That looks like a very good reason to start wet races single file with the firts lap a standing yellow. Such a procedure would let the feild spread out a little and maybe, just maybe allow the drivers in the rear a little better visability.

Don

Somehow, the link got out; looking through the logs, that file has been continually downloaded since late last night. It's been downloaded more times than this thread has been downloaded over 800 times - this thread has less than 700 hits...

Will it be made available again at some point?
Thanks,

is it just me or does it look like someone's safety fuel cell didn't really do its job?

Please someone post the link for the full vid.:(

I have some unused bandwidth...let's see how long this lasts.

Ferrari vid

Thanks Jeff. I cannot believe how long that extinguisher lasted! If not for that guy, the driver would not have made it.

For all you that have seen this video, especially the racers, Halon would not have worked either as a hand held extinguisher or as an on board system in this fire.

That was a dry-chem extinguisher the guy had that put that fire out. People always say dry chem is messy, and hard to clean up, but it puts fire out! An AFFF system or extinguisher would have had similar results.

There's a reason we don't carry Halon on our fire engines.

The first time I watched this
 

I focused on the driver. The second time, I looked at the flagmen on the observation deck. Maybe it's just the angle, but it looks like the flames got them as well. I seem to see remnants of the flames up where they were. Would a flagman on the observation deck have a fire retardant suit on as well? They did have helmets but can't tell if those were flame retardant suits. They don't look like it. And I always thought the tower was a safe spot to be.

that's what I was wondering as well...the fire was dangerously close to them.

Please get this right- the ferrari exploded not the Porsche.

Errr...why? Halon works just fine, in my opinion better than
powder.
I went trough two fire-fighting courses last year and had oportunity to test both dry-chem and CO2 extinguishers on fuel-fires. CO2 worked like a charm. Halon is not being used anymore. In my country you are supposed to turn in your Halon extinguishers for safe destruction.

Yes. The reason is called "ozone layer". Halon is banned from use in almost all applications. There are few (mostly military) installations with dispense (boat engine rooms, automatic jet engine fire-suppression systems) but you'll almost certainly never find Halon extinguisher in a shop. Dry chem is also quite abrazive and corrosive, destroying the engines. Only problem with halon is that it can start to decompose into toxic gases if subjected to very very high temperatures.

one word: AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I thought Halon was the one to use in a car...at least not too long ago. What type of fire extinguisher/suppressant system should be used now?

Yes dry chem is abrasive, but it is very effetive, much more so than Halon in an "open environment" such as the car in this video. I don't think you would care too much about the engine if you're on your way to cooking to death. Did you try Halon on a fuel fire?

Yes Halon works superb in a closed environment, such as below deck in a ships engine room, or computer lab.

"True" Halon is not banned. They just cannot produce it anymore, and is taxed at around 2000% now due to the C.F.C.'s. What's left in circulation can still be used.

I did my thesis paper on fixed facility fire suppression systems for my B.S. degree in fire science.

Jeff, I recommend one of the AFFF systems on the market. Most ae user servicable, and quite affordable.

it doesn't work better than dry chem in that type of fire. Actually onboard halon would be near worthless. Halon may save the mess in limited car open fires, but keep a dry chem back-up. Your CO2 worked fine in a confined tub with siding if it's laid down properly, which you learned, I'm sure.

I'm with Makaio on this one.

Mark,

Absolutely right... ...but it reinforced my absolute fear of fire in the race car.

Now for a fire of this type the fuel on fire wouldn't act like napalm would it? I'm asking since someone mentioned the flag workers earlier in the post.

It was the porsce's fuel cell that exploded, right into the interior of the ferrari. Again, I think that the front crumple zone of a 911 has proven itself "one use only."

Damn that's one of the worst things I've ever seen. I can't believe those "safety" bozos. What if that Ferrari driver had a neck injury; they could have paralyzed him or killed him!

I think most crumple zones are "one use only," but in this case it looks like the fuel cell must have ruptured in the initial impact for the explosion to be so large. Makes me extra glad no one hit me on friday after hitting that jersey barrier! I had no fire suppression at all!