Classic 2CV Racing Club Ltd

Classic 2CV Racing Club Ltd Forum => General Discussion => Topic started by: Trevor Williams on February 27, 2009, 15:53:33



Title: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on February 27, 2009, 15:53:33
I know I wasn't asleep at the AGM, so can someone please tell me when the following regulation changes were put to the membership:

5.5 ...2CV City chassis obtained through Whitwell Motorsport
5.7 Camshaft: This may be either a reground camshaft or a new camshaft ground from a blank
5.7.5 Induction Systems: ..except it is permissible to narrow the manifold by cutting and rewelding on one side only to facilitate fitment to the cylinder heads
5.11.2 It is permissible to replace the brake pipes with flexible pipes

Interested to know why all of these have changed apart from 5.7 Camshaft, and got to say, not very happy they have.

Considering my entry now

Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on March 03, 2009, 12:07:05
News to me too trev.I can't believe the brake pipe,or manifold ones.and why do we need a chassis that looks like an slc but the shock mount is the lowest point?


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Derek Coghill on March 03, 2009, 13:39:53
I remember talking to someone about the manifold a while ago (can't remember who, though). I thought that we were already allowed flexi pipes at the rear? That changed a few years ago.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: helen deeley on March 03, 2009, 13:52:30
Paul I thought you were on the technical committee? This is sounding really fishy.....


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on March 03, 2009, 15:09:40
No helen,but i thought it would have come up at a commitee meeting ,maybe it did and i was asleep.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Roy Eastwood on March 04, 2009, 15:44:56
Camshafts ground from a blank now legal! - brilliant (sic.) - glad to see that one was voted in, the performance increase will be immense, who is making these cams - anybody know?

It is clearly a 'must have'.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 04, 2009, 16:01:51
Roy
It wasn't even discussed at the AGM!!!! Nor were the other changes


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Roy Eastwood on March 04, 2009, 16:27:12
Hello Trevor,
I realise that and I'm surprised it has not been spoken about since - but also understand what performance enhancement is available as a result, interesting principle thought to introduce an expensive technical mod just before the season opens......wonder who supplies it?

Still hoping to get my car out at some time!

Roy
It wasn't even discussed at the AGM!!!! Nor were the other changes


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Mary Lindsay on March 04, 2009, 18:16:28
I am confused.
How did these changes come about if they are a surprise to established 2CV Racing Club committee members?


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Andrew Bull on March 05, 2009, 09:15:48
Firstly let me say that I have no knowledge or info about the changes to the regs (prior to reading them) and the manner in which they were brought about, as i was not a member last year and did not attend any of the club 'meetings'. Therefore i will not comment.  However as a active member this year, running a new driver to racing i have payed attention to these issues.   My comments / interpretations below..

1) Camshaft

REG 5.7 Paragraph 2

"A Classic 2CV Racing Club camshaft, supplied through the approved supplier, must be used. This may be either
a regound standard camshaft or a new camshaft ground from a blank......"

I fail to see how this can create a performance enhancement.  The Grind still has to be a C2CVRC camshaft and must be supplied by Kent Cams (the approved supplier). 

The only opportunity this allows (as i see it) is that we will have less problems with regrinding worn 2nd hand cams.  If Kent deem your cam too worn to grind you have to buy a new cam, then send that to them, get that ground.  As costs of second hand parts are currently spiralling to new highs and getting older and older (subsequently more worn) I assume that the 'blank' based camshaft would work out cheaper, and thats the reason for allowing it.  If you dont have a second hand cam and want a reground then you still have to buy the standard one first anyway.


2) On the subject of approved suppliers.....

I assume that the list of approved suppliers is / should be available to members somewhere.  I thought it would be with the membership pack / regs download.  As a longstanding racer I know where things are bought from, (as a new racer my driver does not) but now we can use any coil, who is the authorized supplier to buy from.  We also have named a supplier in the regs for the new chassis, but everywhere else the term authorised supplier is used.  Confused!  So the supplier cannot change now through the season if necessity dictates, as it is written in to the regs.  Consistency?  The opportunity for changes to the chassis to obtain a performance advantage is now there, as long as you buy it from Whitwell. Longer wheelbase anyone? Custom built chassis?

3)  Decals,

REG 6.3.5

"....An illustration showing all areas for championship graphics will be supplied with the 2009 Classic 2CV Racing
Club membership package and and failure to display designated graphics will contravene these regulations. "

I assume as this was not with my membership pack I can put stuff where I like.  I have a new club member / driver this year and we need to know where we can put his stickers. 

Regards 
Bully


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: helen deeley on March 05, 2009, 11:20:22
Firstly let me say that I have no knowledge or info about the changes to the regs (prior to reading them) and the manner in which they were brought about, as i was not a member last year and did not attend any of the club 'meetings'.

I didnt know about them till I read the regs either- I know I missed the AGM but I was told there were no changes & nothing to vote on. To make these changes general knowledge only 5 or 6 weeks before the start of the season is very unfair when the majority of members  seem to know nothing about them  >:(


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Derek Coghill on March 05, 2009, 15:39:19
<we need to know where we can put his stickers>

Apart from the obvious suggestion, I think there's a drawing (or perhaps there used to be) attached to the regs. I'll have a look and see if I can find one.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 05, 2009, 21:37:56
Derek, never been a drawing previously as far as I know

Bully, you can put stickers wherever you want, so long as you don't contravene 6.3.5 i to vii. Authorised supplier for the coil used to be ECAS, dont know if that is still the case.

And just for a bit of clarity, just because people have been running illegal, shortened manifolds for years doesn't make it correct to change the regs without voting on the Tech Committee's recomendations at the AGM, like it says we should do the the Club rules!

Roy, any chance you could enlighten us as o the potential performance gain of using a billet cam? I know nothing about engineering (as a lot of people will tell you!!)

Cheers

Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Derek Coghill on March 06, 2009, 00:24:59
I couldn't find a drawing anyway; it may have been in the very dim-and-distant past.

There's a bit at the end of the regs about parts of the car "owned" by the club for the attachment of sponsors' stickers. Front doors, the bit below the "A" panel and so on....a guideline rather than an absolute rule, I've found.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Simon Crook on March 06, 2009, 07:43:10
IN BOLD

5.16 Numbers and Championship Decals:
 
5.16.1. Positions
 To be eligible to score points in this Championship all vehicles must carry a BARC Shield on each side in an
 unobscured position when viewed from a direct side elevation (assuming decals are available at the meeting
 signing-on). Failure to have these in place at scrutineering will render the car ineligible.
 Race numbers backgrounds shall be located, unmodified and in the intended orientation on the front doors and
 bonnet as required by Section C(b) of the MSA Blue Book.
Competitors shall be required to locate, unmodified and in the intended orientation the decals of the Classic 2CV
Racing Club, any Championship sponsor and associates on the cars and on their racing overalls, in positions to
be notified.

 
5.16.2. Suppliers
Race number backgrounds for the front doors shall be provided to competitors through the Classic 2CV Racing
Club.

 
5.16.3. Driver Identification
All competitors shall display their name in both rear passenger windows of the car using white vinyl lettering.
Typeface to be Arial Black, first letter uppercase, 7cm high, following letters to be lowercase.
 All competitors shall display their name on their race overalls in positions to be notified. Embroidered name
 badges shall be provided to competitors through the Classic 2CV Racing Club.


I have most of the decals (I think) I don't have the following:

Race Number Backgrounds
Embroidered Name Badges

as it says "Failure to have these in place at scrutineering will render the car ineligible".

As we are only a few weeks away from the first meeting of the season, should I worry that that the car may fail scrutineering :o

So when do I get these ???



Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 06, 2009, 08:36:19
Simon,
If the failure is down to the club, then no you won't. I am going to the Race Retro show and will ask Aubrey to arrange to have a load of number backgrounds available so can pick you up a set. You only get the door ones, so have to provide the bonnet one yourself
As for the badges, unless the club can prove to you that they comply with the FIA regulations (Nomex backed etc), DO NOT sew them onto your race suit. You will have more chance of your race suit not being approved by the scrutineer if you do!!
Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Simon Crook on March 06, 2009, 09:32:30
Hi Trevor

thanks for that, I am hoping to get to Race Retro, if Aubrey has them with him I can collect them. As for the bonnet one ( I didn't know we had to have one on it :o) is there a list of what we should have on teh car so I can see what's missing.

The other thing I'm worried about is the scrutineer's seal on the engine, not sure if i have the right bolt with the hole in it, and can this be fitted on the day?


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 06, 2009, 12:41:03
Simon
Number placement is dealt with in the Blue Book. One on each side, plus one on the front (bonnet) i think. The actual number on the bonnet must be able to be seen by the timekeepers, so it must be able to be rad from the right side (except for Snetterton where the timekeepers are on the left side)

Engine seal - so long as the top 7mm bolt on the engine has a hole (2 - 3 mm iI think) you will be ok. Three of my engines all need them, it is up to the scrutineer to do them (if he is aware that we require it of him - yet again we seem to have a new one this year)

Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Derek Coghill on March 06, 2009, 12:58:28
Just to clarify a bit; it's up to you to make sure that the bolt has a hole in the end (the long one on the top of the crankcase - drill a hole in the bit that protrudes beyond the nut) and it's up to the scrutineer to fit the seal.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Simon Crook on March 06, 2009, 13:07:19
Thanks Trevor & Derek

I will have a look in the Blue Book and at the engine................

Cheers


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Roy Eastwood on March 09, 2009, 16:13:00
Most obvious improvement is the ability to rev. the engine with impunity, to get the power where the 2cv engine produces it naturally, i.e. quite high up the range, this will of course require more work on a rolling road to achieve.

And of course no more broken valves due to float.

It is really the control cam that should have been introduced right away all those years ago.

This doesn't mean I approve of the strange sudden appearance but I'm certainly interested to get the Ecas racer out to play with one of the billet cams.

Roy, any chance you could enlighten us as o the potential performance gain of using a billet cam? I know nothing about engineering (as a lot of people will tell you!!)

Cheers

Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Steve Cowell on March 10, 2009, 22:33:21
Just wondered why no one from the tech commitee has posted to enlighten us when the rules were passed ?????


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Mary Lindsay on March 11, 2009, 06:56:59
Me too.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Martin Harrold on March 11, 2009, 21:32:00
Come on, let's think this through. At least one person on the tech committee must have written down the changes to the club tech rules and sent them to BARC, as an email, a fax or a letter. They are pretty cute down there, but I doubt that they are telepathic as well. So, all we have to do is to ask Nicola for a copy of that. We can anticipate that she might now have difficulty finding her copy.

But, being realistic, my guess is that the Cub needs to remedy the situation before the first race. Otherwise, any member could formally query why the changes had been made in the BARC published regs when there is no matching minute from a C2CVRC AGM authorising them. I recall that Trevor used to say that all suggestions for tech amendments to be voted on at the AGM had to be submitted three months in advance. If this issue became public, it might make us look foolish in the eyes of BARC, MSA and others and could threaten the future of the Championship.

I'm no expert on tech stuff and Dicky is away just now. One change is said by others to legalise a common cheat (not on our manifolds it doesn't), the chassis thing is just poorly worded, and machining cams from billet is something that is presumaby already happening, otherwise why did anyone write it into the reg amendments without proper consultation? We can presume that Kent are not briefed to ask questions about the source of a cam 'blank'.

I suggest that the Committee considers the options to remedy the situation retrospectively.

Frankly, our team is not too fussed about all this - we just enjoy going racing and all that entails, chasing the dream of another podium with not too much optimism. But, it is a bit sad when it appears that club rules and procedures may have been blatantly ignored by at least one person near the top.



Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Ken Hanna on March 11, 2009, 21:52:03
Perhaps it's a case of the tail attempting to wag the dog?
I'm not in a position to comment on the other items which Trevor listed, but seem to recall that in order to obtain approval from the Club ( not the Technical Committee alone) for my chassis, there was a list of requirements specified.

Iirc, amongst these was the stipulation that the race chassis should be as close as possible in form and construction to that which was being marketed for road use, thus ruling out any 'exotic' solutions.

Torsion and beam strength tests were also carried out, to prove the chassis' suitability for racing.

Last but not least, it was stipulated that the price should be the same as the Frome race chassis and the OE Citroen item, presumably to avoid triggering a price war.
( Genuine Citroen chassis are still available, as well as SLC.)

I'd be very interested to know if these criteria have been relaxed, or simply ignored, by the current Technical Committee in this instance. 

