FIA-approved rain lights required starting 1/1/2024

[Rick Kirchner]

Steve - that's what the club needs to move into the future. Get rid of the comp board. Make the classes self governing. Come up with an equitable voting system. Register the cars.

Who was the FC guy that proposed this change anyway?

[JoshuaJustice]

Not sure how this would work with SCCA because of the size and the fact that car owners are not registered.

Car owners don't need to be registered. Just ask everyone who's run an event with the affected class(es) in the past (insert time window here, I'd suggest the past season). Yes, there are rental car guys that won't know what to answer, but they can ask the guy who they're renting the car from what to answer (or not vote at all, or indicate that they're giving their vote to the person they rent cars from as a proxy, or...).

Simple. Yes, there will be some people who leave a class that "shouldn't" be voting and people who are just joining a class who "miss" a vote, but as long as turnover isn't some absolutely massive number year-over-year, that's not an issue.

[Steve Davis]

The VOTE proposal is .. interesting.. BUT.. in all the years I've been a member (closing on 50.. but might not make it), the ONLY HQ THING that a member gets to VOTE ON is the BOD member for his region/division.

Presumably, the reason for that is that only a small percentage of the entire membership participate in 'ONLINE' stuff routinely (the BOD votes are handled by MAIL.. IIRC through some 'certifying agency' that, no doubt, COSTS MONEY). That would take a MASSIVE SHIFT of .. "the way we do things in SCCA". Of course, it IS a CLUB. All we should have to do is .. what most of the regions have already done.. .write it into the Bylaws so it CAN be handled 'on line in some way' at some future date.

Easy peasy.
Steve, FV80

[Peter Olivola]

But Peter, Just how convinceable do you think they will really be. This is proposed as a safety issue, correct? If that is the case the BOD would be hard pressed to vote it down.

I think what will make it into a more sensible proposal is if the CRB modifies their proposal.

In AOBA powerboat racing, when a rules change was proposed, every registered owner of an affected boat got a ballot in the mail so that there was control by those spending t6he money.

Not sure how this would work with SCCA because of the size and the fact that car owners are not registered.

Should a proposal require only a simple majority? A super majority?

In over 55 years in the SCCA, I've seen few things that could garner a simple majority much less a super majority.

The joke about two stewards having three opinions about something works equally well for the overall membership.

[bassracer]

I respect someone telling me my wheel safety pin is not secured.
Or that they found a nut/bolt loose while looking over my car
Or that a Dzus fastener is popped on grid
Or that it looked like I have a drip/leak of any fluid.
Or that I may have not noticed them in my mirrors in a given moment.

Maybe we can politely police each other?

[Steve Davis]

There's (at least) one more thing that hasn't been mentioned in this CRITICAL ISSUE for SCCA... there is NO RULE IN THE GCR that *requires* anyone to turn the blasted rain light ON .. UNLESS the Operating
Steward 'designates' "this is a RAIN RACE - turn your lights on".. I'm am reminded of this because I just ran a MAJORS .. we were sitting on the grid, following a rain shower and looking at a WET TRACK.. but only sprinkles were falling at that moment. Grid personnel came to each car to let us know that the Steward had NOT declared that this was a rain race, so we didn't NEED to run our rain lights...

I ran my, obviously out of date and INFERIOR Afterburner anyway.... and on the pace lap it started RAINING AGAIN.

Steve, FV80

[JoshuaJustice]

the Steward had NOT declared that this was a rain race, so we didn't NEED to run our rain lights...

Important to note in your scenario that if the stewards decided to flag the race for rain and call everyone in the pits they'd have 15 minutes to change to wet tires, but if the race had been declared a rain race from the get-go, that option would not be available.

[Steve Demeter]

Peter, A simple majority. What else. I really dislike your rhetorical questions.

Another point comes to mind :

Why are not all classes required to meet the same rainlight standard? The requirements for most safety items (think helmets, gloves, restraints, shoes, HNR, suits, underwear, etc) ? If FIA rain lights are what it takes to make Formula cars and sports racers visible, what is any different about nay other class?

[jphoenix13]

What you cannot see behind me in the FM is the line of about 4 CF's - I have a very bright rain light.

[Peter Olivola]

Peter, A simple majority. What else. I really dislike your rhetorical questions.

They aren't any more rhetorical than some of the hyperbole being offered up as unfounded outrage.

Given how the membership responds to any question, a simple majority could be 1/2N+1 where N is a small percentage of eligible voters. Is that any better than electing BoD members who appoint the CRB? I think it's just changing the flak catchers.

[Steve Demeter]

Peter,
I agree 100% that a small portion of the eligible people would bother to vote. Then bitch when it turned out different than they hoped for.

[Steve Demeter]

What happens if someone's FIA sticker falls off on the track and can not be found? Do they have to buy another ??? expensive rain light?

[Rick Kirchner]

Peter, there is no reason that the classes cannot govern themselves in this day and age. There's also a much more equitable means of determining who should have a say and how much.

Each car owner gets a vote. Each driver gets a vote for each race entered. Rental drivers can proxy their votes to the car owner if they wish. This rewards the participants with having an equitable say in the rules. You have a class points keeper position that tracks car ownership and participation.

Rule changes get released for vote at designated times of the year.

[Peter Olivola]

Peter, there is no reason that the classes cannot govern themselves in this day and age. There's also a much more equitable means of determining who should have a say and how much.

Each car owner gets a vote. Each driver gets a vote for each race entered. Rental drivers can proxy their votes to the car owner if they wish. This rewards the participants with having an equitable say in the rules. You have a class points keeper position that tracks car ownership and participation.

Rule changes get released for vote at designated times of the year.

You haven't gone far enough. Each class should get to handle its own sanctions, insurance and event organization.[/s]

[Peter Olivola]

What happens if someone's FIA sticker falls off on the track and can not be found? Do they have to buy another ??? expensive rain light?

We lose tech sticklers, particularly in the rain, all the time. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

[DanW]

We lose tech sticklers, particularly in the rain, all the time. Doesn't seem to be a problem.

True, it won't be a problem until one's next annual or Tech at a super tour or major has it on their secret checklist.

First, the FIA's rain light standard/specification is inadequate as written. I write standards and specs as part of my job. There are parts of the spec that are not objectively verifiable when the "spread across the source can be classified as "nominal". How would a lab measure "nominal" and put a number on it as part of the test report? There is no definition of "nominal" in the spec.

The rule is unevenly applied to sports racers and formula cars. If a rain light is required, it should be for all cars. As far as FIA certification, that's a hard no. NO SFI certification either. Neither need our money.

Manufacturer can self certify the rain light meets the current FIA standard. My letter is written and ready to mail.

[Rick Kirchner]

You haven't gone far enough. Each class should get to handle its own sanctions, insurance and event organization.[/s]

Nice attempt at misdirection. Try to compose a legitimate argument.

[Peter Olivola]

Nice attempt at misdirection. Try to compose a legitimate argument.

It's at least as legitimate as any of the hysteria being posted on this subject.

[Rick Kirchner]

Peter, your positions would have more gravity if you actually owned a car and drove.

in this century...

[Peter Olivola]

Peter, your positions would have more gravity if you actually owned a car and drove.

in this century...

Oh? Is that the only qualification for having a different perspective?

[FVRacer21]

Okay - this thread is done.

Write your letter and get ready for round two.

ChrisZ

[Todd Butler]

I respect someone telling me my wheel safety pin is not secured.
Or that they found a nut/bolt loose while looking over my car
Or that a Dzus fastener is popped on grid
Or that it looked like I have a drip/leak of any fluid.
Or that I may have not noticed them in my mirrors in a given moment.

Maybe we can politely police each other?

With all due respect, not a snowballs chance in H*ll.
When drivers are reluctant to file protests against other drivers for on track incidents, and they want every incident called in by every corner and want the Stewards to adjudcate every incident, this results in mandatory cameras and the associated "discussion" about cost, and what happens if video not available etc. Expecting drivers to politiely police each other?????

There are some sanctioning organizations that do have class defined rule sets that they vote on at the beginning of each season.Their structure and their bylaws allow this and provide some defined structure for a) who gets to vote and b) what counts (ie 50% + 1 or super majority etc) as approval. It would take a pretty big change in SCCA structure to go that direction likely requiring a vote of the members to change bylaws. And that vote in the Catch 22 department would take a paper vote of the membership to go to electronic voting.

[John Nesbitt]

...

There are some sanctioning organizations that do have class defined rule sets that they vote on at the beginning of each season.Their structure and their bylaws allow this and provide some defined structure for a) who gets to vote and b) what counts (ie 50% + 1 or super majority etc) as approval. It would take a pretty big change in SCCA structure to go that direction likely requiring a vote of the members to change bylaws. And that vote in the Catch 22 department would take a paper vote of the membership to go to electronic voting.

We do have experience with self-defined class rulesets. For example, in my experience in the 2000s as CF driver rep for WDCR, the local CF driver community (i.e. MARRS competitors) voted every year on rules. To this day, the MARRS SSM crowd maintains its own rules, as do other MARRS-specific classes.

Keep in mind that these are Optional Regional Classes, specific to MARRS, with very small populations. Even SSM boasts fewer than 100 (maybe 75?) drivers. So, small, manageable groups, whose members all know each other personally

Whether this model is transferrable to Majors classes nation-wide is another question.

[Todd Butler]

We do have experience with self-defined class rulesets. For example, in my experience in the 2000s as CF driver rep for WDCR, the local CF driver community (i.e. MARRS competitors) voted every year on rules. To this day, the MARRS SSM crowd maintains its own rules, as do other MARRS-specific classes.

Keep in mind that these are Optional Regional Classes, specific to MARRS, with very small populations. Even SSM boasts fewer than 100 (maybe 75?) drivers. So, small, manageable groups, whose members all know each other personally

Whether this model is transferrable to Majors classes nation-wide is another question.

Good point John. I've also seen the same with Regional Only/Local classes. That works because everybody pretty much knows everybody else. Also somebody or a small group of somebodys steps up to put out the proposals, keep track of the input, put the revisions out there and then there is that issue of who is a valid voter for a set of local class rules and how it gets approved. It still takes volnteers to put in the time and effort to drive it. There's also a trust issue (see above everybody knows everybody) that assumes the proposals are generally agreed for the good of the class and not just the fast guys or the guys with deep pockets trying to maintain a competive edge over the rest of the field.

CRB for all it's percieved faults exists to try and provide reasonably level playing field between cars in classes and deal with overall safety requirements. Probably 90% of the class rules change requests are from competitors. Even if we did abolish the CRB and go to self governing class rules, there would still need to be volunteer committees much like the CRB advisory structure to solicit/write/publish those class rules. Self governing class rules can work locally, but when you go nationally, I believe the only viable options are SCCA/CRB-like models or Benevolent Dictatorship (eg NASA or Pro Series) unless one surrenders and says "no guarantee of competiveness" and run what you brung like Champ Car or Lucky Dog.

[BLS]

What does that matter?
We are not rocket scientists. We are racers putting lights on our cars to help with visibility in the rain.

This is a completely artificial crisis which needs to be resolved with a simple common sense solution.

Why? Because there is a wide variety of LED output values, some so small that 100 of them wouldn't be visible at night across a room, much less in the rain. Some would not put out light in the visible band, rendering them useless.

I'm not making a judgement about the need for a rule change and I personally think the proposed requirement is ridiculous. But counting LED's is as useless as it gets. No rocket scientist needed for this, any plain old ordinary electrical engineer that deals with LED's can tell you this.

[problemchild]

Why? Because there is a wide variety of LED output values, some so small that 100 of them wouldn't be visible at night across a room, much less in the rain. Some would not put out light in the visible band, rendering them useless.

I'm not making a judgement about the need for a rule change and I personally think the proposed requirement is ridiculous. But counting LED's is as useless as it gets. No rocket scientist needed for this, any plain old ordinary electrical engineer that deals with LED's can tell you this.

I don't care. This is a completely artificial crisis which needs to be resolved with a simple common sense solution.

I went away for 4 days and this thread continues. So many important issues to fix in SCCA, and we waste time on this.

[Steve Demeter]

Greg is right. The whole thing could be handled any number of ways. For instance: make the requirement an DOT/ SAe approved light to such and such standard. They are plentiful and inexpensive and the approval self certified by the manufacturer is engraved in the lens.

I have been using motorcycle combo tail light, brake light, license plate light with all 30 LEDS wired to be on at once. I have reached out to the manufacturer (Muth Mirror Systems) to find out what the illumination in candla at 24 deg and 4 deg is. this what I recall being referenced in the FIA standard. So picck a standard that is reasonable and make t a minimum.

On the subject of lost FIA stickers they are much more involved than lost tech stickers since you have to get therm from the FIa. A tech sticker can be replaced by going to tech with your logbook and they can pull your sheet for the event and issue you a anew sticker.

[BLS]

I don't care. This is a completely artificial crisis which needs to be resolved with a simple common sense solution.

I went away for 4 days and this thread continues. So many important issues to fix in SCCA, and we waste time on this.

Doesn't matter. The suggestion to count LED's is not a way to solve the rain light "issue" being discussed nor the solution to the ills of the club.

[bassracer]

With all due respect, not a snowballs chance in H*ll.
When drivers are reluctant to file protests against other drivers for on track incidents, and they want every incident called in by every corner and want the Stewards to adjudcate every incident, this results in mandatory cameras and the associated "discussion" about cost, and what happens if video not available etc. Expecting drivers to politiely police each other?????

I don't disagree, just trying to keep a perspective that this "problem" doesn't actually need to involve the officials and can be supported through mutual respect for safety. Especially if specific specifications are not regulated and some of the economical solutions listed in this thread are possible - there is little excuse to be a stealth car in the rain.

[924RACR]

So... everyone have fun in the wet/damp Sunday at the Sprints?

Turn 1 for P1/P2 was definitely a wall of spray on the start of the race, looking from the back... and I was following Mike, the letter writer, into the mess.

I, and those with me (judging by my rearview camera) were smart, played it safe, and left some space into 1, at the cost of some distance lost to those in front. Which we easily made up into 5.

Then my race fell apart with the return of a bad coil connection, but that's another sob story.

How did everyone else find it? Didn't seem like we lacked for FIA lights... and I'm 99% sure I saw a P1 with (flashing, probably FIA) lights - yes, more than one - mounted so badly they were heavily shrouded and nearly impossible to see on the pace lap, without spray (God knows I wasn't getting close enough to see the car once we launched)...

[Steve Demeter]

When is the BOD expected to vote on this proposal?

[John Nesbitt]

When is the BOD expected to vote on this proposal?

Normally they vote on the accumulated recommendations at their December meeting.

[Lotus7]

I've suggested this multiple times in the past:

I think each posters 'signature' should include the date of their last involvement in a sanctioned race event ...
(mine was last week)

then everyone could decide, prior to responding, if they actually cared what someone who hadn't raced in xx years actually thought

YMMV as they say

[CheckeredFlag]

Based on the August preliminary minutes posted today, the FiA rain light is here to stay. Plan to buy the spec FiA light or not race SCCA. They clamped down pretty hard on the opposition.

August 2023 Prelim Minutes 07.13.pdf (connectsites.net)

[Matt Clark]

Based on the August preliminary minutes posted today, the FiA rain light is here to stay. Plan to buy the spec FiA light or not race SCCA. They clamped down pretty hard on the opposition.

August 2023 Prelim Minutes 07.13.pdf (connectsites.net)

so as was mentioned previously in this thread, when do we see minimum requirements for the sedan people too?
oh, wait....

[924RACR]

"Thank you for your input."

Lazy bastards.

[John LaRue]

"Thank you for your input."

Lazy bastards.

Perhaps you should volunteer to serve on one of the advisory boards.

[CheckeredFlag]

Perhaps you should volunteer to serve on one of the advisory boards.

Is that supposed to be a joke? The advisory committees have absolutely no authority. Thanks but no thanks. I see what's going on with how the CRB and BoD are treating the CSAC with those T5 classification and Dodge Neon stunts that were pulled on them, forcing a later retraction of those non-CSpec cars.

[problemchild]

Not a surprise. When your customers complain and challenge your authority, double down and show them your power.

The old boys club thinks it is 1973.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Based on the August preliminary minutes posted today, the FiA rain light is here to stay. Plan to buy the spec FiA light or not race SCCA. They clamped down pretty hard on the opposition.

August 2023 Prelim Minutes 07.13.pdf (connectsites.net)

And the Flagtronics in car flagging system.