New MSUK track limits proposals
Discussion
LukeBrown66 said:
So the FIA, the governing body for world motorsport, have nothing to do with UK motorsport at all.
All their safety initiatives are done for them and them alone, we have never introduced any of that into UK motorsport, safety, barriers, track design, marshalling, run off areas, fire prevention, in car safety, personal equipment, every piece of that has been done without any communication between the MSA and FIA has it?
It's alright being all clever and sarcastic but the basic premise is very easy to understand if you look outside your little insular world. Try looking out of your little box and seeing it from the bigger picture. I am just a fan and see no reason why this is so hard for anyone to comprehend, try also reading it as if Joe Bloggs was typing, it, not some bloke you would argue with white was black.
The top governing body introduce rules about track limits and ALL regional, national motorsport authorities are duty bound to implement it?
If that could never work, fair enough. But is it too much of a stretch to think it could? Or is that sort of thinking far too simple, easy to understand and implement?
I am not being sarcastic. and I was trying to answer it as if you were Joe Bloggs but it difficult when you don't seem to accept what you are being told. If you had actually read my post you will have seen that I said there are common regulations. All their safety initiatives are done for them and them alone, we have never introduced any of that into UK motorsport, safety, barriers, track design, marshalling, run off areas, fire prevention, in car safety, personal equipment, every piece of that has been done without any communication between the MSA and FIA has it?
It's alright being all clever and sarcastic but the basic premise is very easy to understand if you look outside your little insular world. Try looking out of your little box and seeing it from the bigger picture. I am just a fan and see no reason why this is so hard for anyone to comprehend, try also reading it as if Joe Bloggs was typing, it, not some bloke you would argue with white was black.
The top governing body introduce rules about track limits and ALL regional, national motorsport authorities are duty bound to implement it?
If that could never work, fair enough. But is it too much of a stretch to think it could? Or is that sort of thinking far too simple, easy to understand and implement?
OK moving forward.
This track limits issue is worldwide. I agree that UK circuits are very different to some countries, although not altogether to places in Australia and America in some regards.
Do people not think that tracks limits is so out of hand, and so varied worldwide, and I am including stuff like NASCAR in this on ovals, that the worlds governing body ought to step in and do something?
It is deciding races, even championships at times, and let's be utterly simplistic here, most fans follow F1, that series has gained a lot of what I would call fair weather fans because they can't think for themselves and think it's amazing, they might watch F1 and see tracks designed with huge runoff, kerbs designed to be cut, and then see Oulton Park and wonder why a car using the exit of Old Hall and only putting one wheel over the kerb is punished, yet guys in NASCAR can be 5 car widths over a line and get away with it.
it does not help the credibility of the sport to newcomers and as we have seen it is almost impossible to police, so even taking it under your wing nationally does not work.
it is so bad I believe intervention is needed from the highest authority there is. I say this in the knowledge that America seems to turn a blind eye to most things the FIA do aswell unless it suits them.
This track limits issue is worldwide. I agree that UK circuits are very different to some countries, although not altogether to places in Australia and America in some regards.
Do people not think that tracks limits is so out of hand, and so varied worldwide, and I am including stuff like NASCAR in this on ovals, that the worlds governing body ought to step in and do something?
It is deciding races, even championships at times, and let's be utterly simplistic here, most fans follow F1, that series has gained a lot of what I would call fair weather fans because they can't think for themselves and think it's amazing, they might watch F1 and see tracks designed with huge runoff, kerbs designed to be cut, and then see Oulton Park and wonder why a car using the exit of Old Hall and only putting one wheel over the kerb is punished, yet guys in NASCAR can be 5 car widths over a line and get away with it.
it does not help the credibility of the sport to newcomers and as we have seen it is almost impossible to police, so even taking it under your wing nationally does not work.
it is so bad I believe intervention is needed from the highest authority there is. I say this in the knowledge that America seems to turn a blind eye to most things the FIA do aswell unless it suits them.
LukeBrown66 said:
OK moving forward.
This track limits issue is worldwide. I agree that UK circuits are very different to some countries, although not altogether to places in Australia and America in some regards.
Do people not think that tracks limits is so out of hand, and so varied worldwide, and I am including stuff like NASCAR in this on ovals, that the worlds governing body ought to step in and do something?
