|
Post by Scottish Cartie Association on Nov 18, 2011 15:51:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by neils on Nov 19, 2011 0:17:34 GMT
OK since no-one else has replied. Good to see regs up Stephen. looking forwards to another good weekend at Caingorm in 2012. Thanks for all the hard work. Fell sorry for the poor sods that are going to wonder where their number plates have gone.
|
|
|
Post by leew on Nov 19, 2011 8:54:24 GMT
Thinking about it, an actual car number plate will not be allowed as they are generally made from Perspex and thus would fall foul of rule 10.1. Thus you will have to cut your own from some other matirial.
|
|
|
Post by kingkay on Nov 20, 2011 2:06:05 GMT
Hello all, I’ve had a look at the rules and am left a bit puzzled at the direction some of them have taken.
I’m sure there are good reasons that they’ve been changed from previous years but it’s come as a bit of a shock, and was hoping for a bit of explanation /clarification.
If the actual tyre measurements will be taken, not what it says on the sidewall you have to play safe and go for 2.1’s or bigger (54mm) in case they come up slightly smaller. Even with a standard BMX rim (406) this really limits the choice available. Nearly all are relatively low pressure and heavy. I can only find one or two that aren’t. There’s an interesting variation in soapbox theory and design - this rule appears to be stifling this. There was some talk a while ago about racing in Europe with their use of smaller, wider wheels, does this have any impact on the thinking behind this?
If the minimum wheel width of 50mm applies to all wheels under 460mm then C12, Centra Bavaria and the Red Gazelle won’t be able to race as they’re all too skinny. 50mm tyres aren’t available in the size rims they’re using, so new wheels will be needed. This would alter all the steering geometry so they’d have to redesign all that and it would lift the carts higher, changing the centre of gravity so they’d have to re position the axles. All this would be so costly and time-consuming it would basically be starting again. These are the fastest carts south of the border and you’re purposefully stopping them from coming and racing?
The battery rule makes sense but to what level does that apply? Our Go Pro camera has a built in Battery – I’ve no idea what it is. I’m told most phones/cameras have lithium batteries in them, so does that mean no more onboard footage? That would be a shame.
The drag plate seems very odd to me. Everyone is trying their hardest to squeeze every ounce of speed from every component, and then we’re asked to put an air brake on? Surely nearly all of the crashes at Cairngorm happed at the chicane near the top when everyone is going relatively slowly (though not as slowly as they should have gone ;D ) at this point the air brake will have no effect. If you think the carts are going dangerously fast and need slowing down, maybe the answer would be to slow down the course not the carts. Cairngorm extreme is the fastest race in the UK. That’s a good thing right? Out onboard speedo – (however poorly calibrated) showed we only went 5 mph slower at Dalby than Cairngorm. With an air brake Dalby would be faster. Surely that’s a waste of the best track there is.
I know there was a meeting where all this was discussed and people have put a lot of time, thought and effort into it and all of these changes have been made for good reason. It’s my own fault for not attending. No doubt if I had done, all this would make a lot more sense but if any of my thoughts could be answered I’d appreciate it.
