Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

looking back at the 2007 CSC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

    Originally posted by ScotcH View Post
    +1!
    and beer!~
    set tire pressures to winning!

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

      I will post a reply from Marc M. since he doesn`t have access to post on this forum yet.

      ------------

      Since I cannot post on the CASC-OR Forum (yet), I will answer Carl's request on this forum, since I know that CASC-OR members are being refered on this post to get our opinion.

      You therefore understand why I am writing in English. I will also mention that I will try to be the voice of Quebec competitors since some that were at the 2007 CSC are very rare posters on this board.

      I sincerely hope that no one will be offended by my comments. I know how hard organising these events is. I will post my comments on a plus and minus format:

      + Pre-registration and registration went flawlessly

      + Tech. inspection on Friday and Saturday went flawlessly

      + The organiser, Rob McAuley, is one of the nicest people I have met

      + Mosport is a great track

      - The National rules, as they were posted on the ASN website, were changed a few weeks before the event. Prior to this change, these posted rules were the same as last years rules and were the ones used in Quebec for 2006 and 2007. If these were not the national rules, why were they posted as such on the ASN website?

      - At the first drivers meeting, a commotion was created by announcing that drivers with no experience at Mosport would need to be signed off before driving solo. Strangely enough, our licences were not checked by anyone. This measure affected mostly Quebec drivers. Most of which who were there, coincidentally, are recognized driving instructors that did not want to carry 200 extra pounds during the timed runs. No instructor was available for about 20 mins as we were waiting in the pits. In the end, we did our own instruction, as we had planned, by following the three Quebec drivers that had previously driven at Mosport.

      - "Rules" were applied strangely:
      ex. 1- A car was black flagged because: "Your sun roof is popped open" This occured during the "signing off" process and was very frustrating since the ASN rules provide that "[...] The removable sunroof panel" and "removable T-top panels" may be removed." When the undersigned voiced (!) his concern over the fact that the rules do not preclude him from running with the sunroof popped open, he was answered that "It is in the rules, just do it!" Please note that my car has a roll bar!
      ex. 2- When the rain storm got serious as Z group cars were gridded for their second timed session, the first seven cars sent out were chosen because they had rain tires on, with no respect to grid order. After that, the next session was black flagged. All Z cars except for the ones with rain tires ended up doing their timed session 1.5 hour latter on a damp track instead of in the middle of a flood.
      ex. 3- A Quebec city driver who arrived on Sunday morning was told he could not participate because his helmet is a Snell M. Now, his car does not have a roll cage. Appologies were later given but can you imagine how he felt after having done the whole Quebec season with that helmet and having driven 700km to Mosport? By the way, the guy in question is president of Delta, the most important Quebec city SoloSport club.
      ex. 4- A car that was registered in GT2 was latter included in GT1 results after being scrutinized, instead of being disqualified (which it latter was after a formal request for action).

      - Quebec drivers did not hear calls for drivers' meetings from their paddock area. When yours truly voiced that concern to one of the organisers, he was answered that: "We're here to race, not for camping." (Thank you very much but it was dark when we arrived and we did not know that we would not hear the PA system.) No sollution was offered.


      I know that to some, what you read above are minor concerns. I will admit that some of it is minor, but some is not. Also, imagine that you are going through this on a strange track, and that this goes on in a language that is not your mother tongue.

      All of this just makes me wich that in the future, these mega events will be co-hosted by as many clubs as possible, with people from as many areas as possible.

      If I have hurt anyones feelings, please accept my sincerest appologies. I did not have the time to reread myself.

      _________________
      Marc
      directeur SoloSprint, CADL
      Scirocco 8v no 4 catégorie T2

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

        On my side, i think that we need to improved the communication during the CSC. We had access to the speaker of Mosport but we didnt use it enough. One think that the CADL do really well during their event is having an MC that his job is mainly communication...

        I think that it will be sweet for everyone to have the best time of everyone at the end of their session. That way you know where you stand or what`s the time to beat. At the same time, he can announce every change to schedule or any information related to the CSC for the competitor and spectator.

        Like most of you know, i was steward for this CSC and i was running like crazy because of this lack of communication. Often i was asking question that i received from different competitor becauses no one on the field knew the answer and i was receiving the answer ''It`s obvious''...and than i had to basically ask a couple of time if it was possible to announce the answer on the speaker so every one could know the answer.. i received 2 to 3 times the answer ''you want to do it''...