It is deciding races, even championships at times, and let's be utterly simplistic here, most fans follow F1, that series has gained a lot of what I would call fair weather fans because they can't think for themselves and think it's amazing, they might watch F1 and see tracks designed with huge runoff, kerbs designed to be cut, and then see Oulton Park and wonder why a car using the exit of Old Hall and only putting one wheel over the kerb is punished, yet guys in NASCAR can be 5 car widths over a line and get away with it.
it does not help the credibility of the sport to newcomers and as we have seen it is almost impossible to police, so even taking it under your wing nationally does not work.
it is so bad I believe intervention is needed from the highest authority there is. I say this in the knowledge that America seems to turn a blind eye to most things the FIA do aswell unless it suits them.
Fine, that's your opinion. Others have different views.This track limits issue is worldwide. I agree that UK circuits are very different to some countries, although not altogether to places in Australia and America in some regards.
Do people not think that tracks limits is so out of hand, and so varied worldwide, and I am including stuff like NASCAR in this on ovals, that the worlds governing body ought to step in and do something?
It is deciding races, even championships at times, and let's be utterly simplistic here, most fans follow F1, that series has gained a lot of what I would call fair weather fans because they can't think for themselves and think it's amazing, they might watch F1 and see tracks designed with huge runoff, kerbs designed to be cut, and then see Oulton Park and wonder why a car using the exit of Old Hall and only putting one wheel over the kerb is punished, yet guys in NASCAR can be 5 car widths over a line and get away with it.
it does not help the credibility of the sport to newcomers and as we have seen it is almost impossible to police, so even taking it under your wing nationally does not work.
it is so bad I believe intervention is needed from the highest authority there is. I say this in the knowledge that America seems to turn a blind eye to most things the FIA do aswell unless it suits them.
OK by that argument you are happy with the current track limits situation? And happy that the UK are approaching it a different way, I am too by the way, I am not saying what MSUK is doing is wrong, merely that it should be being lead and pushed by a higher power, regardless of who controls each area, that way teh same message, rules, legality is sent to all.
Drumroll said:
DemonDriverDan said:
The stewards seemed to struggle keeping up with the old rules let alone the new ones. I'm sure we've all seen plenty of people going over track limits when racing that weren't penalised.
1. True but the angle you look at the track from as a driver is different to the marshals
Given the strength of the new punishments it would probably cause me to be a little more cautious but what happens if the car in front doesn't and goes over the limits with no penalty?
2. No real change from last year
Also if you make a small mistake, say going through Paddock, and run wide you should immediately be penalised even for the first time? Seems a bit strong.
3. the argument would be is you have had practice to sort that out
1. True but the angle you look at the track from as a driver is different to the marshals
Given the strength of the new punishments it would probably cause me to be a little more cautious but what happens if the car in front doesn't and goes over the limits with no penalty?
2. No real change from last year
Also if you make a small mistake, say going through Paddock, and run wide you should immediately be penalised even for the first time? Seems a bit strong.
3. the argument would be is you have had practice to sort that out
2. Yes but with these changes there'd be no leeway for a first offence. So if you accidentally exceeded track limits and pick up a 1 second penalty but another driver also exceeds track limits and doesn't get penalised - because sometimes marshals or observers at club level do miss an incident - and then you finish 0.5 second ahead of that driver at the chequered flag I expect you'd be a tad annoyed to lose your finishing position when the results were published.
3. Conditions are often different between practice and the race, either with weather of someone dropping oil during a race.
I don't have an issue with changing the definition of 'exceeding track limits' but I do think issuing an immediate penalty for the first off-track incident is a bad idea for club level racing.
Edited by TwoLeadFeet on Wednesday 8th February 23:13
Seems like sensible changes overall, particularly re-setting the penalties after driver changes or at each hour mark for longer duration races.
Changing the wording from "any wheel of the car goes completely beyond" to "any part of the tyre goes beyond" is much better, as it means that the JOF won't have try and guess if the inside shoulder of the tyre which is impossible for them to see has gone beyond the limit.
I also think making the penalty scale stricter to reduce deliberate 'freebie' abuses of track limits is the right thing to do, though I would make it a warning for the first offence, but not mandatory to display the warning flag to the driver before penalties escalate for further breaches.
Unless they have automatic sensors at every corner entry, apex and exit, and also review video footage of every single breach before applying a penalty then there will always be a risk that some breaches go unpunished, or that some penalties are awarded unfairly. But that's no different to the current situation, and hopefully the change making it easier for JOF will reduce the likelihood of that happening.
Changing the wording from "any wheel of the car goes completely beyond" to "any part of the tyre goes beyond" is much better, as it means that the JOF won't have try and guess if the inside shoulder of the tyre which is impossible for them to see has gone beyond the limit.
I also think making the penalty scale stricter to reduce deliberate 'freebie' abuses of track limits is the right thing to do, though I would make it a warning for the first offence, but not mandatory to display the warning flag to the driver before penalties escalate for further breaches.
Unless they have automatic sensors at every corner entry, apex and exit, and also review video footage of every single breach before applying a penalty then there will always be a risk that some breaches go unpunished, or that some penalties are awarded unfairly. But that's no different to the current situation, and hopefully the change making it easier for JOF will reduce the likelihood of that happening.
TwoLeadFeet said:
1. If you're following a car through a corner you've likely got a better angle of view than a marshals post some 20-30m away
As close as that? Nice!Add in being above/ below the track level, looking up/ down the track, trying to remember the 3 cars that cut the limits, waiting for a quieter moment to call them in the shock is that more cars don't get missed.
At places like Donningtons esses you can be a long way over the the white line on the kerb using the old rules and into the gravel. Last year at one event almost all the formula Ford's were running through the gravel.
I note the Autosport article says “The logic behind the one-second penalty was because too many drivers were keeping their powder dry and then doing track limits at the end of a race,” which suggests a degree of control and premeditation. If I went over the track limits at the end of the race it would more likely be a red-mist induced last lap lunge, which I suspect would also be the case for most of my fellow club level racers.
I've sent this to the MSUK consultation:
I strongly disagree with the proposed changes of penalties for exceeding track limits. Being penalised for the first breach is extremely harsh. A competitor may leave the track through no fault of their own by slipping on a patch of oil or water, or is forced wide by another competitor, so a degree of latitude for a first breach is reasonable.
Also reasonable is the principle that a competitor has a warning of a potential penalty for any subsequent track limit breaches, so having immediate penalties without any warning, for breaches that may not be the competitors fault, is highly undesirable.
With the potential of 3 seconds being added to a competitor’s race time, where currently no time penalties would be given, will have the likely effect of not knowing the result of a race until sometime afterwards when the results are released, somewhat akin to VAR in football, which is highly unsatisfactory.
Also in a race series where close finishes are quite common, such as 750MC Locosts, it could easily be the case that the top 3 finishers on the track are penalised sometime after being on the podium and receiving garlands and trophies, which would very undesirable.
My final concern with this change is the amount of work and time needed by the officials to keep track of penalties given out and to deal with the number of appeals likely from aggrieved competitors who have been denied a podium finish.
The reason given for these proposed changes is to simplify the penalties for sporting fairness, but I believe the outcome will be the complete opposite of that intention.
I've sent this to the MSUK consultation:
I strongly disagree with the proposed changes of penalties for exceeding track limits. Being penalised for the first breach is extremely harsh. A competitor may leave the track through no fault of their own by slipping on a patch of oil or water, or is forced wide by another competitor, so a degree of latitude for a first breach is reasonable.
Also reasonable is the principle that a competitor has a warning of a potential penalty for any subsequent track limit breaches, so having immediate penalties without any warning, for breaches that may not be the competitors fault, is highly undesirable.
With the potential of 3 seconds being added to a competitor’s race time, where currently no time penalties would be given, will have the likely effect of not knowing the result of a race until sometime afterwards when the results are released, somewhat akin to VAR in football, which is highly unsatisfactory.
Also in a race series where close finishes are quite common, such as 750MC Locosts, it could easily be the case that the top 3 finishers on the track are penalised sometime after being on the podium and receiving garlands and trophies, which would very undesirable.
My final concern with this change is the amount of work and time needed by the officials to keep track of penalties given out and to deal with the number of appeals likely from aggrieved competitors who have been denied a podium finish.
The reason given for these proposed changes is to simplify the penalties for sporting fairness, but I believe the outcome will be the complete opposite of that intention.
