[gplsek]

Couple of important bulletins were posted on the scca.org site regarding procedures at STPR. Follow the links below.

http://www.scca.org/news/tech/prorally/PRCB053003-STPRProcedure.pdf

http://www.scca.org/news/tech/prorally/PRCB053003a-STPRDriverMtg.pdf

George Plsek
[email protected]

 

[MDBodnar]

Try this as the second link:
http://www.scca.org/news/tech/prorally/PRCB053003-STPRProcedure.pdf



Thanks,
Mike

 

[gplsek]

oops I missed the 2nd link. It has been fixed.

-george

 

[rally to cave]

From the Bulletin:
B. Competitor?s Display of the Red Cross ? If a competitor sees any personnel located in an unsafe place or operating in an unsafe manner it is the competition crew?s responsibility and obligation to immediately stop and display the Red Cross. If a competitor displays the Red Cross the stage will immediately operate under Red Cross procedures.


What liability does this transfer to the crew of the car. As a navie my priority is staying on the notes, I don't see the road except for a few glances, and almost never notice spectators. The driver's priority is the road. Are they now supposed to be looking for spectators?

What if the cameraman for Speed is in, my opinion, an unsafe location, but the organizers said it was a ok location. According to the above, I stop the stage.

In addition, if a car is having mechanical troubles, they can use the above provision to stop the stage and avoid getting any time penalty.

I see problems with that provision.

Paul Nelson
navie

 

[RallyVolvo]

Mandatory drivers meeting sound reasonable to me. When I was racing karts at Summit Point, they put stickers on your helmet at the end of the drivers meeting to make sure you were there. No sticker = no getting on the track. And they made sure it was the driver they were handing the sticker to as well. I'd always thought drivers meetings were fairly important, so I don't know why they weren't mandatory already.

Nick Polimeni

 

[Don Kennedy]

So it's up to 132 other competitors to decide what's safe and what's un safe? My opinion of safe will I'm sure be different from the other 133 competitors. And like Paul Nelson said, what if they were placed there by an official? For those of us that enjoy rallying (more than we're concerned with our finishing position) and are closer to the end of the pack, we could really get significant less seat time than the front runners when others in front of us decide to throw the red cross. I'm shutting up for now before I get myself into real trouble.

 

[Guest]

Seems awfully likely that if we stop for some poorly-placed spectators, they'll realize what's happening and move to a safer location. At that point, even though the hazard may be gone, we need to stay put and stop the stage, since otherwise we've just killed our chances for a good finish by sitting still for several minutes.

Considering that most poorly-placed spectators will be where they are out of simple ignorance and not malice, this "one strike" policy seems particularly harsh.

I agree that it's important to control spectators, and that this should be an effective method; I just hope the organizers really get the word out about this, because out of the hundreds of spectators that are likely, it'll only take 1 to stop a stage, and 10 to kill the whole event...

Carl

 

[jandreini]

Drivers meetings are bad because they impart VERBAL communication. This results (and has resulted)in misunderstanding, arbitrary application of penalties, and "He said" "She said" situations. If it's important enough to tell competitors, it's important enough to put in writing.

That said, the meeting at STPR is necessary due to the specific nature of the situation. I've also been told that everything covered at the meeting will be put in writing, an important consideration.

 

[Paul Jaeger]

>
>I agree that it's important to control spectators, and that
>this should be an effective method; I just hope the
>organizers really get the word out about this, because out
>of the hundreds of spectators that are likely, it'll only
>take 1 to stop a stage, and 10 to kill the whole event...
>
>Carl

Roads leading into the special stages will be blocked at the previous intersection, I believe by what Pennsylvania calls Fire Police. These guys will give potential spectators written directions to designated spectator areas. This is in addition to the normal stage marshalls at the intersections of the actual stage roads and approach roads. Having a choice of walking a few miles into a place where you will be prohibited from watching or going to a designated spectator area, it is hoped that spectators will use the designated areas.

There are at least six designated spectator areas. The ones in the evening are on a double loop so you get two stages from one location.

Paul Jaeger
PRIMO Stage Crews
For a Good Time, Call PRIMO!

 

[jprowland]

>Seems awfully likely that if we stop for some poorly-placed
>spectators, they'll realize what's happening and move to a
>safer location. At that point, even though the hazard may
>be gone, we need to stay put and stop the stage, since
>otherwise we've just killed our chances for a good finish by
>sitting still for several minutes.
>

If this happens and they move before you show the red cross, you can petition the organizers for a time adjustment. Make sure you note the times that you stop and start; best if you get it on video. It's not perfect, but it may turn a minute or two into only a few seconds without killing the rally for the other competitors.