|
|
|
Post by peasnbarley on Nov 20, 2011 12:07:48 GMT
Hi Kingkay - You have mirrored (No pun intended) ;D the thoughts of many who have not as yet digested the rules fully or have been reticent about sticking their head over the parapet. I was at the meeting and have to admit to being left as puzzled as you are although did vote for several things in good faith that seem to have come out of the wash a bit tangled. I have been inundated with calls and emails about this and my head is just about to boil over so thanks for turning down the gas. Part of the problem is that there was a huge amount to be discussed and agree at one meeting which was in fact the SCA A.G.M so the rule changes for Cairngorm had to be fitted into that. As a consequence the various items were looked at in isolation rather than as a package of proposals which in my opinion changed the overall result. Stephen is the person best placed to give an account of the meeting because although I was voted on as Secretary (I had a pen and paper) it was agreed he would take the Minute of the meeting. However I can say how I voted on the several issues and why. The tyre issue was discussed as an improvement in safety to increase the tyre patch and slow the carts down slightly. I don't have the knowledge to determine tyre and rim sizes off the top of my head but simply wanted very narrow slick type tyres excluded. That is what I voted for. Batteries were discussed in the context of Power Packs that may be carried by teams to power horns and other on-board equipment. Common sense said to exclude liquid acid type batteries in case of leaks and resultant burn dangers. The dangers of 'nasty' Li-Po batteries was put before the meeting and it was agreed they should also be excluded. I would say few if any at the meeting had ever thought of the question that hand held equipment such as cameras and Sat-Nav type stuff were in the equation. I voted in favour of excluding wet cell and Li-Po batteries as power packs in carts. The drag plate issue was discussed and I and four others voted against their introduction. There is a reason which I am not prepared to go into as to why this rule has been implemented and like it or not I must accept that. The provision of teams own tow equipment. I don't believe a vote was taken on this but there did not seem to be any great objection to the idea. The mandatory fitting of Nerf Bars and Bumpers etc was discussed and the suggestion their fitting might encourage drivers to risk closer contact was accepted as being a risk. Drivers own concern to preserve their wheels provided as safe an alternative so mandatory fitting of those items was not adopted. Mirrors were another difficult issue as making them mandatory raised the problem of their actual effectiveness. I suggested a test at scrutineering to ensure drivers had 360 degree visibility that could include mirrors, turning round or anything else the teams wanted to come up with. This suggestion was adopted. I also suggested SCA should have an official paying membership which would then entitle those individuals to attend and vote at future SCA A.G.Ms. They could also be added to the SCA mail list to get updates or raise issues of concern. Also that only SCA members could enter the SCA Championship. Cost only to be nominal but everyone who wanted a voice would have one. I believe this proposal was passed by the meeting. This is only my personal view as to the meeting and should not be taken as Fact.
|
|
|
Post by grahamk on Nov 20, 2011 12:51:32 GMT
My feelings on these rules: I agree with what you say about the wheels. My cartie runs thin wheels and tyres and i find it's too costly to buy new wheels, and have them made up. Going hard into the switch with my skinny wheels at 45mph+ had no effect on these wheels at all, these wheels then raced at Dalby and i only got them checked over last week. My wheel builder checked them for true, spoke tension etc and found nothing wrong with them. As for the air brakes/plates/advertising banner, i dont agree with them. Spending so much money on making a fast safe cartie the last thing i want is to be told is i need to slow down to 60-65 mph. This would no longer make the Cairngorms the most extreme and fastest track in Britain as C12 was reaching these speeds at Dalby 63mph recorded but probably not at his fastest part of the track. I also can't see the logic behind not making bumpers, nerf bars, mirrors etc manditory as the plates will make everyone race much closer together increasing the risk of crashes. This could lead to almost every run being stopped as a result of a crash, probably at the switch, then we would get less runs during the day. I heard there were about 9 people attending the meeting. If 5 people voted against fitting the plates, this rule should have be ruled out on the result of the vote. Seems if the plan to create a SCA membership goes ahead and we were to join the SCA to have a say at these meetings it would be a waste of time as votes don't seem to count for anything and Stevens decision would be final.
|
|
|
Post by bad attitude racing on Nov 20, 2011 13:19:55 GMT
it seems to me that the safety problems come down to 3 main things 1/ unstable carts ... short narrow wheelbases and high speeds dont mix( granted there are a few well built carts are the exception to the rule) 2/poor driver judgement/skill .... 3/4 of 2010 crashes at the switch were down to this the other 1/4 was probably poor cart design. 3/ poor crowd control.. im the first to take my hat off to the soul destroying job the marshalls do , but to minimise the risk to spectators at say the switch or any major corner we need to keep people out of the danger zones. its usually pretty easy to work out where an out of control cart will end up, we know that the cart is gonna move the bales or water barriers so no one should be allowed to satnd at these points. at the end of the day if something was to go majorley wrong its stephen who has to deal with all the crap , but i think that there is a real danger of 2012 being sanitised to the point of it being a procession other than a race. that would be a shame! is it worth a 400mile round trip and £300+ to not try and get the most out of our cart im still processing that!