TwoLeadFeet said:
I note the Autosport article says “The logic behind the one-second penalty was because too many drivers were keeping their powder dry and then doing track limits at the end of a race,” which suggests a degree of control and premeditation. If I went over the track limits at the end of the race it would more likely be a red-mist induced last lap lunge, which I suspect would also be the case for most of my fellow club level racers.
I've sent this to the MSUK consultation:
I strongly disagree with the proposed changes of penalties for exceeding track limits. Being penalised for the first breach is extremely harsh. A competitor may leave the track through no fault of their own by slipping on a patch of oil or water, or is forced wide by another competitor, so a degree of latitude for a first breach is reasonable.
Also reasonable is the principle that a competitor has a warning of a potential penalty for any subsequent track limit breaches, so having immediate penalties without any warning, for breaches that may not be the competitors fault, is highly undesirable.
With the potential of 3 seconds being added to a competitor’s race time, where currently no time penalties would be given, will have the likely effect of not knowing the result of a race until sometime afterwards when the results are released, somewhat akin to VAR in football, which is highly unsatisfactory.
Also in a race series where close finishes are quite common, such as 750MC Locosts, it could easily be the case that the top 3 finishers on the track are penalised sometime after being on the podium and receiving garlands and trophies, which would very undesirable.
My final concern with this change is the amount of work and time needed by the officials to keep track of penalties given out and to deal with the number of appeals likely from aggrieved competitors who have been denied a podium finish.
The reason given for these proposed changes is to simplify the penalties for sporting fairness, but I believe the outcome will be the complete opposite of that intention.
As a fellow club racer, this is bang on point.I've sent this to the MSUK consultation:
I strongly disagree with the proposed changes of penalties for exceeding track limits. Being penalised for the first breach is extremely harsh. A competitor may leave the track through no fault of their own by slipping on a patch of oil or water, or is forced wide by another competitor, so a degree of latitude for a first breach is reasonable.
Also reasonable is the principle that a competitor has a warning of a potential penalty for any subsequent track limit breaches, so having immediate penalties without any warning, for breaches that may not be the competitors fault, is highly undesirable.
With the potential of 3 seconds being added to a competitor’s race time, where currently no time penalties would be given, will have the likely effect of not knowing the result of a race until sometime afterwards when the results are released, somewhat akin to VAR in football, which is highly unsatisfactory.
Also in a race series where close finishes are quite common, such as 750MC Locosts, it could easily be the case that the top 3 finishers on the track are penalised sometime after being on the podium and receiving garlands and trophies, which would very undesirable.
My final concern with this change is the amount of work and time needed by the officials to keep track of penalties given out and to deal with the number of appeals likely from aggrieved competitors who have been denied a podium finish.
The reason given for these proposed changes is to simplify the penalties for sporting fairness, but I believe the outcome will be the complete opposite of that intention.
TwoLeadFeet said:
I note the Autosport article says “The logic behind the one-second penalty was because too many drivers were keeping their powder dry and then doing track limits at the end of a race,” which suggests a degree of control and premeditation. If I went over the track limits at the end of the race it would more likely be a red-mist induced last lap lunge, which I suspect would also be the case for most of my fellow club level racers.
I've sent this to the MSUK consultation:
I strongly disagree with the proposed changes of penalties for exceeding track limits. Being penalised for the first breach is extremely harsh. A competitor may leave the track through no fault of their own by slipping on a patch of oil or water, or is forced wide by another competitor, so a degree of latitude for a first breach is reasonable.
Also reasonable is the principle that a competitor has a warning of a potential penalty for any subsequent track limit breaches, so having immediate penalties without any warning, for breaches that may not be the competitors fault, is highly undesirable.
With the potential of 3 seconds being added to a competitor’s race time, where currently no time penalties would be given, will have the likely effect of not knowing the result of a race until sometime afterwards when the results are released, somewhat akin to VAR in football, which is highly unsatisfactory.
Also in a race series where close finishes are quite common, such as 750MC Locosts, it could easily be the case that the top 3 finishers on the track are penalised sometime after being on the podium and receiving garlands and trophies, which would very undesirable.
My final concern with this change is the amount of work and time needed by the officials to keep track of penalties given out and to deal with the number of appeals likely from aggrieved competitors who have been denied a podium finish.
The reason given for these proposed changes is to simplify the penalties for sporting fairness, but I believe the outcome will be the complete opposite of that intention.
