28 replies to this topic

[Bench Racer]

The more and more I attend SCCA and NASA events...the more I appreciate the current level of oversight that occurs in my region with NASA. I had 2 customers this weekend at our SCCA regional at Laguna Seca. So I watched every SM and group 5(alphabet soup)race. The amount of contact was staggering...at least a dozen cars(34 entries I think) with significant damage...75% were avoidable/idiotic driving. The few that were self induced learned there own lessons I'm sure. Sometimes we(SM group) just have bad weekends...the problem local is this has happened EVERY weekend. NOBODY in SCCA oversee's this large group or has any knowledge of the same guys who are constantly creating problems! Then its he said she said with half the drivers not running video..."racing incident" does no one any favors!

What more needs to be said, it's the job of the Chief Technical Inspector. 

 

SCCA

9.2. VEHICLE DOCUMENTATION
9.2.1 VEHICLE LOGBOOKS
Each car shall have a complete and up-to-date logbook.

J. If a car is involved in an accident or is damaged as a result of mechanical failure, the damage must be
noted in the Vehicle Logbook by the accident investigator or Chief Technical Inspector.

[38bfast]

I have a letter in the system to the CRB/SCCA requesting that a comity be formed to address this. A (CAC) collision avoidance comity. We have run fixing this up the flag pol many times. everyone seems onboard initially but it always seems to fizzle out and nothing happens. If we had a comity that worked on this all the time maybe the flag will get to the top of the poll and stay there. 

 

One of the main issues is on track the drivers don't know exactly what they should do per our rules. The rules are vary vague and seem to have a lot of room for interpretation. Even by the officials. 

 

So as I see it :

clarify the rule

educate all the races and officials

enforcement. 

penalties 

 

most people will only take so much fixing body damage before they quit. 

 

In the case of the protest this weekend both drivers felt that they were 100% in the right per our rules. The ruling was that one driver was wrong. My ruling would have been shared fault. 

[38bfast]

What more needs to be said, it's the job of the Chief Technical Inspector. 

 

SCCA

9.2. VEHICLE DOCUMENTATION
9.2.1 VEHICLE LOGBOOKS
Each car shall have a complete and up-to-date logbook.

J. If a car is involved in an accident or is damaged as a result of mechanical failure, the damage must be
noted in the Vehicle Logbook by the accident investigator or Chief Technical Inspector.

Bench about the only time I have seen that done is when a car gets totaled. 

[Steve Scheifler]

Sounds like a comity of errors.

[Tom Hampton]

Sounds like a comity of errors.

LMAO.  mm tt ee, no y. 

[Bench Racer]

Bench about the only time I have seen that done is when a car gets totaled. 

That ^ my friend is the gray haired attitude of the SCCA. Shortly the SCCA lurking official will come bouncing out and straighten my stuff out. Yes Mr. Lurker, there are rules and it shouldn't be up to the racers to enforce the rules. Once upon a time I got butted and saw the Impound sign as did the other person, neither of us received a note in our logbooks. 

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Ralph I get what your saying to point... I would never vote for a system that blames both drivers and doesn't find fault. If fault is not found on one individual then no penalties should be assessed imo.

I saw some totally assinine driving including a driver and his daddy that wanted to protest after the son hit a car several times seemingly intentionally before finally spinning himself out on the other cars front bumper. Could the other car have backed out so he wouldn't have spun himself absolutely! Should he have backed out after being hit several times for no reason absolutely not!

Fault of everyone is almost like trophy's for all! Bs someone is at fault and normally they deserve what they get.

I found it strange that there where two individuals who had problems all weekend with the same driver that spun himself yet he drove me absolutly perfectly clean both times I passed.

But as you propose this system I would oppose it. And I do not like the idea of my arm chair quarterbacks going over video after each race looking for stuff to penalize either. I has some contact here and there along the way I went straight to each guy if I felt I was as fault and said I was sorry and I got a few appologies. This is racing not precision swimming!

[Jim Drago]

I have a letter in the system to the CRB/SCCA requesting that a comity be formed to address this. A (CAC) collision avoidance comity. We have run fixing this up the flag pol many times. everyone seems onboard initially but it always seems to fizzle out and nothing happens. If we had a comity that worked on this all the time maybe the flag will get to the top of the poll and stay there. 

 

One of the main issues is on track the drivers don't know exactly what they should do per our rules. The rules are vary vague and seem to have a lot of room for interpretation. Even by the officials. 

 

So as I see it :

clarify the rule

educate all the races and officials

enforcement. 

penalties 

 

most people will only take so much fixing body damage before they quit. 

 

In the case of the protest this weekend both drivers felt that they were 100% in the right per our rules. The ruling was that one driver was wrong. My ruling would have been shared fault. 

Hmm.. seems to me the system worked fine? One driver was not happy with the results, he followed the procedure and filed a protest. Once video was provided from a car behind it showed the incident very clearly and the correct decisions were made easily.  

 

With all due respect Ralph.. Your answer to the contact was we both could have given more room? While true, I could have stayed home as well?  Seems equally as silly of a response to me.  This is a competition, why would anyone "give" anything more than what is required? I deleted the rest as it wasn't as nice 

[Tom Hampton]

I deleted the rest as it wasn't as nice 

quoted for posterity, and to clarify what I "liked" above.