Challenge car Safety - we should talk about it.

Pat wrote: ... they could protest another car for its drag time being illegal due to lack of safety equipment, and they'd be right. That would turn the event into a mess of pissed off people. ...

Indeed!

I actually brought this up to one or two people in authority and they did their best to talk me down. I left the conversations assured that they would handle it... still waiting but I guess at this point it will not change the standings...

I value your input (and others) since I do not go to compete and really haven't looked closely at the standings. I bet it must sting to see others have success and know that it is less than honorable and fully righteous.

I am sure it is hard to separate the two issues of safety and competitive advantage and I am not sure we should try. I concede that they might be inter tangled too deeply. I don't give a E36 M3 about standings but if you do I encourage you to tell us how you feel; no one point of view is invalid here and I love to get the input.

aussiesmg wrote: In reply to Stampie: and they finished overall 2nd after cleaning everyone's clock on Concourse points, not sure how to take that. PVC rollcage, wooden stakes aimed at their Vampire driver, a drivers seat that allegedly collapsed and the craziest steering I ever saw on a race car. sigh

Seriously, this hit me emotionally. I know exactly how tough a competitor you are and I also respect you very much. While my jaw dropped at some results; I bet your heart sunk and head starting spinning.

And I am not bringing this up because I consider Aussie a friend but because I value his input as a fierce and honest challenger. Sure, I love to tease him a little, but I also respect the hell out of him and hate to see a man of integrity hurt like this.

I am not sure what to make of all this either! I think that is what we are all trying to figure out. Thank you for speaking up; your point of view is valuable to this discussion!

tb wrote:

Pat wrote: ... they could protest another car for its drag time being illegal due to lack of safety equipment, and they'd be right. That would turn the event into a mess of pissed off people. ...

Indeed! I actually brought this up to one or two people in authority and they did their best to talk me down. I left the conversations assured that they would handle it... still waiting but I guess at this point it will not change the standings... I value your input (and others) since I do not go to compete and really haven't looked closely at the standings. I bet it must sting to see others have success and know that it is less than honorable and fully righteous. I am sure it is hard to separate the two issues of safety and competitive advantage and I am not sure we should try. I concede that they might be inter tangled too deeply. I don't give a E36 M3 about standings but if you do I encourage you to tell us how you feel; no one point of view is invalid here and I love to get the input.

To be clear, I am not concerned about how that impacted my teams standings at all. We didn't bring a car that could win, nor did we try to this year...and we broke anyway. I was just trying to make a point that it could happen.

I will admit, if a clear, blatant violation of the rules put me into 2nd instead of the winners circle, I wouldn't hesitate to protest. Given the massive amount of time and effort that goes into building a winner (which I don't think everyone always understands), I'd fully understand if protests started if there are rule violations at the top of the leaderboard.

I wish I could take this and run with it but I personally am pretty busy doing the single dad thing... So this is just another plea for everyone who has something to say to speak up. I don't think there are any areas that are not open to discussion.

I've been a driver most of my life and have too little experience with the other side in running events and handling tech / safety. Please put me in my place if I am wrong; I don't want to dominate the conversation only keep it going!

Did course working feel safe and straightforward? Could we hear instructions in the grid (I know it got crowded)? Did any pro drivers feel undue pressure to act outside their comfort zone or anything else? Did parents feel ok about the parking lot and pit areas? I want to make sure we are thinking big picture instead of pouring all of our energy into one or two well known problems.

Thanks!

One last quick thought for now.

Big shout out to Andrew Nelson and Derick Freese for taking control during and incident in the parking lot build. Andrew inadvertently had a little trouble but was fully aware of what happened instantly (a true experienced pro) and never missed a beat securing the scene and the dangerous equipment he was using. Derick (most selfless person I know?) sprung into action and stayed focused to diffuse the danger quickly and completely. Two level headed and experienced people who acted perfectly; well done!

Thank you to you two and everyone else who acted with the best interests of the whole group in mind!

Full disclosure: I yelled and got out of the way!

In reply to Pat:

Thank you for the clear and honest explanation. As a perennial top threat I am glad that you can share the experience that you have. I can speak from the bottom since I live there these days but those at the top have a different experience and it is worth noting the different views.

