Gary wrote
"Regarding annual inspections. If....IF.. we have idiots who would do
something like you suggested, total a car and bring it back, race it
un-inspected, I think it is up to the FIRST person who finds out about
this
to turn the guy in.
There are a number of reasons why this is important, but the one I want
to
address now is Club Liability. The Club is responsible for allowing
"inspected" cars on the track. If a car is damaged in an accident and
allowed to continue racing that weekend, even after a "thorough"
re-inspection, and due to structureal failure resulting from that
accident,
causes another accident, injurying someone, the club could be in deep
liability trouble. A cursory inspection of a damaged race car cannot
see
suspension point fractures, or other stressed areas. Why take the
chance?
If the car is damaged more than sheet metal damage, it should be put on
the
trailer. I dont want to be out there with a car that is questionable as
to
its structural integrity. I think, we as racers, have some
responsiblity to
speak up if and when see something like this happening.
The annual tech is only as good as the general population allows it to
be.
Fortunately, most of the racers I know are also responsible people and
would
not play games like this, but there are always exceptions."
I agree 100% about turning someone in like that. In SCCA there are
waived classes every race which means that even after a car has had an
annual it will be seen at least once again that season even if it always
a back marker because his annual will be waived at least once during the
season. In SCCA and VSCDA, having enough people for tech allows us to
wander through the paddock and look over cars in a sort of unofficial
way. Unfortunately at some VSCDA events we have not had enough worker to
do this. My understanding from the survey that was sent out, is that we
have gotten names of some people who will be willing to do some work in
tech at our events.
Gar also wrote
"I think reporting of incidents in the newsletter is a good idea.
However, I
also think maybe a brief description of the incident would be helpful.
At
RA last fall, I was forced off the course, into a pea gravel pit, when
the
356 Porsche in front of me spun in a wet corner. To avoid hitting him,
I
opted for the gravel. I had to report to the drivers committee. The
Porsche
driver didnt. Had he been a bit less aggressive in the wet conditions,
he
would not have spun and I would not have been in the gravel. Should he
have been required to report to the drivers committee also? I think
so. What
really bothered me about that, I was told this driver had done that sort
of
thing regularily that weekend."
I was told by Mason and a couple of other drivers that there was a third
car involved in the incident that WST talks about. A Porsche also. The
Porsche was complaining in sessions before the incident, that he was
being passed on both side going up the main straight. Seems to me if he
was that slow he get out of the groove and stay to one side. Apparently
he had no idea what mirrors are for and he went wide, acting like he was
going to stay to the outside and let them through, as Mason, with Jon
tucked behind him went inside. And then he dropped down causing Mason to
lift momentarily, went he was hit by Jon. This driver did not get
involved in the accident he caused and merrily drove on. Kinda the same
deal Gar got at RA the month before.
I don't know how well these kinds of reports can be made objecively in
the newsletter, but if these guys had their car types and numbers
published it might be able warn other drivers that they are approaching
someone who doesn't have it all together. (that's the nicest set of
words I could think of)-- didn't I do well with that choice of words?? I
seem to remember a bout 4 years ago at RA an MGBGT was black flagged off
the course for being reported by the corner workers as a very slow
moving chicane who was blind as a bat in the rear direction.
Perhaps we can come up with some viable suggestions for the club to take
under advisement.
Bill D
|