thanks to the organisers

Go here to find out what's happening in Oz

Moderator: DLRA

David Leikvold
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

again

Post by David Leikvold »

Pete, none of the problems you mentioned are insurmountable, they just need some thought, some conscripted volunteers, some money (which the club has) and some willingness to take action. Simultaneous runs are not "extremely foolish", with a one mile separation anyone could share the tracks safely. Are we race drivers or not? A car a mile ahead is still visible to the following driver and if something happens even at 240 mph, that still leaves 15 seconds to do something about it. At 180 mph, which is more common, the gap increases to 20 seconds. How long does it take to pull a chute and start braking? Top Fuel drivers can STOP from 330 mph in less than that. And it's not like we have to run into the back of a stopped car, if you need to there's plenty of room out there to go around someone as you slow to a stop, or slow to go past and return to the pits because the track is temporarily closed. It wouldn't be impossible to have a spotter at the start line whose only job was to watch the cars and stop any more leaving if a spin or parachute was seen. I think it's time we had a BIG rethink about the whole track layout and put in a concerted effort to get multiple tracks a workable reality. It isn't fair to expect people to turn up at Speedweek year after year and only get a couple of runs a day (at best) just because we didn't have an efficient race track setup.

As for bits and pieces falling off cars onto the course, that surely isn't being checked between runs, is it? How could anyone possibly spot a tiny piece of debris over such a huge area? Maybe it's time we also got more serious with scrutineering. I couldn't believe the number of spring washers and/or plain nuts I saw on the more carelessly prepared (read junk) cars. Some were even missing fasteners in the pits before racing started! Nyloc nuts and graded bolts should be the minimum compulsory standard. Some car builders should go along to a circuit race meeting and look at the quality of the preparation of the cars, particularly the open wheelers. They are all light years ahead of some of the junk I saw at Speedweek.
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!
User avatar
Greg Watters
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:57 pm

Post by Greg Watters »

I'm another supporter of the 2 track system, seeing it work first hand at 2 meets in the US last year makes me wonder why Cleds 2 track proposal was met with so much resistance .
Even if we don't need it now ( and i believe we do) we do need to have something sorted that can be put in use at short notice,
This will require some changes in thinking of things like track clearances, Are our distances from the track to safety vehicles and pits insurance dictated or a figure that seemed safe at the time ??, US meets have a smaller safety distance, making the running of 2 tracks easier to achieve.
another thing that we may need to look at is pre entry by a set date,
that way we would be more prepared for a large number of entrys on any given year , would cut down on paperwork at the lake and help catering .

More than one vehicle on the track at one time is a scary thought,


Maybe we should start a specific thread to nail down pro's and cons and could be taken to a meeting as a fully sorted proposal for voting, i know there are logistical problems but nothing sopme clear thought and planning can't overcome
Rob
Posts: 1095
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Richmond, NSW. DLRA #888

Post by Rob »

Greg Watters wrote:
More than one vehicle on the track at one time is a scary thought,



My first thought when I read David's original post was a single word... "Insurance".

Then there's the issue of the following vehicle(s) losing their run.

For what it's worth, I rocked onto the salt Tuesday and went looking for Rob Carroll to get a job. We wound up in Rob's wagon double nailing track markers and repositioning the mile markers. After that I asked Rob each time I saw him and also asked Animal about relieving someone in the timing van or anything else that needed doing but was told all was ok at those times.

Something else that needs streamlining/documenting is the pack up procedure for the last day. There must be a lot of jobs that can be progressively taken on as Friday progresses, both on the lake and back at the camp.

I should add that none of this comment is taking away from those that did volunteer or performed their elective roles. If we can streamline what we already have to do then perhaps people can be freed up for other tasks, to enjoy the event or to run their own vehicles down the track.

Cheers,
Rob
I owe, I owe, so off to work I go.
User avatar
jrbcastle
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 4:29 am

Re: help!

Post by jrbcastle »

David Leikvold wrote:Geo Dave, thanks for your response, it answered a lot of questions. And everyone else too. Here are a few more thoughts: I now understand that the lack of volunteers is holding the club back. I don't think the shortage was widely known. My brother and I just came to spectate, so we had nothing much to do. We were completely unaware of the problem, maybe because we didn't bring a CB radio (because we weren't ever going to drive onto the salt). And at the briefing in the pits on Tuesday nobody asked for more volunteers, maybe they assumed because they'd all been working hard for days that we all knew. If we had known we would definitely have stayed all week and helped every day instead of going home on Thursday because we'd had enough. There were hundreds of people there, on the lake and at the canteen who surely would have helped if they'd been aware of the problem.

