Solo Issues - For discussion

[jbyrd]

from the Q4 2006 Safety Belt:

Reflections

By Al Mitchell, SSC Chairman

As I reflect over this year, there are several things that come to mind that we need to continually be aware of as Solo Safety Stewards.

Passengers. Everyone needs to read Section 1.4.C in the rulebook. The intent of this section is to allow passengers for instructional, orientation, or familiarization runs. The SSC believes the current passenger rules to be adequate for our sport. The passenger rules provide a venue to allow in-car instructional, orientation, or familiarization runs once the passenger safety requirements are met. However, what has been reported to me is that some regions are allowing passengers over and beyond this. For example, an 18- or 19-year-old driver who has run a couple of events in his dad's Z06 has invited his friends to an event and spends the day giving "thrill rides" with his friends as passengers. Our rules don't prevent this, but it is definitely not the intent of the passenger rules (which is why I suggest our SSS's read 1.4.C). I am not proposing a change at this time but appealing to the Regions' common sense to discourage this conduct. As always, if we make a formal rule change it will also effect those who are following the intent of the rules. I agree that a change in the passenger rule will hurt our sport. On the other hand, this abuse continues to put our club at a greater risk.

Always pay close attention to the start and finish area of each event. These areas seem to be areas where people congregate, for many reasons. Always anticipate run off room and keep people out of these areas.

Minors in the grid. There has been some discussion on this and the SSC feels that minors are allowed in the grid area if they're over age 12, or under age 12 and driving a Junior Kart in that heat, but only under adult supervision and not as workers.

The Event SSS must be the same individual who is listed on the sanction application. If there is a need to have more than one Event SSS, for example multiple courses or multiple day events with different Event SSSs, they must also be listed on the sanction application. If there is a change of the Event SSS prior to or during the event, the Solo Department needs to be notified no later than the next business day.

As the Event SSS, always be sure you request sufficient help to safely manage the event site. If your Region is conducting multiple events on the same day, appoint multiple Deputy SSSs to work each event and support them with other SSSs or Crowd Control Marshals as needed. This will also allow your fellow SSSs to complete their renewal requirements.

Always try to spend a few minutes at the end of each event doing what I call debriefing. This is thinking and discussing how the event went from a safety point of view while everything is still fresh in your mind. Plan what you may want to do differently at the next event or what issues the current event site offered. This will allow you more time as you plan for your next event or suggestions you could offer to the Event SSS for the next event to make their preparation easier.

Have a great winter and start planning for next year’s events now.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety Belt is the SCCA Publication designed for Solo Safety Steward news and discussion. This article has been posted in many regional forums around the country.

[soloracer]

Thank you, J.Bird. Definite food for thought. And an exhalt to ya for your efforts to keep our events safe.

[C4Shane]

yep - good one, dat.

[jmiklas]

I don't see what the problem is with passengers. As long as the passenger signs the waiver, how is this putting the club at any additional risk?

[autoxdad]

Thanks John, I don't want to rule out pasengers totally, but I think there might be a couple of issues dealing with them. Some of these are age restrictions, novices giving rides, riders with arms out of windows, and holding cameras while riding. We can discuss them at the meeting Monday night. Dave

[russ33]

Start-finish areas are a big thing with me. I watched as Dan McCreary lost the brakes in a Lotus and headed straight for the assembled multitudes. He turned the car hard left and went back the other way as only a Lotus can, but it coulda been a real disaster.

Russ

[damnyankee]

autoxxdad said:

Thanks John, I don't want to rule out pasengers totally, but I think there might be a couple of issues dealing with them. Some of these are age restrictions, novices giving rides, riders with arms out of windows, and holding cameras while riding. We can discuss them at the meeting Monday night. Dave

I agree Dave, I don't want to eliminate riders completely either. However, there seems to be some issues (as noted) that need to be addressed.

[MrsVlad]

damnyankee38 said:

autoxxdad said:

Thanks John, I don't want to rule out pasengers totally, but I think there might be a couple of issues dealing with them. Some of these are age restrictions, novices giving rides, riders with arms out of windows, and holding cameras while riding. We can discuss them at the meeting Monday night. Dave

I agree Dave, I don't want to eliminate riders completely either. However, there seems to be some issues (as noted) that need to be addressed.

