El Mirage

[JackD]

The tape was used in part to close the gap from the body to the box and
allow the chute to pass without snagging.
The rest is quite telling and really leaves a bad taste where there could be
respect.
 A lot of that is gone now from both sides of the question.
The end result will be rules to prevent it because it was so poorly applied
and supervised.
It was a really poor showing all around.

[KeithTurk]

Right wrong or indifferent, Rick has kept us talking about it for 8 pages...

I've been fascinated really.... funny Tom should mention the electric air box pressure ... I'd had that thought a few years ago... ( it was poo poo'ed but it was a great thought )

Joe Timney and I write the rule book for the ECTA and it's similar to the SCTA in large part... I'd hate to keep adding things to cover stuff like this...  it's one of those things that is out there a bit.  It would be hard to write the rules to the level necessary to cover the total imagination of all the racers... so yeah there has to be some level of fair play involved... however if a guy can use his wit to come up with something inside the rules and the members don't like it, obviously something has to be written to prevent it.  In the mean time... if it's legal ... well then it's legal... if it's not then it's not... and that is for the board to decide... Since we elected them we have an obligation to support their decision...

K

[JackD]

The age old problem that KT outlines is the constant competition between
the entrant and the people charged with the responsibility of making it fair
for everybody and help the sport to survive for another day.
This stunt shows the extent both sides are willing to go and will continue
as long as it is allowed.
Sometimes you fall victim and take your lumps.
Sometimes you have to stand up and look past the today problem and
decide what is good for the long term.
In this case , both sides backed up.

SEE  BELOW

[Malcolm UK]

I had not realised that I was attending the most controversial event on the dry lakes for many years!

Firstly, may I say that I helped Jack Costella with his 5050 bike on the Friday, so as the car entry of Rick contains his and Jack's name I might be biased (then again I am a Brit. so that may not count either).

When Jack and I were discussing Rick's plan for the meeting, during Friday trials with the bike ..... I recalled that there seem to have been other rules on equipment that dictate a vehicles classification, even when that items "use" may be in doubt.  When the 'spirit' of all streamliners is innovation then it is hard to see that this idea detracted from that intent.  It can hardly be called 'cheating' when unrestrained thoughts are encouraged.  The car carried the cubic capacity and it was fitted in a manner that gave the impression that it was an additional drive element.

What the rule makers may need to look at is why in the 'lakes points chase process Rick had to run up a class, to gain more points than his competitors and more than he could get from staying in his original class with the one engine.

The 'safety shrouding' needed to save the chute did an effective job of blocking the view when the vehicle was running or moving.  (The duct tape was an aero add on at the staging lane, as the unit was already well secured when they pushed up).

I took pictures on film so will not see the results for a few days more.  I stood looking at the unshrouded unit (in the back of the truck) on Saturday when chatting with Rick, but I may not have taken any pictures.

As a first time observer there were a number of matters that might have been handled better, but that is a 'lakes procedural matter for the organisers.  Not every car was presented at Tech on the ground in the condition that it would be run, for example.

It was a shame that there was the need to change course and only one run was made by racers, as I had hoped to chat with many more people as the event progressed on Sunday.

The near suicidal dirt bike riders should be worrying competitors and course workers more than a two engined streamliner.

[promachine]

You got it Malcom UK, it was done for the points advantage.
The car ( bike or whatever ) did not run in the configuration that it
was presented in tech inspection. Its a no brainer!
But you gotta give those boys credit, its a bitchen car and hauls ass!!

[fastesthonda_jim]

Yeah, well I filed the protest, and I still think the outcome sucks.  It sounds a whole like Al Gore to me ("There is no controlling legal authority").

You know why there wasn't a specific rule (controlling legal authority) about this?  Because the rule book is small.  It fits into your hip pocket.  There's a whole other thread about how to make it even smaller, fercrimminysake!

You know what keeps it small?  The notion (I think it's actually spelled out in the rulebook but I can't find it) of the Spirit of the Rules.  The notion that too cute doesn't cut it.  That too much out of whack needs to be re-designed.  IMO Rick was given a pass on something I would have been dinged on.  Do I hold that against him?  Only a tiny bit.  Mostly I am in awe of his creativity and how he (and Jack C.) have taken this sport and turned at least part of it right on its ear.  But it does seem application of protest and the results lacks consistency.

And I have (had?) friends on the board.  Those are smart guys.  I just can't help but question, why on one hand a person's entire meet is thrown out by entering the wrong number on an entry, while at another time an entry with so many things out of whack in so many different areas, and with a potential to cause so much damage physically and for the long term health of the sport IMO, is/was given a pass.  And not just a small pass.  Only two of the board voted for the protest.