I am amazed that most of the challenges go off without a storm of protests at the top. The hard work and high emotions could turn us against each other but we do have great sportsmen, like Pat, to show us how it is done with class!

pimpm3 wrote: I hope we are not referring to the parkinglot buid. In hindsight i shoud have taken TB up on his arm restraints, but i don't feel the car was inherently unsafe. The car had a nhra legal 6 point roll cage, a 6 month old 6 point safequip harness, door bars and a oem seat mounted to the stock location. I brought a window net but did not get it installed in time and i will take responsibility for that.

It's one of the reasons that many of us jumped in to help you on the cage Jeremy. We like you and a dead pimpm3 wasn't on our planner for the week. Calvin, Lon and I jumped right in to help Andrew construct the safest cage possible in the conditions available. You did great under the conditions that you had.

Watching andrew notch the cage blew my mind. The guy thinks in like 4 dimensions...

I was not there and have little to add, other than this:

I have seen it called many things, but the most pertinent name is the Logo Rule.

It doesn't matter who was right, who was wrong, who followed every rule and checked every box, but if the Logo gets into the newspaper after something bad happened, we all lose.

So I applaud the efforts to figure out what went wrong (whatever it was). If someone gets hurt, even if they followed all of the rules (but especially if they didn't), if it's bad and ends up in the news, GRM loses.

tb wrote:

bigben wrote:

tb wrote: In reply to spin_out: If you want to make a list I really didn't like to see a car competing with a shattered window...

Ouch! That was me. I was confident it wasn't going anywhere, but was fully prepared to remove it if tech had a problem with it.

I'm sorry. I am really not here to call people out individually and I stepped out of line. I apologize for being rude and inconsiderate and will try to behave better in the future.

No worries. I wasn't offended. (I was actually wondering if it would come up in the thread.)

I was thinking on the drive home from work today about this whole idea of trying to instill a better culture of safety. It is really easy to go down the negative route, and the thou shalt or else route. So I was contemplating how we could make it more positive. . . One idea might be to add a safety facet to the overall score. The judging could be administered during the tech inspection, and it could be two sided. Your car meets the basic safety requirements = Safety score of 0 (no effect on overall score), you go above and beyond to make your car safer, you get bonus safety points which could make a difference in the final standings. Your car has some questionable stuff, you get a negative score which is subtracted from your overall standing.

bigben wrote:

tb wrote:

bigben wrote:

tb wrote: In reply to spin_out: If you want to make a list I really didn't like to see a car competing with a shattered window...

Ouch! That was me. I was confident it wasn't going anywhere, but was fully prepared to remove it if tech had a problem with it.

I'm sorry. I am really not here to call people out individually and I stepped out of line. I apologize for being rude and inconsiderate and will try to behave better in the future.

No worries. I wasn't offended. (I was actually wondering if it would come up in the thread.) I was thinking on the drive home from work today about this whole idea of trying to instill a better culture of safety. It is really easy to go down the negative route, and the thou shalt or else route. So I was contemplating how we could make it more positive. . . One idea might be to add a safety facet to the overall score. The judging could be administered during the tech inspection, and it could be two sided. Your car meets the basic safety requirements = Safety score of 0 (no effect on overall score), you go above and beyond to make your car safer, you get bonus safety points which could make a difference in the final standings. Your car has some questionable stuff, you get a negative score which is subtracted from your overall standing.

I like this. Sure, it benefits guys like me, but it's a positive reward versus a negative consequence. Better way of looking at it.

Hats off to you good sir

I am so glad to read this thread! I was at the Challenge, and personally saw some of the cars that are being talked about here. I was particularly shocked by the PVC pipe and wooden pieces masquerading as safety equipment on one car. Sure it looked great, if the car was only intended as a show piece, great. But it was on the racetrack.

I have competed in the Challenge many times (OK, maybe not competed, my cars are slow), and I am truly amazed at the build quality of most of the cars (in a good way). This is the first year that I looked at a podium finishing car and was surprised at the disregard for basic safety.

I love this event and am proud to be a small part of the Challenge community. But I fear the disregard for safety is going to result in someone getting seriously hurt (or God forbid worse). That will be the end of this event.

Dusterbd13 wrote:

bigben wrote:

tb wrote:

bigben wrote:

tb wrote: In reply to spin_out: If you want to make a list I really didn't like to see a car competing with a shattered window...

Ouch! That was me. I was confident it wasn't going anywhere, but was fully prepared to remove it if tech had a problem with it.

I'm sorry. I am really not here to call people out individually and I stepped out of line. I apologize for being rude and inconsiderate and will try to behave better in the future.