        I will not go further on the communication issue has i think that everyone saw it. For the Next CSC, no matther where is it we definatly need to improved it during the event as it will remove a lot of none needed frustration and will improve the spirit of competition.

        -------

        Regarding the number of entry for the CSC. As a competitor i don`t think that hoping for 100+ competitor for solosprint event is good for the sport. We often have difficulty to complete 3 run per competitor with 60 or less. Going to a national and being able to complete only 2 runs in an entire day or even 1 full run + half of the second one where you need to cancel the score of the second run...would really suck..

        -------

        Regarding the rule, it`s comming more and more obvious that the rules are better for Heavy and high powered car than light and all handling car. It was already a little bit in the past but now with the new special Suspension PIP and weight PIP it`s now obvious.

        It`s for sure that the National rule needs to be available sooner than August and that waiting the end of each season to start working on the rules of the following year is not working at all. Something that i heard from different people during the CSC is that since we are grassroot, ''could we have a rule for a 2 year period instead of changing it every year?''.
        -------

        I hope that my point can start a nice discussion about the future of the Solosprint...
        Last edited by djphoebus; 10-16-2007, 01:59 AM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

          I agree with almost everything that Guillaume pointed out. Communication was no where good enough and an MC would have helped that a lot.

          Group Z on Saturday..... I understand both sides of the coin, but it was still messed up (as were the conditions). If competitors felt their personal safety was at risk, decline to run. If you are going to run, get in line where you should be and run.

          Impound..... That is where other competitors go over their competition's vehicles and launch protests. Scrutineering is for safety, impound is for protests from competitors.

          Rules NEED to be posted in the spring. ASN needs to get there stuff together. I know everyone are volunteers, but you can not properly prep for a national competition with rules released a month or so before the event (or in the case of CAC major changes the week leading up the the event with no advance notification)

          This was a national level event, there should be no need for instructors to "sign off" inexperienced competitors. This is a national level event!

          Having this thread is a good idea, having excessively defensive people defending every action taken, is not. Sure there is no need to be nasty in your comments or suggestions, but let those that have a concern voice their opinions. If people that didn't run or weren't even there start criticizing the event, well that's a different story, but let those that ran the event voice their observations and concerns.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

            Originally posted by djphoebus View Post
            I will post a reply from Marc M. since he doesn`t have access to post on this forum yet.

            ------------

            Since I cannot post on the CASC-OR Forum (yet), I will answer Carl's request on this forum, since I know that CASC-OR members are being refered on this post to get our opinion.

            You therefore understand why I am writing in English. I will also mention that I will try to be the voice of Quebec competitors since some that were at the 2007 CSC are very rare posters on this board.

            I sincerely hope that no one will be offended by my comments. I know how hard organising these events is. I will post my comments on a plus and minus format:

            + Pre-registration and registration went flawlessly

            + Tech. inspection on Friday and Saturday went flawlessly

            + The organiser, Rob McAuley, is one of the nicest people I have met

            + Mosport is a great track

            - The National rules, as they were posted on the ASN website, were changed a few weeks before the event. Prior to this change, these posted rules were the same as last years rules and were the ones used in Quebec for 2006 and 2007. If these were not the national rules, why were they posted as such on the ASN website?

            - At the first drivers meeting, a commotion was created by announcing that drivers with no experience at Mosport would need to be signed off before driving solo. Strangely enough, our licences were not checked by anyone. This measure affected mostly Quebec drivers. Most of which who were there, coincidentally, are recognized driving instructors that did not want to carry 200 extra pounds during the timed runs. No instructor was available for about 20 mins as we were waiting in the pits. In the end, we did our own instruction, as we had planned, by following the three Quebec drivers that had previously driven at Mosport.

            - "Rules" were applied strangely:
            ex. 1- A car was black flagged because: "Your sun roof is popped open" This occured during the "signing off" process and was very frustrating since the ASN rules provide that "[...] The removable sunroof panel" and "removable T-top panels" may be removed." When the undersigned voiced (!) his concern over the fact that the rules do not preclude him from running with the sunroof popped open, he was answered that "It is in the rules, just do it!" Please note that my car has a roll bar!
            ex. 2- When the rain storm got serious as Z group cars were gridded for their second timed session, the first seven cars sent out were chosen because they had rain tires on, with no respect to grid order. After that, the next session was black flagged. All Z cars except for the ones with rain tires ended up doing their timed session 1.5 hour latter on a damp track instead of in the middle of a flood.
            ex. 3- A Quebec city driver who arrived on Sunday morning was told he could not participate because his helmet is a Snell M. Now, his car does not have a roll cage. Appologies were later given but can you imagine how he felt after having done the whole Quebec season with that helmet and having driven 700km to Mosport? By the way, the guy in question is president of Delta, the most important Quebec city SoloSport club.
            ex. 4- A car that was registered in GT2 was latter included in GT1 results after being scrutinized, instead of being disqualified (which it latter was after a formal request for action).

            - Quebec drivers did not hear calls for drivers' meetings from their paddock area. When yours truly voiced that concern to one of the organisers, he was answered that: "We're here to race, not for camping." (Thank you very much but it was dark when we arrived and we did not know that we would not hear the PA system.) No sollution was offered.


            I know that to some, what you read above are minor concerns. I will admit that some of it is minor, but some is not. Also, imagine that you are going through this on a strange track, and that this goes on in a language that is not your mother tongue.

            All of this just makes me wich that in the future, these mega events will be co-hosted by as many clubs as possible, with people from as many areas as possible.

            If I have hurt anyones feelings, please accept my sincerest appologies. I did not have the time to reread myself.

            _________________
            Marc
            directeur SoloSprint, CADL
            Scirocco 8v no 4 catégorie T2
            Good feedback ... thanks! Here is my (personal!) take on your points:

            Agreed on all your + points ... the things that worked, worked VERY well. TAC and Rob did a great despite some of the issues (like weather!). As for your - points:

            - The posting of the National Rules was not under our control, as far as I know ... ASN was sitting on them (they were available in the spring I believe!) This was definitely a problem, and I agree with your frustration here. Rules need to be known as early as possible.

            - The need for an instructor is a saftey measure, and is common place in all the Ontario series events (new competitors get signed off). The execution of this seems to have perhaps been lacking. The intent is good, but perhaps it needs to be streamlined so that time is not wasted, and also needs to be CLEARLY spelled out in the supp regs as to what is expected.

            - Black flagged for open sun roof is BS (my opinion!). It should not have happened. Perhaps the Mosport marshals are not used to seeing this, so they black flagged the car? The clerk cannot see the cars except on the front straight, so we rely on the marshals to call it in.

            - Grid order is never set in stone, so moving people around WILL happen in order to avoid yellows and improve event flow. Cars on rain tires will clearly be faster, so it does not make sense to put them out on the tail of a car on slicks ... it will just slow down the event. This has been pointed out before. I understand the issue, but in this case, what was done was the correct action. The grid order is in fact changing all the time, as people get faster, or conditions change. It is entirely up to the grid marshal and the clerk/timers to set the grid order. The RUN order (as in Z group, then X, etc.) should NOT be changed ad-hoc, and again, it was not changed (correctly) on Staurday.

            - The Snell M helmet was BS as well. Obviously a mistake, but handled very poorly ... thanks for bringing it up!

            - The moving of the car from GT2 to GT1 was simply a classification correction. In lieu of a proper rule for this case (we need to address this for 2008!), we felt that was the easiest way to handle it. The protest was voiced, and the organizers made a decision to disqualify. I'm not sure how better we could have handled the situation (again, no rules on the subject at all!).

            - Driver's meeting times should have been posted in the Sup regs. I believe all of them were, except for the lunch meeting on Saturday. The schedule is also posted in the sup regs. While it is the resposibility of the competitor to know where and when to go, I can understand the frustration here. Communication is VERY important, and needs to be priority #1 before and during the event.

            Again, the above is my personal take on the points you raised
            Arek Wojciechowski
            8legs Racing, SPC #77
            http://www.8legsRacing.com

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

              Originally posted by ConesRnotEnough View Post
              Group Z on Saturday..... I understand both sides of the coin, but it was still messed up (as were the conditions). If competitors felt their personal safety was at risk, decline to run. If you are going to run, get in line where you should be and run.
              This was not really a competitor's call, so much as a griding call. See above for my comment on this.

              Impound..... That is where other competitors go over their competition's vehicles and launch protests. Scrutineering is for safety, impound is for protests from competitors.
              Actually, Impound is for checking cars for complience during an event. In regional racing for example, after the race, cars come into impound, and some or all cars are checked. Non-complience leads to disqualification. We did a similar thing, though I agree that it should have been in the rules that it would be happening. it was news to much as much as you guys

              Rules NEED to be posted in the spring. ASN needs to get there stuff together. I know everyone are volunteers, but you can not properly prep for a national competition with rules released a month or so before the event (or in the case of CAC major changes the week leading up the the event with no advance notification)
              Agree completely!

              This was a national level event, there should be no need for instructors to "sign off" inexperienced competitors. This is a national level event!
              Saftey is still our #1 priority ... I'm not sure how to better address this ... maybe a 3 lap follow the leader or something to see the layout, then off you go? I dunno .... Mosport is a track that can bite hard, and we want to avoid this if possible.
              Arek Wojciechowski
              8legs Racing, SPC #77
              http://www.8legsRacing.com

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                Originally posted by ScotcH View Post
                Actually, Impound is for checking cars for complience during an event. In regional racing for example, after the race, cars come into impound, and some or all cars are checked. Non-complience leads to disqualification. We did a similar thing, though I agree that it should have been in the rules that it would be happening. it was news to much as much as you guys
                Terry Epp, the ASN Director responsible for SoloSports, was in attendance at the event. It was Terry who instructed that impounding would be performed. As Arek says, it was unexpected, or I'm sure it would have been mentioned in advance. The fact that it resulted in at least one significant change suggests that it was a good instruction by Terry. He happened to tell a story about how impounding was done at this year's Targa Newfoundland, one result changing a competitor from finishing very high, to way down in the order.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                  So, Carl, my take is what you will want are essentially improvements in communications:

                  1. to and from ASN Canada FIA, the Nat'l Solo Ctee., and Mr. Epp; and
                  2. timely and more complete (and accurate) communication to competitors (and other clubs/territories).

                  At least, that's what I'm reading.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                    This was a national level event, there should be no need for instructors to "sign off" inexperienced competitors. This is a national level event!
                    Originally posted by ScotcH View Post
                    Saftey is still our #1 priority ... I'm not sure how to better address this ... maybe a 3 lap follow the leader or something to see the layout, then off you go? I dunno .... Mosport is a track that can bite hard, and we want to avoid this if possible.
                    We had a lot of rookies this year who had not run the big track before who signed up for the Nationals. In fact, the rookies were essential for financial viability of the event.

                    That track is not very forgiving to people who go in too fast to a corner, panic, lift throttle and brake. Less so in the rain. It's not ASE. We thought it prudent to put an instructor with people NEW to the track to show them around the first time to keep THEM and fellow competitors safe, not to make instructors and organizers feel self-important. Once they were comfortable on their own and lapping safely they were fine to lap on their own. (five laps with me driving the new person when practice opened, after that a five lap session with them driving, all during practice was all that this person and I thought was necessary) I'm sure that some were signed off faster than that. One thing that would have helped here though, was for people who were instructors to have known it BEFORE lapping opened rather than after marshaling assignments were given out. I didn't realize I was charged with instructing and just stepped in to help.

                    Although this was a National event, there was no qualifying procedure. You could have registered for this event if it was your first time on a track. (Should that change?) The decision of the organizer was for one instructor to get a person comfortable with the track. For some people, that meant an instructor in the car, for others there were no instructors available, and they had to try and follow and keep up on an unfamiliar and challenging track, or wait for an in car instructor.

                    The Ontario series policy, as it was announced in driver's meeting minutes during the year, was that TWO instructors must sign a person new to Ontario Solosprint off as a novice. (I mistakenly thought it was in our ruleset, but it was only in the drivers meeting minutes.) As you mentioned, many of these people at the Nationals were not novices, so that policy was not applied.

                    Did the host club of the Nationals at ASE in 2006 not put cones on the front straight in the rain? Did that not take track space away from National level competitors? Did anyone really complain about that safety measure though?

                    If it was their first morning on the big track, one might think that most competitors would be faster WITH an instructor for a session or two than without.

                    As for the sunroof thing... it is a typical lapping rule with different organizations I've lapped with and something that you expect. Window policy is something that an experienced competitor asks about. There's nothing in the rules about car windows needing to be all the way down, or all the way up either, though that is enforced in Solosprint. Others allow you to lap with windows half-way up or all the way up, but not all the way down without a window net.

                    Should window and sunroof policy end up in the rulebook?
                    sigpic

                    Stephen, SPDA VP, OTA Director, CCC Member
                    OTA: SGT1 ! -=- CSCS: SSA #842

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                      - The Snell M helmet was BS as well. Obviously a mistake, but handled very poorly ... thanks for bringing it up!


                      I was the person who told the Quebec driver his helmet was wrong in no way did I tell him he could nt compete I told him he needed a proper helmet to compete,when he protested the helmet rule I told him ill look into it and get back to him,when I found out the proper rule I personally went over to his pit and apologized. a simple mistake,all corrected in under 5 minutes.There is a whole lot of rules to remember.I thought it was handled fast and properly,it should nt of even been brought up as a problem. (just my 2 cent)

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                        Originally posted by shawn cormier View Post
                        - The Snell M helmet was BS as well. Obviously a mistake, but handled very poorly ... thanks for bringing it up!


                        I was the person who told the Quebec driver his helmet was wrong in no way did I tell him he could nt compete I told him he needed a proper helmet to compete,when he protested the helmet rule I told him ill look into it and get back to him,when I found out the proper rule I personally went over to his pit and apologized. a simple mistake,all corrected in under 5 minutes.There is a whole lot of rules to remember.I thought it was handled fast and properly,it should nt of even been brought up as a problem. (just my 2 cent)
                        As always, 2 sides to every story. Told this way, it's seems like no big deal, and was handled quickly. Mistakes happen ... we're all human, and erring on the side of caution is always better.
                        Arek Wojciechowski
                        8legs Racing, SPC #77
                        http://www.8legsRacing.com

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                          I want to repeat what I said in the first post.
                          This thread was not started in order to point fingers at specific people nor the organisers (including ASN).
                          We NEED to identify problems and correct them so that people leave the nationals event with a positive feeling.

                          We NEED to identify what was done right, to be sure to include that in future planning.

                          As a long time racer in this sport and experience in both regions and at a national level, people came to see me to voice their opinion.
                          I agree there are always 2 sides to the story and this thread is about bringing the fact to light and clearing any misinformation (as someone put it) on both sides.

                          However, IMO, certain things should have happened and certain should not.
                          I am well aware of the differences of ASE and Mosport but the bottom lign is....if you can sign up for the national event, you obviously are holding a license that says you can. If the prerequiste is too low, we need to raise it. But once registered for the event, and presenting the required credentials, IT IS NOT UP TO THE ORGANISERS to decide who needs coaching or not.
                          In fact, I was told that a certain instructor was called on to instruct at this event, but he had never turned a wheel at this track!

                          Run orders ARE NOT SUBJECT TO CHANGE once posted. If the weather dictates a safety hazard present, the event can be delayed, but the cars that are on grid must run as they are gridded. If you choose to show up with the incorrect tires on grid for the conditions...TOO BAD, run what you brung or go back to the paddock as DNS.
                          If CASC liberally alters the run orders at regional events, that is their choice, but this is the CSC and needs to be run as such. if the rules (CSC) allow this, they need to be re-examined....hell I may never buy a set of rain tires again!!!!

                          Arek- unfortunately roadrace and Solo ( Targa too for that matter) work differently as far as parc ferme is concerned.
                          In roadrace, the cars are checked for compliance by the organisers tech people after the races. In Solo, it has always been the exclusive duty of the COMPETITORS to police compliance within a class.
                          In the case of non compliance after the fact, there is only one alternative, protest and then disqualification.
                          I agree that with the never ending changing rulesets, organisers should be encouraged to help class competitors that are not rules aware. After that the impound can really only deal with obvious violations of the rules.

                          BTW, 100 competitors is quite feasible if run properly. The use of major race tracks dictates the need of many more competitors to be viable, so the logic is there. Should novices be allowed, that is to be discussed, but if you attain the required minimum amount of events to be eligible...why not!!
                          With 100 entries, a 3rd day lapping/test day makes sense and allows 2 full days for competition.

                          CRAIG- you have one thing right for sure ( well maybe more than one...) communication needs to be improved, both on game day and in preparation.

