Timing transponders (merged)

[graeme]

Thanks for that, Jimbomit. It's amazing that a little communication can make you feel better about an issue. Are MST still giving a reduction on the price with the return of a Chronit? How much and how long for?

I remember the cut-off date for use of Chronits to be end of November (?) - anyone any ideas what's going to happen to races in December (Anglesey Circuit Club & Plum Pudding)?

[johnw]

Great letter Jimbomit.
Interesting to get such a detailed response regarding the decision - first time anyone has related the decision to the potential rebuilding cost. As I understand it the timekeepers still need sight of the competing vehicles, so I can't see how Transponders helped offset any of these costs. Can't say that I have noticed any rebuilt timing boxes either.

I shall be counting the number of timekeepers in attendance at future meetings, as the last time I entered the hallowed portals, there were 7 of them.

One thing. There is no explanation of why the whole timing exercise cannot be done electronically. I could assume that the humans are there as fallback in case of equipment failure, but it would appear that (in the 750 MC 's case there would never be enough of them to do this.

[jimbomit]

Totally agree, if this information had been clearly comunicated at the offset there would have been far less upset.

There are some follow on points however to keep in mind. As MST say, AMB have changed their decoders to only register their transponders. That is the action of a monopoly!! Their action dictates to the racer what unit must now be bought.

If the MSA had ruled on transponder and decoder specifications, they could have ensured anyone on the market had to decode ALL transponders, hence only necesitating a replacement once tours has broken rather than ceased being supported by a companies software.

The MSA have been requested many times to discuss this and have rejected each request. This issue is one I intend to follow up as there are some anomilies here as well!!! (Potential conflicts of interest etc)

As I have been led to believe, although transponders in most cases could be used to accurately time cars, race meeting are required to use the traditional light beam system for official timings. Transponders are used only to identify cars passing the beam.

MST timing who provided the answers in my mail above have an internet site which can be found in most search engines.

[StephenRae]

When John Ward says 'the price savings of supplying the cheaper Chronit were passed on' this is not true, had we been offered an 'approved' AMB at one price and spurious Chronit at a lower price then the risk would have been ours.
As is, Chronit owners are having to pay for a failed 'make more profit for MST scheme'.

[jimbomit]

Originally Posted by StephenRae

When John Ward says 'the price savings of supplying the cheaper Chronit were passed on' this is not true, had we been offered an 'approved' AMB at one price and spurious Chronit at a lower price then the risk would have been ours.
As is, Chronit owners are having to pay for a failed 'make more profit for MST scheme'.

What is also true is that we were NOT offered an AMB unit at one price and a Chronit at another. There was one price and one form to fill in, the only choice being battery or fixed.

The unit received was either AMB or Chronit, I know this as myself and a friend ordered within a week, he received an AMB, I received a Chronit.

[JNWRF01]

Does anyone actually know the price of these new AMB units at cost for the Chronit PX? I assume it will be a token discount (ie £20) rather than the real "at cost" price...

[jimbomit]

We should not let up the pressure.

The MSA timing meeting brought up Chronit transponders as an off agenda point at their meeting last week.

It was decided that the issue is not relevant as the cost is only equivalent to a tyre or two. . . .easy to decide when your company sells the replacement units.

Also no standards were proposed as the panel could not see how this could be done. . . . If your timing panel can't work that one out you obviously don't have the right people on your pannel.

If you are in any way disappointed, write a letter to the Chairman of MSA

Mr Graham Stoker

Motor Sports Association
Motor Sports House
Riverside Park
Colnbrook
SL3 0HG

Ask how persons with, potentially, a commercial vested interest in the outcome of a decision, no matter how impartial they may claim to be, can be making policy decissions. As a barrister Mr Stoker will be well aware of the legal obligations of companies to ensure fair practice is done and seen to be done.

[Chris Y]

Originally Posted by jimbomit

As I have been led to believe, although transponders in most cases could be used to accurately time cars, race meeting are required to use the traditional light beam system for official timings. Transponders are used only to identify cars passing the beam.

We still have not heard how the 'upper echelons' of the sport are timed - this would be a point worth persuing I believe. Do the touring cars, F3, etc. use a light beam for timing? What about F1? Do they rely on transponders for timing, or just identification?

Certainly things like F3, touring cars ave sector times, so I presume they have transponders - are they the same type, or uber-accurate ones?

[johnw]

Originally Posted by jimbomit

As I have been led to believe, although transponders in most cases could be used to accurately time cars, race meeting are required to use the traditional light beam system for official timings.

I have heard this too, but nobody has ever offered a reason for the requirement.

[Tick Tock Man]

Originally Posted by johnw

I have heard this too, but nobody has ever offered a reason for the requirement.

In circuit racing the key priority is to accurately record the times of cars as they cross the timing control line.

To be able to purely use transponders for timing it needs to be ensured that for all vehicles they trigger the timing at the same point each car breaks the timing control line.

Back in the old manual stopwatch days it used to be that the middle of the leading wheels (wasn't always the front wheels!) was the point the time was taken. When light beams came into use it was the leading edge of the car.

For transponders it would need all cars to have the transponder mounted in exactly the same position at the front of the car and as low to the ground as possible. This would be easy to achive in a one-make class but where there is a mix of vehicles it would not be possible. Also, the speed of the vehicle can have an affect as the point the transponder is detected is the same but the time between that and breaking the beam is greater if the car is travelling slower.

[Al Weyman]

That was a reasonably plausible explaination but I wonder if 750 can get away with 3 timekeepers (or less) then surely other clubs can and if so will they pass the savings on to the entrants to offset the costs of buying these things.