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Cartie Association on Nov 20, 2011 14:14:38 GMT
If the actual tyre measurements will be taken, not what it says on the sidewall you have to play safe and go for 2.1’s or bigger (54mm) in case they come up slightly smaller. Even with a standard BMX rim (406) this really limits the choice available. You misread/misunderstood it. For standard BMX rims (i.e 20" tyre) the minimum tyre width is 45mm. There are loads of perfectly decent tyres that are well within spec'. 20x1.95 Primo Comets for instance. The battery rule makes sense but to what level does that apply? Our Go Pro camera has a built in Battery – I’ve no idea what it is. I’m told most phones/cameras have lithium batteries in them, so does that mean no more onboard footage? That would be a shame. My camera uses AA batteries. So does my GPS logger. We might review the rule and allow very low watt hour Li Ion batteries, but large ones are definately a no go. To be honest, onboard footage is not my biggest concern right now. The drag plate seems very odd to me. Everyone is trying their hardest to squeeze every ounce of speed from every component, and then we’re asked to put an air brake on? Surely nearly all of the crashes at Cairngorm happed at the chicane near the top when everyone is going relatively slowly (though not as slowly as they should have gone ;D ) at this point the air brake will have no effect. Not true. In 2011 there were four crashes where the drivers lost control at speed while travelling in a straight line and with no other vehicles anywhere near them. (e.g. Check out this 60+mph tumble drier. www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUZMWhg6Ar0)My calculation is that the drag plate will take about 5mph off the entry speed into The Switch. Some of you will still need to brake from around 50mph to around 35mph. Overall, the changes should take about 10mph off the top speed of the very fastest carties. The effect on slower carties will be less. This still gives a top speed of around 65mph, so is still faster than anywhere else in the UK. We'll also be reviewing the use of the drag plates after practice and qualifying and if it is clear that the speeds have been reduced too much or if there are other factors (such as a howling head wind) then we might allow them to be removed. However, that is entirely at the discretion of the organising team. To be honest with you, however, I'm pretty confident with my maths. I reckon your all still going to be going fast enough for white knuckles and brown pants. The main problem we're trying to address - and this is something that you hint at yourself - is that carties are becoming faster all the time. However, the increased speed is not matched by increases in stability, crash protection, brakes, steering and handling, with the result that many of the carties are operating close to and in some cases beyond the limit of their driver's ability to control them. We could dramatically increase the build spec' and require you to build new carties with far better build standards, but that is likely to be prohibitively expensive for you and would also make it much harder for new teams to get involved. It would also add dramatically to our workload on the day and would make scrutineering itself a far more time consuming affair, and with a much higher chance that teams would be sent home without turning a wheel. Alternatively, we could dramatically increase the crash protection on the course itself, but that again would be prohibitively expensive and would raise the amount of work involved way beyond what most of us are prepared to put in. The only option, therefore, is to slow the carties down. We know what makes a cartie go fast - high mass, light wheels and low drag, so we know how to slow them down too. Reduce mass, bigger tyres and more drag. Reducing mass is not a good option, since some teams would have no choice but to remove structural weight. That leave tyres and drag. You can make the tyre and drag plate changes without major modifications to your cartie and you can reverse them relatively easily so you're not at a disadvantage when you race on slower courses. Tyre changes alone are not enough because there are some very fast carties that meet the new tyre spec' without any alteration at all. If you think the carts are going dangerously fast and need slowing down, maybe the answer would be to slow down the course not the carts. Cairngorm extreme is the fastest race in the UK. That’s a good thing right? Out onboard speedo – (however poorly calibrated) showed we only went 5 mph slower at Dalby than Cairngorm. With an air brake Dalby would be faster. Surely that’s a waste of the best track there is. It's still the best track in current use. It would be a bigger waste not to race there at all. The fact is that I'm not comforable with the level of risk I would be exposed to if we didn't do something to address the ever increasing speeds. I am not prepared to continue my involvement with organising CSEx with the same level of risk as we had in 2011. (Although, paradoxically, I'd be entirely happy to race there). There is further information on the thought processes and logic that have brought us to these decisions in the document "CSEx - The Road Ahead", which can be downloaded from here. It includes, amonst other things, why we're not going to be using chicanes. What I'd really like - more than anything - is to actually get to race at the event that has taken over my life for the past 3 years, and have a year in which we don't have someone going home in an ambulance.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Cartie Association on Nov 20, 2011 14:23:33 GMT