I dunno.... I just don't know...  certainly leaves me wondering.

Okay, enough of my rant.  I know there's a bottle with some medicinal Tequila around here someplace...

Jim

[JohnR]

John,
You mean you don't have a copy of the meeting documentation to read ?
I do.

Nope, not yet, coming snail mail. But that is not a problem as I was there and saw it first hand. I was just not aware of what you were referring to.

[JohnR]

The near suicidal dirt bike riders should be worrying competitors and course workers more than a two engined streamliner.

Great observation Malcolm!

[Glen]

Page 6, 1.A Technical inspection
States the vehicle must be in race ready condition. Then why wasn't the trailer carrying a non complience 2 stroke engine not attached to the back of the vehicle for inspection. Having it in the back of a pick up truck ain't in race ready condition for pre race inspection. It seens to me there are a bunch of things wrong with this record and how it was gotten.
Glen

[landracing]

Page 6, 1.A Technical inspection
States the vehicle must be in race ready condition. Then why wasn't the trailer carrying a non complience 2 stroke engine not attached to the back of the vehicle for inspection. Having it in the back of a pick up truck ain't in race ready condition for pre race inspection. It seens to me there are a bunch of things wrong with this record and how it was gotten.
Glen

Glen,

I wasnt there, and I am for more innovation as anybody, however that said what you stated is what I have been thinking all along. RACE READY, does not mean motor in back of a pickup. Doesn't matter if it didnt fit on the car hauling trailer, the vehicle should have been dropped and motor assembly attached to the car and inspected that way.
And people loosing records for not putting correct numbers on sheet and this vehicle did not show up as per the rules and operating procedures of El Mirage and rule book but is given a pass.

On a side note. way to go rick on the innovative thinking.

Jon

[JohnR]

...And I have (had?) friends on the board.  Those are smart guys.  I just can't help but question, why on one hand a person's entire meet is thrown out by entering the wrong number on an entry, while at another time an entry with so many things out of whack in so many different areas, and with a potential to cause so much damage physically and for the long term health of the sport IMO, is/was given a pass.  And not just a small pass.  Only two of the board voted for the protest....

There is a bright side to this for everybody upset by the decision. Immediately after the vote on the protest a motion was made by the board and unanimously passed by them directing Dan to insert wording in the next rule book specifically disallowing this type of device in 2007 and beyond.

Regards,

John

[Glen]

I still don't think it's fair. If I was the other guy I woild appeal the protest. There are to many things wrong with the whole picture.

[jimmy six]

Not speaking for the inspector who completed the form for vehicle 988, but I have inspected many vehicles in or on trailers. Most of the time I like it because I can see under it much easier. Vehicles we have inspected every month also seem to go faster than the ones we don't.  In impounds we look at them again, just not a many.  

If a car is going to change something, usually tires, we inspect them separately. Any body pieces which will be added I want to see them.

The 988 car moves only on it's trailer except for competition and staging. Eventho I have looked at this car many times with the body off every time and I would have wanted to see the additional engine mounted. This would have made for more work for the team but the body would have been off anyway. Not being there until Sunday I don't know if the inspector asked for this or not.  

At this time Jim K. has a 45 point lead on the 988 car and a 128 point lead on the #635 car. It appears to me Jim K. will change to fuel for November and will run on an open 140. If he repeats from last month he will gain near 258 points.

If we see the The 988 car come back and repeat in the fuel class his total would be 274. The 988 car would need to run an additional 20 mph from last moth to catch a repeat performance from Jim K. That would be a great accomplishment especially on the light of what has transpired since October. (I hope my #'s aren't too far off)

We will all write a ton of stuff after the November meet and nothings over until the meet is done.

[fastesthonda_jim]

There is a bright side to this for everybody upset by the decision. Immediately after the vote on the protest a motion was made by the board and unanimously passed by them directing Dan to insert wording in the next rule book specifically disallowing this type of device in 2007 and beyond.

Regards,

John

And what did that language say, "Vehicles presented for inspection must be in race ready condition"?

Sorry, this whole issue just seems so cut and dried to me, otherwise I wouldn't have protested.

Now where is that fresh bottle of Tequila?

[JohnR]

And what did that language say, "Vehicles presented for inspection must be in race ready condition"?

Sorry, this whole issue just seems so cut and dried to me, otherwise I wouldn't have protested.

Now where is that fresh bottle of Tequila?

Hey, pour me one if you're getting up!

The language was going to address the "dead" engine I think. The specific language was not discussed, only the motion enabling Dan to sort it out.

Regards,

John