Printable View
So we are blaming the customers and the track staff.
I really wish that we were working toward proper solutions instead of accepting the status quo as unfixable. I make my life as a "problem solver" and watching each of about a dozen FCCs take place, it was tortuous. Everything just seemed to happen painfully slow without any flow that would be expected by a well-organized team of workers.
Especially with the TV access, I saw nothing that would be fixed with the FT system.
No, Greg, we're not blaming either. Blame is your game. We're explaining to someone who seems bent on starting from blame how things work in the real world of race operations.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Actually, I did not blame anybody. That was you and John. I just summarized.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
In order to fix a problem, you have to identify the factors that are contributing to the problem. I cannot believe that both of you are accepting of the extended FCCs at the Runoffs. From a customer perspective, it was horrific and unacceptable!
It would seem that there are cooperation and communication issues among the various parties that constitute race operations. Having FT input does nothing to help that problem. It would seem that, either the people or the process needs improvement.
Race Control, like the con on a warship, has to work through other people to make things happen. That requires a good working relationship since, unlike a warship, they're dealing with unpaid volunteers and contractors.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Relying on video to make decisions is a two edged sword. There have been enough video induced mistakes to make any operating steward, in any program, leery of relying on them without corroboration from the boots on the ground. The opposite is far less likely to produce errors. In my stewarding career I have only experienced a boots on the ground failure once and that was only a partial failure and I took responsibility for the resultant delay.
I hesitate to suggest this for obvious reasons, but the racing community would benefit greatly from you joining the stewards program. You'll either "fix" the program or gain enough knowledge about how things actually work to temper your rhetoric.
We get spoiled watching F1 where there are multiple stations around the track with the equipment needed to rapidly move cars out of the way and repair safety barriers.
That is not VIR. 15 mph farm equipment having to travel 2 miles eats up a lot of time, I saw tow trucks driving half the track or more to get to a scene.
It just takes more money to clear incicents faster.
I still propose to always schedule SM as the last race of the day, and set aside 2 hours to get in a 40 minute race. :D
To be clear we are talking about long delays caused by an accident. Management of the delay really represents only small possibilities for improvement. The real issue affecting the time delay is the accident and track damage, both of which are uncontrollable. Any discussion about delay management is really superfluous to what can be done mitigate long delays.
How these delays are handled by SCCA represents a compromise of factors and decisions that the club has made over time. Long delays have been present in SCCA racing for six decades. With fewer run groups in the early decades, the schedules had some extra time available to mitigate the delays. Today with all the run groups, to get reasonable group session times the schedule has to be kept very tight. No extra time in the daily schedule to mitigate long delays.
It would be my opinion that after 20-30 yrs SCCA stilled on the best compromise for the variables that surround these delays. Do any of you have a different compromise to volunteer?
SCCA's approach is clear to see, if you are not happy with their compromise then you should find a club with a compromise that you agree with.
Brian
This would be one of the compromises SCCA has made. That competitors are not willing to pay high entry fees to mitigate long accident track delays.Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Frog
This is a clear cost-benefit compromise.
Brian
It is great to dismiss my hard commentary as rhetoric, but that "Rhetoric" would be shared by a couple hundred customers after their races. We should all be trying to improve our product, and shortening these extended FCCs should be at the top of the list.
So then we are talking about post 'long delay' incident management?
You claim that SCCA could do better, but you have yet to indicate even one thing that SCCA could do differently. The great 'problem solve' please expound on just one of your ideas. Use the SMX race as a test case.
Brian
You have an entire dash that seems occupied by things that being duplicated by your AIM unit. Get rid of those and you have a whole dash for the FT unit
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arbitrary
You keep emphasizing customers without ever acknowledging that they, and the volunteer workers, are members of a club. Every effort should and for the most part has been made to train staff. SCCA trained staff is considered the gold standard in the U.S.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
I also note that you call for shortening FCCs without ever providing concrete suggestions on how to do that. I have participated in and headed training sessions specifically aimed at maintaining on time schedules. A great deal of that is how to recover time following a clean up.
Time certain schedules, such as those used in Super Tours and the Runoffs, are a significant contributor to the problem. They don't allow Race Control any opportunity to "bank" time early in the day against future clean ups. Schedules with little or no intersession time (getting more common as regions buy minimum on track windows to save track rental costs,) are another recovery defeat issue.
A great deal of clean up time issues are track dependent. Even if Race Control had brought the SMX field into the pits, that wouldn't have impacted clean up time and together with the time certain schedule, it wouldn't have had a positive schedule impact.
I challenge any competitor or prep shop owner to spend a weekend in Race Control. If you see something that can be improved and a way to accomplish that, I, for one, would be eager to hear about it.
I would say the AIM unit is a Solo 2 lap timer with the possibility of only RPM as extra data.
Brian
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
That sums it up very nicely. I would absolutely consider people that spend 5 figures to attend a week long event in Virginia as "customers." Fortunately, most of the workers I meet do recognize that customer satisfaction is part of the process.
I am disappointed that you admit that you don't consider participants as costumers., never mind, think that. Hopefully someone else out there has an open mind and recognizes this as a problem that needs addressing. The SCCA people that responded here clearly are happy with the status quo. Go ahead, have the last word.
I expect most "members" will feel like "customers" when they pay for their FT unit. :)
Peter,Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
(addressing this from a formula car perspective)
One thing that gets me is that for the most part we are clearing cars with the same equipment and personnel that do that job on the street. I know we cannot afford cranes and the like, but maybe spending time thinking about this would be more productive than a new rain light (small dig. :D)
Maybe it is about time we design a low flat bed trailer that has the capability of loading a race car quickly and is able to capture any fluid leaking. For example with dual winches to pull a damaged car on evenly. Special dollies to support a damaged corner.
Flat towing cars is a disaster waiting to happen (re FV at Indy) and a smaller truck and trailer can probably make it around much faster, especially if it is just a mechanical and not an accident.
I am also assuming (although will check when I am at Thompson in a week), that the current wreckers can be staged around the track and especially in areas known for incidents. I hope that someone meets with the new guys and they are trained on lifting and securing formula cars.
I am hoping like other pro racing, that areas are designated for race cars to be deposited after accidents and not have to go all the way around back to the paddock during a race. They can be moved after the race.
In the "old days" tire walls were just lose, woven tires, now it seems that they are banded or bolted together. (Probably designed for the heaviest car hitting them. Gerard Owen Callahan (FV) barely scratched the tire wall when he hit it head on.) This is a track question, but are they designed in sections for quick repair and do they have a tire truck standing by with loose tires (I know - Insurance, Insurance) or a new section for a quick repair? Would it be better to have a boom truck for this rather that tractors and fork trucks?
Maybe set aside time at the next convention for this topic - it would be great for the SCCA to lead this for other groups to follow. I am sure some tracks do these things better than others and we need that input.
ChrisZ
PS - All drivers should read GCR 5.4
How many accidents would have Flagtronics have prevented, Peter and Brian???
If there is no return on the investment than any person with a lick of common sense would not make it.
Perhaps the emphasis should be on selling what the Flagtronics will do for the "customer" and improving it so that it is simple to install in multiple configurations for tight cockpits, rather than just shoving it down people's throat.
You do have a way with twisting someone's else words to suit you agenda. It's a dual categorization which magically becomes only one when you need to march out your gadfly malcontent behavior. At no time did I say members are not customers. Perhaps you would benefit from reading the articles of incorporation and operations manual.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
So, no response to any other part of my post?
Chris,Quote:
Originally Posted by FVRacer21
How ES responds and with what equipment is largely specific to a given track. Road America is an example of a track that has multiple cut outs with access to paddock roads. Depending on the rental contract, a large number of fire trucks (with flat tow capability) and tow trucks and even Gehls can be stationed around the track. I think that describes your ideal situation WRT equipment.
The personnel/training situation at Road America is also of the highest caliber. Many, if not most, of the track's paid ES staff, started out as SCCA volunteers. When SCCA runs an event there Safety has been happy to use SCCA ES staff not just on club vehicles, but mixed with paid staff on track vehicles.
Tracks which host pro events tend to have things more developed in those categories. OTOH, they are much more expensive to rent than club only facilities. The situation is really all over the map. I haven't found any two tracks that do things exactly the same with the exception of those where SCCA provides all but the licensed tow truck driver. The prime example is Rocky Mountain Division where volunteer staff all work the three primary tracks; High Plains, Pueblo and La Junta.
In some cases, local ordinances specify who and how many people are required. Autobahn, Joliet being the example I'm most familiar with. Then there's situations like Road Atlanta where the ES staff is contracted by the track.
I've never worked an event as a steward where I didn't see room for improvement. There is no one size fits all answer save for the reality that each track is different and requires a willingness on the local region's part to work within the capabilities, limitations and requirements of the track.
I have not expressed an opinion on the Flagtronics in car system requirement. I have been responding to the complaint about a slow cleanup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
I'm pretty sure we are ALREADY paying HIGH ENTRY FEES. From my 1st Runoffs in 1980, we have progressed from getting the TWENTY FIVE DOLLAR ENTRY FEE refunded for showing up.. NOW.. we are at WELL OVER $1000 - whether you show up or not.. At the 'zero entry fee' times, we almost NEVER had FCY - rarely anything more than LY.. and F&C could clear most incidents in LESS than ONE LAP. I can't actually recall a SINGE FCY in my first 10 years of SCCA (IN MY CLASS). Of course, I have some difficulty recalling just what I had for breakfast yesterday... But I DO REMEMBER the $$$ fees from then to now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardingfv32
Steve, FV80
I can't think of any way that FT could have PREVENTED most of the accidents. The only one's that MIGHT have been prevented would be those that happened at least 2 turns ahead.. that triggered an FCY.. BEFORE some cars reached that area .. probably NONE. However, it is quite possible that FT could have REDUCED the # of FCY laps .. IF RC/EV had recognized that *ALL* cars had received and SLOWED to ... whatever Pink/xx speed they had dictated in order to release EV's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
I'm afraid that's about the best we can hope for. THAT is the reason I am now in favor of FT. If it allows EV to respond 'almost immediately' to incidents.. rather than sitting 'on station' for .. up to TWO (*LONG*) LAPS waiting for the field to get "under control", that seems a $$ benefit to me. I am NOT HAPPY about trundling around and around the track.. lap after lap waiting for EV to even GET ON STATION of an incident.. while I am PAYING (through the nose) for that 'track time'.
Steve, FV80
OK.. I will add some input to the 'HOW can I get FT into my formula car dash'? Here are a few examples of what some OW drivers have done during THIS 2023 Runoffs event. I found as many as I could on Friday while waiting for my race Saturday...
Although it WILL TAKE SIGNIFICANT *EFFORT* to make it work.. it CAN BE DONE in most cases. We just have to weigh off the (possible) benefits against the $$Cost and EFFORT.
Check a few out at
https://www.wedgeracing.com/2023/FT200_installs/index.html
Your are only evaluating the system relative to how it directly affects the driver. The competitor gains benefit from a better functioning race control, an emergency services group that functions better because of safer working conditions, etc. So unless you can appreciate that this sport is more than just about drivers, you will never see the value in the Flagtronic system. Fortunately SCCA saw the big picture and we are on the way to adoption.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
Brian
There is no special equipment out there. F1 for example uses the std flatbed. The SCCA clubs in Calif own there own equipment and it is all std stuff. We barely can afford that, something special who not be affordable. When you consider all the clubs that tracks see, all most everything is sedans or bikes. Why would they even considered something special. SCCA racing simply does not have the market power to dictate anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by FVRacer21
Face facts, fewer run groups (few entries) to provide buffer time in the schedule or special handling equipment is going to raise entry fees. Are these long delay FCY events really that frequent? One session a year maybe at worst. A pace car race maybe once ever 5 years. Do you want to pay a higher entry fee to avoid this very limited risk?
Brian
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
I gave you the last word. I am still waiting for you to explain why race control did not use the extra hour on Saturday to help customers return to green flag racing. Or why they did not roll the backhoe immediately after the FCC was called. Or why they did not have 2 backhoes. Or .........etc.
Once you objected to my referencing drivers as customers, any further discussion is pointless. That says it all. Everyone involved with SCCA knows that there are major issues that need fixing. When someone with knowledge of the inner workings continually denies these issues with unapologetic cheerleading and admonishes those stating the obvious, it is apparent why these issues continue.
I find your cheerleading sad and depressing. I have just had enough sadness and depression for this week, so will disengage. So once again, go ahead and have the last word.
Everybody else, have a great weekend!
I would suggest that the easiest way to 'make room' would be to move all of your switches to a separate 'vertical' panel attached to the lower left side of the front roll hoop (done that way in MOST FF/FC cars). That will leave you a good bit of space. Nudge your oil gauges more 'outside', then offset your tach to one side or the other and place the FT200 on the 'other side'. You can probably also rotate your tach so that 6500 points upward.. then you don't really need to be able to see the lower part of the tach, so you COULD move it down..and put the FT display center top.. with the connectors on the back passing underneath the roll hoop. Might take some 'playing around' with it, but it appears that you could probably locate it 'almost center'.. sitting on a tab of AL sheet bent at 90 degrees and rivited or screwed to the dash... I THINK :).Quote:
Originally Posted by Arbitrary
Your dash is 'allowed' to be CLUTTERED. Take a gander at MY dash. I had to move a LOT of things - see my post #421 - my dash is the bottom 4 shots.. from NO FT through 3 shots at getting it installed and viewable.
Steve, FV80
Chris brings up some good points, but the club doesn't seem to have the critical thinking skills possessed by many of its members.
You don't necessarily need special equipment, just a combination of equipment that's not currently used and folks trained to operate it. If you did have the luxury of specing and owning it, it could be hot-rodded for higher speed operation.
Avoid agricultural equipment and equipment designed to recover street cars. The first group is slow to move and the second is slow to operate, especially in recovering broken race cars in the grass. There are plenty of companies offering drop deck trailers. Spec one out long enough to haul two cars (or have two with standard pickups to tow them) and combine that with a boom crane truck capable of lifting 3500 lb without outriggers and you have the start of a tow team that can hustle to the scene and remove cars quickly. The truck at least, can be rented. The rest is training and practice to go as quickly as possible. It seems like in the days leading up to the runoffs, there's lot of opportunity to get in some practice.
Another question is why do these things go FCY as opposed to black all? Bring the cars in, allow the crews to do whatever they need to do with the idea that they have to do it quickly, and as the cleanup progresses, make the decision when to put the pace car and field out to make a quick start.
Yeah, black all has issues, overheating, difficulty in starting, etc. At the runoffs the crews are going to handle most of that with support equipment anyway. Circulating around behind the pace car counting yellow laps is a bit of nonsense though. It would require race control to look at the time remaining and make a call on how many laps, plus pace, will remain and get the word down to the competitors before the field rolls again.
I see you've found an excuse to avoid any effort to think about how to solve problems when it's so easy to sit behind a keyboard and critically lash out.Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
And just to repeat myself, I wasn't at the Runoffs and don't have any insight into the specific situation you're so eager to use as a cudgel. Same as you using customers as a cudgel to avoid dealing with he dual nature of anyone participating in SCCA events.
In situations where the track supplies the equipment, we're forced to work with what's available, but having equipment more suited to the task would be welcome. Most regions don't provide that kind of equipment as it comes with the track rental. If the track will allow a region to bring in outside equipment that should be looked at with the usual caveat about cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner
Circulating behind a safety car vs BFA is generally session dependent. Most stewards I've worked with (including myself,) use a BFA during practice/qualifying since there's nothing to be gained for the competitors from a FCY/safety car parade. That also applies to an extended local yellow during qualifying. In a race session the balance tips in favor of using the safety car for several reasons. During a race, cars under BFA can not be worked on in the pits until the BFA is withdrawn and the safety car begins to lead the cars back on track. Accumulating laps under an FCY becomes important for schedule maintenance reasons. In order for a race to be considered complete at least half the scheduled laps must be completed. Timed races need to reach half way with cars on track. Getting restarted is faster under FCY than BFA. Much faster. Much less prone to restart issues which can result in scrambling positions.
Also, generally, Race Control relies on ES/Corner workers recommendations for a race session BFA. At the risk of triggering he who shall not be named accusing me of blaming the competitors/members/customers, their behavior is what staff judges when calling for a BFA.
The most important thing I hope to communicate on this subject is that every situation is different and needs to be handled appropriately for that situation. There are guidelines and annual training to help. There is also post incident review, mostly informal, to see what could have been done differently. In many cases, Race Control uses the Back Up Operating Steward as a second voice to help with over focus/target fixation/local knowledge to aid the Operating Steward.
I renew my suggestion that anyone wanting to see first hand how things work in Race Control, make arrangements with an event Chief Steward to spend some time in Race Control.
What I'm still upset about is the fact that the SCCA gave the MIata's another 26 minutes of race time to complete their race on Saturday, however they couldn't nor wouldn't allow the FV's another 2-3 laps to finish their National Championship race under green, even with a race group removed from the schedule. I'm tired of the boutique groups receiving preferential treatment from the SCCA while we are denied the same options etc!Quote:
Originally Posted by problemchild
Mark Farnham
"Accumulating laps under an FCY becomes important for schedule maintenance reasons. In order for a race to be considered complete at least half the scheduled laps must be completed."
So what you have here is a set of competing priorities between this rule and a sacrosanct schedule. It seems like changing this rule as required gets rid of a meaningless yellow flag parade. The amount of racing is the same with BFA, just no parade.
The CRB awaits your letter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner
Nyuk, nyuk, nyukQuote:
Originally Posted by Peter Olivola
It's pretty obvious that rule only works under nominal circumstances. A plan never survives first contact with the enemy....
Then again, not my circus, not my monkey.
Seeing Steve’s simple and effective solution at the Runoffs made me wonder why this debate has carried on this far from a mounting perspective. But, as a potential competitor, I do understand any mandate that just complicates a build, and the checkbook.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Davis
Thanks for the time you took with us, Steve — and off-topic, same for the Farnhams, the Barrons, Terry Abbott, the Whitstons, the Carmodys, Dave Scaler, Donnie Isley, and their drivers, crews, and wives. The Brookshires were also awesome despite being in FE2 now. We really appreciated it and hope to move forward surrounded by the great people in Vee.
Back to topic...
I'm glad someone else used that old chestnut.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner
Mechanical Prototype with display separated.
Attachment 108675
Attachment 108676
Attachment 108677
James,
Will this prototype still have the 6 x 12 display .. presumably with slightly smaller LED's? Although I obviously have not seen it but I'm not a fan of a 2 x 12 matrix. The driver 'interpretation' of the screen info is 'not inconsequential' with the current display. I'm not sure that removing 80% of the display is a good direction to take .. we don't need to be trying to interpret 'morse code' from the cockpit.
The interesting thing about the CAN interface with (a few) data systems is really nice since it can 'TAKE OVER' the entire screen - i/e it gets a LOT BIGGER then there's something important to look at -- whereas the FT200, can't really do much to 'suddenly appear' when the data changes.
As discussed here, the biggest drawback to the existing unit is those CONNECTORS on the back. Ideally, the unit would also be 'less thick', but the connectors are the major concern. We were able to shoehorn the display into several Vees.. with a LOT of compromises. Remoting the display from the 'radio and 'smartness' parts would have been huge drop in effort to install in a small dash.
What is the actual SQ IN of the 'face' of this new unit compared to the old one?
I have more questions, but let's start with those and go from there :D. OH.. and there is not indication in your prototype about just WHERE and HOW BIG the connectors will be.
It was 'interesting' having it in my car.. but the lack of ability to position it so that it was in FULL VIEW at all times was MAJOR. I ended up seeing corner FLAGS *WAY* (>> 1 sec - which is a TON at 100 MPH) before I had time to divert my eyes from the track to the FT screen - even though it wasn't FAR... it was AWAY from my direct view. I think Donnie (car #30) had the only install that kept the FT200 'very close' to his 'view'.
Steve, FV80
So is the display the long skinny piece on the right???
What are the dimensions that can be expected to achieve?
Hi Steve,
Having seen your 'final' installation at VIR I think a pic would be helpful for many of us with a smaller dash. I agree with the comments in your last paragraph as those reflect the same concerns that I have. I also agree the the connector(s) for the prototype unit could complicate installing that version - having the option of a straight OR 90 degree connector would be very helpful in my opinion....
-Jim
Edit: Sorry Steve, I didn't see that you had already posted pics of these in several cars; thank you for doing that ;-)
i am going to assume they want to stay with a LED display. From what I have seen, full color LEDs do not get much smaller. You might be stuck with 2 x 12 matrix if that is the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Davis
it would seem some consensus is needed on what size the remote display should be. You are asking for Flagtronic to make something for a very small market with what sounds like variable installation requirements. Can a size be agreed on?
I would say we are looking at a remote display about .400" deep/thick connected with a pigtail cable. Is there really any need to change the main box connectors if it is remotely located?
So how is the display going to function? If it is going to be smaller than the FT200, then it will probably loss the use of letters/numbers. Can we get all the information we need from just colors that can be solid on or flashing?
Brian
5x12 with the same LEDs and minimized form factor with a flying lead that should be able to exit right or rearwards. We will likely offer the same inversion logic we do for the FT200 (it can mount upside down and there is a mode to flip all text and graphics) which means that the wires could also come out to the left too with the same mechanical packaging.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Davis
Yes, the long skinny piece on the right is a prototype housing for a remote display. Final dimensions not yet determined. The FT200 dimensions are shown a few pages back and we'll publish the drawing and a solid model step file or similar soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
I'm almost certain that with this configuration I'll have room to mount the display where my GPS-2 box is currently mounted (top center of the dash panel), and move the GPS-2 box elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by vtjballeng
As mentioned by someone else, it is just a Solo 2 DL. Could move only the tach to it. And I could also get a 2in1 oil pressure and temp gauge.Quote:
Originally Posted by iamuwere
It's certainly not impossible to come up with a solution. It just takes my time and money and I don't like being mandated to spend either of those when there is virtually no real benefits from doing so.
Really hoping to see a remote, flat mount solution sooner than later so I don't have some janky angle bracket holding the whole unit on the dash.
https://www.apexspeed.com/forums/att...d=108679&stc=1https://www.apexspeed.com/forums/att...d=108680&stc=1
Here is my attempt to fit it to my car (may be premature considering the new version that I see now.....SHT....) I tried three different spots and it interfered with my hands steering, or the wiring wouldnt work due to the hoop.... This is the third attempt. Only about 1/2" taller than the OEM rollhoop cover. Making my own harness next weekend or so depending on if connections arrive. Its a test but will see how next year goes.
Looks like a ton of work for what?? I know the what is somewhat controversial so do not flame me anyone. That is a very neat job. Now if that space was already not taken up by other things and if I could raise the top of the cowling a half inch and still see over it....
Yea, I will let my flaming opinion pass on the requirement but I am buying a spare cover just in case. I couldnt find anywhere else to put it as they all interfered with my hands. Its a tad bit taller than what was there but my new seat raised my but an inch so will see.. (Not to mention I am short.....) Yes. Not a simple implementation or bolt in but I did what I could under the circumstances. I should have waited for GEN2 shown above! That would have worked a lot better! Lesson learned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Demeter
I dont want to read through 12 pages of this, I think I have it figured out but can someone answer my questions.
1. Flagtronics is required only for the 2024 SCCA runoffs and beyond?
2. If you have an Aim Evo4s with a Formula Wheel what do you need to buy or do to get it to work through your wheel display?
3. If you want to buy a stand alone system and not run through the AIM, it's better to wait until the smaller unit is built? when will that be?
Thanks in advance,
Brian
What engine do you have?Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianT1
See above in red.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianT1
Need a TFT display only found on the latest AIM products.
Brian
I have a zetec engine.Quote:
Originally Posted by romoman