There has to be more than one?

[Malcolm UK]

Testing of the Dieselmax is underway as from Saturday without bodywork.  To my knowledeg the first car ever constructed in the UK for a speed record attempt that has required a push-off start.

The complete looking car with body work is on display at the London Motor Show, according to a speed record group member who took photos on Sunday.

So perhaps not two but the team are making it appear so.

Just so long as the correct pieces get on the plane to Wendover for the 11th August!

[PorkPie]

has required a push-off start

When John Cobb used the Railton the first time at the salt he also was pushed due to clutch/transmission problem - this problem was at last fixed in 1947.......the problem was, that they can't syncronizise the two engines properly.

[Glen]

Push off starts are a lot easier on the equipment.

[Malcolm UK]

The Cobb Railton was not designed to need a push start.  

It is only a few months ago that the European governing body in Council agreed that push starting with another vehicle would not be considered as contravening their own rule  " ... it must start by its own means of propulsion ..."  which still remains in print.

Have to agree that it saves the equipment when the gearing and clutch pack are not designed for a static take off in accordance with the rules that were in place over here.  (The Brits will still prevent push starts for National records it seems).

For some vehicles the push start (or tow start) can be a godsend and money maker at the right meeting (refer to Bub '05).

[PorkPie]

Yup, the Railton was not designed for, but in the earlier record attempts it helps to get the car in gear.
Did I understood correct, that now push starts are legal?

[JackD]

Push starts for cars have always been common practice at Bonneville even for many of the existing FIA records.
The existing FIM ultimate record was also done with a tow start as with many before him.
 The sanctions tried to change the rule without consulting with anybody that knew.
 Because that would have changed the procedure, it should require that all previous records set under those circumstances be retired.
They had their first thought and changed it back.
I tried to get the rule changed for both of them to require the vehicle have no outside assist for a distance equal to and before the timed distance.
 They didn't understand the concept as well as the racer that took their money, the "Slingshot."

More of the blind leading the deaf.

[Malcolm UK]

The email from the FIA secretariat does not frame the rule in the format of Appendix D but does permit push starts in a manner that the Chief Steward for the attempt accepts.

FIM and tow starts were there for streamliners, then went away (it is claimed because of an accident) but were reintroduced when the Gillette Mach3 Challenger needed it for stability purposes before ignition.  Ofcourse the streamliners had to be defined by the FIM rule and the method of propulsion does not matter.

[JackD]

Learning tow start procedures is just the start of learning to drive a stream liner bike at speed.
Upsets will happen just like anything else.
 The job of the sanction is to require the vehicle to be as safe as developments will allow
 and as equal a basis as can be accommodated.
Knee jerk rules in response to perceived problems with out consultation with those that know
 from experience is really stepping on it.
Given a little thought, both sides can do better.
Learning from others and you can do better than that.
Rather than a book on dumb stuff, how about a cartoon strip ?