FSF on Sunday 8/31

[OversteerS2K]

I'm opening myself up to some bashing, I'm sure, but what did everyone think about the Sunday course? BTW, the decreasing segment slalom was NOT my design (but it served the purpose of keeping the finish at a safe speed).

[w0rd]

I liked the entire course, including the decreasing segment slalom.
A few feet less per segment is not going to kill you, unless you were that blue M3 at the end of the day.

[SUV-ETR]

Originally posted by w0rd
A few feet less per segment is not going to kill you, unless you were that blue M3 at the end of the day.

Ha ha! Apparently, you didn't see my spin, or the numerous other ones!

But seriously, I thought it was a really nice course, including the decreasing slalom. It was done in a safe manner, and did a good job of making DAMN SURE that nobody was doing Warp 8 through the finish. The spins that did happen (including mine) were about as safe as they could be. Drivers who were going too fast were penalized well before the finish, which is MUCH better than if people were spining right at or after the finish.

Good job Todd!

I would also be interested in hearing comments about the "final revision" of the Saturday practice course. In the end, I think the only issue was that there was one certain place where cars from both directions seemed likely to spin towards each other. But if that were fixed, it seemed like the course was about as fast/flowing as possible while being safe for that site. It didn't seem like anyone ever got out of shape near the gate or any other obstacles, and I thought it was fun. Agree? Disagree?

[sloaccord]

the slalom was one pace short on the last slalom. maybe three feet; the others were all the same.

i could have used that three feet to keep second place in SM, though. . . .

[w0rd]

About Sunday's course, I still think the entrance to the hairpin was too fast. I know we tried to slow it down, but I think it should have been slower. I was getting bad vibes from the concrete barriers just beyond the hairpin.

SCCA rules say 50 ft. right?
I wonder what is the actual distance to those barriers.

[BodyRollin']

wah, that hairpin is there every time, if you havent learned how slow to be going by now, perhaps you should re think your hobby lol. i had a great time i loved the front half of the course and the back half was fun too the slaloam wasnt too bad, you just had to keep in mind what was coming and be slow enough for it. all in all not a bad course, too bad for the craters keepin us off the cross over eh?

chris
white integra LS DSP (for now)

[w0rd]

Originally posted by BodyRollin'
wah, that hairpin is there every time, if you havent learned how slow to be going by now, perhaps you should re think your hobby lol.

Of course I am quite familiar with the hairpin. I was speaking as a SSS. That turn broke 2 SCCA rules. And I doubt our 10 novices had any idea that the hairpin is there everytime lol.

[PseudoRealityX]

i dislike the hairpin for a couple reasons, and this is one of them...

[OversteerS2K]

That last slalom on Sunday actually started with a 58' segment and dropped 2' on each additional segment, ending with a 50 footer. It was hard to pick that up pacing it out.

Neal, I thought Saturdays course was great, especially the front half. I was getting a little bit through 3rd gear before jamming the brakes for the Chicago box by the hairpin. From my in car cam I was hitting 69 to 74 there depending on how smooth I ran the start.

I'll be going to the Fairgrounds tomorrow with the little rolller gimmick and will have a scaled map either sent to Neal or posted in the yahoo groups files. That should allow course designs to be submitted well in advance of the event. Most safety issues should be able to be addressed from an accurate map. Of course there will always be last minute tweaks by the Safety Steward on site. I hope it will make things easier in every aspect. It would be nice to have a final version available for the entrants at registration or maybe even posted on-line in advance of the event.

I'll volunteer now for the Sunday course next time out. I can't make it on Saturday, though.

[PseudoRealityX]

Hmm, I'll all for speed, but 70+ mph in a street tire clad stock class car might be a bit quick, especially for the Fairgrounds site. I'd guess that some of the really built faster SP cars would be close to 80 then....

Take this with a BIG grain of salt, since I wasn't there.

[w0rd]

Jesse: It was pretty safe. It was a long straight on which we were exceeding 70 mph. (I believe they wanted the straight in front of the huge FSF gates) Then you had to break HARD to get into the chicago box. You should have seen all the black marks from locked up tires trying to get into that box. But the box was far enough away that you weren't in danger of hitting anything, and it put you at the perfect speed for the hairpin.

We had to slow down the back section after a Z06 managed to silde completely across the infield and ended up on the front section. He wasn't reading the course correctly and thought that huge ammounts of throttle would be the answer.:crack:

I think there was a separate incident in which two cars spun in the same place and had a near miss (15-20 ft). I can't remember if that was Saturday or Sunday though.

[oilleak]

The synchronized spinning event was on saturday. I would imagine we could get the fairgrounds to move those barriers further back if it's a serious safety concern. Didn't they move a bunch of them that were too near the course for the July event?

[w0rd]

There are 2 that aren't movable. They are like walls built up along the drainage thing.

edit: And they really shouldn't be a problem as long as we aren't entering the hairpin at +60 mph like Sundays event. If it would have rained that would have been a very dangerous section.

