On event scrutineering.

[Simon Hadfield]

This coming weekend at Oulton Park we have the reappearance of on-event scrutineering.
Was nothing learnt during the COVID fun and games experience?
It seemed to me that the self declaration scrutineering concept was far more grown up and elegant than the previous regime.
When in many places such as in the USA - the most litigious society known - they can scrutineer once and that is accepted for an entire season what makes our way necessary?
With the self declared concept were there more failures? Were cars less safe? Did accidents due to poor preparation increase?
As compliance scrutineering is done in or after parc ferme I can’t believe that cars have become less correct in a way that they are going to be spotted in the shed in the morning, in fact I was told by a senior MSUK scrutineer that this is not what was being looked for in any case.
It also appeared that the ability of the scrutineers to roam around the paddock looking at cars “undressed” was just as useful and productive, if not more so, than a brief look over a car in a shed.
Would MSUK like to tell us what was so bad about the way we scratched that itch during COVID?

[zefarelly]

I always thought scrutineering on the day was purely about safety?. The Goodwood method always made more sense than everyone causing a traffic jam in the paddock at busier meetings . . . .

obviously weather can play a part there, a shed to shelter in can be useful.

[midgetman]

I totally agree Simon, online scrutineering makes a huge amount of sense.

Given that the car is taken away from the Scrutineering Bay, wheels changed, bodywork/wings may be changed, engine may change - what's the point? It's like an MOT - only valid at the time the tester walks away.

When we scrutineer the karts on Saturday evening, it's very likely that only the frame remains the same on Sunday morning. Always strikes me as a waste of time when our overnight work isn't re-checked.

Sent from my AC2003 using Tapatalk

[The Fat Clerk]

Originally Posted by midgetman

I totally agree Simon, online scrutineering makes a huge amount of sense.

Given that the car is taken away from the Scrutineering Bay, wheels changed, bodywork/wings may be changed, engine may change - what's the point? It's like an MOT - only valid at the time the tester walks away.

When we scrutineer the karts on Saturday evening, it's very likely that only the frame remains the same on Sunday morning. Always strikes me as a waste of time when our overnight work isn't re-checked.

Sent from my AC2003 using Tapatalk

As both a Clerk & a Steward I can only agree 100% with both Simon & Midgetman.

[Newall Andy]

Worked great for the vast majority of us... then some idiot at Donington this year got caught with a set of belts two years out of date , declared 2026.

[Duddha]

Originally Posted by Newall Andy

Worked great for the vast majority of us... then some idiot at Donington this year got caught with a set of belts two years out of date , declared 2026.

Something that has happened in other countries too.

[Simon Hadfield]

Ok, there’s always some numpty somewhere but the odd outlying car apart is that really why we have to go back to the Stone Age? As MM says very often wheels, setup, possibly roll cars, you name it, are changed after scrutineering so what is actually achieved that wasn’t by the self declaration concept?
What should have been done to the competitors who tried it on was that they were named and shamed and lost their licence for the rest of the year. That would have very quickly disabused those who might have been tempted.

[The Fat Clerk]

Exactly.
To my mind the only people that should be looked at and looked at thoroughly, are the first timers, people that have never raced anything before, because at the moment they can sign the declaration genuinely not knowing that their car or their Helmet / Overalls etc have something terribly wrong with them.

[Lancsbreaker]

CSCC this weekend are only doing limited scrutineering (for one series, I think) - and coming to the competitors in the paddock. I agree that a more broad-brush approach, with limited spot-checking seems much more sensible....and anything that gets away from having to push a race car around first thing in the morning because of the "no racing engines" curfew has to be welcomed.....

[Simon Hadfield]

An interesting article in yesterday’s Autosport on this very subject.
I think the CSCC and others doing maybe one series per event is a concept with legs, but in reality this idea of having your car scrutineered before a meeting, actually like quite a lot of regulations in motorsport, is a throwback to the “old days”.

[delta]

Simon and others , How many times have I said we need log books. Simple. Yes blooming simple !!!! but no body listens to me.
At the start of the year or your first race the car gets scrutineered. Any problems are reported and noted in log book. Next meeting you turn up with your car with log book and have completed any changes to the car. If you have an accident at a meeting the damage gets noted in log book and then again next meeting car gets checked. This system is used in hill climb and we run in Holland where there is one scrutineer and he can check 30 plus cars and he also races himself.
OK might take a bit of getting sorted and used to but this will solve all these issues.
See you in the Que at Oulton.

[Duddha]

Originally Posted by delta

Simon and others , How many times have I said we need log books. Simple. Yes blooming simple !!!! but no body listens to me.
At the start of the year or your first race the car gets scrutineered. Any problems are reported and noted in log book. Next meeting you turn up with your car with log book and have completed any changes to the car. If you have an accident at a meeting the damage gets noted in log book and then again next meeting car gets checked. This system is used in hill climb and we run in Holland where there is one scrutineer and he can check 30 plus cars and he also races himself.
OK might take a bit of getting sorted and used to but this will solve all these issues.
See you in the Que at Oulton.

Interesting Iain, did you know there is a log book in every HTP

Page 25 and 26 for reference........

[zefarelly]

Originally Posted by Newall Andy

Worked great for the vast majority of us... then some idiot at Donington this year got caught with a set of belts two years out of date , declared 2026.

Then there's the issue of whether they're legit, copies, or mum sewed new tags on

[midgetman]

Autosport tackles this online today. Don't know if you can read the link as it's possibly behind a paywall.

https://www.autosport.com/national/n...edoms/6653580/


Sent from my AC2003 using Tapatalk

[Robert Farrell]

Originally Posted by Simon Hadfield

Ok, there’s always some numpty somewhere but the odd outlying car apart is that really why we have to go back to the Stone Age? As MM says very often wheels, setup, possibly roll cars, you name it, are changed after scrutineering so what is actually achieved that wasn’t by the self declaration concept?
What should have been done to the competitors who tried it on was that they were named and shamed and lost their licence for the rest of the year. That would have very quickly disabused those who might have been tempted.

Judging from the post it would appear the offenders were discovered. The system worked?