Ken                 


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 12, 2009, 08:34:29
Martin
The deadline for Tech Reg changes to be submitted hasn't changed, it is the 1st July.

I understand the reasoning behind the billet camshaft was to keep control of the cost of getting a camshaft done. If anyone has been using a billet cam in previous years, then they are a cheat, simple as that

I understand that the chassis change is due to the non availability of the Frome chassis

The manifold and brake pipe issues are both performabce enhancing in my opinion.

As I stated above, none of these were voted on at the AGM

It's down to the committee to resolve.

My entry to the championship is dependant on the outcome.

Cheers
Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on March 12, 2009, 13:23:43
The regs used to say a 2cv racing club camshaft must be used no more no less,therefore if the camshaft comes from kent cams and is a 2cv racing club grind it is legal.Nowhere does it say it must be reground from an original cam.
Paul
Oh and i am definitely not a cheat.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 12, 2009, 14:30:54
Paul
I know you are not!!


And I agree that that is what the regs used to say. However, below is the method of obtaining a 2CV Racing Club Camshaft

http://www.2cvracing.org.uk/technical/camshaft

Nowhere in there does it mention billets, only that you send your camshaft to Kent for them to re-grind

With my nasty bastard hat on (you know the one!) if any protest was brought before me, I would uphold it on that basis

Speak to you later

Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on March 12, 2009, 15:58:25
Advice ,not even written by an officer of the club ,that forms no part of our regs .They don't even suggest you check the website for ways of obtaining a racing club cam.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 12, 2009, 16:13:18
Beg to differ Paul.
It was written by an officer of the club, me. It should be communicated in the "membership pack" as it has been in previous years. The Camshaft Scheme has never been rescinded, therefore its still active.  ;D

I will give you a call later when I am stuck in the M3 roadworks

Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Martin Harrold on March 12, 2009, 23:09:01
Err, have I missed a posting?

Or, is whoever sent the note with the changes to the regs to BARC keeping very, very quiet? They obviously know who they are, and a reasonable guess is is that they did not act alone. It is surely up to the Technical Committee to either reveal the sender or all resign.

Is a billet cam in the spirit of the regulations of low cost racing? - most members would think not.

Surely, it is implicit in the regulations that all parts must be sourced from Citroen unless specifically stated otherwise. Under the general all-embracing rule that "if it does not say you can, then you can't" then a billet cam must be against the letter of the rules and certainly the spirit. I'm sorry Paul, but under that rule, your defence of a billet cam simply does not stand up.

Our new scrutineer will no doubt be very interested to take a view on the matter. At last, we might see some engines being dismantled. 

Roy - for the information of all members, can you estimate here how much a billet cam would cost?

 


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 13, 2009, 09:02:16
Martin
There is no reason for anyone to resign. The committee are endeavouring to sort this as far as I am aware. Once a solution has been agreed, I expect it will be communicated

Trevor



Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Aubrey Brocklebank on March 20, 2009, 10:57:25
The board decided to edit the regulations prior to the 2008 AGM in order to clarify any elements of the rules that were proving to be unclear with the secondary aim of reducing costs where possible. 

Item 9.1 of the articles of association states “the business of the club shall be managed by the board who may exercise all the powers of the club.”  Whilst it would not be our intention to make any major changes to the regulations without consulting the membership it would not be ultra vires for us so to do. 

Following publication of the regulations, 5 points have been raised which have now been discussed by the board.  It has been decided by the board to further amend three of those points.  The BARC will shortly be issuing an amendment bulletin.

If anyone has any issues with any of these points then please contact directly a member of the board.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 20, 2009, 13:37:10
Surely, as we only have TWO weeks till the first race, it would be an idea to post what the changes are?

And since when did the club become a dictatorship? In my reading of the Articles, Memorandum and Club Rules, Technical changes are part of the Agenda for the AGM and HAVE to be voted on at the AGM


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: helen deeley on March 20, 2009, 13:40:51
If it was discussed PRIOR to the AGM, how come it wasnt mentioned before?


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on March 20, 2009, 14:17:25
"Consider any proposals or recommendations made by the Technical Sub-Committee;"


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Martin Harrold on March 29, 2009, 18:41:56
To be fair, it does seem that the Board is actually getting on with the job of managing the clubs affairs very efficiently, and I'm sure that it is very time consuming, so well done to all those involved.