Not that I necessarily agree with the new regulation...

--
JP Rowland jeremyrowland -at- mac.com
Visit my boring web page: http://homepage.mac.com/jeremyrowland

 

[joeg]

Making all competitors into marshalls or "judges of fact" is about the silliest thing I have ever heard. You can imagine the potential for abuse, fraud and protest.

What would make more sense is to recruit only several teams for such role, or put several fast "0" cars in amongst the running group (randomly and/or secretly)with the "red cross for spectator authority".

Food for thought?

 

[Jake]

i would love to be a fast 0 car with pace notes. jus' gimme the chance.

 

[MDBodnar]

There is actuall some equity in the "sleeper car 0" idea. (full cage, helmet, etc.)

Working with the speed factors, you run an 80% driver with the 70% cars and a 70% driver with the 60% cars.

If the 80% car is catching the 70% car he is driving to fast to do his job correctly and adjusts his speed.

Would the straight % be enough of a stagger? Could it be reduced to 5% gaps?

There is still an issue of an uncopmetitive car "in the way" but I think this could be managed. (If your cathing the sleeper car 0 ask to pass on the next stage...)

It is an interesting proposal. And one that logistically could work. Setting up the qualifications for the drivers would require some serious thought, I think you would have to run x-number of events without on off to show that you know your limitations. -- Same qualifications for any car 0.

Very Interesting -- someone shoot some holes in this.

Mike

 

[jandreini]

Put your way, the idea actually makes a lot of sense. As you & I both know, Mike, the hard part is finding drivers who view the job as a sacred trust rather than a free entry.

 

[joeg]

You might consider John Buffum in last year's Hyundai Media car, for example.

There are many other possibilities and with STPR (as well as the strange situation we are currently in), I'm certain people would respond favorably.

 

[Jake]

Sounds better than the hair brained idea that might come about. Something like requiring a third seat in all cars for a marshall or the expense of live video feed from every car to a mobile base station positioned mid stage. The base station could then let out a car 0 from its position to deal with any spectators or emergencies.

 

[Trevor Donison]

>Sounds better than the hair brained idea that might come
>about. Something like requiring a third seat in all cars for
>a marshall or the expense of live video feed from every car
>to a mobile base station positioned mid stage. The base
>station could then let out a car 0 from its position to deal
>with any spectators or emergencies.

If they had Buffum do it at say Car 16, he could pick up the Speed Vision Cameraman and help him get to his next place to shoot.

 

[Morison]

Probably the stupidest and potentially DANGEROUS part of the 'red cross' plan is the fact that the meaning of the red cross will be diluted and will now mean 'please stop, I think something could be dangerous' instead of what it is meant to mean ... "STOP AND HELP, WE HAVE A CRITICAL INJURY!"

While I disagree with the concept of having competitors judging safety of others while competing ... There is absolutely no reason that if this is felt to be desirable then PLEASE as a page with STOP written red and leave the red cross for real emergencies!!!!

The current safety plan in Canada calls for a minimum of 3 course opening cars with the final '0 car' being not more than 10 minutes ahead of the first competitive car ... there is only so much that you can do to protect the spectators, and two well trained opening cars should get the idea across that a)people should be moved or B) a marshal is needed at an impromptu spectator area.

The reality is that needed / wanted or not, spectators are coming out to Rallies, and they need to be educated about what is and is not safe, and why we are asking them to move. It is FAR better to accept, educate and attempt to control them than to have them finding their own way onto the stages ?

 

[wvonkessler]

>Probably the stupidest and potentially DANGEROUS part of
>the 'red cross' plan is the fact that the meaning of the red
>cross will be diluted and will now mean 'please stop, I
>think something could be dangerous' instead of what it is
>meant to mean ... "STOP AND HELP, WE HAVE A CRITICAL
>INJURY!"

My reaction as well. Widespread use of the red cross threatens to lower the reaction time getting to a Medical Emergency. It is wholly innapropriate that a Medical Emergency sign is being used for closing down a stage because of people on course. Furthermore, linking the shutdown for unauthorized spectators to the emergency response plan is equally as stupid. A red flag, internationally recognized, and a separate circuit in the operations plan for spectator issues would have made a lot more sense. Furthermore, a little research on the internet or a look at orginizing documents for FIA and European rallies would have yielded the simple answer for Topeka.

My .02

Wilson

 

[jblewis]

*Expect* to see that the procedures for stopping a stage because of spectators to be REQUIRED to be linked to the Emergency Response Plan. I agree that using the red cross is not the best idea, but you also have accept that what you see at STPR this weekend, may *NOT* be the final product.

JBLewis