Driver's safety belt containment, prone/forward versus sitting up

[joea]

...NRHS per your quote ""Honestly if I was the SCTA and there was an accident or death which resulted in the SCTA being sued I would ban that particular team from ever participating in any of our events again""

i guess i would ask...are you serious..?...

meaning...accidents happen and the difference between catastrophe and not is often chance....

IE......in looking at the link below, a cetain team (noted on side of bike...sublte irony..) has a bike
that as seen in pics (starting at 448)has a catastrophic failure at the rear of the bike...should the team be banned...?...

http://www.scootershoots.com/2008-BUB-Motor-Land-Speed/2008-Motorcycle-Land-Speed/6013406_4JM7d#658219144_K8cG4
 
Joe:)

[nrhs sales]

Joea,

Where did I say that if a team has an accident they should be banned? Quit trying to only use part of what i said to suit your needs. Makes you sound like a politician.  You might want to read the quote  you posted again before you come off all high and mighty here.  

I very clearly said that if a team was involved in a lawsuit against the organizers due to an accident IMO I would ban them.  There is a very big difference which I am sure you know.  Your post above is an obvious attempt to atagonize me into a debate. Liike I said, if some of you feel the need to make me the bad guy then so be it.  But if the SCTA, AMA, FIM etc keep getting sued every time there is a death how much longer do you think we will be able to keep racing?  

I 100% agree with your statement, "meaning...accidents happen and the difference between catastrophe and not is often chance....

How does that equate to it's okay to file lawsuits should a participant get hurt or die?  As that is the stance you are taking if you are saying i am wrong in my way of thinking.  

So are you saying that we should just let teams race whatever they want with no regard towards safety and if they die you feel it is a good thing for the family to sue the organizers?  Because that would be the opposite of my stance if you do not agree with me.


BTW,
nobody on our team sued anybody after that accident.

[Chris Horoho]

 

So are you saying that we should just let teams race whatever they want with no regard towards safety and if they die you feel it is a good thing for the family to sue the organizers?  Because that would be the opposite of my stance if you do not agree with me.


BTW,
nobody on our team sued anybody after that accident.

but with this same type of statement you are saying the vehicles jack designs and builds are unsafe?
When his designs are safe and also very innovative
I dont want to get in the middle of this with anyone or the scta but I am another person designing a face forward liner, granted mine is taller and more prone to how a MC rides just skinny and taller the some liners, but i feel my design when complete will be very safe and comfortable to ride

[nrhs sales]

No I am not saying any such thing.  Why is this so hard for some of you to understand?

I am saying that if a team has an accident and sues the organizers  I feel they should not be allowed to compete in an LSR event ever again.  Period!!!  

It has nothing to do with safety rules. It is all due to the fact that you competed in an event knowing full well that racing is dangerous and you signed a waiver saying you would not hold the organizers responsible should something go wrong. But if you or a fmaily member then sue said organizers why should you be trsuted to come back again to another event and not sue once again should something bad happen.  You have shown a propensity to sue instead of saying it was a racing incident have you not?

Please stop trying to put words in my mouth that I have not said!!!

For all I know the reasoning for Jacks vehicle has nothing to do with a lawsuit.   

[Seldom Seen Slim]

Jack:  Wow, were you ever successful in getting a discussion going, hey?  And to everyone that's posted here (on this topic, at least) -- thanks for your comments - and even the sometimes heated repartee. 

But let's get back to the specific topic of the thread -- driver's safety belt ... etc.  If you'd like to carry on with the banging around about legal ramifications of racing -- how 'bout using the LSR General Chat topic?  Here's the base address:  http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/board,41.0.html  Let's allow Jack's thoughts and your responses to continue - but also let's move the other stuff away from right here, okay?  Thanks.

[bak189]

Hey, people....I am certain that some of the SCTA/BNI officials are reading all these postings, and most certainly the M/C Committee officials...........but you can post all you want......but Jack's liner is out with SCTA/BNI........Once they make their ruling I have yet to see a reversal...........been there.. had that......

