Stupidity of Safety Car Rules

[storyline]

Race 3 at Oran Park this afternoon highlights the absolute stupidity of the CAMS implementation of Safety Cars in Australian Motor Sport.

Race 3 is the Australian Production Car Championship - with, as one of its drivers, a Mr. Colin Osborne (although it hasn't been determined exactly which Colin Osborne this is!)

OK - to state from the state I am working of lap time data here - so anyone that was there that can refute this - feel free.

On lap two car #2 (John Houlder) has 'an incident' of some kind and records a 2 min 38.9sec lap - nearly twice the normal lap time for both himself and most other cars in the race. So this lap time puts him WAYYYYY behind everyone else.

On lap 5 the safety car is deployed and brings the field under control (all lap times, with one exception, drop from around 1 min 26's-30's down to 2 min plus laps.

With one exception - Car #2, John Houlder, on lap 3 recorded a 1:23, lap 4 a 1:23, lap 5 (under safety car) a 1:24, lap 6 (green flag racing) his fastest lap of the race a 1:22 and finally a 1:23.

Ummm did I miss something here - but was the purpose of a safety car supposed to be to bring the field under control to allow something to be done on the track - remove a dangerous object (car, driver, debris) which usually required marshalls to be on or close to the track?

So WHY is a car permitted, regardless of HOW far they are behind the main pack, to maintian absolute race pace during this period?

Can anyone explain this to me because the way I see it - not only did car #2, John Houlder, ignore safety car procedures, he very likely put at risk a number of marshalls somewhere around the track.

Of course, with Colin Osborne present in the field (if this is the one that is CAMS President and not the 'other' Colin Osborne) does this negate common sense and throw any safety concerns out the window?

[alfacors]

Nick Dunkley and John Houlder had a slight touch and did the synchronised spinning coming off the bridge. The field passed them, and Dunkley resumed racing at the tail of the field. Houlder had some issues getting the car going again (was too far away to tell if he couldn't start it or some other reason). Safety Car is deployed and promptly picks up Nick Dunkley (nope, not the leader) - but in the meantime, Mr Houlder has managed to get the car going again and set off to chase the rest of the pack. Safety Car eventually waves through Dunkley and trundles around waiting for the leaders (Briffa/Ryan/Russell) to catch up. The field takes a while to catch up to the Safety Car (due to the strange timing of its deployment), and Houlder is basically around 3/4 of a lap behind the Safety Car (at one point less than the length of the straight between them!). So Houlder is driving fast to catch up the field (as he is required to do), but obviously his laptimes show he wasn't buttoning off (as he is required to do). So his hands are tied, does he trundle around at 70% pace and not have a hope of catching up, or does he continue at fullpace knowing full well that there is no track blockage, and no marshalls cleaning the track of assisting cars etc?

So yes, Safety Car was deployed at a strange time, and it picked up the wrong car as well (took 1/3 of a lap before they waved him through). It was also deployed so far ahead of the leaders, it took almost two laps for them to catch it.

I'm not sure what Colin Osborne has to do with it, unless somehow he has radio contact with Race Control and deployed the Safety Car himself. He's competing in the race, and that makes him a competitor and nothing else.

[storyline]

Colin Osbourne - he was simply in the race - but thats a story fore another day.

From what you are saying, the spin Houlder had - and from the lap times - happened on lap 2 but the safety car, according to the lap times at least, didn't come out until 3 laps later (the lap times and lap chart suggest car #7, Leigh Mertensa was involved in this but you can't say for sure based purely on the data).

But either way - there HAS to be a mechanism in place to stop cars racing around under the safety car regardless of where they are on the track.

Or does it take someone possibly being injured before CAMS does something about it? I would have thought with their pronouncements on OH&S over recent months that this should be at the top of their list of things to fix.

[alfacors]

As I stated - in this particular case, there was no track blockage, nor were any marshalls involved in assiting Houlder. So whilst Houlder was at full speed, he was not endangering people any more than during a normal race.

If you bothered to read my post at all, you'll see that it was Dunkley and Houlder that spun. I'll even post a photo if you want. But you seem hellbetn on relying on lapcharts to form the basis of your arguments as opposed to someone who was actually there and witnessed the entire race.

And yes, please leave your beef with Colin Osborne out of posts and threads that have no connection to him whatsoever. It makes you look like a small petty vindictive man Stephen.

[BigDaddy]

Seems to be heating up in here

[storyline]

alfacors - once again wrong person.

But I'll ask again - Houlder appears ot have spun on lap TWO - correct or not?