However, I do think that a tad more open communication would be in order, for as Trev says, it would be helpful to know what the five issues are now, rather than wait for BARC to issue a note.

On a small point, I've read the Blue Book - and find I'll need some new overalls for next year. That apart, under Night Racing, there is an old clause which says that all cars must have a number on the back, on a vertical panel (so not the sloping part of the bodywork) and illuminated. Many of the night racing rules are a bit vague and largey ignored. Is this one to be be ignored, again?



Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on March 30, 2009, 08:34:41
No martin ,you were supposed to have one either in the top corner of the rear screen or on the back panel to my recollection.Last year it was requested that we had full size numbers on the bootlid (so the marshals can identify the cars from behind ) which we talked ourselves out of.It may well be that we may have to do something about it this year though.
Paul


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on March 30, 2009, 11:43:07
Martin
The night racing requirements haven't changed recently. So long as the Clerk is happy with what is included in the Supplementary Regs thats all that matters. The regs aren't vague, and I assure you are not ignored.

As for new race suits, glad you noticed. I'm sure there will be a few at the first race of 2010 (not just in 2CVs) that will be shocked when they aren't allowed to race because their overalls are out of date!!

Also, check your crash hat, I think the BS6658 Type A approval and Snell2000 is withdrawn at the end of this year too

Cheers

Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Martin Harrold on March 30, 2009, 20:42:21
Paul: The smaller race number on the rear, the same size as the one by the passenger side window, seems to work well enough. But maybe it would be more easily read if it was black numbers on a white circular background. That would not be hard to do. My question was about the reg which apparently requires them to be vertical and illuminated.
Let's not insist on a full size number on the boot lid - otherwise where would we put the sponsors' message

Trev: I did also check my helmet, and that will still be OK in '10. But that is only because it is A/F, not A.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on March 31, 2009, 08:19:40
I thought reflective, and the marshals could shine a lamp at the rear of the car to help pick out the number.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Martin Harrold on March 31, 2009, 19:29:45
Paul - I'll see if I can get a price for 30 reflective discs. Once the size is sorted, teams could get their own race numbers cut to suit. But, if we're talking torches, then it might be simpler to have black backgrounds and white numbers.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Simon Crook on April 01, 2009, 12:04:12
My tickets for Silverstone arrived this morning ;D - no new regulation notes with them - should I worry about this ???


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on April 01, 2009, 12:33:29
Simon,don't worry :Enjoy.(http://www.jonrb.com/emoticons/wooyeah.gif)


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Terry Scannell on April 13, 2009, 12:49:37
No martin ,you were supposed to have one either in the top corner of the rear screen or on the back panel to my recollection.Last year it was requested that we had full size numbers on the bootlid (so the marshals can identify the cars from behind ) which we talked ourselves out of.It may well be that we may have to do something about it this year though.
Paul

Hi Paul,

Sorry just catching up with this one and as Martin and Trevor quite correctly state the requirement in the Blue Book for Night racing is quite clear, however in past years it has not been enforced as such but I know that we have tried to encourage teams to provide full size numbers on a white (ideally reflective) backgound for three main reasons.

The first being to assist with identification of cars by marshals generally during the night section of the race, which in some incidents may be some distance from the nearest post.

Secondly, from my experience as Clerk normally involved in the 24hr (and in previous years an Observer out on the circuit), should we need to scramble the safety car at anytime, day or night, but more importantly during the night we will contact the Observer /Post Chiefs on Coram and Russell and ask them to inform us when the leading car passes their posts so that we can get the Safety Car onto the track between Senna & Riches in order to pick up the leader with the minimum number of other cars between the safety car and the leader. 

This can only work if the Observer/ Post Chiefs can see the numbers of the passing cars clearly. In the hours of darkness for an observer to be looking at the oncoming cars with headlights ablaze and perhaps (with due respect) poorly lit side numbers and with the cars possibly being in a bunch of traffic it is not always possible for them to identify the numbers of the car we need to pick up quickly. 

However if as has been suggested in the past that all cars had a white (reflective) background on the Left Hand Rear of the car with ideally regulation sized numbers the observers would be able to more clearly identify the numbers as the cars are exiting Coram and also Russell with the numbers being illuminated by the lights from the following cars. This would certainly help us avoid situations where we miss picking the leaders up correctly.

