Rule change banning enclosed trailers #5 Rule change request #21

[kiwi belly tank]

Sid, so You boldly called me on my statement that we would not run at a SCTA event

because at that time the rules, if enforced, would have not allowed u to run for several

reasons. When we passed tech we would have been stupid to bow our neck and not run

because of a statement that I made. When I made the statement it was based on a firm

decision that the car would not pass tech. I don't know that the prior rules have been changed

but I do know the car passed tech and our driver is comfortable with the car as presently run

at speeds close to 300 MPH.

Our car is 43 feet long and has 3" of clearance. You can take this to the bank. It will not be towed

on the ground. The amount of time spent on building the transporter was well spent. At the WOS

event we found that even in the carrier it was impractical to move the car any substantial distance.

The salt is just too rough to even move it in the carrier. So the car is lifted by the carrier, secured

and reloaded into our 3 axle 53 foot triple axle trailer and moved.

If this doesn't meet with your approval, build a streamliner with a open trailer and protest us.

In your opinion that will make my prior prediction come true ........unless the protest is disallowed.

Not because the CAR didn't pass tech but because we didn't have an open trailer.

The car was not built to satisfy SCTA rules but somehow it has.

FREUD
 
My statement neither stated or implied I had any issue with anyone trailering anything on the salt, only what you had previously stated. I would also never expect you or anybody do anything to seek my approval, that's just ridiculoce.
  Sid.

[johnneilson]

Racing

Fair

Two words that contradict each other.

Neither should be used in the same rulebook, much less in the same rule.

John

[SPARKY]

I am guilty---but I plead the Flip Wilson defense  "The Devil made me do it"  hmm  so how I do not think that will gain much traction

[Finallygotit]

This seems to be a solution in search of a problem.

Regards, Neil  Tucson, AZ

I agree 100% with Neil's statement.  This proposed rule change is ridiculous.  YMMV

[NathanStewart]

I think the core intent is somewhat valid however the execution is a bit flawed and saying that it makes things fair isn't really the right concept.  If cheating was really an issue, the association should either provide a ride along rep that travels in the trailer after a record run to keep an eye on things or require that a rep close and seal the trailer between the end of the track and impound.  This wouldn't be to keep thing "fair" but to keep people honest.  While I'm sure people have gotten away with fishy stuff over the years, I really don't think this is an issue.

It's not like enclosed trailers would actually get banned.  C'mon now.   

[superleggera]

If there are concerns about possible irregularities occurring, thus maybe the following would work and is one scenario specific: 

If a vehicle (car/motorcycle) sets an initial qualifying record speed, if actual mechanical work is performed upon vehicle within an enclosed transport unit (trailer, box truck, van, etc) -- all the doors must be open for SCTA officials observation while in the impound inspection compound or when in the actual staging area before a return run the following morning. 

Basically someone would have to be very brazen to do an engine swap or other not quite legal modifications between initial qualifying and second run for a record if an SCTA official could walk up into their enclosed transport unit and witness modifications being made to the vehicle.

Otherwise let everyone transport or work in their air conditioned or heated transport box of choice until they set an initial qualifying record run and ONLY then does the rule above apply. 

[fastesthonda_jim]

Actually, SuperL when we work on the car in Impound in our enclosed trailer our doors are rarely open.  However, our doors are always open, to the curious, to our fans, and to the over heated and/or thirsty, not to mention to our friends, the tech inspectors.
There are so many ways to cheat at Bonneville, that you easily can... if you "need" to.  Given that the "rewards" are a mere slip of paper, I frankly can't see the motivation... not to mention I have to (get to?) look at my self in the mirror each morning.

Thanks to all for viewing this thread.  Now make sure your club reps vote "No" on this issue if you would, please.
Thanks,
Jim

[joea]

there are numerous reasons many of us prefer enclosed trailer....

lets say a wind/rain storm blows in, and your under the clock, and
you have waited 25 years to get to this point, that record...

and you were in, or loaded into enclosed trailer, under the clock....

anyway, as Jim mentioned....and imo "anywhere" at an SCTA venue as a
participant...we are ALL subject to the scrutiny of said officials...

[Stan Back]

. . . and even more often by our fellow competitors.

[johnneilson]

. . . and even more often by our fellow competitors.

More so by the current record holder.

[Nortonist 592]

Guilt by suspicion.  Another page for the telephone book. 

[BIGHORN]

I have no dog in this fight but this proposed rule is overkill

[Crosley]

I am guilty---but I plead the Flip Wilson defense  "The Devil made me do it"  hmm  so how I do not think that will gain much traction

A person needs some age under thier belt to know who Flip Wilson is.  Is he still alive?

[37str]

   
   This is the problem of non racers writing rules.

[Tman]

It truly is a Whiskey Tango Foxtrot sort of rule proposal.