So what I am saying is that all this input is very interesting and great reading......but a waste of time.....
it will not get Jack's liner off the "Red Tag".....Let's hope I am wrong.....OK. Van and Tom...prove me wrong!!!!

[joea]

...watchit bak...were not allowed to talk about legal ramifications as it pertains
to racing...

Joe

[fastman614]

Jon, You are correct..... but this also seems to be about the "cloak of secrecy" surrounding matters such as this and secrecy breeds speculation....

And to some of you others, in your recent posts, it would not, in all likelihood be a team member or a competitor suing..... it will be a third party, an heir or a spouse or someone.... a person, if they were banned from competing, it would be a "hollow move"

[joea]

...NRHS...my point was to try to protect great teams from falling victims to outside entities..ie riders/drivers(and their families)
of vehicles built by great people/teams...

and by great teams and people I include NRHS and its efforts..!!!!

...Drivers safety belt containment...prone/forward vs sitting up....well the word on the street is
that insurance is playing a big part in the red-tagging of such efforts at this time...which is in large part
why this discussion has become about legal ramifications......thats where the emphasis lies right now!!!!!

Horoho......how do "you" think you are going to get it approved....when its currently not legal...?...

[Chris Horoho]

Horoho......how do "you" think you are going to get it approved....when its currently not legal...?...

answer me this how is it illegal if just one vehicle is redtagged?

also my position of rider is very different and the belting in is also
i planned on having a half shell of the front half of the body where you fit in at an angle similar to setting on a sport bike but legs further back more like a top fuel motorcycle
and at this time ive not seen anything saying its illegal

but my design would let me change the position a bit if required
as its only in design mode at this time

below is a design draft of it and as you see mine is different then jack's

[joea]

Horoho...the redtag is for prone position as i understand it, not having approved hans type security....yours has prone position (planned).....

the letter written to Jack from SCTA Motorcycle Tech Chair speaks to the red-tag as i understand it is banning prone position until documentation can be provided ascertaining its acceptable (to the SCTA) safety.....

and again it sounds as though the scta hands are abit tied on this as it relates to the current era of insurance liability.......nothing is unsolvable......

I also know that the SCTA has alot of respect for Jack and his innovations (heard it from scta "official representatives" mouths and
also multiple times second hand)....

[DocBeech]

Heres one of the main problems. Crash testing costs a lot of money. Each crash test costs $50,000-$100,000 dollars and some vehicles are tested more than 20 times. Thats $2 million dollars, vehicles that are more complicated are sometimes crashed 30 times. Meaning a total cost of $3 million just for the tests. This doesn't include the cost to repair dummies that are damaged(cost to purchase new is $100,000).

I don't see a whole lot of people with 3 million to dump in to crash testing an experimental vehicle.

[joea]

..doc....many folks also assume that to break world land speed records one would need
very expensive engine and aerodynamic testing.....

[Chris Horoho]

but joea mine is more a motorcycle positioning (granted you cant eject like on an MC but similar riding position)
and the belts on mine and position would allow for a HNS device to be used (you cant use a HNS on some of the lines that you lie flat on your back and tilt head to chest now can you and i see nothing on them yet (actually that setup would more likely snap a neck
when the design is 100% finalized with human body (which we have) cad design inputted
I will submit it for approval
I am not a slow person when it comes to engineering and design and i do feel the design and position of the rider in my liner is a very safe comfortable position for a MC liner
but i will let the people who will need to approve it decide (as we all have to)
I will more then likely though be more prone to run in AMA/FIM events then the SCTA

[RichFox]

Heres one of the main problems. Crash testing costs a lot of money. Each crash test costs $50,000-$100,000 dollars and some vehicles are tested more than 20 times. Thats $2 million dollars, vehicles that are more complicated are sometimes crashed 30 times. Meaning a total cost of $3 million just for the tests. This doesn't include the cost to repair dummies that are damaged(cost to purchase new is $100,000).

I don't see a whole lot of people with 3 million to dump in to crash testing an experimental vehicle.

Every streamliner and lakester as well as most other vehicles seen running at Bonneville could be thought of as "Experimental" None that I know of were intentionally crash tested.. Nor do I expect to see crash testing to become the norm. So we can disregard that expense.