Turbine vehicles

Other News, Views and topics.

Moderators: DLRA, Rob Carroll, OLDtimer, outbacktrev, Peter Noy

Turbine
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:35 pm

Turbine vehicles

Post by Turbine »

I noticed in the rule book there is a wheel driven turbine class.
Why is there no thrust driven class?
Would it be possible to race a thrust vehicle?

David Leikvold
Posts: 979
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

whoosh

Post by David Leikvold »

Sadly no, there is no current DLRA class for such exotic vehicles. There is a line in the rule book somewhere that says something about reaction propulsion vehicles being specifically precluded. Every vehicle must be wheel driven. Of course, there's no rule that says you can't start every run wheel driven and then assist that progress with something else. And the turbine's exhaust has to go somewhere, it might as well go straight out the back. Good luck getting it through scrutineering!
I don't see any valid reason for their exclusion, they have been a legitimate part of racing at Bonneville since its glory days in the 60's when Art Arfons and Craig Breedlove went at it with jets and set new records almost on a weekly basis. Maybe one day we'll rescind the rule and allow jets and rockets at Lake Gairdner. And for those interested in history you may recall that at the original Bonneville meets only Special Construction vehicles (lakesters and streamliners) were allowed, hot rods and sedans were not allowed to race.
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!

User avatar
jrbcastle
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 4:29 am

Post by jrbcastle »

the set up time to run a jet powered car at speed week would be massive no other car's or competeirs at start line due to the heat it would only slow the whole week down meaning less run's for everbody.Anybody that was there when the yanks run there streamliner motorbike would understand.

David Leikvold
Posts: 979
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

old tangents

Post by David Leikvold »

I'm not intending to ever build a jet or rocket car so I don't have any particular interest in getting a class approved any time soon. I will say that I see no reason why the start line area / setup / procedures couldn't be modified to accommodate them. It's easy, don't have a drag strip style start line setup. It's only salt and witches hats, how hard could it be? Just have the waiting lines at right angles to the track and a bit back so the jet blast isn't a problem. When jet cars ran at Willowbank Raceway a few years back they just moved everyone out of harm's way.
Some time ago I made the mistake of commenting that starting line delays and difficulties could be overcome by being a bit ruthless. Some people (I don't remember who and it doesn't matter anyway) tried to have a go at me for daring to ask why the existing start line routine couldn't be improved. I don't want to go there again. But the reality is still this and it applies to everyone: Don't get in the queue if you think there's something wrong with your car. Fix it first. Build your car properly so it can always start without being pushed. If you know you need a couple of minutes to start your engine/s and check the gauges and whatever else and shut the canopy get started early so you don't slow things down. You aren't that important. When the starter tells you to start, you start, when the starter tells you to go, you go and if you can't do either on demand get out of the way of the people who can until you can too. It's that simple. No race meeting anywhere waits for people who aren't ready.
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!

User avatar
Greg Watters
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:57 pm

Post by Greg Watters »

Ground driven turbine engines use there power to drive the gearbox, there is not much left for thrust unless an afterburner was setup

properly setup ground drive turbine shouldn't take any more time than a piston engine, just have to think a little which way its facing (or exhausting) to not cause complications to someone else,
Its my understanding
Thrust vehicles were getting too fast for the limited distance of Bonneville and the use of aluminium wheels meant they needed a softer surface to run on like the Blackrock lake Playa.

Turbine
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:35 pm

Post by Turbine »

It's a shame Thrust vehicles can not run. I can understand they were becoming too fast, maybe they could be limited to engine outputs under 3500 pounds thrust, no afterburner etc.
Who is the best person to contact about this?

User avatar
BOB ELLIS
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Location: BRISBANE QLD , AUSTRALIA

Post by BOB ELLIS »

Turbine,(who ever you are),the DLRA is aligned with the SCTA,and the way it is,All vehicles must be wheel driven.
Don Vesco (Hero) ran the 'Turbinater' in 3/T to a record of427.832 mph in '99 (still stands) with a gas turbine driving the wheels,If you want to run thrust powered that puts you in the FIA department.
They govern the world record attempts,ala ,Breedlove (Craig was the first to try and run a jet for the World record),(he got the FIA to change the rules to accomadate thust powered cars-to run for the "unlimited " landspeed record), Arfons , Noble/Green , McGlashen (our Aussie Invader Hero,holder of Australia's LSR),and all the other thrust powered heros run in this elite club.
The DLRA will not be introducing any new classes , so you may be an idea to talk to the Kiwi team that is looking to run here in a few years (go halves in costs maybe)
Will try and find their website and post it here.
Cheers , Bob. #66 C/GCC , Dlra (Joint)Car Steward,

David Leikvold
Posts: 979
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

you've got a turbine in the shed already, haven't you?!!

Post by David Leikvold »

I don't know who to contact about changes to the rule book, I think Carol Hadfield might be the best person to speak to about it. I'd be happy for jet cars to be legal. Perhaps a maximum weight rule would be easier to enforce than a maximum thrust rule. Or a restriction on the physical size of the engine. An engine about the size of the one in that crazy New Beetle from the US would be plenty of fun and fast too.
When Roscoe McGlashan ran at Lake G he wasn't at a DLRA meeting so the ruts his solid wheels left didn't matter and were gone next time it rained. He told me they had to have the convex V groove shape otherwise the car was undriveable.
For our Speedweek it would be smarter to use the Goodyear LSR tyres and try not to go much faster than 300mph. Perhaps just run the 3 mile short course then shut off. If you can't do 300+ over that distance you never will. And if your jet wasn't very big the car wouldn't need to be very big or heavy either. I've always liked the look of the jet dragsters like the one that nearly killed the Hamster. Just as an aside, why on earth was that thing just using ordinary circuit slicks when it was as fast as a Top Fuel car and never needed to turn corners? If you had plenty of money you might be able to get some of those Mickey Thompson tyres that were made recently, they had much higher speed ratings.
Then you could use the afterburner :D !!!!!
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!