I take the risk of being ostracized, when I suggest;
If you run in the Novice Class. The only passenger(s) in your car, on course, can be an 'Instructor'.

I leave 'instructor' up to your discretion.

[lagunamiata]

I think that riders has gotten out of hand. NCR says "no riders unless they are instructors or on fun runs." I don't know if we want to go that extreme, but we do need to do something.

[W. Dean Furr]

Food for thought: If an incident occured, and you were following the SCCA guidelines to the letter, you would likely have good support in your court case. (In fact, it is likely there would never be a serious incident in the first place, and that's the real goal.) But, if we don't follow our own rules, what kind of verdict would you expect when the prosecution reads your own club's minimum safety requirements to the jury and asks why you were not following them? It's not just the club that is at risk. Each person is individually liable for their own actions. (What a radical concept! Individual Responsibility!) Defend yourself.

Each club puts considerable effort into ensuring events are run safely. We often go above and beyond the SCCA requirements. But, in cases where the SCCA establishes a safety requirement, we must treat those as minimum REQUIREMENTS, not suggestions. This goes for passenger requirements, course layout requirements, insurance requirements, crowd control, and more.

Specifically on passengers: The #1 way passengers put the club at risk is by leading to the "Hey,Y'all, Watch THIS!" syndrome. This is rarely a problem when the passenger and/or driver is an experienced and serious autocrosser. But when it's a new driver with an inexperienced passenger, joy-rides spring up. In the olden days, we required exactly what Mrs V suggested: passenger or driver must be an instructor. The event chairman designated the instructors for that one event. If someone asked, and we had seen them at enough events to know they were safe and sane, we verbally approved them as instructors for the event.
And we did NOT allow more than one passenger. THAT's a joy-ride.
Passengers also put the club at more risk because a passenger means there are twice as many persons in the car if something goes wrong. It is NOT a theoretical concern. Passengers have been injured. Autocross is a relatively safe sport (probably few injuries than most high-school sports), but that is largely due to the safety precautions each club takes.
It is my understanding THSCC limits passengers because of the advantage gained through an extra at-speed view of the course. But that's another thread.

[lagunamiata]

wdfurr said:

It is my understanding THSCC limits passengers because of the advantage gained through an extra at-speed view of the course. But that's another thread.

On that note, the SCCA does have in the rule book that a competitor is not allowed to ride in another car until their official runs are complete. Enforcement of that was slack, but we're self-policing and its not a problem now.
As always, the 24hr is an exception...

[volksman]

I heard at one or more of the events, during the safety speech, that the only people allowed were Instructors, for novices. And they had to be drivers as well, meaning they also had to be competing. That's the way it is, right?

[lagunamiata]

volksman said:

I heard at one or more of the events, during the safety speech, that the only people allowed were Instructors, for novices. And they had to be drivers as well, meaning they also had to be competing. That's the way it is, right?

If we make it that way, fun runs could be an exception.

According to the Safety Steward section, there are "competitors" and "non-competitors." A "competitor" is someone that has signed the waiver. By that logic, anyone that has signed the waiver and is designated an instructor by the club could ride with a novice. If they are competing, this should be after they make their timed runs.

[orange40]

I have to believe that a ride in the car has caused more than one person to become a participant in the sport.That is a GOOD thing.Most definitely no foolishness should be tolerated. And if it's a safety issue,why would it be any different if it's a "fun run"If a competitor is willing to carry the exrta weight in the car?? it's a disadvantage to that driver only. I guess I don't understand all the fuss. The allowing of passengers is one of the best things about CCR as opposed to other organizations. Please don't take that away.

[jmiklas]

I saw lots of spins and over driving situations at that last event (especially at the finish) -- none of which seemed to be related to having passengers in the car... I may be wrong but I really do not see ride alongs affecting our club in a negative way at this point.

As orange40 said, a lot of new auto-x participants get hooked initially by taking a ride along. That is how I started.

As far as the club designating instructors goes -- there are a lot of great competitors with a lot of information to share who may not be well known in the club, or may not want to be a designated instructor for everyone, but would like to help a particular friend get better. I do not think that the club should prevent this.

