Hi list,
I just went through all the messages on the topic of sanctioning and rules,
all in one drop, and may I say the whole discussion is nonsense?!?
But discussing and arguing is FUN (as an italian I am most qualified to say
that: we have just about 35 million soccer coaches over a population of 30
million males, and about 60 million would-be prime ministers over a total
population of 60 million - yes, that includes infants) so I will add my own
opinions...
Also, I am not a racer, and the "interested spectator" point of view is
vital, isn't it?
Oh, by the way, I see that understanding between americans and british has
not made any progress: "two countries divided by a common language"...
Well, italians have a very bad opinion of themselves and spend a lot of
time and energy in self-insulting; and this bad opinion is generally
endorsed in international circles, so spare any nasty comments my words
might prompt for a better cause, please!!!
It seems to me that the opposed groups (pro-FIA and against-FIA) speak
totally different languages (just like americans and british...) without
being aware of it. Which makes mutual understanding a little difficult...
The SCTA and USFRA (not to forget the other early organizations that
eventually disappeared) were set up to organize land speed "racing": i.e. a
form of competition, that was born spontaneously several decades ago to
fullfill the desire of hot-rodders to go fast with a minimum of
restrictions, for fun, for sheer love of speed, to prove their technical
abilities, for personal prestige in their circle of friends and so on.
In the same way the NHRA and AHRA were formed to organize drag racing.
Land speed as a racing activity is based on a single measured distance (the
flying mile) and the sanctioning organizations change rules and classes
rather often to suit current technical trends and to overcome practical
problems.
The fact that the records would be recognised in wider circles than the
racing community, or not, was not an important issue, at least for a long
time. The records are there to be broken by the next racer and that's what
counts (and getting in the 200 Club, of course!). So much so, that those
who did care for international recognisement stayed at Bonneville the week
after Speed Week, when the AAA had their own speed week under FIA sanction.
For a long time there were no problems.
The FIA does not organize "racing" in this area: strictly speaking, it does
not consider record breaking a racing activity, it just holds a book of
records based on a fixed set of rules that change very little over the
years, to allow direct comparison of technical achievements over long
periods of time. They allow only four different categories (production
automobiles, special construction automobiles and special vehicles - thrsut
evhicles, that is -, plus drag racers) because these are classifications
that will be good for ever (or for as long as the automobile, or anyway
free-rolling land vehicles will exist).
It certifies records on many different distances and times, in addition to
the flying mile.
And it is a fully internationsl body, in that it has affiliated
organizations in most countries of the world. It is based in france, but it
is not a "french" or a "european" organization, it is a world organization
that organizes not just the motoring sport, but all spects of the
automobile culture and life (well, at least in theory). It was formed
because the differnt local Automobile Clubs wanted it to exist, and the US
have been represented in it since 1927, by the AAA first, and then also by
USAC, NHRA, IMSA and others.
Do we need them both? Of corse we do, because they fill different needs.
Could they co-exist? Yes, and indeed so far they did for half a century.
So? Where is the problem?
No problem regarding timing reliability: we all know SCTA/USFRA timing is
as good and as reliable as the FIA version (Did anybody question this? Not
that I am aware of, so why do so many people insist on this point???)
No problem regarding integrity and respectability: we all know the SCTA and
USFRA do a great, professional job (again, did anybody question this?)
No problem regarding the technical skill of the racers who build highly
efficient and often extremely well contructed and (pardon me) highly
sophisticated vehicles.
Of course, the problem comes when people call "World" records those set
under SCTA/BNI/USFRA sanction. And in particular when one of these records
is faster than the equivalent FIA record: which, in the end, given the FIA
rules, mostly applies to records set by streamliners (and occasionally
lakesters)
A good example is the current SCTA/USFRA record for Turbine engined
vehicles, which is quite a bit faster than te FIA record (still belonging
to Donald Campbell's Bluebird in 1964!!)
Now, anybody can call their records whatever they feel like. After all, the
Guinness book, which is a perfectly private (and commercial) group,
"sanctions" thousands of records in all fields: some people respect them
while others do not pay the slightest attention. And evrybody is happy.
If the holder of an SCTA record in any category or class that has no
equivalent in the FIA rule book wishes to call it a "world" record, that's
fine. I would maybe object that if a particular type of body or engine is
only used in the USA, or if in other countries racers could not set records
according to those rules the claim would be unfair, but it would still be
up to the record holder to decide wether it is fair or not. (May I remind
that till a few years ago SCTA and USFRA had different rule books and two
separate sets of records: which ones should have been considered "world"
records at that time??).
The problem arises when we compare records set under different conditions,
but which, from a vehicle classification point of view, could be sanctioned
by either organization (basically: production and streamliners).
Now, if we forget for a moment the definition the FIA gives of a World
(i.e.: unlimited) record as opposed to an International (i.e.: class)
record (or a National, or a local...), sincerely, I don't see why, if
conditions were the same", we should not consider Vesco's SCTA/USFRA record
a "World" record, superseding the Campbell one.
The point is all here: "IF CONDITIONS WERE THE SAME". Now, the one hour and
the two way rules are enforced on ALL records set on flying distances by
the FIA, while they are not by the SCTA and USFRA.
Do these rules make a significant difference? Pardon me, I know some people
do not agree, but yes, I think they do. Back to my example: Vesco was in
fact ready to comply with the FIA rule, as FIA sanctioning was available at
the World Finals, but COULD NOT make a return run in the opposite direction
in time. If you are looking for a confirmation that the FIA rule is more
restrictive - that is: it makes the record more difficult to achieve -
there you have it. The same thing happened to Mickey Thompson in 1960 and
to many other people over the years, both sides of the ocean.
(If it was the other way around, and the SCTA/USFRA rules were more
restrictive, who would care about the FIA sanction any more?!!?)
>From what I read, some of you americans agree about this and would welcome
the one hour rule and only dismiss the two way within one hour part only
because it is unpractical for Speed Week.
In fact, FIA sanctioning has always been available at World of Speed and
the World Finals, but I also remember it was available at Speed Week not
many years ago and indeed, Al Teague's still-standing record was set at
Speed Week in 1991.
Maybe it could be set up at Speed Week again: after all by wednesday
activity at Speed Week is usually pretty slow, and there would be plenty of
time to allow those interested to set records under FIA sanctioning.
Or eventually the SCTA and USFRA might just sanction records using exactly
the FIA rules: the FIA would still not recognise those records, but I am
sure nobody in the racing community, either side of the Atlantic (and
Pacific !) would ever object over calling those records "World" records,
once set in the same conditions.
As Beverly Stanley (I believe it was her) pointed out sometime ago ago,
that was the very idea that drove to setting up the LSA: too bad that
opportunity was wasted, but I do not see why the same path could not be
walked again.
Until then, I guess we europeans (but some americans too), will still be
objecting whenever we will hear an SCTA/USFRA record called "world" record:
it does not mean we don't consider the american organizations respectable,
reliable, serious, professional or whatever (if we did, we would not come
to Speed Week, we would not seek the friendship of american racers, we
would not even get involved in these discussions): it is just that we need
the words we use to have one and the same meaning for everyone in the whole
world, if at all possible, just to know what we are talking about. Other
than that, they are just words and a record set under SCTA or USFRA
sanction is as respectable and "offical" as an FIA record, just different.
Ok, hope this is a useful contribution, specially towards a more relaxed
approach to the problem. Otherwise, as I said, we italians know that we are
always wrong. (Let us be happy with our great loosers, Ferrari and Luna
Rossa!)
Ugo Fadini
|