When I was a P-plate kart racer it was compulsory to do a day as a flaggie to get your open licence. So here's my latest fabulous idea (I've got a million of 'em, folks!); everyone at the lake has to do a day's volunteering. This could be achieved by having a volunteer(!) waiting on the road just before the drivers camp and collecting a sizable chunk of cash from everyone who comes along ($50?) in return for a specifically coloured wristband that allows them into the camp and onto the salt. That same "toll booth" could also charge for camping fees in advance with the same wrist band marked for when they had paid to. Wristbands could be checked at the ramp or by wandering "wristband nazis" in the pits. The $50 would be refundable only after they had done a day's volunteering and had been signed off as having done so. If they didn't do the work the club keeps the $50. The same wrist band could cover the $20 pit entry fee as well. Next we need a Coordinator of Volunteers to do exactly that, assigning people the tasks they chose wherever possible and ensuring a roster was organised and maintained. To be fair to drivers they might be allowed to do two half days instead of one whole day.

I also think a noticeboard at the canteen might be useful. A public address system in the pits and the canteen (a loud speaker linked to the CB channel) would be ideal for getting messages and announcements to everyone.

And by the way John, if you only got one run in the whole week because you were volunteering so much you should be refunded your entry fee.
David i don't won't my entry fee back ! i'd love to see more people put there hand up to help ,there were 4 blokes running a burgundy commodore in c/pro and they were every were on the start line helping Cled all 4 at different times they offered to do the tolilets they helped pack up and i'm pretty shaw they got in 8 pass's too .Thats what we need around the club not people that turn up sunday night have there fun and go thursday night.the club needs help to grow and cater for the bigger event that it has become .
David Leikvold
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

rehash

Post by David Leikvold »

I don't want to rehash what I've already written but we all really need to get used to the idea of multiple vehicles on multiple tracks. It is the best way to secure our future. Consider this: most circuit cars race so close to each other that they touch. Formula Fords do it at 140mph. V8 Supercars run nose to tail at 160mph all day at Bathurst. Champ cars on ovals do it at 220mph. So do NASCARS. Le Mans cars do it for 24 hours. Top Fuel cars do it side by side at 330mph. A one mile separation is HUGE, especially when the track width is not 30ft but 3 miles!

As for insurance, circuit race meetings all have affordable insurance, so why can't we? I think I'll continue this on the new volunteering thread. See you there.
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!
OLDtimer
Posts: 381
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:56 pm
Location: Eyre, South Australia.

Post by OLDtimer »

Our main concern is the safety of the competitors, and doing something as crazy as running more than one vehicle on the track is downright dangerous. In case you havent noticed, nascars and V8 supercars run into each other regularly and that is the last thing we want. 19 years experience has shown me you cant decellerate quickly on the salt without spinning. I have spoken to a number of members about this idea and all agree it is not possible. Pete. DLRA #6.
DON NOBLE
Posts: 742
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:37 am
Location: PAIHIA , BAY OF ISLANDS , New Zealand

Re: rehash

Post by DON NOBLE »

David Leikvold wrote:I don't want to rehash what I've already written but we all really need to get used to the idea of multiple vehicles on multiple tracks. It is the best way to secure our future. Consider this: most circuit cars race so close to each other that they touch. Formula Fords do it at 140mph. V8 Supercars run nose to tail at 160mph all day at Bathurst. Champ cars on ovals do it at 220mph. So do NASCARS. Le Mans cars do it for 24 hours. Top Fuel cars do it side by side at 330mph. A one mile separation is HUGE, especially when the track width is not 30ft but 3 miles!


Ok heres my view , I,m against more than one car on the race track at a time , I am basing this on my having competed in 4 events and have done over 20 flat chat runs down the salt .