The times indicated by those published indicate the safety car on lap FIVE - correct or not?

Or are the indicated times wrong? Because if the times, as published are correct, and what you say is correct (that a spin by Houlder and Dudkley caused the safety car) then they just don't match up.

I'm not trying to argue with you or anyone - just trying to make sense of what the data shows - and your vesion doesn't match with the data and the data doesn't match with what you are saying.

As for the other thing - I left it with a 'no comment' - so there was no need to bring it up again.

[Mark Twain]

A good old fashioned arm wrestle will settle this argument I believe.

[storyline]

Possibly - so you can see where I am coming from here are the lap times:

http://www.natsoft.com.au/cgi-bin/re...2006.ORAN.R3.I

In particular check the times for laps 2 and 5.

[alfacors]

Okay, here we go again. You're trying to make sense of laptimes ONLY - it DOESN'T work unless you know the story behind them.

As I said, it took nearly two laps for the field to reach the Safety Car due to it's wofeully timed deployment. At once stage it was only the length of the main straight behind John Houlder (the last car in the field!)

Lap times do not tell the whole story and in this case, not even part of it. They only become relevant once you realise the timing of the Safety Car deployment - which I have already explained.

[alfacors]

Further explanation.... there should be no doubt about the race times or laptimes after this post! :P

Lap 2 - Dunkley and Houlder tangle and spin. Dunkley recovers after the field passes - dropping his laptime to a 1:49. Houlder is stuck (for whatever reason) and finally gets going a longtime after Nick - hence the 2:38 lap.

Safety Car is deployed and proceeds to hold up Nick Dunkley (lap 3 - 1:42). Dunkley is released and chases to catch up to the field (again).

The field is way behind the Safety Car, so they continue at quickish pace for Laps 3/4 until they finally hit the SC at Lap 5 - and all their laptime increase.

Dunkley doesn't actually catch the field until around the dogleg/final corner - so his laptime isn't affected much (Lap 5 - 1:28).

Houlder is so far behind (almost a lap behind the Safety Car) that he continues at racepace to catch up the field (which he doesnt - he is still 14s behind by the finish of the race).

Leigh Mertens pitted for unrelated reasons to the Safety Car - his laptime is irrelevant to the scenario.

[storyline]

OK - I understand how you have described it now.

The unfrotunate part is - this makes an even bigger mockery of the use of a safety car to 'slow and control a field' because, and yes going purely by lap times, only four cars have backed off their race pace for more than one lap (Best, Keene, Ryan and Briffa) - every one else is within 1 to 2 seconds of their fastest lap.

So maybe the problem here is a double whammy?

Refusing to slow down (aren't yellow flags waved all around the circuit during a SC period in which case lap times should have increased) and the CofC not knowing how to use the SC properly?

[johnny yuma]

I can tell you alfacors there is no chance you can crack the storyline nut.
He does not seem to understand or even read posts with a different
point of view.Might as well talk to a post as send one.

[JABWOA]

Or how about when drivers/cars have an accident, they stay accidented so if a circuit shutdown is required (and filters through to all points) there still is an accident to respond to. See this happen before (more with reds - get called and then the car drives away...)

[storyline]

Originally Posted by johnny yuma

I can tell you alfacors there is no chance you can crack the storyline nut.
He does not seem to understand or even read posts with a different
point of view.Might as well talk to a post as send one.

Regardless of how you want to look at it, the fact is that when the safety car was out there were cars out ther that did NOT slow down - alfacors confirmed that, lap times confirmed it. Does this mean it is acceptable for this to happen?

[alfacors]

So is this the fault of the SC rules as laid out by CAMS - or is it the fault of the CofC who deployed the car when the field was nowhere near the incident or the SC? Do the rules state the SC must be deployed immediately? Or should it wait for the leader of the field? If someone has the guidelines for deployment of the SC, can they please post them?

[storyline]

Generally SC rules are spelled out in individual category regulations - I believe they were written for inclusion in the NCR's but, like many other rules, they may have been 'lost in transit' within CAMS National Office. As to when it should be deployed doesn't really matter. Personally a SC should go out as soon as an incident requires one - let it bunch the pack up and then sort out the order once the incident has been dealt with.

From memory, when the safety car is out on the track, the entire track is under 'Waved Yellow Flags' - PVDA could possibly confirm what drivers are supposed to do under these conditions, but a noticeable reduction in speed is supposed to be one effect this flag condition has.