Really good summary.I've sent this to the MSUK consultation:
I strongly disagree with the proposed changes of penalties for exceeding track limits. Being penalised for the first breach is extremely harsh. A competitor may leave the track through no fault of their own by slipping on a patch of oil or water, or is forced wide by another competitor, so a degree of latitude for a first breach is reasonable.
Also reasonable is the principle that a competitor has a warning of a potential penalty for any subsequent track limit breaches, so having immediate penalties without any warning, for breaches that may not be the competitors fault, is highly undesirable.
With the potential of 3 seconds being added to a competitor’s race time, where currently no time penalties would be given, will have the likely effect of not knowing the result of a race until sometime afterwards when the results are released, somewhat akin to VAR in football, which is highly unsatisfactory.
Also in a race series where close finishes are quite common, such as 750MC Locosts, it could easily be the case that the top 3 finishers on the track are penalised sometime after being on the podium and receiving garlands and trophies, which would very undesirable.
My final concern with this change is the amount of work and time needed by the officials to keep track of penalties given out and to deal with the number of appeals likely from aggrieved competitors who have been denied a podium finish.
The reason given for these proposed changes is to simplify the penalties for sporting fairness, but I believe the outcome will be the complete opposite of that intention.
Did you send this to an email address, or via "snail mail"?
Would you object if other copied and pasted to paraphrase into their own similar response?
Your sentiment that they are trying to make things simpler, whilst actually making everything far more complicated is exactly right.
TwoLeadFeet said:
My final concern with this change is the amount of work and time needed by the officials to keep track of penalties given out and to deal with the number of appeals likely from aggrieved competitors who have been denied a podium finish.
I don't think the number of penalties issued will change, except for maybe at the at the first few meetings run to the new rules. The good drivers will drive up to the limit of the new rules and not receive penalties, and the less good drivers who can't consistently drive up to limit without risking going beyond it accidentally will simply have to leave a bigger margin to avoid getting a penalty. Just as drivers did when there were big kerbs acting as a physical deterrent to exceeding track limits.Track limits breaches are determined by Judges of Fact, and there is no right to appeal or protest against a statement form a JOF (which has always been the case). So there won't be any extra work for officials on that front or any post race changes to results due to appeals and penalties being rescinded.
Edited by clubracing on Monday 13th February 12:22
mat205125 said:
Really good summary.
Did you send this to an email address, or via "snail mail"?
Would you object if other copied and pasted to paraphrase into their own similar response?
Your sentiment that they are trying to make things simpler, whilst actually making everything far more complicated is exactly right.
I emailed the address given in the consultation document on the MSUK website https://www.motorsportuk.org/wp-content/uploads/20...Did you send this to an email address, or via "snail mail"?
Would you object if other copied and pasted to paraphrase into their own similar response?
Your sentiment that they are trying to make things simpler, whilst actually making everything far more complicated is exactly right.
No problem with anyone using this to send their own objection in. The more responses they get the better!
LukeBrown66 said:
OK moving forward.
This track limits issue is worldwide. I agree that UK circuits are very different to some countries, although not altogether to places in Australia and America in some regards.
Do people not think that tracks limits is so out of hand, and so varied worldwide, and I am including stuff like NASCAR in this on ovals, that the worlds governing body ought to step in and do something?
It is deciding races, even championships at times, and let's be utterly simplistic here, most fans follow F1, that series has gained a lot of what I would call fair weather fans because they can't think for themselves and think it's amazing, they might watch F1 and see tracks designed with huge runoff, kerbs designed to be cut, and then see Oulton Park and wonder why a car using the exit of Old Hall and only putting one wheel over the kerb is punished, yet guys in NASCAR can be 5 car widths over a line and get away with it.
it does not help the credibility of the sport to newcomers and as we have seen it is almost impossible to police, so even taking it under your wing nationally does not work.
it is so bad I believe intervention is needed from the highest authority there is. I say this in the knowledge that America seems to turn a blind eye to most things the FIA do aswell unless it suits them.
And are the FIA the governing body of NASCAR? There is a tenuous link, but they are certainly not setting sporting regulations. This track limits issue is worldwide. I agree that UK circuits are very different to some countries, although not altogether to places in Australia and America in some regards.
Do people not think that tracks limits is so out of hand, and so varied worldwide, and I am including stuff like NASCAR in this on ovals, that the worlds governing body ought to step in and do something?
It is deciding races, even championships at times, and let's be utterly simplistic here, most fans follow F1, that series has gained a lot of what I would call fair weather fans because they can't think for themselves and think it's amazing, they might watch F1 and see tracks designed with huge runoff, kerbs designed to be cut, and then see Oulton Park and wonder why a car using the exit of Old Hall and only putting one wheel over the kerb is punished, yet guys in NASCAR can be 5 car widths over a line and get away with it.
it does not help the credibility of the sport to newcomers and as we have seen it is almost impossible to police, so even taking it under your wing nationally does not work.
it is so bad I believe intervention is needed from the highest authority there is. I say this in the knowledge that America seems to turn a blind eye to most things the FIA do aswell unless it suits them.
The cynic in me would say this has nothing to do with Palmer resurfacing Donington!
The "hidden" concern as far as I am concerned is the change from a tyre/wheel fully exceeding the white line, to any part of it exceeding the white line. It narrows circuits further and while penalties will be inconsistent, if your tyre over hands the edge of a curb by an inch you could find yourself with a time penalty. What happens here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjNBCYyAh0g
Is the racing better? The cars in front should all receive a time penalty which disincentivises making the pass in the first place.
The "hidden" concern as far as I am concerned is the change from a tyre/wheel fully exceeding the white line, to any part of it exceeding the white line. It narrows circuits further and while penalties will be inconsistent, if your tyre over hands the edge of a curb by an inch you could find yourself with a time penalty. What happens here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjNBCYyAh0g
Is the racing better? The cars in front should all receive a time penalty which disincentivises making the pass in the first place.
clubracing said:
I don't think the number of penalties issued will change, except for maybe at the at the first few meetings run to the new rules. The good drivers will drive up to the limit of the new rules and not receive penalties, and the less good drivers who can't consistently drive up to limit without risking going beyond it accidentally will simply have to leave a bigger margin to avoid getting a penalty. Just as drivers did when there were big kerbs acting as a physical deterrent to exceeding track limits.
Track limits breaches are determined by Judges of Fact, and there is no right to appeal or protest against a statement form a JOF (which has always been the case). So there won't be any extra work for officials on that front or any post race changes to results due to appeals and penalties being rescinded.
Quite right, at the end of the day most circuits are 3 or 4 cars wide at their narrowest point - if drivers struggle staying on a piece of road that width then either drive within the skills/abilities available, or take up knitting.Track limits breaches are determined by Judges of Fact, and there is no right to appeal or protest against a statement form a JOF (which has always been the case). So there won't be any extra work for officials on that front or any post race changes to results due to appeals and penalties being rescinded.
Edited by clubracing on Monday 13th February 12:22
Does anyone know if drivers ever get penalised for exceeding track limits at somewhere like Goodwood? I can't recall hearing about it in all the Revival Meetings I attended, and the nature of the track being a proper old-airfield road circuit means opportunities for 'gaining the advantage' by doing so just don't really exist, as I understand it.
bumskins said:
Does anyone know if drivers ever get penalised for exceeding track limits at somewhere like Goodwood? I can't recall hearing about it in all the Revival Meetings I attended, and the nature of the track being a proper old-airfield road circuit means opportunities for 'gaining the advantage' by doing so just don't really exist, as I understand it.
Goodwood is quite unique in it's layout of sweeping bends, with the chicane towards the start / finish line being the main "tight" part of the track. Drivers are definitely pushed for any liberties at that area of the track.My point about NASCAR at the self same stuff happens the world over, I know the FIA do not govern there, but people get their safety stuff from al over the world and I happen to think it should all be under one umbrella, thereby making it easier to swap between series if you an or want to and not have to buy different gear for different countries as you do now
Track limits is a worldwide issue, and by my thinking needs a worldwide solution.
I know that each area governs itself, and that is fine, but eventually you will have a standard in Europe, America, Australasia, the Far East, when in reality it would just make sense to have a central message.
Track limits is a worldwide issue, and by my thinking needs a worldwide solution.
I know that each area governs itself, and that is fine, but eventually you will have a standard in Europe, America, Australasia, the Far East, when in reality it would just make sense to have a central message.
Gassing Station | UK Club Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff