![]() 11/22/2015 at 13:12 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
There’s not much worse for the race track owner and race promoter than a rain delay. Go ahead and make the investment. You have my pre-approval.
![]() 11/22/2015 at 13:56 |
|
You’d need some kind of filtering system with covered tracks to keep the smog out of the grandstands.
At the end of the day, cancellations due to rain probably are far less costly to the track owners, especially if the construction cost of a covered track could be used to adding more seats to make up for the loss in revenue during rainy days.
![]() 11/22/2015 at 14:27 |
|
... some kind of filtering system ...
Solvable. It’s only 43 cars.
... cancellations due to rain probably are far less costly ...
I think there are far greatest costs. The first from ticket buying spectators having a bad experience and decide to never ever risk again the hundreds of dollar investment on a rain-out, or a rain delay for what is already a very long event. And then there is a large cost from losing TV viewers waiting on rain delays or frustration with results from a rain shortened event.
Just my opinion.
(Photos below are past events)
![]() 11/22/2015 at 15:59 |
|
In my opinion, the #1 reason it is tough to pull off is dealing with exhaust fumes. For indoor shows like monster trucks, Speedway Grand Prix, or Supercross there’s built-in downtime where engines aren’t running, combined with the ventilation system it allows the exhaust fumes to be dissipated. Trying to do the same thing with 43 cars running at the same time for several hours straight with no race stoppage will quickly displace the air in the venue.
Could it be done? Maybe, a concept was made up about a decade ago but the shear cost and other things killed the idea.
![]() 11/22/2015 at 16:55 |
|
Or make racing in the rain possible. The nature of the sport makes it hard though..