2024 results

[Mbiker]

Mark,

"How do you think the FIA/FIM would handle a situation like this?"

I am not worried how the FIA/FIM would deal with it.

It's like when the course gets too wet overnight to safely run on and the RD opts to postpone the return runs for a few hours or a day.
The racers appreciate the RD being able to adapt to changing conditions and not having to throw away their Qualifying run.
As a racer at Bonneville, I know I appreciate it.

[37 ROADSTER]

It all depends on who you are, some people get away with skirting the rules . Have seen it many times, rule book doesn't pertain to everyone.

[zzcruzin]

It all depends on who you are, some people get away with skirting the rules . Have seen it many times, rule book doesn't pertain to everyone.

X2. Sometimes it does appear like that.

[tallguy]

This message is part of my opinion.  I am not an official member of any racing organization.

I have no problem with rules -- as written -- being strictly enforced as written.  But I am in favor of changing the rules if they
can be improved by the changes.  And the changes should be applied to future competition, rather than "retroactively".


I believe that rules should have enough "flexibility" to allow for certain circumstances.  Of course, the rules should be applied equally to all competitors.  And the "flexibility" in the rules should be spelled out, and included in the rules . . . even if this is simply something equivalent (or similar) to a statement that gives authority to the race director (or other appropriate individual) to make exceptions that don't grant to anyone a technical advantage that would not be granted to others in similar circumstances.

In the case of "impound", I believe the rules should be changed to allow for an impound inspector to go to the vehicle, if
the vehicle cannot -- for all practical purposes -- be brought into the designated impound area.  The purpose of impound is
to ensure that the vehicle physically qualifies for its classification.  It's not impound's purpose to geographically dictate where
on the planet the vehicle happens to be when it is inspected (i.e., for measurement of engine displacement).  The impound area is designated for convenience, not for technical qualification regarding the size of an engine.

[TD]

The Race Director at Bonneville, and El Mirage, has the authority to make decisions which are in the best interest of the racers.

Matt

So... the Race Director's opinion carries more weight than the Rule Book?
That sound like a perfect recipe for "fluidity" in which rules get enforced differently for different racers.

How do you think the FIA/FIM would handle a situation like this?

Disclaimer:  Not a racer, just a fan, with no dog in this hunt.  That written -

There's at least one answer to the question.

On October 13, 1997 Thrust SSC made two runs, with a combined average speed thru the mile of 762.152 mph.  However the car suffered a double chute failure on the 1st run, which happened to be the first supersonic speed through the measured mile.  The second run began 61 minutes after the first, or 1 minute past the then-required 60 minute turnaround time.  The average was not recognized as a new unlimited LSR nor as the first supersonic LSR.  That came later, on October 15th.

Tim

[SpeedRacer93]

In the case of "impound", I believe the rules should be changed to allow for an impound inspector to go to the vehicle, if
the vehicle cannot -- for all practical purposes -- be brought into the designated impound area.  The purpose of impound is
to ensure that the vehicle physically qualifies for its classification.  It's not impound's purpose to geographically dictate where
on the planet the vehicle happens to be when it is inspected (i.e., for measurement of engine displacement).  The impound area is designated for convenience, not for technical qualification regarding the size of an engine.

One of the reason "impound" is a controlled location is so the impound staff, can monitor that teams do not make changes to the car that would put in outside of the rules.   IE changing the engine block.   My understanding is they do not pump the engine until after the return run.   So they could do a run with an engine out of spec, change the engine, and do the back run with a legal engine.   Yes the speed could be lower but the average could still set the record.   With sometimes 20 plus cars in impound that would take a lot of staff to monitor everyone remotely.

[PorkPie]

about FIA/FIM and Thrust SSC...

the turnaround time starts in the moment the record vehicle ENTERS the measured mile/kilo and
ends in the moment it Leaves the measured mile/kilo

for FIA it is 1 hour and for FIM 2 hour turnaround time...up to 1935 it was 30 minutes for the FIA, when Malcolm Campbell run at Bonneville, he went in trouble with his Daytona Beach tire and had to change them after each run...so the FIA gave him 1 hour and it stays so....

on the 13 October 1997 Andy Green leaved the measured mile on his return run with a delay of
49 seconds, so the FIA couldn't accept it as a new record

on the 15 October 1997 Andy Green stayed inside the 1 hour, overall he was on 4 runs over the speed of sound

for years, several teams runs the request to the FIA to change the turnaround to 2 hours as the FIM runs. Not for an advantage but for safety....

