200 mph down the back stretch. Maybe they are worried they could catch an edge of pavement and really have a mess when sliding. Just a guess...
could pave it and then determine the "off" point... and anyone in the "off point" gets 5 seconds added to his next pitstop as a penalty
Back in the early 2000's, the CART cars down in Austrailia had to contend with very LARGE temporary curbing blocks defining the edge of the street course. The drivers soon took the advantageous line of driving the inside tires over the curbing and shorting the course and taking a straighter line through the chicane. The long term effect was broken tubs and suspension failures mid-race, which affected all cars, not just the ones that beat the cars to death. The edge of the pavement presents a real limitation to performance and is the most passive way to limit short-cutting the course. Trying to add penalties for running out of bounds is more likely to get missed/overlooked/ignored.
The idea of an increasing grip surface out of the intended course would help cars get back on course after trying to over-drive into a corner and may even provide the 'fast' way thru a corner. It is an interesting idea, but harder to police. Keep in mind some of the earliest circle track intended the banking as the same type of run-off area, but the drivers found they could run faster on the banking than on the flat apron.
Just a few thoughts on the matter...
