Did anyone see? - Page 3

MosquitoByte · 3 Nov 2007, 22:23 (Ref:2058870)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big_Trev

methinks ssracer is yet another CAMS plant, put on here to make a bit of mischief.

Hmmmm.... Why is it I wonder, that every-time someone asks a decent question which seeks to look hard at AASA rules/regulation, they are labels as a "CAMS PLANT"?

Such defensiveness could be construed as having something to hide.....

Or could it just be paranoia?

Fair's fair Big_Trev, if AASA supporters are going to ask hard questions about CAMS, it should be prepared for the same. If not, then perhaps it's time to get out of the sandbox and find a sport that is more suited to such infantile antics. Might I add, the same can be said for certain CAMS stalwarts who seem to have regressed to the self-same sand-box attitude.

End.

ssracer · 3 Nov 2007, 22:30 (Ref:2058878)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silver 3

I now get to SS's real point-- and that is " that the AASA event has a lesser safety standard and requirement"
Where is the evidence?

My point is not at this point in time about better or lesser safety standards, it is simply the existence of standards .
I go to a cams meet
and see something i think is stupid or unnecessarily dangerous, most of the time i can go to the cams manual and find that it was individuals not complying with the cams rules.
The same happens at AASA meets but there is no standard other than an implied standard carried over from the cams manual.

The management and maintenance of the cams manual must cost money,
my money. ( and yes it must cost cams money to use FIA standards )
Is this one reason AASA is cheaper, Sponging off other organizations.
CAMS can be fixed.
IF we end up with a private Enterprise monopoly we will all be far worse off.

Its not just roll cages, fuel tanks, scattersheilds, windscreens, seat belts,
The size of the flags,fire extinguishers etc... the individual items is not the point, its having standards that cover all.

Its not about CAMS or FIA other than at the moment those seem to be the Australian standards. CAMS competitors are paying for them and AASA are trying to use them for free. At the expense of making CAMS look expensive
My aim is to try to help get the playing field even
So that there is never a privately owned monopoly.

Trevor · 3 Nov 2007, 22:56 (Ref:2058902)

Maybe someone from AASA would like to answer ssracers questions, there are plety who read this forum.

I am no longer associated, so I am not the one to be commenting, so I will bow out.

pete55 · 3 Nov 2007, 23:11 (Ref:2058913)

If CAMS were doing such a good job would there be a need for an organisation such as AASA?

Silver 3 · 3 Nov 2007, 23:57 (Ref:2058945)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssracer

My point is not at this point in time about better or lesser safety standards, it is simply the existence of standards .
I go to a cams meet
and see something i think is stupid or unnecessarily dangerous, most of the time i can go to the cams manual and find that it was individuals not complying with the cams rules.
The same happens at AASA meets but there is no standard other than an implied standard carried over from the cams manual.

The management and maintenance of the cams manual must cost money,
my money. ( and yes it must cost cams money to use FIA standards )
Is this one reason AASA is cheaper, Sponging off other organizations.
CAMS can be fixed.
IF we end up with a private Enterprise monopoly we will all be far worse off.

Its not just roll cages, fuel tanks, scattersheilds, windscreens, seat belts,
The size of the flags,fire extinguishers etc... the individual items is not the point, its having standards that cover all.

Its not about CAMS or FIA other than at the moment those seem to be the Australian standards. CAMS competitors are paying for them and AASA are trying to use them for free. At the expense of making CAMS look expensive
My aim is to try to help get the playing field even
So that there is never a privately owned monopoly.

These are nitty griity issues of how the future is going to work. I do not disagree with the relevence of point being made. How are standards to be maintained? From my observation a lot of this area is a work in progress in many areas( there are clear examples where all existing are being maintained)
and the existing standards have provided a platform- that is true. Wether that is "sponging on Cams" or not is debatable-- I would make the point the point that the evolution of the rules and regulations has been the result of years of competitor contributions-- so why can that experience not then be applied in another place.?
The difficulty is that it has been impossible to alter Cams direction as it has moved from what we all still tend to believe is it's purpose. Unfortunately some still believe of that percieved purpose and cannot see the harm being done to the sport generally. As Pete55 correctly says-- AASA would never have a arrived if there was not some solid reasons. More than 1/2 the tracks in the country already run AASA events and that number is growing.That is a reason to jump into the system and help create a workable system SS that does satisfy yours and mine needs for a workable structure for the future.
Generally speaking Cams are only interested in what brings money into the Cams system eg " why would all the licence holders and members be of concern- they only contribute 3% of Cams income" or " our roll is to maximise the income to Cams" . That is from the paid hierachy at Cams-- and emphasized in the face of my incredubility. Now all that might be ok-- except when you then consider the way it was and is being applied-- needless to say-- I do not believe in the interests of competitors.The Cams system has become to entrenched and cumbersome to reform-- it needs a revolution-- or much easier - an alternative.