                          At the end of the day, we all want the same thing....to go racing!
                          Carl Wener

                          PERRY PERFORMANCE & COMPETITION

                          450 662 8886
                          carlwener@hotmail.com

                          HJC-CANADIAN STILO IMPORTER-PERFORMANCE FRICTION -HAWK-HOOSIER-COBRA SEATS-SPARCO-AIMSPORTS

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                            Here`s some additionnal comments from Marc:

                            ------

                            A few more comments that are meant to be constructive.

                            Rain tires issue:
                            Because of the decision that was taken, people with rain tires were penalized since their times in heavy rain stood, whereas the rest of the field in Z group got to run in damp conditions. The correct action, in my view, would have been to call drivers in the normal run order. Competitors who refuse to go should loose their turn. When you have 7 cars ready (or whatever the number of cars you are sending out at one time), you put the faster cars up front (the ones with rain tires), like you normally do. Therefore, no one is penalized since, if it rained hard during your run group, it is just bad luck and not a situation were you are taken from the back of the field to be a guinea pig of sorts.

                            Signing off process:
                            You can agree or disagree with the signing off of new to a track drivers. However, if you decide to do it, it should be put in the supplementary rules. Therefore, there are no surprises, and no one has to run and reinstall the passenger seat right before the first open track session starts. Also, make sure you have enough instructors. I still wonder how come licences were never checked? Does that mean that an unlicensed driver could have been signed off?

                            Sun roof:
                            As I stated in my previous post, it is in the rules that the panels can be removed. There is therefore not much room for interpretation. Besides, a car with a roll bar can be run without a roof.

                            _________________
                            Marc
                            directeur SoloSprint
                            Scirocco 8v no 4 catégorie T2

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                              Originally posted by bbqman View Post

                              Run orders ARE NOT SUBJECT TO CHANGE once posted. If the weather dictates a safety hazard present, the event can be delayed, but the cars that are on grid must run as they are gridded. If you choose to show up with the incorrect tires on grid for the conditions...TOO BAD, run what you brung or go back to the paddock as DNS.
                              If CASC liberally alters the run orders at regional events, that is their choice, but this is the CSC and needs to be run as such. if the rules (CSC) allow this, they need to be re-examined....hell I may never buy a set of rain tires again!!!!
                              run orders have always been fluid since day one

                              run orders change constantly through out the day,

                              run orders typicaly change after the fact, ie, yellow flags, or, weather changing conditions.

                              if the grid marshals and timing KNOW IN ADVANCE the probability of a particular car, or a group of cars, running significantly faster than the rest, they will make the call to move them up the grid.

                              the result is less time delay, less headaches for the timing guys, the marshals (esp marshals not all that familiar with our system)

                              this is how it has always been.
                              set tire pressures to winning!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

                                Signing off process:
                                You can agree or disagree with the signing off of new to a track drivers. However, if you decide to do it, it should be put in the supplementary rules. Therefore, there are no surprises, and no one has to run and reinstall the passenger seat right before the first open track session starts. Also, make sure you have enough instructors. I still wonder how come licences were never checked? Does that mean that an unlicensed driver could have been signed off?
                                "License held" was on the application form where I listed CASC-OR Class C and the License #, but you're right, it could have been checked at the event because maybe someone put their provincial driver's license #. Agreed on qualifications and # of instructors.

                                Sun roof:
                                As I stated in my previous post, it is in the rules that the panels can be removed. There is therefore not much room for interpretation. Besides, a car with a roll bar can be run without a roof.
                                I think the concern with a part-open sun roof is in line with the part open window; in the event of an impact when the sun roof is not fully closed, nor fully open within the cabin, it is at greater risk of shattering or becoming dislodged in an impact. If it is fully removed, this is no longer an issue.

                                In Ontario Solosprint, the window can be fully up (braced against the full frame of the door/roof) or fully down inside the door (so that broken glass would not fly around the cabin.) It's logical that this applies to sun roofs as well; fully braced against the frame, or fully enclosed.

                                But you are right that this specific wording is lacking from the rules and Supp Regs. Mind you, we don't have it in the rules that you will be black flagged for using a cellphone on track or having a hand out the window, or if your passenger can't recline the seat fully and rests their feet on the dash either, etc. The difference is that window and sunroof policies vary from one organization to another and affect all intelligent competitors.
                                sigpic

                                Stephen, SPDA VP, OTA Director, CCC Member
                                OTA: SGT1 ! -=- CSCS: SSA #842

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X