When your belting down the salt as fast as your vehicle can , its getting pretty close to the limit in many areas . Traction , not just power traction , but the steering wheels ability to hold onto the track . Braking , you just cant jump on the brakes at high speeds , read traction again , and a pretty good chance of spinning . A lot of vehicles only have brakes on one axle . It gets a bit skatey out there on the salt and the last thing you want out there is to come across another vehicle thats on the track for whatever reason . The really fast vehicles need at least a mile to pull up safely and its a too hard to see a failed vehicle that distance especially when your on the limit with yourself and your vehicle .
Really you just want that track to yourself and your vehicle , no distractions , just full concentration and no obstacles .
NOW LIVE IN NEW ZEALAND
RED NISSAN WAGON 1986 # 281
2002 F/PRO 125.4 MPH RECORD
2003 F/PRO 140.2 MPH RECORD
2005 F/GC 137.9 MPH RECORD
2006 F/GC 141.1 MPH RECORD
1/4 mile ( drags ) @ Willowbank 14.15 @ 97.61 mph August 2006
User avatar
Lynchy
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 6:12 pm
Location: Brisneyland

Post by Lynchy »

and then you get scenarios such as a slow car/bike deciding to go long course being followed up by something really quick that's going to overtake them in a hurry. Which way do you swerve left or right? And which way is the slow vehicle going to swerve? Too scary to contemplate! What if the two on the track both need the fire crew?

I really don't think the idea has any merit Dave. I'd say 2 tracks would be a better option. One short course and the other short/long. So what are the logistics of this? I'd say sort out the current logistics of volunteers and workload first and see if there is any spare for a second course.

Lynchy
David Leikvold
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

umbrellas

Post by David Leikvold »

Maybe we need to make better use of parachutes. I know I'm stating the bleedin' obvious, but a chute (or two) will quickly slow you down significantly with no concerns about traction. And once the initial jerk of the chute is over the car will be directionally stable too. The other advantage is that a chute is really visible to anyone behind whether it be the hypothetical mile or at the start line. The stability of a car at speed varies very much from car to car. Don, your car was a wild ride flat out because it was still a registered and roadworthy vehicle (not that there's anything wrong with that!). The Jarman-Stewart bellytank with it's beautiful aero, no suspension, no ground clearance and 30 degrees of castor was very stable and steerable at 160mph.

Anyway, I've had enough. I won't bother taking this idea any further until more people can see the value of it. I've had enough of offering suggestions to improve Speedweek only to be dismissed out of hand by people who think a dozen runs a year is good enough. It isn't even close.
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!
grumm441
Posts: 523
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 5:43 pm
Location: Buggery, a tidy town
Contact:

Re: rehash

Post by grumm441 »

I don't want to rehash what I've already written but we all really need to get used to the idea of multiple vehicles on multiple tracks. It is the best way to secure our future. Consider this: most circuit cars race so close to each other that they touch. Formula Fords do it at 140mph. V8 Supercars run nose to tail at 160mph all day at Bathurst. Champ cars on ovals do it at 220mph. So do NASCARS. Le Mans cars do it for 24 hours. Top Fuel cars do it side by side at 330mph. A one mile separation is HUGE, especially when the track width is not 30ft but 3 miles!

David


This is all very good in theory
But could you explain to all of us just exactly how the timing system would work with two cars on the same track, at the same time
Also
after having to chase and overtake a lakester so it could follow me to the start line and then race to the exit/return road so it could follow me back to the pits, i would suggest that some of the vehicles on the salt had limited vision and would be put in a dangerous position if they were on a track with other vehicles.
I also noted at least one other driver and one rider? stating to their crew that they couldn't see much and were thankful for their support crews
I think two tracks is a good idea, but not two cars on the same track
G
They make it
I make it work
David Leikvold
Posts: 981
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

theoretically speaking

Post by David Leikvold »

In one of my earlier posts in this thread I mentioned Dorian timing systems (Google it) which have been used at all race tracks in Australia for many years. Every race car has one. They are internal battery operated (and come with a charger) and sit low in the car so they can be picked up by a sensor buried in the track surface. Each Dorian sends a unique signal so the system can time as many cars as required, i.e. a full grid of cars. If we upgraded to the same system we could also time multiple cars (or bikes) simultaneously and with the required high degree of accuracy.

As for visibility difficulties in certain cars I have to ask why people would knowingly build a vehicle that they can't see out of. Those vehicles could be allowed to run on the track by themselves if necessary, but with other cars with normal seating positions the need wouldn't be there. With a 30 second or one mile separation there would be huge capacity for those awkward vehicles to have the track all to themselves. Obviously, the multiple cars idea isn't instantly perfect but with some effort and imagination it could work very well. But as I've already said, I'm over this.
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!
OLDtimer
Posts: 381
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:56 pm
Location: Eyre, South Australia.