[PseudoRealityX]

Originally posted by w0rd
Jesse: It was pretty safe. It was a long straight on which we were exceeding 70 mph. (I believe they wanted the straight in front of the huge FSF gates) Then you had to break HARD to get into the chicago box. You should have seen all the black marks from locked up tires trying to get into that box. But the box was far enough away that you weren't in danger of hitting anything, and it put you at the perfect speed for the hairpin.


Is a ton of brake lockups by people good? Damn tires cost me a fortune:P

I want ABS!:mad:

[OversteerS2K]

I'm going to "pave" the potholes in the crossover, unless I get sticker shock at Home Depot. It won't be smooth by any means, but it will be usuable. With Jesse's courses, that implemented that crossover, the entrance speed toward the hairpin was never an issue. Measuring from the tip of the grass at the center of the turn around, one immovable barrier is 65' away and the other is 87'. Measure from the outside line of the course and you'd be looking at 40 to 45' on one of the barriers. Yeah, it breaks some rules. With the crossover in place no one should be entering at more than 50 MPH even if you made a straight segment coming in. All that said and done, I've probably had 60 to 80 runs there and never remember anyone getting out of shape while still moving towards those barriers. I've spun and slid a few times coming out of the hairpin, though, where there are two safe grassy areas.
We'll see. If Neal gives me the nod Cory and I have two great courses ready for a Sunday, either this month or next. One uses entirely different start and finish points than what we've always used. It's pretty unconventional but will shake up the status quo and almost feel like a different site.

[SUV-ETR]

Originally posted by OversteerS2K
. Measuring from the tip of the grass at the center of the turn around, one immovable barrier is 65' away and the other is 87'. Measure from the outside line of the course and you'd be looking at 40 to 45' on one of the barriers. Yeah, it breaks some rules.

So...what rules, exactly, were broken? The "hard obstacle" rule is 20' minimum distance. The "specator area" rule is 70'. I'm not seeing any rules broken. I do agree that we should try to slow people down before the hairpin, but I did not see any indications of anyone out of control on either Saturday or Sunday.

We might not use it at every event, but we won't stop using the hairpin. Period. Heck, it is hardly any tighter than the "Token Hard Turn" on the Nationals South course...which a rather reputable designer actually intended to do.

If anyone wants to find a new site, please do!! I'd love something better too.

As for Saturday's course, the initial design belonged to Jesse, but he used the cross-over instead of going down to the hairpin. So the choice came down to either requiring a turn before the gate to keep people slow, or just allowing a straight-line past the gate. We opted for the straight-line, knowing that speeds would be high but with virtually NO risk of spinning near the gate. Any maneuvers before the gate would have been higher risk, IMHO.

The Chicago box was essentially a 45', 3-cone slalom to slow people down for the hairpin. It worked. Fantastically! The SSS and course designer's job is to keep people from dangerous situations. They are NOT responsible for keeping Novice MR2 drivers (as in: 8th-place-in-the-nation-novice, I mean!) from locking their brakes. And I didn't hear Jesse complaining about locking brakes on the course last week, so I'll assume he has retracted that comment. ;)

Neal

[w0rd]

Originally posted by SUV-ETR
So...what rules, exactly, were broken? The "hard obstacle" rule is 20' minimum distance. The "specator area" rule is 70'.

1. Entering a hard turn at speeds greater than 45mph.
2. Solid objects less than 50' feet away.

I was at the SSS training last event and I thought Gary said 50' to hard obstacles, and 75' (or 70', can't remember) to spectator areas. I don't have a rule book, so I could be wrong. Now that I think about it, 20' has to be wrong. That gives you no time to react to anything.

But no doubt about it, if you add rain to the hairpin it would have been dangerous on that PARTICULAR DAY. I was approaching the hairpin at 60 mph in a stock engine civic. Plus the shoulder sucks over there also. In the dry it was fine, but this was during a time when it was still raining every day. Also remember that we slowed down the approach to the hairpin before the event also. The orginal configuration would have had speeds 70 mph or higher in a stock civic, heading towards a hairpin, with a sucky shoulder, with a concrete wall 40-45' away directly in the runoff path, on a day that very well could have rained. Am I being too paranoid? I don't think so.

[PseudoRealityX]

Originally posted by SUV-ETR
And I didn't hear Jesse complaining about locking brakes on the course last week, so I'll assume he has retracted that comment. ;)

Neal

It's still not good to lock them up, even if I overcame such a horrible thing with fantastic driving in other areas:D :D :P

[SUV-ETR]

If you're gonna start spewing rules, don't you think you should maybe get a rulebook?

Section 2.1.C
"The course boundary shall not normally pass close than 25 feet from solid objects"

But you're right. It doesn't matter. If it feels like it isn't enough room, it probably isn't. Maybe it should be changed. I'm open to that.

Here's the bottom line from my perspective: A 20-year autocross veteran with numerous National Championships and and SSS with 15 years of autocrossing helped Todd design the course for Sunday. The chief SSS instructor for the region was also on-site and had no complaints. Four of the fastest raw times of the day were run by four different licensed Safety Stewards. Finally, as Event Chairman, I never heard complaints about the safety of the hairpin until this thread.

