BNI/SCTA board meeting 07/17

[dw230]

I have combined a couple of items from the board meeting under the El Mirage thread.

First, the good news. The BNI reports that salt conditions are excellent. There was some discussion about the addition of a 4th! course in the future. Not for 2010. All arrangements have been made for the trailers, sales items, safety gear, etc. and the first group of workers will be on the salt 08/08. Please do not show up expecting to join the work force as all jobs are handled and no provisions will be made to put your race equipment on the salt until opening day 08/12. Do not be po'd when you do arrive and see some race gear there. These belong to the workers who are given access because of their volunteer time.

Second, El Mirage. All in all it was a great meet, see my report on the home page. Four runs were offered and we ran until there were absolutely no vehicles left. The was one serious back door incident. As many of you know in the past few years there have been several problems with race vehicles going out the back or out of bounds to the spectator side. Incidents like these can jeopardize our future racing at the lakebed, everything must be reported to the BLM and they are looking for an excuse to shut us down.

This year a committee put together a list of guidelines to lay down uniform penalties for various infractions. This list is begins with something as easy as a do-over to complete life time banning of you as a driver/rider from all future SCTA/BNI events. This list is available from your club rep or the registration trailer.

Now for my story. One driver drove under full power, according to witnesses, out the back of the track boundaries. He lost track orientation because of a problem with his car. After discussion with the driver and input from the reps, the committee recommended that he lose all points for this meet, loss of all driver's license levels, start over with rookie orientation and be sat down from the Sept. meet as a driver. He will be able run his car with another driver though. At Bonneville he will have to start his licensing over and be yellow tagged for observation. These are serious penalties however, some people in the room were pushing for the life time ban because of the potential repercussions of the violation.

Please understand that violations like these are taken very seriously and are not tolerated. This isn't your Father's SCTA. That was then, this is now.

DW

[Nortonist 592]

some people in the room were pushing for the life time ban

DW

I'm pretty sure the first incident outside the racing boundaries will result in a lifetime ban for ALL of us.  (courtesy of he BLM)

[dw230]

Certainly, the first fatal incident.

DW

[desotoman]

He lost track orientation because of a problem with his car.

First off thanks for the report Dan.

Now back to the quote, If a person loses track orientation why wouldn't he shut off? What was he thinking? The cones come closer together in the shut off area now to let the competitor know they are past the finish line. IMO there is no excuse for this kind of excuse. IMO this person should have been banned from further SCTA competition for one year. This might sound awful harsh, but the message needs to be sent LOUD and CLEAR that this is NOT ACCEPTABLE.

Tom G.

[Glen]

Maybe it's time SCTA require a chute for every run over 100 mph,That car has no large scoop or supercharger blocking his vision. If he is looking inside the cockpit to see the tach., he is traveling roughly 120 feet at second and should have turned off by position #9. No excuses.

[Nortonist 592]

If John Noonan can stop a bike from 252 without a chute or Freddie D. can go 300+ and turn out at 7 there really isn't any excuse.   And if there is an "incident" I don't think the BLM will buy any of our excuses.

[John Noonan]

If John Noonan can stop a bike from 252 without a chute or Freddie D. can go 300+ and turn out at 7 there really isn't any excuse.   And if there is an "incident" I don't think the BLM will buy any of our excuses.

FYI..

This is not defend the driver that went out of bounds while still under power:


On our 252 mph run we were hard on the brakes and was gearing down about as hard as we could, I new when I sat up just after the finish line that we had set the M/C track record as the GPS was dropping in speed however the first time I saw it was at 246 mph and coming down.

I was on the brakes and was trying to scrub off speed as I am aware of the serious (needed) penalties for an out of bounds infraction at El Mirage, I realised that I may not make it and contemplated laying the bike down to keep from possibly going out the back door and also to preserve the record.  I was aware that I would lose the record, points and more by going out so I started to position myself to lay the bike down and started to get the bike leaned hard to the left while also removing my left leg from the bike in preparation for the possible dismount ahead of me.

We were able to stop the bike within three feet of the boundary markers and was fortunate not to leave the bike or damage myself, course workers or spectators.  This has now changed the shutdown procedures for me and I will also take other measures as well to make sure I can stop in the shut down area without either delaying the racing or going out the back door.  One of the reasons it is harder for me to stop the bike was the fact that our bike is heavy. 

Placing a small pilot/parachute on the bike would not be an option at this time as the chute would end up needing to be mounted just about 3 inches above the center of the wheel so none of you dumbazzes like flaklin even suggest that.  In the future on a dedicated A-Class bike it might be something that could be taken in to the design of the bike chassis.

Now back to the backdoor violation, I have heard a little about it however unless the driver was suffering a heart attack I did not see why he needed to go that far or take the excuse given however we are fortunate that nobody was heart this time....

[Glen]

John, I heard you used up the shut down area, thanks for your input and what it takes a high speed vehicle to stop. No excuse for a 118 mph roadster.

[Papi]

Not to be a sh!t disturber, and I know it "can" happen, but :

- there is the points reduction,
- re-rookie status,
- limited speed introduction
- general hazing,

How about adding a Fine, and a heavier Re-Entry Fee to any racer that goes out the back door?
Or maybe make a mandatory three meet minimum under rookie runs for all NEW drivers and crew before graduating up?

Maybe a Fine of $1000 plus a re-entry fee of $1000 will make folks focus a little more as they approach the lights to STOP.

I know I am going to catch a boatload of crap for even suggesting this, but this is a serious sport that "does" have serious consequences attached. Most everyone I have met has a lot invested in this sport, and it just seems to me that laying down the law heavier up front could prevent a future problem.

OK, flame away.

[Papi]

Oh one other thing;  Is it possible to mildly increase the length of the backdoor, however, close it in with the same water barrels used by Caltrans at freeway exits?  Basically graduate the backdoor down from x feet wide to 0 feet wide with the barrels as an emergency stopping device?  May be a silly idea, but I thought it could use some thought. There may be a better idea than above, but at least it is a talking point.

[Glen]

Papi
While we are interested in every ones input we still have a procedure to submit requests for rule changes and procedures at SCTA events. Everything must be submitted on the proper forms to be considered.
We are all concerned about safety and we have only so much area provided by the BLM to race on.
Many drivers and riders have been fined and had restrictions put on them and the clubs as well.
Hopes this helps you understand.

[Papi]

Papi
While we are interested in every ones input we still have a procedure to submit requests for rule changes and procedures at SCTA events.

Hey Glen- Thank you for that. I do understand (marginally) that there is a procedure.
However, and more so, I was just exploring talking points in the thread, not a written suggestion to the committee at this point.

You have been around a long time, what do you think of some assisted stopping devices at the back door like I mentioned?

[Glen]

Papi
E-mail the SCTA secretary and ask to be put on the mailing list for board and reps minutes. You will find this very helpful with what goes on when some one breaks the rules for what ever reason. They are discussed at great length and a ruling made for each case.

Adding a barrier of any kind could create other problems stopping that we don't need.

[desotoman]

There was talk at the Board meeting of trying to lengthen the shutdown area, according to the minutes.

Tom G.

[Dynoroom]

There was talk at the Board meeting of trying to lengthen the shutdown area, according to the minutes.

Tom G.

Yep, there going to add 300 feet to the shut down. But remember this is going to move the patrols a bit further apart so we can't just keep making the shutdown longer....... It takes volunteer personal to man the track.