No wheels off...
Discussion
bmwguy said:
Actually....this is a really poorly thought out piece of drafting. There are many corners where it will allow drivers to stray further off track than they do already. eg Jim Clark Esses at Croft. Currently you have to keep the inside wheels on the track side of the white line or get into trouble...but the curb is at least two car widths there, so under the new rule you will be able to run much wider.
I've not driven Croft. But looking on youtube, I can't see a wide kerb at the Esses.Bert
I feel it to be more of a problem of granularity. At the moment in the Radicals where I race, getting 4 wheels off is keenly watched and reported to the CoC, but by and large its a fairly easy limit to manage. IE you can reasonably easily keep to the rules.
But with the proposed new ruling it's a much smaller margin or error - getting a wheel just over the line. It feels very pernickety. Also where the kerb ends and the white line takes over is a step change (IYSMIM) - the circut limit instantly moves a kerb's width to one side!
On the subject of current enforcement, the blue book (Q.14) is quite generic. We (in the Rads) seem to run with some much more specific penalties - I wonder where they are defined?
Bert
But with the proposed new ruling it's a much smaller margin or error - getting a wheel just over the line. It feels very pernickety. Also where the kerb ends and the white line takes over is a step change (IYSMIM) - the circut limit instantly moves a kerb's width to one side!
On the subject of current enforcement, the blue book (Q.14) is quite generic. We (in the Rads) seem to run with some much more specific penalties - I wonder where they are defined?
Bert
Dave Brand said:
but, subjectively, I would say that the number of occurrences of "four wheels off" has drastically reduced.
Which means the current rules are working, so there is no need to bring new ones in.Scuffers said:
these new rules are relying on something that's not currently defined - ie, it's going to be up for argument.
I don't see that actually as a practical problem. I think where the kerbs/curbs are is pretty clear. I actually think that 4 wheels off is easy to identify and report. I think one wheel off is *much* more marginal. I'm sure it'll be fine, I just don't know what the benefit is.BTW does anyone know what the F1/FIA rules are regarding track limits? Just out of interest.
Bert
yes, looks the same as the current MSA definition for the track limits. Interesting that the MSA rule changes have a "reason". Because the change to the circuit limits ruling is lumped in with the defending position ruling, the "reason" given by the MSA for the change is to bring it in-line with the FIA rules. Nicely disingenious!
BErt
BErt
chrisb0 said:
If they really don't want us to go outside any white lines build walls on every corner, that will stop us using the grass.
I strongly object to the creation of additional dangers and I'm sure you didn't mean your comment literally. I think the the 4 wheels off rule is perfectly adequate, gives the driver plenty of leeway and is easy to enforce. The new rule doesn't add anything at all. I don't buy the argument that track maintenance on commonly used areas for two wheels off is costly at all.Also we know how particular JP is about his kerbs. Surely if he had his way, kerbs would be off limits too!
Bert
terenceb said:
Quite simply the circuits were not designed with mistakes to corners included.IE,they were designed as a test of driver skill.
That's an interesting thought, but I completely disagree. I think circuits were exactly expecting mistakes at corners and the circuits and the rules tolerated those mistakes well.I think what is actually happening is that the circuits and rules are trying to get to the state you suggest.
I'm intrigued as to why you think the way you do. Do you have any historical references or evidence to support your assertion?
Bert
PhillipM said:
If people are using the kerbs and finding an advantage, your kerbs aren't harsh or slippery enough.
I don't think thats really the point. The point is that the new rules which explicitly allow kerbs to be used have little benefit and arguably a lot more dis-benefit.Bert
Time will of course tell how it works out. I don't mind driving the track in a race so you can't go over the line (ignoring the daftness with curbs at the moment), but I don't like where the implementation of the rule takes us.
To effectively and fairly police it (as has been described above), you will need a lot of eagle eyed people who have to be able to spot the occurrences. So it's a huge focus on transgression spotting which I think just reflects our penal law driven world. If in doubt make a law about it.
It's just like driving in London. All the rules and laws are individually ok, but I don't expect to make a drive into london without getting some kind of penalty.
That's what's happening with this new daft rule. Lots of observers needed to look for any slight slip.
And to achieve what? It doesn't make the racing more fun, more fair, more interesting, cheaper, better, fairer, cleverer. No benefit at all.
Bert
To effectively and fairly police it (as has been described above), you will need a lot of eagle eyed people who have to be able to spot the occurrences. So it's a huge focus on transgression spotting which I think just reflects our penal law driven world. If in doubt make a law about it.
It's just like driving in London. All the rules and laws are individually ok, but I don't expect to make a drive into london without getting some kind of penalty.
That's what's happening with this new daft rule. Lots of observers needed to look for any slight slip.
And to achieve what? It doesn't make the racing more fun, more fair, more interesting, cheaper, better, fairer, cleverer. No benefit at all.
Bert
BaronVonVaderham said:
What about chicanes? Obviously we don't all want to go BTCC-style but maybe by hitting the larger 'donut' kerbs and getting two wheels airborne with the other two wheels still on the black stuff we can circumvent this silly new rule..?
I've tried this. Not recommended 
terenceb said:
Really quite surprised that this "new" rule has upset so many. In fact it is not a new rule at all,driving standards,abilities,whatever have been declining since everyone seems to think that BTCC standards are what one needs to follow.Track limit lines have always been there,offenders who continually run the kerbs/over the limit lines HAVE been observed/reported,its these people who apparently cannot drive fast enough without using kerbing/grass who have brought this to a head! As for a petition,dont bother,MSA will enforce this "new" ruling whether its liked or not.As for ciruit owners causing this,they have nothing to do with it,its just the MSA reminding us the white lines/kerbing are thiers,the black bit is ours.
I see things a little differently...It clearly is a new rule otherwise it wouldn't require rule changes! It also materially affects the way that you are allowed to drive, so to me that's a good enough definition of a new rule.
I don't think it's anything to do with standards declining. In fact I'd say the highest standard is to extract the absolute max in all regards without breaking the rules. Perhaps F1 drivers aren't very good as they go over the white line. Perhaps Colin Chapman wasn't quite as clever as he's made out to be for extracting everything the rules allowed.
As for the whole "BTCC Driving" and "the black bit is ours the rest is theirs", that just sounds like CoC duff briefing rhetoric to me.
I've got nothing really against driving to the new rules. My objection is actually about what benefit do the new rules bring? Does it make it better for the paying spectator customers? No. Does it make it better for the paying driver customers? No. Does it make it better (or easier) for the observers to spot transgressions - it would seem most certainly not. So in the way I think about it, a bit of a duffer of a new rule.
Bert
Gassing Station | UK Club Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff