What caused Hinch’s horrific crash?
The motorsports world examines Indy 500 wrecks, including critical injuries Oakville driver suffered
Say it ain’t so! When the green flag flies on the 99th running of the Indianapolis 500 tomorrow, Oakville’s James Hinchcliffe won’t be among the starters, even though he qualified for the race in 24th position.
The “Mayor of Hinchtown,” as he is known, crashed heavily during practice for the race on May 18, when a component in the right front suspension of his car failed, slamming it into the outside wall at something close to 224 mph (360 km/h).
A piece of the broken suspension pierced the car’s carbon-fibre tub and Hinch’s left pelvis and thigh area, damaging soft tissue, blood vessels and arteries and causing significant blood loss, according to reports from the scene.
It was “a dagger straight through the bottom of the seat,” said Sam Schmidt, co-owner of Schmidt Peterson Motorsports and the No. 5 Dallara-Chevy that Hinchcliffe was driving.
He was extracted from the wreck and transferred directly to surgery at IU Health Methodist Hospital.
“His condition was critical upon his arrival,” said Dr. Timothy Pohlman, who performed what is now described as successful surgery. Hinchcliffe is said to now be recovering well, and out of the hospital’s critical care unit. No further procedures will be required and he is expected to make a full recovery, according to a statement from IndyCar — although it added that he is out of competition for the foreseeable future.
In his own statement, Hinchcliffe said: “Words can’t describe how thankful I am to the (IndyCar Series’) Holmatro Safety Team. Those guys, in addition to the doctors and staff at the hospital, are my heroes. I can’t say enough how much I appreciate the outpouring of support from IndyCar fans, my family and fellow drivers. We are all one big family and it feels like that today.”
Cause of crash
Practice was put on hold while Hinchcliffe’s crash was investigated, in case other cars were at peril. The cause was determined to be a failed right-front suspension rocker arm — a critical component that transfers loads from the wheel to the spring and damper.
According to a report by Racer magazine, the failed part was manufactured in November 2011 and had accumulated 22,500 kilometres of use. Dallara, the car’s manufacturer, had since released a thicker, more robust second-generation rocker, which many teams have purchased and installed.
Following Hinchcliffe’s crash, IndyCar issued a technical bulletin. It said: “Based on the initial findings of Monday’s incident of the #5 car, we remind teams to inspect the front rockers with the other routinely performed crack checks.”
Other crashes
The Hinchcliffe crash was the most serious, and the only one resulting in serious injury, during a tumultuous week of testing and qualifying at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. In fact, it was the fourth accident in which the cars went at least partially airborne. (Hinchcliffe’s car went up on its side after bouncing off the wall, before coming back down upright.)
The other three — cars driven by Helio Castroneves, Josef Newgarden and Ed Carpenter — also involved impacts with the wall, after which the cars became airborne and flipped end over end.
All three of those crashes occurred with the cars in qualifying trim, which allowed additional engine boost, said to be good for about 40 extra horsepower, as well as special aero bodywork intended to reduce drag.
Castroneves set the fastest lap in that configuration, 233.474 m.p.h., followed by eventual pole winner Scott Dixon at 233.001.
Nineteen cars, including Hinchcliffe’s, topped 230 m.p.h. before Carpenter’s crash, which occurred during Sunday practice before qualifying.
Following that crash, IndyCar halted proceedings and revised its rules. Cars now could qualify only in normal (race-level) engine boost and aero configuration. To the garages for the cars and their engineers.
Back in race-trim configuration, Scott Dixon eventually claimed the pole at 226.760 m.p.h. — almost six m.p.h. lower than his earlier fastest lap.
Aero kit concerns
Perhaps by coincidence, the three crashes that ended in blowovers all occurred with cars using Chevrolet engines and aero kits. There was naturally some concern that the kits themselves may have been contributing factors.
But there was no conclusive evidence supporting that conclusion so, in the interest of safety, Indycar levelled the playing field for all.
Aero kits are a new addition to the series for the 2015 season. Until now, since the current Dallara DW-12 Indycar chassis was introduced in 2012, all cars have used the same Dallara bodywork and wings.
This year, each engine manufacturer — Chevrolet and Honda — has been allowed to develop its own aerodynamic bodywork and wings, or aero kits, for the cars. Each aero kit had to be approved by IndyCar
Two different sets of aero kits are now allowed — one for street and road courses, where high downforce is required to generate maximum traction, and another for high-speed ovals, including Indianapolis, Pocono, Texas and California, where minimum drag for enhanced speed takes precedence.
The speedway kits weren’t released to teams for initial shakedown at Indy until May 3. Teams had less than a week of running with the new kits before qualifying began for the 500.
More to get wrong
Both Chevrolet and Honda have conducted countless computer simulations and CFD (computational fluid dynamics) analyses of their own designs and express confidence in their stability.
There is no smoking gun to suggest that either got it wrong. In fact, they may have done their jobs too well — enabling speeds just fast enough to push near-critical situations over the edge.
The multiplicity of aero combinations now possible has given race engineers a lot more flexibility in how to set up the cars — more opportunity to make choices bad and good. It’s a much more complex task than it used to be.
It’s never been simple. Engineering those cars is almost as much a highwire act as driving them — the continual search for the perfect balance between drag and lift, between straight-line speed and cornering grip. Most of all, consistency.
Get it just a little bit wrong and the car can spin. At Indy, that usually means hitting a wall and that’s when things can really go wrong.
Ideally, when that happens, the car will stick to and slide along the wall. That was the norm. But it hasn’t always been the case with the Dallara DW-12.
A YouTube video showing Carpenter’s 2015 crash alongside one he had in 2012 makes an interesting comparison. Both crashes start the same way and the wall impacts are similar. In both, the rear of the car flips up in the air. In 2012, the car came back down; in 2015 it went on over.
Could it be as simple as the higher speed reached this year making that critical difference?
Another question begs: Why aren’t these cars sticking and sliding like Indy cars used to do?
One theory points to the car’s construction. While older Indy cars and many other Formula cars have sidepods with high fronts that serve to some extent as a crash structure, the Dallara’s structure just aft of the front wheels is primarily an extension of the floor pan.
That structure is likely the first to hit the wall and transfer load to the rest of the car once the wheels shear off — and it’s well below the car’s centre of gravity.
Basic physics suggests a significant lever action as a result that would induce a roll motion in the car. This is exactly what I’m seeing in video reviews of these crashes.
Just a theory. But it’s hard to argue with the laws of physics. Gerry Malloy is a regular contributor to Toronto Star Wheels. To reach Wheels Editor Norris McDonald: nmcdonald@thestar.ca