Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,368 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Can anyone dispute that the incident of serious injury and death per stage mile of open, 4wd turbo cars is much higher than 2wd normally aspirated cars?

If this is viewed as a disproportionate risk by an insurance carrier, would open class entrants be willing to pay the higher insurance costs that follow the increased risks?, or should those entries be subsidized by the G2 and P cars?
 

·
your other left, you idiot
Joined
·
3,909 Posts
Mike-

I applaud your thought process.

Unfortunately, this is almost impossible to assess without hard data. We don't know the loss part of the equation(s). We could figure out the exposure side (miles driven, maybe). I have tried for years to get this data, but it seems locked up somewhere. How does our (stage rally) loss experience really compare to other racing venues?

Keep the juices flowing, but absent data, it becomes just a mental exercise.

press on,
 

·
codriveur
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
>Can anyone dispute that the incident of serious injury and
>death per stage mile of open, 4wd turbo cars is much higher
>than 2wd normally aspirated cars?

Can anyone support it? I think it should be, but that's based on no data.

Bernie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
No one has this loss information now--not even SCCA Risk Management.
Even the total number of legal actions are not known at this point, let alone the potential liability and amounts of losses. These questions won't be answered until all the cases are settled, and that likely will be years from now.

But answers are needed now. Decisions have to be made based on what is known, some of which is:
SCCA rallying has suffered five fatalities in recent years. Additionally, there have been several incidences of serious injury during the same time period.

Prospective insurance providers for US rallying are going to ask why. They will look (are looking) at these previous incidents and pending/potential claims and use their experience to project probable losses from them.
They will be looking at three and potentially five wrongful death lawsuits, plus personal injury claims/lawsuits. They will ask what will be done to prevent such losses in the future.

Rallying's answers will determine how these incidents will affect the future insurability of non-SCCA rallying.

We don't have the luxury of waiting for all the final details.

How may of the decisions in your personal life are based on the best information you have at the time you need to make the decision?



George Beckerman
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Well, while this is an interesting idea with some general observational data suggesting a correlation there are several perceived and practical problems with this :

- say insurance rates increase for a given year (e.g. 2005, 2006 etc.), how do we know how much this is due to estimated risk for a given class vs. general cost increases

- if above proposed then why not a tiered system (Open > Group N > Group 5 > PGT > Group 2 > Prod) since if Open is higher risk, then surely Group N is higher risk than Prod i.e. don't disenfranchise the Open Class - Performance Rally already appears to be the disenfranchised red-headed stepchild of racing, let's not bring this into rally itself



=============================================================================

Web site : www.SoCalRally.com
Sponsors : www.VwSpecialties.com www.Parts4VWs.com

Rally - I don't need no stinkin' epi pen to get my adrenalin rush !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
I'm gonna get myself in trouble now, but what the hell....

Can anyone demonstrate that driving suits have saved anyone's rally butt here in the States? NO. But does that make any difference with regards to rules? NO.

Almost everyone jumps up and down saying FIA cages are needed. Did Lovell's FIA cage save him or his co-driver. NO.

Have any cars burned to the ground that might have been prevented by having a fire system? Probably. Are fire systems required? NO.

There are no required fire systems, but they require suits. So if you're trapped in your car while it is on fire, you can rest easy knowing your suit will give you an extra 15 seconds of life while you fumble around with trying to use your fire extinguisher because you don't have a fire system.

Are fuel lines and pumps required to be outside the passenger compartment in such a way that no fuel can ever leak in the passenger compartment? NO.

Happy roasting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
Here's one for you the Vintage road race group I race with reguires a fire system and a head and neck restraint - you know you might want to take a closer look if "vintage" race cars are sporting more safety gear than you are.

Tom

PS safety is an evolving process that requires constant attention.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
868 Posts
I believe horsepower and the driver's head are the two main risk factors. Mike Hurst would not be a dangerous driver in Open class because he stays within his limits and within the limits of the car given the conditions.

I could support a $50 per event discount for normally aspirated cars under 3 liters. This would allow budget minded drivers such as Randy Zimmer and Jerry Brownell to benefit from their less risky choice of machinery.

I could also support specific licensing to drive turbocharged vehicles. For example a driver would need to finish 5 Clubrallies (coefficient 2 or higher) or 3 Prorallies to qualify for a license to rally a turbocharged vehicle.