[desotoman]

Mark,

"How do you think the FIA/FIM would handle a situation like this?"

I am not worried how the FIA/FIM would deal with it.

It's like when the course gets too wet overnight to safely run on and the RD opts to postpone the return runs for a few hours or a day.
The racers appreciate the RD being able to adapt to changing conditions and not having to throw away their Qualifying run.
As a racer at Bonneville, I know I appreciate it.

Well you are comparing two different scenarios. On one hand we are talking about a team that put low speed chutes on a 400 mph race car.

Your example is a safety issue for a group of people waiting in impound to run. IMO the two are completely different issues.

Tom G. 

[desotoman]

I was "told" that the car went substantially faster than what they had anticipated, and they had loaded their "slow-speed" chutes rather than the "high-speed" ones.  The "slow-speed" chutes were shredded at the higher speed.

Go to it, gang.

Sorry but I am not buying that excuse. Reason you ask, go to the rule book and look up the records they have set.

AA-470.015 mph  8/20
A  -423.521 mph  8/17
B  -416.511 mph  8/16
C  -437.183 mph  8/13
D  -422.509 mph  8/12

All of their current records are over 400 mph, and you are not going to use your high speed chutes when going for the B record? Now I would buy that they put low speed chutes on for the E runs, they only had to go over 348 to get the record.  But running on an 8 year old B record of 416, when you have already set the C record at 437 11 years earlier and you are not going to use High Speed Chutes? Please tell me how that makes sense?

Then the Race director allows them to get their timing ticket stamped for impound for their mistake?  Just so a team does not lose a qualifying run?

If the parachute rule is not important why is it in capital letters, as I have been told when something is in capital letters it mean someone is yelling at you. So I interpret that as the rule book is yelling at everyone that this is the way it will be, with no exceptions.

Tom G.

[Mbiker]

Tim,

FIA/FIM does not have an impound, they run within 1(FIA) or 2(FIM) hours of the qualifying run.
SCTA-BNI has an overnight impound, with 4 hours to work on the vehicle.
A better analogy to Thrust SSC missing the turn around time in FIA/FIM would be a vehicle leaving Impound for the return run the next morning. 
Before the return run time, an SCTA official pulls their truck onto the return road and all of the race vehicles are instructed to get in line.
At the return run time, another SCTA official makes a sweep of Impound to get all vehicles in line. He pulls his truck up to the end of the line.
Once the time to go is met, the parade of vehicles start to the Start line and any vehicle not in line is not allowed to make a return run.


Tom,

I was not addressing the chute situation, just the allowance of more than 1 hour time to get Speed Demon to Impound.
Gowing asked how the FIA/FIM would deal with the issue as opposed to how the SCTA-BNI deals with it.


Matt

[37 ROADSTER]

Speed Demon crew also worked on the car for over an hour in the staging lanes before making there return run.

[desotoman]

Tom,

I was not addressing the chute situation, just the allowance of more than 1 hour time to get Speed Demon to Impound.
Gowing asked how the FIA/FIM would deal with the issue as opposed to how the SCTA-BNI deals with it.


Matt

Matt,

Thanks for the clarification, I should have taken out the FIA-FIM part.

Tom G.

[zzcruzin]

Speed Demon crew also worked on the car for over an hour in the staging lanes before making there return run.

Hum,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,did not think anyone is allowed to do this. Maybe another unwritten rule change?

[Stan Back]

"Working" on a car includes putting the driver in, checking the cute(s), checking tires, resetting some instruments, etc.

(I guess working on the car by changing engines might not be kosher, but it would be hard to disguise.)

[zzcruzin]

"Working" on a car includes putting the driver in, checking the cute(s), checking tires, resetting some instruments, etc.

(I guess working on the car by changing engines might not be kosher, but it would be hard to disguise.)

And pushing it off the trailer and icing down the inter cooler.