[lagunamiata]

Here's the section from the rulebook:
1.4.C
A passenger is allowed provided he/she: is no younger than twelve (12) years old; is in a vehicle which has passed tech inspection;
is wearing a properly fitted seat belt and a properly fitted helmet; he/she (or parent/guardian, as appropriate) has completed and signed the required participant waiver(s). In general, a passenger should be either a student riding with an instructor or an instructor riding with a student during an instructional run (as in a Solo drivers’ school). However, it should also be noted that some Regions allow passengers in order to acquaint newcomers with the sport. As long as the passenger meets all of the above requirements, he/she would be allowed at Regional events where a passenger is permitted. Passengers are not allowed during competition runs in Divisional, National Tour, and National Solo events.

So, it's pretty much up to the region. Personally, I don't want a passenger on a competition run, but I'm fine with one on a fun run. Also I'm willing to ride with a novice after my runs are complete.

[pistonwheels]

I think that for most of the event Chairs - certainly from my own practice - we consider an "instructor" as someone who has been at several events, who understands what autocrossing is about and what it entails and significantly considers the interest of the club and event.

If you are one of those people and you want to take along a friend who's turned up for the day, generally the event Chair or Safety Steward will allow that.

What we try and avoid is someone who's stumbled on the event, calls friends up on their cell-phone, enters and then decides that he's gonna give those firends a thrill by tearing around the course. That person is Not interested in best times or apexes, just in a fun day out. At the very least, we're going to have to reset a bunch of cones after their runs.

There is also a risk that they will let one of their friends make a run in their car and that person hasn't even signed a waiver or walked the course. With a helmet on its hard to police this.

I for one never want to be involved in the after-effects of an erroneous decision on who is in a car at an event.

I know that all those who have been event chairs or safety stewards have a much more cautious approach to what goes on at events, because you spend most of the day worrying about things!

So my interpretation (and the one I push as R.E.) is that passengers should only be allowed in cars where one person is capable and responsible enough to act an an instructor and ambassador for the activity.

In regard to "learning the course" by riding along. For most of our entrants its marginal. I don't think you should do it in an identical car until after you're timed runs, but if you're not in an identical car, there's not a lot more benefit than multiple course walks.

Ever notice that even at the 24 hours, after 35 runs, if you just had one more you would nail it....


Martin B.

[pistonwheels]

wdfurr said:

Food for thought:

Just wanted to say, Hello Dean.

For those who don't know, here's a long-time CCR member, past Solo Chairman for many years, long-time hillclimber and Triumph Spitfire racer....

[autoxdad]

orange40 said:

I have to believe that a ride in the car has caused more than one person to become a participant in the sport.That is a GOOD thing.Most definitely no foolishness should be tolerated. And if it's a safety issue,why would it be any different if it's a "fun run"If a competitor is willing to carry the exrta weight in the car?? it's a disadvantage to that driver only. I guess I don't understand all the fuss. The allowing of passengers is one of the best things about CCR as opposed to other organizations. Please don't take that away.

I agree. I don't think that any of us want to eliminate passengers totally. I think that we just need to have some clarify some rules. There will still be plenty of opportunities for people to ride in cars. I will talk to some of the safety stewards and other people and see what we can come up with to have fun and be safe. Any ideas will be appreciated. Dave

[markt]

pistonwheels said:

There is also a risk that they will let one of their friends make a run in their car and that person hasn't even signed a waiver or walked the course. With a helmet on its hard to police this.Martin B.

Pehaps make it a requirement that drivers MUST wear a wristband on the left wrist and that the starter see said wristband prior to start...more werk fer the starter...

[prancingdawg]

My .02-

It is not a safety issue on the face of it. It is less likely to become a safety issue when there is an experienced driver along for the ride, or driving and showing the inexperienced one.

It is most purely a competition issue from my vantage point.

At the last autocross, I was instructing during my competition runs as well as during Melynn's runs. She insisted I ride with her on each of her runs- wouldn't have tried it if it were not so. I hope my fellow competitors grant me the grace and realization that I was not trying to gain a competitive edge in doing so- (except for the tire warming aspect).

But in light of this thread, if any competitor wishes to challenge the notion of passengers, ever, on a competitive basis, I'd support that challenge. I find that if I have a novice in the seat next to me and I'm trying to explain what I'm doing as I'm driving, it helps me become more focused in the process. And if I'm riding shotgun and instructing them, similarly. So that is an edge over someone who is out there with no passengers. Is it enough of an advantage to decrease one's time? Who knows? I'd say it probably is, because you are getting more exposure to the course, at speed. But in someone else' car, I'd say it gives me no edge whatsoever. Different car, different dynamics-unless the cars are classed the same, say, miata vs. miata.

So, the real question for the club is this- acknowledging that it is a competition- can we allow for the passenger situation and still maintain the integrity of the competition to the satisfaction of all concerned? I'd dare say if we structure for it, and publicize it uniformly and fairly, we can succeed.

Until that happens, just say whether it bothers you or not. Most of us have something between the ears besides dead airspace.

[jbyrd]

Quote from Lagunamiata:

Here's the section from the rulebook:
1.4.C
A passenger is allowed provided he/she: is no younger than twelve (12) years old; is in a vehicle which has passed tech inspection;
is wearing a properly fitted seat belt and a properly fitted helmet; he/she (or parent/guardian, as appropriate) has completed and signed the required participant waiver(s). In general, a passenger should be either a student riding with an instructor or an instructor riding with a student during an instructional run (as in a Solo drivers’ school). However, it should also be noted that some Regions allow passengers in order to acquaint newcomers with the sport. As long as the passenger meets all of the above requirements, he/she would be allowed at Regional events where a passenger is permitted. Passengers are not allowed during competition runs in Divisional, National Tour, and National Solo events.

So, it's pretty much up to the region. Personally, I don't want a passenger on a competition run, but I'm fine with one on a fun run. Also I'm willing to ride with a novice after my runs are complete.

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


Re-focus: The competitive issue is another question.

We have had events that have become more focused on "joy-rides" than on competition.

[lagunamiata]

jbyrd said:

We have had events that have become more focused on "joy-rides" than on competition.

Indeed... back on topic...

I feel that if you want to give Billy from your neighborhood a ride on an AX course, do it during the fun runs after the event.

[dono540i]

Howdi folks, I agree with most of the safety discussion. I had a great bunch of class instructors, one of whom rode with me the day after class during the regular AX here at the stadium. It was a learning experience!

I have a friend who is ready to learn and I would appreciate showing her the ropes but if we happen to run in the same group, would any experienced AXer wish to provide some instruction? Nikki will driving BSP in the #40 white vette? PM me...thanks!

[damnyankee]

dono540i said:

Howdi folks, I agree with most of the safety discussion. I had a great bunch of class instructors, one of whom rode with me the day after class during the regular AX here at the stadium. It was a learning experience!

I have a friend who is ready to learn and I would appreciate showing her the ropes but if we happen to run in the same group, would any experienced AXer wish to provide some instruction? Nikki will driving BSP in the #40 white vette? PM me...thanks!

WOW!!! That's an open door!!!

There are about 12 of us that would love to help!! ;D

[jbyrd]

[jmiklas]

dono540i said:

Howdi folks, I agree with most of the safety discussion. I had a great bunch of class instructors, one of whom rode with me the day after class during the regular AX here at the stadium. It was a learning experience!

I have a friend who is ready to learn and I would appreciate showing her the ropes but if we happen to run in the same group, would any experienced AXer wish to provide some instruction? Nikki will driving BSP in the #40 white vette? PM me...thanks!

How would you be in BSP? I thought you were going to run SS?



RE: the picture posted above -- Granted that is ridiculous, but what harm is it actually doing? (Other than adding about 30 seconds onto the driver's time?)

[jbyrd]

jmiklas said:

RE: the picture posted above -- Granted that is ridiculous, but what harm is it actually doing? (Other than adding about 30 seconds onto the driver's time?)

Assume you are responsible for the safety of participants and non-participants at an event.

And let's say...for the sake of argument...that this photo was taken at NASCAR Tech or Knights where cars routinely are traveling at competitive speeds among the curbs and lightposts that must be dealt with in course design.

Now assume for a moment what common sense would dictate:

• -A car with 4 or 5 passengers is less stable than a car with only a driver (and maybe one instructor)
  
• -4 people in a car assumes more risk than 1 person in a car (4xRisk > 2xRisk > 1xRisk)
  
• -What reason could there possibly be for this many people to be in a car other than simply "showing off?"
  
• -We are in a sport which carries some dangers. Should competitors be more focused on competition or "showing off" to thier friends?
  

Now how do you feel?

We really don't know a lot about that photo, and you're right - it is ridiculous, but we are in a sport that is potentially more dangerous than we pretend it to be sometimes, or at least, some potential dangers are lurking right around every corner.

We are affilliated with the SCCA, and follow its guidlines. We follow them for a reason.

Should we disallow passengers? Absolutely not, but there should be a good reason for someone to be in your passenger seat if you are making a competitive run. For that matter, the same safety issues apply to fun runs and "test-n-tunes."

If you don't think we have become cavalier in our attitude, you are mistaken. If you think that signing a waiver relieves us of responsibilty, you are mistaken. If you are more focused on impressing your friends than driving a car at speed in the presence of several hundred people in a parking lot, you are wrong.

Without banning passengers all together, there is really little we can do. We can dictate passengers only run with experienced drivers, but beyond that, it is up to us as competitors to ask ourselves if there is a good reason there is someone in the seat beside us.

If you (or I) can't answer that question sensibly, we need to re-think what we are doing.

[trickbrick]

jbyrd said:

There was a guy who drove a crown vic in AL region that also looked like that on a fun run or two...

But on a serious note about the passenger rule...
(I know this has probably already been said in some way. Oh, and it's really long...but just try to bear with me.)

It is a very good point that it can be advantageous to the passenger if they ride before all of their runs were completed, but I also think there's somewhat of a fine line between the instructional aspect of having passengers and the competitive disadvantages. When I started autocrossing, I'd never driven a FWD car for any length of time. My friend Evan allowed me to ride with him to get a feel for the course and then would ride with me and pointed me in the right direction when I got confused. (lol, lack of pointer cones...)
I also spun the car a few times that first time, and if Evan hadn't been riding with me he may not have been able to explain what I'd done wrong to cause that. (Lifted when started fishtailing, oops!)
So, being a co-driver, especially if not familiar with the car, it can be beneficial to ride along once to feel what the car can do...
but then there's the downside...

The following race, we basically ran things the same way, having a passenger until our last two runs... only I was able to really analyze his lines and speeds etc and decide that the car could handle differently or faster, and ended up using that to my advantage. In addition, I was able to ride with another FWD driver who was consistently one of the highest in his class. That was fun, of course, but it probably gave me a little advantage too.

I definitely agree that there are a lot of people drawn into SCCA simply by riding with someone. I know personally I enjoy riding in the different kinds of cars and seeing what they can do...cars that I would never actually be able to own or drive normally.

Obviously there has to be a balance...

We don't want to give one driver an advantage over another simply because they were able to ride with people...
but it is the driver's choice if they are to act as "instructor" for a less experienced driver.

In general, I feel like a pretty decent driver overall, but every race I go to I realize just how much more I DON'T know! ... and I want a more experienced instructor to give me helpful hints on how to improve.
Of course, someone who has been racing a long time and is more experienced probably wouldn't want or need an "instructor" as passenger, but could offer a lot of experience to a less-experienced driver.

I DEFINITELY agree that "watch what I can do" joyrides are completely out of the question! I've had friends ride with me who weren't competing...and by nature that was supposed to just be a "fun" ride, but I was actually serious about getting a good time and wasn't exactly worried about giving them a fun time or scaring them.

Okay enough of that. Just my .02 Book.

[jbyrd]

Points taken, Aimee, but the competitive advantage issue is not what we are discussing here. That is specifically addressed in Solo Rules. No competitor (other than Novices) should see the course at speed before he/she has run his/her competitive runs unless his/her fellow competitors allow it. It happens a lot in some classes in CCR, and in others we are very specific about enforcing the rule.

The real question is "whom should be allowed to ride in a car during a run," and "who should be allowed to carry passengers in the first place?"

I don't think there is much of a way to define it, but I do believe there are a lot of competitors running in CCR that are just as focused on "giving rides" as they are on competing.

What concerns me is we don't have a sport which is designed for "giving rides." It is designed to be a precision driving competion....not a "show me how I race on weekends" event.

We shouldn't even associate the word "race" with Solo in the first place. While semantics dictate we are actually "racing against a clock," the word has implications that may be negative as we seek to find public acceptance of the sport and venues on which to compete.

It is up to us to be responsible, and to this point, I feel we have demonstrated a certain lack of responsibility. If that weren't true, it shouldn't even bother anyone if we simply banned passengers.

Step back for a minute, and re-read Dean Furr's post above, and then re-read Martin's post right after it. Nuff said.