Post by OLDtimer »

Apart from it being too dangerous to contemplate, the timing system can only handle one vehicle at a time & "time" is needed to reset it & program in the next vehicle details. It often gets pretty hectic in the timing van ! For the record, approx. 330 runs were made during the week, damn good for a weather delayed meet. Pete. DLRA#6.
gidge348
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:50 am

stremling event

Post by gidge348 »

I must say that we are maybe knocking David’s ideas based just on first impressions.
Agree the thought of coming upon a spun out vehicle at 200mph + on the salt and trying to do something about it is a scary thought.....but. Our racing is really not that different to other forms of motor sport when you think about it.
The Clipsal on the weekend saw a lot of cars coming up on blind corners in a concrete canyon, bashing door handles at speeds that some of our competitors would be glad to see on the salt.
The reason they can do this moderately safely is because they use lights to warn when the circuit is closed.
Imagine if you can car leaves the line accelerates to 100 mph. 1 minute later the next car leaves and accelerates to 100 mph here would be 2.5kms separation between the 2 if either the starter, timer or any of the rescues see a problem or see that they are closing on each other they call abort. Red lights flash on mile markers and following vehicle slows down and gets another run.
With regards to the idea of cards to speed up pre-stage I think this is a great idea. Say 10 laminated yellow cards numbered 1-10, 10 blue, 10 green etc total of 100 cards. In pre-stage the fist 10 are given numbered cards 1-10 in one colour based on their anticipated speed fastest first. These could be recycled through the event.
Then their numbers are written down in pre-stage and passed to the timer. All the starter has to do is radio Red 1,2 or whatever to the timer for him to know who is coming next. If someone is a scratching then their number is skipped.
By having fastest first this makes the separation get larger 2 cars at 200 mph would have over 3 miles separation so 3 mile markers with flashing lights to know the course is closed from the last timing marker to the exit ramp is less than that.
DON NOBLE
Posts: 742
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:37 am
Location: PAIHIA , BAY OF ISLANDS , New Zealand

Post by DON NOBLE »

OK OK . heres my next 2 bobs (20c) worth .
Take a look at most motor sports , and whats the highlights they show most on TV , biffo and smasho and replayed 5 times . We dont want any of that . We minimse the risks as much as possible so there will be no incidents . One car at a time minimises the risk , lets keep it that way .
From a spectators point of view , more cars down the track would be great , but the spectators are sitting safely on the side lines .
Unless your a diehard drylake racing fan , the sport can be exciting as watching grass grow , and for most they would have had enough after a day . Peoples span of attention is a lot less these days in the world of instant gratification . 5 day test matches shrink to 20/20 matches . Super cars , grand prix , speedway ,indy cars , basketball , football , all seem to resort to tits and bums shielas , fireworks , and all sorts of whoopy doo to keep the troops amused when the short span of attention has elapsed .
Hope you can see what I,m getting at , sure we could make the sport more exciting , but at greater risks . And no we dont want Bob Ellis and his famous dancing sheep troupe , even tho there are some honeys like this bad girl :D
.Image
NOW LIVE IN NEW ZEALAND
RED NISSAN WAGON 1986 # 281
2002 F/PRO 125.4 MPH RECORD
2003 F/PRO 140.2 MPH RECORD
2005 F/GC 137.9 MPH RECORD
2006 F/GC 141.1 MPH RECORD
1/4 mile ( drags ) @ Willowbank 14.15 @ 97.61 mph August 2006
gidge348
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:50 am

Post by gidge348 »

DON NOBLE wrote:OK OK
From a spectators point of view, more cars down the track would be great , but the spectators are sitting safely on the side lines.
Unless you’re a diehard dry lake racing fan, the sport can be exciting as watching grass grow, and for most they would have had enough after a day.
.Image


Yes agree to Joe Public it is about as interesting as watching grass grow, but that is not the reason to increase the number of cars through the track.
As Pete put it so well earlier "For the record, approx. 330 runs were made during the week, damn good for a weather delayed meet" that is totally correct, all the officials and volunteers did a fantastic job, the problem is that we had 130 competitors this year and probably more next year.
330 runs divided by 130 competitors equals an average of 2.5 runs for the week or one run every 2 days. If we get more members (as looks possible) it may get down to one run per week or even missing out because of numbers.... something has to be done and we need to look long and hard at all options.
I also believe that conscription of “All” members for a few hours in the week is the best option to address volunteer shortage. There are about 1000 members or so and at a guess say half were at speed week (say 500) if EVERY member had to put in 2 hours over the week that is 1000 volunteer hours over the week or 20 extra bodies every hour….. All that would be needed is a page that members can log onto and put in their preference of job and day. Those that volunteer early get the pick of jobs those that volunteer late don’t.
Post Reply