2024 results

[SpeedRacer93]

Did they get the record?

Yes they did set the B record using the qualifying run where they lost both parachutes, got stuck at 10+ mile mark and were 3+ hours late to designated impound area with the vehicle.

[desotoman]

Stan,

Go to page 41 of the 2024 SCTA Rule book. Under section 3.M Parachutes it states in all Capital Letters:

"ALL VEHICLES HAVING A PARACHUTE FAILURE SHALL RETURN TO THE INSPECTION AREA WITH ALL COMPONENTS OF THE PARACHUTE SYSTEM. A NOTATION WILL BE MADE IN THE VEHICLE LOG BOOK DESCRIBING THE FAILURE AND SOLUTION."

Was this done? As that would apply before even going to impound according to the rule book. Or was this skipped, or was 3 inspectors sent to impound as is required for a vehicle going those speeds?

So many things that IMO seem to be out of the ordinary procedures according to the rule book?

More questions than answers?

Tom G.

[gowing]

The vehicle did not make it to the designated impound area with in the one hour,  impound inspector came to the vehicle.  As the rules state Impound is a designated area not a person.    The rulebook don't state that a inspector can come to the vehicle, the vehicle has to come to the designated impound area so it not "with in" the rules as printed in the 2024 rulebook.

Valid Point

[zzcruzin]

Here is my take, which doesn't mean s--t i guess. But if the chutes stayed attached, and blossomed at the 5, and he slowed and turned out at the 61/2 or 7.........then we wouldn't be having this conversation. They would have made it to impound in the proper allotted time, spent their 4 hours working on the car and went and had a good dinner and got some sleep.................................But this did not happen. As pointed out above in the rule book, the chutes failed and became unattached. Why??? The rules are there for a reason and were not followed. Not taking anything away from the team. They work hard, and usually go fast. And god bless George.....But,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,rules are rules. What happens to the next record run that is late going to impound?

[Saltfever]

I think it would be valuable for all if we new the cause of the chute failure. Crew error or a mechanical failure? Either case might cause everyone to re-visit their "system".

I still remember Danny Thompsons in-car video of his seat belt failure in the mustang!  That was a sobering visual of the forces involved out there. He did LSR a great service.

[Mbiker]

Assisting a racer who needs more time to get to impound is part of the "racer friendly" aspect of LSR. It is a long standing practice for an Inspector to be called to stay with the vehicle due to unforeseen circumstances. It has happened at Bonneville and El Mirage. Miriam MacMillan and I went to the 9 mile mark back in 2012 to assist Keith Copeland when his car went into very rough salt and needed help on his 364.051mph record. I don't remember if he needed the extra time, but we stayed with him until he got back to impound.

I will propose to codify that into the rulebook for next year.

[gowing]

 I never knew that the SCTA's rules were so fluid.
I guess that using terms like "Racer Friendly" makes it OK.

[zzcruzin]

Assisting a racer who needs more time to get to impound is part of the "racer friendly" aspect of LSR. It is a long standing practice for an Inspector to be called to stay with the vehicle due to unforeseen circumstances. It has happened at Bonneville and El Mirage. Miriam MacMillan and I went to the 9 mile mark back in 2012 to assist Keith Copeland when his car went into very rough salt and needed help on his 364.051mph record. I don't remember if he needed the extra time, but we stayed with him until he got back to impound.

I will propose to codify that into the rulebook for next year.

And what was the final decision and outcome after he lost his chutes? Or did he?

[Stan Back]

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. 

[Mbiker]

I don't know about the chutes on Speed Demon, I was not at Speed Week this year.

As for the rules being "fluid", 99.9% of the time, or more, the racer does not need any extra time to get to Impound.
This does not give a racer an unfair advantage in setting a record.
It did not make the vehicle faster on a Qualifying run and it will not make the vehicle faster on a Return run the next morning.
They are still limited to a 4 hour window to work on their vehicle in Impound.
The Race Director at Bonneville, and El Mirage, has the authority to make decisions which are in the best interest of the racers.
In my 20 years on the salt as a racer, Inspector and Record Certifier, this is an extremely rare occurrence.

Matt

[zzcruzin]

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.

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........... So they were going after a 416 record but did not think they would go that fast? What am i missing? And what is considered a slow speed chute? That car usually always goes 350 or better.

[Stan Back]

Thank you, Matt.

[Stan Back]

The car was running a smaller engine than usual -- B?

[gowing]

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?

[Elmo Rodge]

I have had experience with that but I am on my way out the door. I'll reply later. not exactly the same relevant.
Wayno