The third reason for the request was one of safety - should a car stop out on the circuit for whatever reason without lights or should a car have a failure of it's rear lights (does this happen??) the fact that there is a white (reflective) backgound again, that would be picked up by the lights of any approaching cars, will provide additional visability to drivers of the potential problem, perhaps stationary, vehicle on track.

By asking for the white background to be reflective we would avoid the need for any additional fixed illumination and wiring as I appreciate we need to avoid any unnecessary expense and work for competitors for this once a year event.

I hope this clarifies the logic for the request for rear numbers for this event. Any assistance teams can provide regarding this would be greatly appreciated by the team in Race Control.

Terry


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on April 13, 2009, 13:27:29
Terry,yhm.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Martin Harrold on April 14, 2009, 20:54:06
Terry:

Well put. I'm getting a price for 30 white reflective roundels,12" dia. Drivers would have to get their own numbers cut to fit as the admin for that part would be a nightmare. Do you mean passenger side or drivers side positioning on the back?

For an entirely different pupose, we are marketing a product a bit like that used on Le Mans cars which is an electro luminescent panel, as thin as a sheet of paper, running on 12v. It would mean that the numbers on the side of the car are black on a greenish white background. If you'll give your support to us testing it on our car in the '09 race, then we'll progress the idea.



Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on April 15, 2009, 15:03:39
Terry
No offence but I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

The Safety car will pick up whoever is behind it when it is sent out, if it can then release those who are between it and the leader so be it, but after being told at the briefing last year that that would happen, and then being told in the middle of the night that it would not, I don't see that it really matters.

If a competitor has trouble seeing a car on the track because his lights are not bright enough, he should be black and oranged flagged and not released till his lights are up to the job

Trevor


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Paul Robertson on April 16, 2009, 08:55:59
Thing is trev we should insist that the leader is picked up ,not accept that the officials will just make token gestures towards running the race in a fair and proper manner.In my opinion if the officials can't do their job for what ever reason then that needs addressing.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on April 16, 2009, 10:08:33
Good point Paul, but with the safety car regs now, the imperative is to get the SC out no matter where the leader is. The problem as I see it in the 24 hour race will be people not catching the SC up. Once the race is neutralised you can use the timing info to work out how many cars are between the leader and the SC and instruct the SC observer to wave through that number


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: philip myatt on April 16, 2009, 13:02:58
All it actually needs is a reliable method of the safety car waving cars through. This could be a green light system in the rear window, it would also seem reasonable as a back up to expect the race leader to know who he/she is and to hold position once he/she is behind the safety car.
Additionally we need consistency with instructions, if the CoC tells us that a certain process will take place it is not acceptable for that process to be changed in the middle of the night without informing all competitors of the need for a change and what the change is.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Trevor Williams on April 17, 2009, 07:20:14
Philip, I totally agree with you regarding consistancy!! Don't want a repeat of last year!!


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Steve Panas on April 17, 2009, 14:47:59
I'd settle for a repeat of last year ;D


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Mary Lindsay on April 17, 2009, 18:35:52
Quote
it would also seem reasonable as a back up to expect the race leader to know who he/she is and to hold position once he/she is behind the safety car.
In an endurance race it is surely less important to pick up the race leader? Also, it is sometimes hard to know just what position your team is in and of course some drivers are quicker than others in the same team.
I would have thought that just picking up one of the cars by the safety car and then backing the field up so that it forms a train is the safest way in this race.


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Derek Coghill on April 17, 2009, 21:31:23
Mary, if the safety car picks up the leader then every one stays in the same relative position (albeit bunched up) unless they choose to pit.

Can you imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth that would ensue if the safety car came out in between the first and second cars, held up the second car and the leader was able to join the back of the train thus gaining a lap's cushion for free?


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: Mary Lindsay on April 18, 2009, 09:23:54
Good point Derek, no doubt if our team is ever in a position where that becomes an issue I would view things differently! Meanwhile we will just keep plodding on.....


Title: Re: 2009 Regulations
Post by: philip myatt on April 20, 2009, 15:25:13
I've spoken with BARC today and had confirmation that we only need to do what we have done in previous years with the numbers, as long as we have the reflective backgrounds on the door numbers we'll be OK.

Philip