Flame away!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
4WD cars generally do more damage to the roads as well.

Best way to implement something like this is to have various championships that run concurrently at an event. So you might have the highest level of the sport (Open Class cars), then the production championship (PGT) and then a 2WD championship. Entry fees are based on the championship you are running.

Actually this could be a good way of creating "experience stepping stones" in the sport. You start in the 2WD class and work your way up. As you get better, you get a faster car. You might also get more sponsorship so you can afford the higher entry fees.

And yes, I know I left Group N out of this. GN is a vehicle for manufacturers to sell race cars...cars that cannot be purchased in this country, I might add. We're putting enough rules around Open class that it is no longer really "open" anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
397 Posts
Flame on!!
We are in desperate need of a hard look at just what our insurance companies are paying out for losses and how we got there.
Is our insurance carrier paying out X number of dollars to the family of someone who dies in a racing incident? This should not be the case. We all know that racing is dangerous.
We should not be having to pay out for Bozo competitor who tee-bones the bus-load of social workers on a transit due to his having a bad case of the red mist or that East-Coast thing of too short of transit times. We are all required to have insurance on our cars. We are required to have limits that 'should' be high enough to cover the unthinkable happening.
Are we paying out for ER visits of the team that finds itsself on it's roof with cuts and abrasions? The individual competitor should be responsible for his/her own boo-boos.
My belief is that we should be paying for LIABILITY insurance for the landowner. I have a rider on my life insurance policy such that my wife will STILL get rich should I be killed in the rallycar on a stage. I pay extra for this. We all should.
We should NOT be having to use our event insurance so much.
What can we change to get there?
Thoughts?

John Lane
Viva Le Pro Le Ralliat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
397 Posts
>4WD cars generally do more damage to the roads as well.
>
Daphne has not seen the number of rocks that the REAL Fire Breathing Monster throws. ;)

John Lane
Viva Le Pro Le Ralliat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
But I beleive the insurance does cover spectator deaths/injuries. I know my car insurance would never cover anything on stage and this is where the sanctioning bodies coverage kicks in.
 

·
I am not here anymore
Joined
·
2,798 Posts
Gonna have to side with Mr. Lane on this one.

I volunteered for road marshall duty at Shitepoke after Ross' car broke in the Dryad Quest rally in 2002? I was marshalling where a side road joined a long sweeping right that was the stage road.

While I was waiting for the stage to start, I cleared the road of anything that might do damage to a rally car. Then, the competitor's came through. The biggest, nastiest rocks were pulled up by Mr. Lane's fire-breathing Volvo and Mr. Streets driving the ex-Jardevall Volvo. They were tearing up the road far more than the AWD cars in that particular instance.

alan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
397 Posts
>
>Gonna have to side with Mr. Lane on this one.
>
---What can I say?
>
>While I was waiting for the stage to start, I cleared the
>road of anything that might do damage to a rally car. Then,
>the competitor's came through. The biggest, nastiest rocks
>were pulled up by Mr. Lane's fire-breathing Volvo and Mr.
>Streets driving the ex-Jardevall Volvo. They were tearing
>up the road far more than the AWD cars in that particular
>instance.
>
-----Jay and I were having more FUN too.

John Lane
Viva Le Pro Le Ralliat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
789 Posts
">We should not be having to pay out for Bozo competitor who
>tee-bones the bus-load of social workers on a transit due to
>his having a bad case of the red mist or that East-Coast
>thing of too short of transit times. We are all required
>to have insurance on our cars. We are required to have
>limits that 'should' be high enough to cover the
>unthinkable happening."

But we probabbly are, John. The Event put them on the transit; the Event (organizer club) also will be sued and likely bear some portion of the liability. The competitor's limits are insufficient in such scenarios.
 

·
codriveur
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
>No one has this loss information now--not even SCCA Risk
>Management.

Then what was the decision to drop the Rally program based upon? Fear of undue liability?

>Prospective insurance providers for US rallying are going to
>ask why. They will look (are looking) at these previous
>incidents and pending/potential claims and use their
>experience to project probable losses from them.