No worries. I wasn't offended. (I was actually wondering if it would come up in the thread.) I was thinking on the drive home from work today about this whole idea of trying to instill a better culture of safety. It is really easy to go down the negative route, and the thou shalt or else route. So I was contemplating how we could make it more positive. . . One idea might be to add a safety facet to the overall score. The judging could be administered during the tech inspection, and it could be two sided. Your car meets the basic safety requirements = Safety score of 0 (no effect on overall score), you go above and beyond to make your car safer, you get bonus safety points which could make a difference in the final standings. Your car has some questionable stuff, you get a negative score which is subtracted from your overall standing.

I like this. Sure, it benefits guys like me, but it's a positive reward versus a negative consequence. Better way of looking at it. Hats off to you good sir

I like it too.

I only have 1 hesitancy. It seems to be implying that it would be OK to have unsafe items, as long as the competitor was willing to accept negative safety points. Not sure I can agree with that part.

"Hello, Mr. Suddard? This is the lawyer for Competitor X's widow. I understand that you knowingly permitted unsafe items on his car that were NOT in accordance with the SCCA or the NHRA regs which contributed to his death. Seeing as how this is your event and your rules clearly permit this kind of safety violation, we are pursuing you on behalf of not just our client, but we are filing a class action law suit on behalf of all of the competitors."

Yeah, I'm not too sure that will fly...

Although i'm not a drag racer and had to muddle through the NHRA rule book to clarify their safety requirements to make sure I was gonna be ok, I did race scca for 15 years and before that did AX for years. I know there aren't log books for solo, but what if each entrant was required to get a letter from solo safety steward in their area and whatever their counterpart in NHRA is to be allowed to compete in each of those events @ challenge? As I understand it as ets go down/speeds go up safety requirements change.

Just trying to think outside the box

I really like that this discussion has legs and that lots of people are sharing ideas in a constructive manner.

I am glad that I am not the only one whose thoughts are about also protecting GRM legally, financially and in the court of public opinion. Personally, I am not trying to attack them even if I think that mistakes were made and responsibility is (purposely?) nebulous. I also appreciate that they are allowing a wide ranging discussion and trust us to behave.

Is there a consensus that this is not an "Us vs. Them" issue but rather a "Us AND Them vs. danger" issue? Tuna and rex are making some good points that all parties need to be quite aware of possibly serious repercussions.

Speak up if you agree or disagree but I think that there are other threads about scoring issues or wtf people were thinking with some awards...

In reply to bigben:

Cool, glad to hear we are good.

I think that the points idea is nice in that it is positive but it opens a can of worms... I am hearing what SVreX is saying loud and clear.

Perhaps there should be an award for the car judged most safe but I am wary of too much scrutiny over minutia. I always carry a fire extinguisher (proper size with proper mount) but an arms race could ensue and I would be forced to go to a 3 nozzle suppression system just to keep up, etc..

Plus I honestly and deeply feel that safety goes much further than how you mount your harness. I was very happy to spend time with Jon on his mule delivering water to workers on course (and track people too, treat the EMT good!). It was hot and some shifts were long and hydration is a big deal, especially for rookies and those not from the south. A weak, dizzy worker on course is a safety nightmare!

I took more than I gave (sweaty, busy guy) but I will not behave that way next year! Small examples of how we can look out for each other can add up to a culture of caring that sets the standard for best practices.

Ovid_and_Flem wrote: Although i'm not a drag racer and had to muddle through the NHRA rule book to clarify their safety requirements to make sure I was gonna be ok, I did race scca for 15 years and before that did AX for years. I know there aren't log books for solo, but what if each entrant was required to get a letter from solo safety steward in their area and whatever their counterpart in NHRA is to be allowed to compete in each of those events @ challenge? As I understand it as ets go down/speeds go up safety requirements change. Just trying to think outside the box

Muddle through, indeed! Some of this stuff is seriously confusing, even to the lawyers and officials in our group...

I love the fresh thinking and big picture approach but I am not in love with this specific idea.

I am not sure that we need to add another layer to any of this and I am not sure that it will be possible for all people to contact and schedule with their local stewards. Also, we are already living with at least some level of deceit at this last challenge and I worry about trustworthiness. This event largely runs on the honor system but an unenforceable requirement wouldn't make me feel better.

