Joined
·
2,759 Posts
For those of you didn't attend, my summary based entirely on memory and only a few notes scribbled down on the ride home:
1) A good start with an open request for agenda items from Kurt.
2) Everyone introducing themselves.
3) Start on topics. These are the ones 1 recall:
a) Stage notes; kinda turned out to be a "See how SAFE they are" marketing pitch by Kurt. This drew several responses of "wait a minute, it's only 3 events; STPR roads were the best in 5 years", etc. Doc Shrader appeared to be the most concerned of any of the PRB members over the safety aspects of Stage Notes, due to higher speeds.
b) 3rd tier: Bruce Perry made a very good presentation of what was discussed a lot on the forum. Lot's of general discussion ensued, with the Club Stewards bringing up a revival of Super D. The point was made to not exclude cars due to age from the middle tier.
c) The topic of annual inspections came up in the context of safety and a question of why not exclude cars based on age due to safety concerns. Doug Robinson told a horror story of a car with rust below one cage mount point, covered by RTV and painted over that was not caught at tech, so this was one reason to exclude cars based on age. The rejoinder from a large group was "FIX the annual inspection system, don't throw out perfectly good cars!" I reminded Phil Mellor later that if this was done, Historic class had to be the first to go, IF we are basing things just on age. That rasied an eyebrow...
d) Kurt ignored my topic agenda, which was "How much/many input has there been from members to the PRB?" He did this while most everyone was chatting on another subject, with the comment to me that "I'm not going to get into THAT here." My question was to gage how much input they are getting from us, not to put him or anyone on the spot, so he blew an opportunity to bring out what I would have turned into a positive.
4) There were a couple more topics, but I didn't put them down in notes, so sorry.
5) ADDED IN EDITING: Bruce reminded me of what may have been the most important annoucement: No plans to further limit car age in Pro Rally. My apologies for being so dumb as to forget this; regards to Bruce for catching me on this. See his post below, and my post with further related items on that topic. END OF EDIT ADDITION.
My overall imprsssion: a good cross section or competitors, organizers and PRB, except for the big boy teams. A good organizational flow start by Kurt. Kurt talking too much and expressing his views at too great a length to make me think he is open. I would rather see someone else lead these meetings. (BUT, I AM highly biased here.) Lots of intelligent, experienced folks with good ideas if we can work together with leadership that wants to implement a borad spectrum of ideas. Lots of caring folks (but that was no surprise).
The biggest negative: From Doug Robinsons's points about car age, and some side converstaions by Phil Mellor, I fear a new move to eliminate cars based on age alone, in the name of safety. This flies in the face of logic if you think about it for a while.
Mark Bowers
1) A good start with an open request for agenda items from Kurt.
2) Everyone introducing themselves.
3) Start on topics. These are the ones 1 recall:
a) Stage notes; kinda turned out to be a "See how SAFE they are" marketing pitch by Kurt. This drew several responses of "wait a minute, it's only 3 events; STPR roads were the best in 5 years", etc. Doc Shrader appeared to be the most concerned of any of the PRB members over the safety aspects of Stage Notes, due to higher speeds.
b) 3rd tier: Bruce Perry made a very good presentation of what was discussed a lot on the forum. Lot's of general discussion ensued, with the Club Stewards bringing up a revival of Super D. The point was made to not exclude cars due to age from the middle tier.
c) The topic of annual inspections came up in the context of safety and a question of why not exclude cars based on age due to safety concerns. Doug Robinson told a horror story of a car with rust below one cage mount point, covered by RTV and painted over that was not caught at tech, so this was one reason to exclude cars based on age. The rejoinder from a large group was "FIX the annual inspection system, don't throw out perfectly good cars!" I reminded Phil Mellor later that if this was done, Historic class had to be the first to go, IF we are basing things just on age. That rasied an eyebrow...
d) Kurt ignored my topic agenda, which was "How much/many input has there been from members to the PRB?" He did this while most everyone was chatting on another subject, with the comment to me that "I'm not going to get into THAT here." My question was to gage how much input they are getting from us, not to put him or anyone on the spot, so he blew an opportunity to bring out what I would have turned into a positive.
4) There were a couple more topics, but I didn't put them down in notes, so sorry.
5) ADDED IN EDITING: Bruce reminded me of what may have been the most important annoucement: No plans to further limit car age in Pro Rally. My apologies for being so dumb as to forget this; regards to Bruce for catching me on this. See his post below, and my post with further related items on that topic. END OF EDIT ADDITION.
My overall imprsssion: a good cross section or competitors, organizers and PRB, except for the big boy teams. A good organizational flow start by Kurt. Kurt talking too much and expressing his views at too great a length to make me think he is open. I would rather see someone else lead these meetings. (BUT, I AM highly biased here.) Lots of intelligent, experienced folks with good ideas if we can work together with leadership that wants to implement a borad spectrum of ideas. Lots of caring folks (but that was no surprise).
The biggest negative: From Doug Robinsons's points about car age, and some side converstaions by Phil Mellor, I fear a new move to eliminate cars based on age alone, in the name of safety. This flies in the face of logic if you think about it for a while.
Mark Bowers