But apparently it was irresponsibly unsafe. Am I the only one who finds this hard to swallow? Over two dozen experienced autocrossers drove that course, and nobody said a word. And I won't even ask why w0rd (who are you, anyway?) didn't say anything about it all day to me or the SSS on duty before the event began.

This needs to change. If you find something wrong with the course, you need to let someone know immediately after you walk the course. Not days later.

And after Jesse's remarks (especially since he didn't drive the course), I expect his new course designs to be a significant departure from his previous ones. 'Nuff said.

So far, I'm not seeing any new course design volunteers. Just the same crew. Todd, Jesse, and probably Brian, Danny, and some input from me. So I don't see the situation changing. Shall I cancel the event this month? Maybe someone needs to find us a new site. Do we have a volunteer?

Despite my best efforts to fix the situation (including a change to the course on Saturday even after runs began...which pissed people off too...) some people are still saying that CFR is being irresponsible regarding safety and course design. This is getting REALLY OLD. And as the person responsible for the event as a whole, I take this stuff very personally. I don't want anyone to feel the course was unsafe, but when nobody says anyting before or during the event, I don't know what more I can do about it.

We've tried VERY hard to make these events safe. What can I/we do to keep this from happening in the future? The same people are still designing the courses, and the people who feel they are unsafe aren't doing anything about it except posting to Internet boards days later. I welcome anyone to design the course and/or provide feedback, but this stuff requires active involvement early in the day when course is being setup. Will you be there to provide this input next weekend? I sure hope so.

See you Saturday. We'll probably be there about 7:30.

Neal

[SUV-ETR]

Oh, and for what it's worth, I think all of our courses lately have been steadily improving with regard to flow, creativity, and fun. And while we have discovered issues that nobody predicted before the event began (like the Saturday spins), I've personally thought the designs were generally safe within the limitations of the site. The only trouble area I've been focusing on lately is trying to make the finish area safer, and I thought last month was a huge improvement on both Saturday and Sunday. I want to thank Jesse, Todd, and everyone else who has provided input on course design. They get up early and work hard, and I think it is paying off.

[SUV-ETR]

Final note:

If anyone wants to read the course design "Bible", go to Roger Johnson's page and download it.

http://www.ghg.net/cmjfsl/

[w0rd]

I was thinking of 2.1.D. Which is a 50' minimum for carts to run.

I did mention the safety of the hairpin to Danny and Todd. Danny moved a gate to be tighter about 2 gates from the hairpin. But it really didn't slow me down much.

:? I don't know why you want to squash any conversation about course safety. I mean, any conversation about safety is a good one. Don't take it personally. Hopefully it makes people think about safety more.

I helped Jesse and Todd design the 4th of July course and I started to help Todd design the last course but I had a lot of other stuff to do and I was hoping Danny would take over for me, which he did.

-Jeremy

[PseudoRealityX]

Originally posted by SUV-ETR


Here's the bottom line from my perspective: A 20-year autocross veteran with numerous National Championships and and SSS with 15 years of autocrossing helped Todd design the course for Sunday. The chief SSS instructor for the region was also on-site and had no complaints. Four of the fastest raw times of the day were run by four different licensed Safety Stewards. Finally, as Event Chairman, I never heard complaints about the safety of the hairpin until this thread.


Not to jut in here...but I didn't hear any complaints in Sebring until Dat smacked a wall at 40 mph...

We had all the same saftey stewarts at THAT event too...

[OversteerS2K]

The SSS there Sunday said it was o.k. Neal is now requiring courses to be submitted prior to the event. Most safety issues can and should be addressed before the first cone is laid.

I had fun on both courses last month. I'm happy there were no incidents with mine. I'd feel horrible if anyone even hurt there car, let alone hurt themselves.

My FSF map has clear radius markings around the hard objects and any future course design from me will certainly keep those car crunchers in mind.

Let's let this thread die, please.

[SUV-ETR]

Originally posted by PseudoRealityX
Not to jut in here...but I didn't hear any complaints in Sebring until Dat smacked a wall at 40 mph...

We had all the same saftey stewarts at THAT event too...

Your sarchasm illustrates my point EXACTLY. Everybody said the course was unsafe and too fast...after the event!

Nothing has actually changed today. And unless people start bringing up issues AT the event, nothing is ever going to change.

Jeremy, I'm sorry if I came across as trying to sqelch talk about safety. That is not my intent. My intent is to make it productive. Hindsight is 20/20. Anybody can say that a course had problems after someone gets into an accident. The Sebring incident is a perfect example of "Monday morning quarterback syndrome". Everybody blaming the "obvious bad course design", when it is every participant's responsibility to ensure they don't endanger themselves on a particular course. We need to identify problems AT THE EVENT.

Also, designing a good and safe course is very difficult! Even the best course designers in the world are unable to predict every type of accident. Just ask the two owners of the wrecked S2000s towed home from Nationals last week. :(

Neal

[PseudoRealityX]

In case anyone hadn't heard the details of the Nationals accident...

One of the National SCCA Staff members were taking a few exhibition runs during the event and one got lost, and T-boned another ~30 mph. It wasn't the course's fault, but the driver being a bonehead.