David Leikvold
Posts: 979
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

found it

Post by David Leikvold »

I know someone's already put it somewhere else on this forum but it was easier to just Google "jet beetle" to find it.
The jet beetle is at www.ronpatrickstuff.com. Its a beautiful piece of work and very simple. The engine is certainly small enough to fit in a jet dragster easily. I think I'll buy a couple and get started!! Just kidding, although my brother (member 143) is a QANTAS engineer so he could get it running right. I keep asking him to buy any old spare APU's he finds but he just rolls his eyes and groans. I don't know why! Some people have no imagination!!
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!

OLDtimer
Posts: 381
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:56 pm
Location: Eyre, South Australia.

Post by OLDtimer »

As Bob Ellis stated, the DLRA will not be adding any more classes. If you want to race you must build a vehicle to the specifications in the rule book. If you want to use thrust, contact the FIA. Pete DLRA #6

David Leikvold
Posts: 979
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

set in stone

Post by David Leikvold »

The SCTA / DLRA rule book has any number of classes for just about any type of race vehicle, even one for old sprint cars, which would have to be one of the most unsuitable vehicles to ever race on salt. If one ever turns up to race you won't hear me complaining, he's entitled. In the past we have let vintage specials, tractors and go karts run happily on the salt, none of which have classes. (I have no objection to that sort of thing, by the way). We even have a DLRA-only class for utes in addition to the SCTA pickup class. A while back there was a discussion about hybrid vehicles (which are now run at Bonneville) and the suggestion of a class for them here was howled down. Now we have "Turbine", a new contributor to the forum and a potential member of the club who might even build an exciting car if we'd let him, who asks a reasonable question about the rules and is met with the same stonewall response, No New Classes. I don't understand why and with the members list now 749 names long and growing all the time, I'm sure I'm not alone. It's not like another class would matter, the lines of cars waiting to run wouldn't be any longer or shorter, the scrutineering wouldn't be any different, the safety requirements would still be the same as for any other Special Construction class.

I'm not looking to start a fight but I have to ask, what possible reason could there be for refusing to even consider any new classes?
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!

User avatar
Greg Watters
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:57 pm

Post by Greg Watters »

Don't know how insurance would view thrust ??
I would love to see a thrust vehicle in action, either at the salt or on a dirt pan, particulary would have liked to be in Dons shoes in 97 :D

I intend to have a turbine powered ground drive vehicle on the salt in the next few years, and know of another being built, both following current rules and regs.

David Leikvold
Posts: 979
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

ripper!

Post by David Leikvold »

Excellent news Greg, best of luck with your project. Any chance of a build story here when it's well underway?

Insurance costs are certainly not helping us up here in sunny Qld. What a shame it is that we still have to go cap in hand to these vultures so that we can be gouged to the point where we effectively can't afford to race. Australia needs to follow the wise example of New Zealand (Good morning, Bob) and have a national public liability insurance scheme that legislatively limits payouts to realistic amounts. As I understand it, the scheme allows people to do whatever inherently risky things they like knowing full well that if they hurt themselves it was probably a direct result of their own decision to participate and so they can't bankrupt someone else just because it didn't end well.

By the way, the American spell checker doesn't recognise New Zealand, the Pentagon sure knows how to hold a grudge!
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!

User avatar
jrbcastle
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 4:29 am

Re: you've got a turbine in the shed already, haven't you?!!

Post by jrbcastle »

David Leikvold wrote:I don't know who to contact about changes to the rule book, I think Carol Hadfield might be the best person to speak to about it. I'd be happy for jet cars to be legal. Perhaps a maximum weight rule would be easier to enforce than a maximum thrust rule. Or a restriction on the physical size of the engine. An engine about the size of the one in that crazy New Beetle from the US would be plenty of fun and fast too.
When Roscoe McGlashan ran at Lake G he wasn't at a DLRA meeting so the ruts his solid wheels left didn't matter and were gone next time it rained. He told me they had to have the convex V groove shape otherwise the car was undriveable.
For our Speedweek it would be smarter to use the Goodyear LSR tyres and try not to go much faster than 300mph. Perhaps just run the 3 mile short course then shut off. If you can't do 300+ over that distance you never will. And if your jet wasn't very big the car wouldn't need to be very big or heavy either. I've always liked the look of the jet dragsters like the one that nearly killed the Hamster. Just as an aside, why on earth was that thing just using ordinary circuit slicks when it was as fast as a Top Fuel car and never needed to turn corners? If you had plenty of money you might be able to get some of those Mickey Thompson tyres that were made recently, they had much higher speed ratings.
Then you could use the afterburner :D !!!!!
I don't think Carol, Rod, Rob, Bob or anybody else that give's there time for free really want to deal with rule changes there got enough on there plate trying to get all the problems sorted so there is some chance of even been able to run an event next year !! :roll:

David Leikvold
Posts: 979
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

yes

Post by David Leikvold »

That's true, I know we're certainly feeling the time running away trying to finish Trevor's car and get the logistics organised too.
Of course this whole thread is hypothetical until someone declares a serious intent to build a thrust car and genuinely pushes for a rule change.
But when the March rush is over and we're all sunburnt, dehydrated, exhausted and excited about a fabulous Speedweek 2009 I'll be looking around for someone to change the DLRA roof chop rule back to the SCTA original.
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!

Post Reply