Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Go here for general DLRA News

Moderator: DLRA

User avatar
internetscooter
Posts: 474
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 12:18 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by internetscooter » Wed Jul 30, 2014 3:42 pm

I think the fit criteria is extended from my original suggestion...
For this rule I believe the "fit criterion" is that no vehicle shall have the ability to drive off and do a "herbie goes bananas"...
To... that no vehicle shall have the ability to drive off and do a "herbie goes bananas" AND explode into flame unchecked (for want of better wording)...

So this might be better wording and maybe would work for both cars and bikes...

"A DRIVER/RIDER SHALL BE IN CONTROL OF THE RACE VEHICLE AND ALL DRIVER CONTROLLED SAFETY MECHANISMS ANY TIME THE ENGINE IS RUNNING"

I am not sure though if this would allow someone to sit beside a bike in the shade with a lanyard attached but I would image that having some mechanism to switch of the vehicle would constitute being in control (since the lanyard is the alternative to the shutoff switch).
Paul
---
DLRA #647
89.664 mph (aiming for 100mph+)
Vespa Labs [url]http://www.vespalabs.org[/url]

Clarebrothers
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:01 pm

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by Clarebrothers » Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:17 am

I concur with above statement. I think about our Low Streamliner as we have it in the air on stands to work / inspect it. If Someone has to be in the seat that means climbing of a ladder to get in. No good practice
The above interpretation cover a lot (do we look at what it doesn't )

Mossy
Posts: 187
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 4:57 pm
Location: Pt Augusta

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by Mossy » Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:38 am

I would be happy with the `lanyard attached' proposal.
Cheers Mossy
DLRA # 959

User avatar
DLRA 112
Member
Posts: 394
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 2:33 pm
Location: Castlemaine.
Contact:

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by DLRA 112 » Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:49 am

Please note RGN has been removed from the forum.
Member DLRA 112.

hawkwind
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by hawkwind » Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:19 am

DLRA 112 wrote:Please note RGN has been removed from the forum.
Why ?
Vehicle......................A new creation.
Designed by................Troglodyte.
Engineered/ built by......Rustic.
Financed by.................Nickles & Dimes.
Rider......................... Tardus Vetus Inflatio

User avatar
DLRA 112
Member
Posts: 394
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 2:33 pm
Location: Castlemaine.
Contact:

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by DLRA 112 » Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:13 am

hawkwind wrote:
DLRA 112 wrote:Please note RGN has been removed from the forum.
Why ?
This is why > http://www.dlra.org.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=2565 For further information you can ask the forum Admin.
Member DLRA 112.

User avatar
DLRA
Site Admin
Posts: 1324
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2003 11:03 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by DLRA » Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:20 pm

For your information RGN infringed on the Terms and Conditions and Rules and Guidelines of the DLRA Forum.
More specifically from the R & G;
3. No threats, racist remarks, or other type of posts that attack, insult, "flame", or abuse members or guests.

This was the second time RGN had been pulled up for insults and attack on committee and forum members.

I explained this all to him and gave him the opportunity to respond as to why he should not be removed from the forum and in the end he chose not to respond.

Sadly this is the first and only time in all the years that the forum has been going that I have had to remove a member.
Keep the shiney side up........
DLRA WebMaster / Editor

BIG GAZ
Posts: 328
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 2:52 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by BIG GAZ » Wed Aug 20, 2014 10:55 pm

Greg
I know you do many thankless tasks for the club. Looking after the forum for us is a huge job and not always pleasant.
Thanks for looking after the clubs best interests mate.
GAZ

User avatar
RGV
Posts: 661
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 9:17 pm
Location: Adelaide Hills

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by RGV » Thu Aug 21, 2014 12:47 am

Yep +1 what Gaz said.

Thanx Greg.

Dave

Last Minute Racing "its a 2-stroke ya twit - Its supposed to smoke"
DLRA #928
SATA #10

2010 MPS/G 250 118 MPH:)
2011 Washed Out:(
2012 Washed Out:(
2013 MPS/G 250 131 MPH (RECORD):)
2014 MPS/G 250 140 MPH (RECORD):)
2015 MPS/F 250 DNF:(

vetteracer
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 7:56 pm
Location: KINGAROY QLD AUSTRALIA

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by vetteracer » Thu Aug 21, 2014 2:41 pm

Thanks from me too!
Denis

User avatar
AuotonomousRX
Posts: 631
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 10:05 pm
Location: Eyre Peninsula SA

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by AuotonomousRX » Thu Aug 21, 2014 6:34 pm

I agree ...

Thanks Greg

Pete
Metric Target 250 on a 250 on a Red Bike

Pete :shock:
DLRA #866
SATA #49

OLDtimer
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:56 pm
Location: South Australia.

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by OLDtimer » Sat Aug 23, 2014 11:38 am

Thanks Greg, right decision,well done.
Pete Noy.

GeeTee
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:55 pm
Location: #1078. Newcastle NSW. A bright yellow Bug!

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by GeeTee » Tue Oct 28, 2014 9:48 am

wow, RGN must've said something nasty via PM because I reckon everything he discussed in this thread was insightful, clear - even when the rules aren't - and relevant, even when given 'attitude' by other participants



So, am I allowed to have my trusted mate sit in MY car when I am tuning/working on my car's engine in the pits?

My mate is not "THE" driver under the rules, I am

User avatar
DLRA 112
Member
Posts: 394
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 2:33 pm
Location: Castlemaine.
Contact:

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by DLRA 112 » Tue Oct 28, 2014 11:16 am

GeeTee wrote:wow, RGN must've said something nasty via PM because I reckon everything he discussed in this thread was insightful, clear - even when the rules aren't - and relevant, even when given 'attitude' by other participants



So, am I allowed to have my trusted mate sit in MY car when I am tuning/working on my car's engine in the pits?

My mate is not "THE" driver under the rules, I am
Many of the things he posted got removed. Insults never help in anyway and that is not what the DLRA is about.
As for you mate helping you in the pits I see nothing wrong with that.
Member DLRA 112.

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

Re: Rule Clarification-Requirement clarification request?

Post by BOB ELLIS » Wed Oct 29, 2014 10:10 pm

The ruling 1.L PARTICIPANT CONDUCT states,,,, " A DRIVER / RIDER SHALL BE IN OR UPON THE RACE VEHICLE ANY TIME THE ENGINE IS RUNNING" Note this says , A driver , not THE driver.


There is a new clause that has been added to the entry form this year,,,,,,,,,,,,,," By my signature I swear and affirm that I have read and understand the rules and regulations of the event and will comply with them".

This has been done to make sure that all entrants have read the rule book thoroughly , not just the bit regarding their vehicle / class etc.

Bob Ellis
DLRA Chief Car Inspector.

Post Reply