I did think that perhaps we need to hire qualified locals to represent us challengers as our safety stewards for the weekend. I know that Martin SCCA is out for several reasons but this is a large event in our world and it shouldn't be too hard to find people. A small increase in fees to go to tech inspectors and experts on procedure might make a big difference. GRM staff is too busy and Track staff are unsatisfactory so maybe we need more hands on deck?

SVreX wrote:

Dusterbd13 wrote:

bigben wrote:

tb wrote:

bigben wrote:

I was thinking on the drive home from work today about this whole idea of trying to instill a better culture of safety. It is really easy to go down the negative route, and the thou shalt or else route. So I was contemplating how we could make it more positive. . . One idea might be to add a safety facet to the overall score.

I like it too. I only have 1 hesitancy. It seems to be implying that it would be OK to have unsafe items, as long as the competitor was willing to accept negative safety points. Not sure I can agree with that part. "Hello, Mr. Suddard? This is the lawyer for Competitor X's widow. I understand that you knowingly permitted unsafe items on his car that were NOT in accordance with the SCCA or the NHRA regs which contributed to his death. Seeing as how this is your event and your rules clearly permit this kind of safety violation, we are pursuing you on behalf of not just our client, but we are filing a class action law suit on behalf of all of the competitors." Yeah, I'm not too sure that will fly...

I can agree with your point. I was thinking of the same thing as I wrote it. When I say questionable stuff getting negative points I'm thinking things that may be debatable not clear safety issues. Like your tires aren't showing any chords but they sure are close and they might start showing before the day is up. I suppose we could just stick to bonus points for safety for going above and beyond. Like you're running a miata with 200 tw tires. Technically a roll bar is not required, but you added one. Here's 2 bonus safety points. Minimum safety requirement stuff could be exempt from the budget and "extra" safety items would come out of the budget. So if you want to add three fire extinguishers to get bonus points then go right ahead but you'll have to fit it into your budget. (Just trying to stir the creative juices here.)

Tb,

This definitely needs to be People V. Danger and not Competitors V. GRM.

Everyone needs to be safe. I don't want an unsafe art car out there where the driver had it pointed at the wall on a drag pass without sufficient safety involved. I don't want ANY of us getting hurt or worse, it's not worth it.

I know people are not coming right out, but the guys around me know i voiced fear for the life of the driver before the drags even started. Had I come up against it on the strip I would have refused to run at the same time.

So for those of us planning on bringong cars with stock seatbelts , seats etc what does all this mean?

In reply to tb:

I fully understand and probably agree with your sentiments regarding getting other officiants involved with this event. Perhaps we don't need to go so far as getting a logbook from each sanctioning body, NHRA an scca. Perhaps the answer is having through scrutineering buy NHRA in scca at the event. And they would have the final say on whether any car was safe to compete. In other words put the onus onus on WE the competitors bring cars that would clearly pass technical inspection for each discipline. If it don't pass you don't run that event

In reply to Ovid_and_Flem:

I don't think we need much at all.

The track officials are perfectly capable of a basic safety check. They've done it in the past. As Andrew Nelson noted, they are also capable of a more in-depth check, and gave him one. They simply got lazy, and the staff of GRM knows it, and is dealing with it.

We really don't need to go overboard. All I'm asking for is a basic safety check. I've asked for a couple of years. This year, it got bad enough that people noticed. That's all.

For the record, the issues I noted I saw from 20' away in less than 15 seconds with no further scrutiny. There were a couple of cars that were bad enough they should have been DQed for safety, and it WOULD have effected the standings and the trophies. That's not fair to other competitors, and taints the event.

I've been coming for 12 years. We used to check reasonably decent safety checks. We are not getting them now. The track is being paid for this service. It should be done. Pretty simple.

Antihero wrote: So for those of us planning on bringong cars with stock seatbelts , seats etc what does all this mean?

Nothing.

This thread is blown completely out of proportion.

"Mr Tech Inspector, please LOOK at the berkeleying cars. ALL of them."

""Mr Judge, please be prepared to give low scores to a competitor for workmanship and execution if they are poor, regardless of whether or not the car is cool"

That is all.

SVreX wrote: This thread is blown completely out of proportion. "Mr Tech Inspector, please LOOK at the berkeleying cars. ALL of them." ""Mr Judge, please be prepared to give low scores to a competitor for workmanship and execution if they are poor, regardless of whether or not the car is cool" That is all.

And this, people, is why we need the "plus eleventybillion" button.