Why is subjective. There is no Y in actuarial. Risk cannot be inferred. I can infer that lower cost cars will be more dangerous because it will allow younger less experianced drivers with more likelyhood of crashing on the stage. Therefore only $100000.00+++ awd firebreathers should be allowed because only older, experianced individuals or better organized teams can afford that. I said in a different thread the greatest service the SCCA can leave behind as they run out the door is the actual reasons and DATA the decision to end the program was based upon.

>They will be looking at three and potentially five wrongful
>death lawsuits, plus personal injury claims/lawsuits. They
>will ask what will be done to prevent such losses in the
>future.

That's the most fustrating thing to me about the SCCA leaving, they didn't take the time to FIX the liability. What good is the rule book and the operations manual going to be to RA in the hunt for coverage if the SCCA is running from it?

>We don't have the luxury of waiting for all the final
>details.

>How may of the decisions in your personal life are based on
>the best information you have at the time you need to make
>the decision?

The best decisions in my life just happened. When it's serious I've just collected the issues and dealt with them. (The 2 people who might read this and know me might be chuckling) But to rush and spread a big CYA over the sport will not help RA and NASA. I actually believe 4wd/turbo beast's are inherently more dangerous, but YOU HAVE TO PROVE IT.


Bernie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,757 Posts
Mike et al,

We can easily count the number of fatalities attibuted to each in the US:
4 NA 2WD
3 Turbo AWD
1 I can't account for
Spectators: seems like the drive config is immaterial

That, on the surface seems to be a draw. However, look over the recent few years and all fatalities are in turbo AWD, none in NA 2WD or turbo 2WD or NA 4WD.

It's a chore to try to compute this per miles driven; it would be easier to estimate this based on approximate time and numbers of the types of cars. Since the 4WD turbo cars have been around in SIGNIFICANT number (numbers approaching the number of 2wd cars) for approximately 1/4 the time as 2wd cars. From that, then 4WD turbo would show a rate of 3 times higher.

(And the interesting point is that the recent trend is heavily against 4WD turbos. But the samples are so small that this could reverse over any short period of time.)

I think it is more telling that we have had a very steep rise in the rate of serious incidents/fatalities per number of events in a very short time. And all at a time when safety equipment is better than it was 10-20-30 years back. What is the one other thing on the rise in that same period? The number of turbo 4wd cars.

It's not solid, conclusive analysis, but it does not take a genius to make the connection.

Mark B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,407 Posts
>What is the one other thing on the rise in that same period?
>The number of turbo 4wd cars.

There is another thing that is on the rise in that same period. Speed. Not just for AWD turbo cars but for all cars. G2 records are broken every year just like in Open.

Prorating based on car class doesn't seem fair to me. I have seen some pieces of excrement on the stages that, in my opinion, are not safely maintained or engineered in the first place. And these cars are in all the classes. A well engineered, well maintained, 34mm restricted 4wd turbo car would pay more under this plan than a booger welded, poorly designed, and worn out G2 car with 15 rally old ball joints and 20 year old seats that have been in 4 previous accidents.

I believe in being inclusive and rallying on a budget, but some cars DO need to be turned away when they are neglected or poorly built...we can't just cross our fingers and hope that they DNF before they get to the fast stages.

I don't care what the car's paint or bodywork looks like. I just hate seeing poorly designed cages, bubble gum welds, WORN OUT spherical bearings on critical suspension pieces (yup, I've seen it), loose pedal assemblies, rust, more rust, etc.

I'll admit I'm guilty of it. I ran some things in poor condition in the past. I'd like to think I know better now.
 

·
codriveur
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
Greetings Mark,

All stats are a chore. That's where the key to an answer may lie. It's not easy.

So when you say...

>It's a chore to try to compute this per miles driven...

And then take the easy way out. (which on the surface I agree with)

And you then go on to say...

>It's not solid, conclusive analysis, but it does not take a
>genius to make the connection.

( again I agree) Your not approaching it in the manner the people who DO make the judgements will. Obvious and inferential sentiments do not satisfy the needs of the people insuring our risk. In consumer coverage the base factor is the frequency per mile traveled. Simply put, accidents are the function of miles traveled. Factors such as weather, age, ability, vehicle, type of use, and stuff we do not even know are added after the base frequency is computed.

It may be a chore, but the people computing the risk factor will do it because it is their job. AGAIN it is imperetive the SCCA release the DATA that supports the undue risk they claim rally is. As I said above can you support it?

Bernie
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top