I heard there were about 9 people attending the meeting. If 5 people voted against fitting the plates, this rule should have be ruled out on the result of the vote. Seems if the plan to create a SCA membership goes ahead and we were to join the SCA to have a say at these meetings it would be a waste of time as votes don't seem to count for anything and Stevens decision would be final. The rule changes were circulated beforehand and you emailed back to say you had no problem with them. Yes 5 people were not in favour, but 3 out of the 4 executive officers were in favour, and it is them that will be ultimately responsible. The likely chief marshal for 2012 is also in favour, although he wasn't at the meeting, and several others not present did not object. I'm comfortable that we have enough support and a good enough consensus to proceed. The plate sizes in the final version are half the size of the ones initially proposed. I'm also confident that I can make a good job of justifying the changes and backing them up with verifable figures. Nonetheless, if you feel strongly that it needs to be organised differently then I'd be absolutely delighted to step aside and let you get on with it, but if I am the person who is exposed to the risks then the risks need to be at a level that I am comfortable with.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Cartie Association on Nov 20, 2011 14:34:22 GMT
3/ poor crowd control.. im the first to take my hat off to the soul destroying job the marshalls do , but to minimise the risk to spectators at say the switch or any major corner we need to keep people out of the danger zones. its usually pretty easy to work out where an out of control cart will end up, we know that the cart is gonna move the bales or water barriers so no one should be allowed to satnd at these points. The switch is not the biggest concern any more, as I think we've got the risks there pretty well under control. The section between dead tree and the allt mor bridge is the problem now, with carties passing through there over 70mph and barely in control. at the end of the day if something was to go majorley wrong its stephen who has to deal with all the crap , but i think that there is a real danger of 2012 being sanitised to the point of it being a procession other than a race. that would be a shame! Nail on the head there. We're trying hard to avoid that, and I genuinely think we'll achieve it. It's certainly the objective. is it worth a 400mile round trip and £300+ to not try and get the most out of our cart im still processing that! I hope you'll be there. I really don't see why you don't think you'll be getting the mosxt out of your cartie - I've no doubt you'll still be going faster than you do anywhere else, and the winner will still be the best driver and cartie combination.
|
|
|
Post by leew on Nov 20, 2011 14:46:25 GMT
You can make the tyre and drag plate changes without major modifications to your cartie and you can reverse them relatively easily so you're not at a disadvantage when you race on slower courses. Er, not true for some teams, like myself as my wheels are of a rim size where the largest tyre made is 40mm thus in order to race I'd not only have to buy new tyres AND wheels, I'd also have to change the kingpin angles and steering layout etc to work properly with the new wheels. Some other teams including TDR have the same problem of using a wheel size for which sutible tyres simply don't exist. Due to the time and expenise required (which I don't really have at the moment), I don't think I will be racing in 2012 Also if I have to weld my ballast in that would substatially complicate transport (as it would be too heavy for the roof rack) and storage (currently hangs from workshop roof) adding to the expense. The ballast rules will cause serious problems for peter pope as he relies on it to maintain good front/rear balance, he would be much more likley to crash without the ballast due to a very light front end.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Cartie Association on Nov 20, 2011 14:55:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Cartie Association on Nov 20, 2011 18:50:55 GMT
Due to the time and expenise required (which I don't really have at the moment), I don't think I will be racing in 2012 Also if I have to weld my ballast in that would substatially complicate transport (as it would be too heavy for the roof rack) and storage (currently hangs from workshop roof) adding to the expense. I thought you were getting new wheels made anyway? You were recently asking me if CFRP wheels would be legal (they would). As for ballast, I don't think it's reasonable to build a 35Kg cartie and ballast it up to a competitive weight. There just isn't enough structural steel there. Likewise, welding your ballast in is not really the response we're looking for either. If you want to make your cartie heavier, make it stronger.
|
|
|
Post by leew on Nov 20, 2011 19:13:07 GMT
Just because a cartie is light does not mean it's weak, if you have a close look at C12 for example, CFRP can be orders of magitude stronger than steel for the same weight. Also the quality of welding can have a big impact on the strength of a cartie and using heavier guage stock can put more stress on the joints. A cartie made by an unqualified novice may suffer from poor penitration/cold lap, undercutting, inclusions etc. A mate who drives a Caterham 7 with a mostly box section spaceframe chassis weighing about half as much as a typical road car claims they are much stronger than typical road cars.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Cartie Association on Nov 20, 2011 19:39:31 GMT
If the minimum wheel width of 50mm applies to all wheels under 460mm then C12, Centra Bavaria and the Red Gazelle won’t be able to race as they’re all too skinny. 50mm tyres aren’t available in the size rims they’re using, so new wheels will be needed. Last time I saw C12 racing it had 20" wheels and tyres that looked like they had been nicked from a tractor. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by peasnbarley on Nov 20, 2011 20:17:04 GMT
Leew posted: That's perfectly correct as is the rest of your statement. However I have to agree with Stephen's concern regarding bolting on ballast to come near to maximum racing weight. Again I know of teams suggesting they can get round the 'No Ballast Rule' by simply hiding the lead under a new floor, glass fibering over it, or welding on a steel sheet of the same weight. All these 'modifications' run against the spirit and intent the organisers brought in the rule and if the 'modifications' can't be shown to contribute to the structural strength more than the desire to simply add weight they might find their cart fails for structural/safety reasons and that would be sad. Of course that will be a matter for the team who are conducting the scrutineering to decide and I don't think there will be time for long discussions or arguments on the day. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Cartie Association on Nov 20, 2011 20:36:19 GMT
Again I know of teams suggesting they can get round the 'No Ballast Rule' by simply hiding the lead under a new floor, glass fibering over it, or welding on a steel sheet of the same weight. The relevant rule here is #3; My hope is that teams don't put us in the position of having to make a decision about this in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by kingkay on Nov 20, 2011 21:16:45 GMT
C12 was using smaller at Dalby. I suspect he only used these to get the ground clearance on grass. how it handled at 70 mph wasnt really an issue. I doubt they'd be the weapon of choice at Cairngorm.
|
|
|
Post by leew on Nov 20, 2011 21:23:42 GMT
Maybe it would be a good idea to insted of having a fixed size for the drag plate, allow a rectangle of any dimensions providing the (width in cm x height in cm) / 5 is more than the weight of the of the cartie + driver in KG, I.E 5cm^2 of drag area per KG of weight. That would mean lighter carties are not unfairly slowed down compared to much heavier carties and would make loss of ballast less of a problem.
|
|
|
Post by kingkay on Nov 20, 2011 21:25:32 GMT
We use 451 rims. I could build the hubs into 406's but I cannot get tyres in my current size that are legal to race. 4 rims, 4 tyres 144 spokes = at least £200 quid in parts + labour on top of that. £90 entrance + 800 mile round trip in petrol. Not that easy to justify. As I recall at Dalby (and I might be wrong - it has beed known) C12 was using 349 tyres. I'd put money on his geometry angles being spot on. he'd need new wheels and change his angles. Or he can leave his angles as they are, make new wheels and be legal to race. However with his angles wrong he may be legal but his cart may handle like a pig and therefore be more dangerous than is was before he started. How is that an improvement? Centra Bavaria is in exactly the same boat, lots of time and money went into making those. Back to the drawing board for him too. I suspect Andy can’t get bigger wheels under his bodywork so probably a whole new cart. Lee’s in the same boat too with Red Gazelle. Also from looking a this and other sites www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/tech/JL.htm it would appear that you can get 47 406 tyres with rolling resistances very close to anything available in smaller and thinner sizes, just I expect for as bit more money. So this legislation is not necessarily slowing the carts down, just pushing the build cost up. So three of the consistently fastest carts around are excluded. Bringing them up to speck will take more than a little money/effort. It’s going to be up to them whether they think it’s practical or viable to try. It will be interesting to see. If they choose not to – or can’t for financial or other reasons I think it will be a great shame. I’d have thought the last thing anyone wants is a fragmentation of the cart races. Are any of the other courses considering similar rules? I’m blabbing on and speaking for others which I have no right too. They may be fine about the changes, I might be wrong about it effecting them too. I should let them speak for themselves. I’m also sorry Steve if this sounds like I’m ranting at you, I fully understand your concerns about safety and realise that should the worst happen it is your conscience and worse at stake. I don’t doubt all this is driven by a genuine concern for our safety, it’s just a bit of a knee jerk reaction as it effects me directly and more importantly financially! You’re working like a loon to organise the impossible and I’m just moaning about it. I’ll get my coat.
|
|