Time Trial Safety Committee Notes Jan. 2011

[FVee90]

My first action on the committee was almost a bust in that only CENDIV and SEDIV were represented.
We did have a gent from the National office in on the call.
The main attention regarded the helmets which will remain as L1/L2 to ref. the Solo rules and L3/L4 to ref. the GCR. There will be a email to try and get more discussion from the no-shows but so far the TTCS is recommending to the TTAC to update 2011 rules to what was mentioned above.
A discussion opened up on speeds associated with L1/L2, which with two people didn't take long to discuss. I will admit that the CENDIV rep is on the cautious side and said that he believes we should not be like NASA or be swayed by the mentality of "just because they do it" should SCCA mimick. I would assume that there will be more discussion on this once we get the other Divisions involved.
The CENDIV rep seems to want to be the chairman of the TTSC but there was a possible co-chairmanship with me. There was more discussion on this but we decided to send an email out to the other reps (one had a house fire - so that is a very good excuse) to see if we can come up with a chairman.
The last bit of news concerned Head and Neck Devices. As I hope you are aware Head and Neck Devices are MANDATORY for Road Racing in SCCA for 2012, as written in the GCR. So the meeting was about to be adjourned when I asked if we were going to discuss HNR and the response was well aren't we going to go by the GCR? Holy crap! So the discussion was brought up and after stating the obvious that L1/L2 are not usually equipped with racing harnesses (unless the entrant choses to add more safety) that we RECOMMEND not the "M" word. Whew that was a close one!
To the newbies in the TT game - RECOMMEND is just that, it would be safer but it is not a "must have" at the event. It would be nice if a there was a product line for over 1/2 of what they cost (590ish and above) but not at this time.
Of course any comments - preferably civil - are welcome

[JohnW8]

Thanks Mark for the update. The cost of head and Neck restraints will probably continue to decrease as more folks are "recommended" to use them. As far as speeds go I'd say if you want to increase participation in the upper events you must restrict speeds in L1 to make L2 look more attractive (get to go faster) and L3 even more attractive ( Lemme get the race car out!) TT is growing quickly thanks for all you do.

[Welacey]

Speeds don't go up too much in my miata.

[jatow]

Speeds don't go up too much in my miata:

Warp speed is warp speed...




Mark, thanks for the update.

[zukitek]

This seems to be an apropriate place to pose this question and I apologize if it strikes nerves .Its unintentional.

In my opinion,every man or woman has the right to decide what is an exceptible risk and they do this on a daily basis . Who are we to say that they are not capable of making that decision on their own?

I know some may say that its to limit exposure to litigation or RESPONSIBILITY but I would say that to REQUIRE something increases exposure and RESPONSIBILITY because that seems like an endorsement.

I am not in favor of REQUIRING head and neck devices. Obviously those who have a brain in their head have the capacity to know the risks and have made whatever provisions they deem acceptible.

Where do we draw the line? Now by using the same arguement one could argue that a helmet should be a choice as many hardcore oldskool motorcyclists will still go toe to toe . Where is the line ...I would really like to know how the individual points of view stack up.

[Welacey]

I think it should be a personal decision in TT on the hnr. It's a whole different story in RR. Have you seen how crazy the spec miata pilots are? Hey Andy is that Bimmer ready yet? Can you post some more pictures of that bad boy?

[chuck schultz]

Mark, keep reminding people that classroom time and the instructor in the right seat (or observing after a signoff) keeps the speeds down as needed for PDX. Folks speed up naturally and safely with good instruction. Also, it's not just NASA we're competing with for these entry-level enthusiasts. It's PCA, BMWCCA, PBOC, Audi Club, Chin, Skip Barber, and lots of other operators around the country who do not restrict track day speeds, and do continue to have safe events.

Nice catch on the head restraint issue. That could've killed the program.

John, the incentive to run Track Trials is not greater speed - it's the clock, or, in some cases, it's the only game in town that doesn't require new clothes.

[rodhx]

John, the incentive to run Track Trials is not greater speed - it's the clock, or, in some cases, it's the only game in town that doesn't require new clothes.

+1

I had grand intentions of doing the TT school this year but tires, harness, & clothing are not in the budget. The level 2 event sounds like a great compromise. The only thing I would need is a place to mount a transponder and, judging from the rule book, and pair of shoes that covers up to the ankle.

[JohnW8]

John, the incentive to run Track Trials is not greater speed - it's the clock, or, in some cases, it's the only game in town that doesn't require new clothes.

In my opinion, Club trials will eventually run Track Trials out. Why spend the money to get all the safety gear when you can get your track fix, your TIMED track fix with no more safety equipment than a PDX requires?

There have been discussions about how to get folks to go up the ladder of the Club Racing program and SCCA has given little incentive to continue up beyond Club trials. I was commenting on how we could make it for attractive to move up if your speed was restricted at lower levels with Track trials (Level3) being the rung where you drive flat out.

Level 2 now offers the Level 3 experience without the safety gear requirements.

SCCA created this to get more people on track and I think they will achieve that goal but there's a lot more risk involved to do it.

[JohnW8]

I am not in favor of REQUIRING head and neck devices. Obviously those who have a brain in their head have the capacity to know the risks and have made whatever provisions they deem acceptible.

Me neither. I got a HANS device because I don't want a broken neck if I run into a immovable object.

[jatow]

Hey Andy is that Bimmer ready yet? Can you post some more pictures of that bad boy?

Haven't touched it since November....gotta get back at it! It may not have fancy suspension or wheels by then but it'll be at TGPR in March.

[GBugg]

In my opinion, Club trials will eventually run Track Trials out. Why spend the money to get all the safety gear when you can get your track fix, your TIMED track fix with no more safety equipment than a PDX requires?

My thoughts are that if we limit the number of L2 events - and we have to, because there are very many tracks that are suitable - then hopefully folks will get hooked and come up to L3 prep to run Roebling and Road ATL and hill climbs, etc.

[JohnW8]

I read a good idea regarding the SCCA levels. This person stated the idea of having Level 1 being the instruction level as it currently is, Level 2 being the "Signed off" drivers from Level 1 doing lap days and not having it timed. Level 3 will offer lap times and championship points and your TT events counting towards a road racing license as the incentive to move up. Level 4 remains as is. I thought this was a great idea to follow SCCA idea of moving up the ladder. It effectively covers the spectrum I thought it was brilliant!

[bmwe21]

like N.A.S.A ? They have a similar progression in their program.
I know of some people that run both S.C.C.A. and N.A.S.A. you might could get their feed back on past experiences, and go from there?

[JohnW8]

like N.A.S.A ?

I don't know, I haven't run with NASA but I have worked a corner at a NASA event.
I didn't care for the overloaded track and mismatched speed differentials.