aneed4spd67
Newbie
Offline
Age: 56
Location: vancouver
Posts: 6
|
 |
« on: September 15, 2009, 05:04:58 PM » |
|
How am I gonna make this happen. one rule book violation (cannot exit car under own power) other rule book violation (no drivers license) Scenario: My friend was paralysed from the neck down in a surfing accident 30 years ago. Since then he has gone on to do incredible accomplishments. Most noteworthy as an inspiration to other people with handicaps and to not let their disability hold them back. A year and a half ago he brought up how he wished he could go 100mph in a car, that never been done before by someone with no use of their arms and legs. A friend donated his 1968 Firebird and we preceded thru enough avenues to get the car setup for him to drive with a joystick (mouthpiece) We are halfway to his goal as we got him up to 58mph around P.I.R. portland international raceway. The big stage is Bonneville, where he can bring more public attention to the hurdles people with disabilities encounter. We want to run in Aug/Set 2010 at one of the 3 events. Kinda like a modern day version of the movie 'worlds fastest Indian' So, 100mph is no friggin Rocket, and safety is number one, but how and when can we do this? The no license and exit the car thing are holding us back from a run in the 130 club. I appreciate any constructive criticism or advice anyone has. An abandoned airstrip is not an option, our goal is Bonneville thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
1212FBGS
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2009, 05:21:24 PM » |
|
contact Mike Cook..... if anybody can make your buddies dream happen, its Mike..... Hey jr PM this guy your dads info.... Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
hotrod
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2009, 05:44:16 PM » |
|
I can't speak for the powers that be but my impression is:
The no drivers license issue would be an administrative issue, I could imagine a "qualification" process could be worked out to satisfy the safety crew that he has adequate control of the vehicle.
The safety issue brings to mind some possibilities to minimize risk for a driver that could not self extract. 1. higher fire suit standards for this driver 2. higher standard of fire protection equipment in the drivers compartment 3. a chase vehicle that follows in close pursuit with people suited to assist extrication 4. Remote cutoff safety system similar to those used in the monster truck programs.
Good luck on finding workable solutions to the hurdles involved.
Larry
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jimmy six
Hero Member
   
Offline
Age: 67
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1833
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2009, 12:25:13 AM » |
|
Check with USFRA............Good Luck
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
First GMC 6 powered Fuel roadster over 200, with 2 red hats. Pit crew for Patrick Tone's Super Stock #49 Camaro
|
|
|
|
A2WindTunnel
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2009, 07:25:59 AM » |
|
In Section 1F: Only one person in vehicle durring compatition.
Would there be any exemption to the rule for this case? If someone could sit shotgun in the car they could be there for safety. Kind of like a drivers ed. instructor to take over if anything goes wrong (shut off switches or chute control), or first on the scene to help extract if need?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
roadster589
Full Member
 
Offline
Age: 32
Location: norco, CA
Posts: 124
GOD SPEED GARY
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2009, 09:05:28 AM » |
|
Pm sent and good luck too you I hope the dream comes true 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Mike cook jr
|
|
|
|
sockjohn
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2009, 10:05:10 AM » |
|
one rule book violation (cannot exit car under own power)
This rule exists for a reason, for safety sake you want to make sure you do your best to prevent any real safety issues. Doing so will also probably help in alleviating tech inspector fears. The fire system rules are minimums, no reason you couldn't have multiple systems, completely separate so if one fails the other is still there and working. Maybe even expand on hotrods suggestion of a remote cut off and add a remote fire extinguisher system as well. other rule book violation (no drivers license)
Can this one be corrected? What prevents getting a drivers license in his state? Would a neighboring state have more lax requirements that would allow him to get one? I'm kind of thinking by hook or crook here, since you usually have to live in the state to get a license. My other thought is for one of the private time meets. They are not cheap, but never hurts to ask.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Glen
Global Moderator
Hero Member
  
Offline
Age: 76
Location: South West Utah
Posts: 4936
SCTA/BNI timer 1983 to 2004,Semi Retired,.
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2009, 10:18:56 AM » |
|
It would also require a open face helmet (not legal in SCTA) and any sort of impact would cause the control lever to be forced into his mouth. That is a major safety issue. I admire what he would like to do but I think the constraints will be difficult to get around.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Glen  South West, Utah
|
|
|
|
V8Pinto
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2009, 11:07:49 AM » |
|
just trying to think outside the box here...
Are there any two-person type vehicles at other Bonneville events (sidecar maybe?)
the joystick/mouth safety thing would be tough to get around, maybe voice control? That would be a programmers dream.
Self extrication - what about an eject?
I bet you could get somebody computer savy to work on the software control. If cell phones can voice dial, it can be done. Shoot, voice control is available on the oscilloscopes I have at work. You've already got the recognition part worked out, just have to port it to the right button. 100mph would be tough though. Maybe experiment with an r/c car on the voice control thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Shane 306 N2O Pinto
|
|
|
|
|
|
sockjohn
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2009, 04:47:20 PM » |
|
the joystick/mouth safety thing would be tough to get around, maybe voice control? That would be a programmers dream.
Maybe experiment with an r/c car on the voice control thing.
Sounds like a nightmare not a dream. Voice activated in a noisy environment and situations where a persons voice would likely be under stress if not downright duress sounds like a recipe for failure. FWIW, this is coming from a guy who writes software for a living and claimed making a robotic car follow that black line down the salt would be fairly easy to accomplish. (in the R/C car thread) Think of how many small corrections you make to throttle and steering, every one of those would have to be verbalized adding a lag to the response on top of the lag from the system. I wouldn't want to be in the car for the first few runs of that system! Not an easy task, but probably possible. I think Glen has highlighted the biggest and most real safety issue, and probably the hardest to overcome.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
k.h.
Hero Member
   
Offline
Age: 63
Location: Webster Groves, MO
Posts: 565
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2009, 05:07:26 PM » |
|
Perhaps he can get a sidecar passenger ride at BUB's.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But in practice, there is.--Jan L. A. Van de Snepscheut
|
|
|
peglegcraig
Full Member
 
Offline
Age: 56
Location: socal
Posts: 105
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: September 16, 2009, 09:27:26 PM » |
|
Sidecar......  Now your talking, and thinking. I bet that will get your buddy going plenty fast and should it all go to custard an open bike is plenty easy to exit from. Bub lets us carry passengers. Keep working and thinking on this one, the answers are out there. If I might be able to help I'll do what I can. I understand the power of dreams and aspirations, as a modified production human. Peg Leg Craig
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Stan Back
|
 |
« Reply #13 on: September 16, 2009, 09:29:20 PM » |
|
I see a team coming together!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters – California's most-exclusive roadster club.
|
|
|
Freud
Hero Member
   
Offline
Age: 80
Location: Everett, WA - USA
Posts: 3346
|
 |
« Reply #14 on: September 16, 2009, 09:32:10 PM » |
|
Maybe Mike could organize a special meet for him.
FREUD
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Since '63
|
|
|
|