Oh and I hate that arguement about 'only the cost of a tyre or two'. What on earth has that got to do with the price of eggs, we still have to buy the 'tyre or two' so that is an often used and totally irrelevant statement usually used when justifing the latest increase in entry fees.

[graeme]

Actually, it's the cost of 6 of my tyres, and I only get through 4 at the most a year.

"Spending more on transponders than tyres"

[Chris Y]

Ok, so we are told that the beam break is the most accurate method of timing. Fair enough, but I've always wondered what happens when two cars (or bikes) cross the line at the same time. If one has already broken the beam (and is still breaking it) as another one crosses the line, how is that worked out?

Also, does F1/BTCC/F3 still use the beam break system?

[Tick Tock Man]

Originally Posted by Chris Y

Ok, so we are told that the beam break is the most accurate method of timing. Fair enough, but I've always wondered what happens when two cars (or bikes) cross the line at the same time. If one has already broken the beam (and is still breaking it) as another one crosses the line, how is that worked out?

Also, does F1/BTCC/F3 still use the beam break system?

First car to break the beam gets that time. Time for second car is calculated based on the length of time the beam is broken compared to the length of time it would be broken for bt 1 car. So if normal beasm break is 0.10s bur 2 cars break beam for 0.16s then second car is 0.06s behind the first.

As far as I know all classes of circuit racing in UK use a light beam.

[johnw]

Thank you for the reply TTM

Originally Posted by Tick Tock Man

For transponders it would need all cars to have the transponder mounted in exactly the same position at the front of the car and as low to the ground as possible. This would be easy to achive in a one-make class but where there is a mix of vehicles it would not be possible.

Why not? It would be easy enough to mandate (and verify) that the transponder is mounted in a plane between the front wheels. I can see that this might disadvantage those crossing the line backwards, but so what?

Originally Posted by Tick Tock Man

Also, the speed of the vehicle can have an affect as the point the transponder is detected is the same but the time between that and breaking the beam is greater if the car is travelling slower.

Not sure that I understand this point. Are you suggesting that the car which is travelling more slowly needs differentiating in the event of a "dead heat"?

I still don't see any practical reason why the timing and recognition cannot be entirely transponder driven, rather than using a light beam.

[Eddy V]

Originally Posted by johnw

I still don't see any practical reason why the timing and recognition cannot be entirely transponder driven, rather than using a light beam.

It is done this way, only using a transponder, in Belgium, Netherlands and Germany. No light beam is used here.
And with many different cars.
Belgium and the Netherlands use the right rear window mounted method, Germany uses the front right wheelarch, works even for the tracks where the pitlane is on the other side. And they all use those lovely AMB things.

[tete rouge]

We could always protest next year by not buying them, but renting to start with, this would mean that at any given meeting they would need upwards of 120 transponders available to rent, or go through the hassle of having to take them back after qualifying to give to someonelse to then have to re issue to you again for your race .But thats my antagonistic streak coming through.

[johnw]

Thanks for that Eddy.
I thought that was the case, so now back to you Tick Tock Man - why not here?

[MikeM]

I think the basic prices are as follows:-
Direct new - £165.00
Replacement - £135.00
Battery new - £180.00
Replacement - £148.00
Plus bracket, VAT and delivery

[Chris Y]

Originally Posted by Tick Tock Man

First car to break the beam gets that time. Time for second car is calculated based on the length of time the beam is broken compared to the length of time it would be broken for bt 1 car. So if normal beasm break is 0.10s bur 2 cars break beam for 0.16s then second car is 0.06s behind the first.

And they say the transponder method is inaccurate.. Who decides how long a particular car should take to cross the beam, and what if a car is slower than normal across the line? This must be a nightmare in multiclass races, where you might have, for example a Mini and a Corvette crossing the line together.

I know we're talking fractions of seconds here, but that's about the same inaccuracy as with transponders.

[R59]

What about the issue of that on the bottom of the time sheets, where it often says:

"Car xx, transponder not working - please fix it or you will NOT be timed in the race".

Now, how would it stand up in a court, not necessarily the MSA judicial system, if someone refused to run a transponder, raced, won the race, was clearly the winner, but the MST results didn't show that car, would the win be awarded to the first car across the line which had a (working) transponder, followed by protests, appeals, and legal action?

After all, the MSA states (in the Blue Book) that vehicles will be timed using the beam, and identified by the timekeepers by way of their racing numbers. Not by MST with a transponder.

Anyone with a regular winning car fancy trying out this theory?

Mr Birley.....????

Rob.

[johnw]

This seems to have gone dead.
Are you there Tick Tock Man? See posts 141 and 143.
Is there a rational explanation?

[Tick Tock Man]

Originally Posted by johnw

This seems to have gone dead.
Are you there Tick Tock Man? See posts 141 and 143.
Is there a rational explanation?

Sorry, been busy working.

Not going to help you much but as I don't know anything about the systems used in other countries I can't really comment.

One question though. If timing was purely by transponder and for some reason your transponder was not working (loose connection, blown fuse for example) would you be happy to not get a time?

[johnw]

Originally Posted by Tick Tock Man

.......One question though. If timing was purely by transponder and for some reason your transponder was not working (loose connection, blown fuse for example) would you be happy to not get a time?

Of course. It would be no different than the wheels falling off. Would however, expect to see a reduction in timekeeping costs.

Many thanks for the reply - now get back to work!

[soper]

Link below - Some interesting discussions from foreign parts about amb compatible transponders

http://www.rctech.net/forum/showthre...8&page=2&pp=30