I am not sure anyone can say this is the fault of the SC rules or the CofC - but what SHOULD have happened is that those cars you identified a 'trying to catch up' should have been charged after the event (at a minimum) or, prefereably, been black flagged during the event.

I guess the 'argument' comes down to perception - just because there are no marshalls on the track doesn't excuse anyone from not reducing speed under these conditions.

The problem is - this isn't the first time this has happened and, most likely won;t be the last. But, CAMS as the regulatory body, MUSt start cracking down on this behaviour if their role is to have any meaning.

The last thing anyone wants to happen is for someone to have a mishap - for example, a marshall is directed to retrieve something on the track whilst under SC conditions only to find, after the main train has passed his point, that a follow up vehicle is still driving at 10-10th's trying to catch up to the pack and comes up on a marshall(s) working on the track.

[johnny yuma]

what was wrong with the old system where yellow flags were waved immediately APPROACHING the incident. Then you dont have to guess where.Lets keep safety car for major-major stuff--or would this upset the providers of Safety Cars with their advertising signage ?

[storyline]

Technically there should be no diffrence between the old Yellow Flag rules and SC rules - with the exception that SC rules apply around the entire circuit - yellow flags were localised areas.

So, under the old ruls, a car COULD go hell-for-leather once out of the 'danger' zone. But under SC rules they should be at a reduced pace around the entire circuit - thu sth equestion in the title of this thread.

[racer69]

That is how it should be, but take a V8Supercar race for instance, half the field puts the foot down harder when the Pace Car comes out, they go all-out to get in and out of the pits as quickly as possible so they don't lose track position............

It's interesting, i was watching the 1996 ATCC review last week, at Mallala there is a major accident on lap 1 of one of the races, taking out 3 cars on the left hand sweeper of the back straight. The cars are left there (right on the edge of the track) for the entire race distance, not even the hint of a safety car is mentioned..........

[JABWOA]

And under the current rules, a stranded vehicle is covered under flags for upto 4 laps and then is deemed to be part of the circuit. Okay, allow room for extreme safety (ie car blocking track) but when just off the circuit or off race line, leave it be. For risk management purposes, adopt the british exclamation boards...

[Jacal]

From the Description of how far ahead the SC was and how long it took the field to catch up, it sounds like the driver of the Safety Car wanted to join in the race.

Surely the simplest solution once the safety car had been deployed and the situation realised, would have been for the driver of the SC to slow down, the field catches him quicker, the field then slows down to the speed of the safety car, the people lagging behind catch up quickly, and racing resumes with only 1 lap lost. But then common sense isn't always present at a racetrack.

[johnny yuma]

Safety Car is a misnomer. It is really a pace car.No matter how timely it's
deployment,it will never happen as quickly as a flaggie putting out the yellow the second an incident happens.By the time the safety car comes out its ancient history.IMHO the safety car thing grew out of "race management" for TV at the 1000,and now everybody wants one for better or worse.

[storyline]

JABWOA - have you got a reference for this (the 4 laps?) - I know it has been 'discussed' at various race meeting sbut no one has been able (or wants to) to produce anything like this in writing.

Jacal - in theory this is what the SC is supposed to do - slow the field down for the safety of workers on the track AND to allow the entire field to bunch up. But where this all falls apart is when cars are waved through to allow the leader to be at the head of the pack (no argument about this part) - the problem, here though, is that the cars are expected to get around to the back of the pack ASAP.

Maybe a 'technical' way to over come this is to have these cars move 'backwards' to the rear of the pack (i.e. they have to literally pull over and wait for the pack to go pass them, and have the timing system credit them with that lap to stop them from being artificially put down a lap.

johnny yuma - Nop argument on the naming of the vehicle - the whole reasoning belongs to one person alone withiin CAMS for being so hard-nosed about what it was to be called - the FIA called it a Safety Car therefore Australia was going to do so reagrdless of what anyoe thought (except at Calder btw).

The other issue with SC's is that very few people have actually been trained in how they should be used - from all descriptions Oran Park is a prime example of how NOT to use the SC - but the problem at OP is the entrenched race control staff (Does Mr. Chisholm still plonk himself in the back corner where he can't see anything and let his half dozen or so 'assistants' do the work for him? Or have they finally moved on?).

And don't get me wrong - SC's DO have their use during bad accidents - Sandown last year when the car rolled over the barrier, Pukekohe - accident where there is a LOT of clean up - but the reality is that the various race contropls are letting the drivers get away with driving at RACE SPEEDS when the whole track is under a SC situation.

[johnh875]

If you are looking at the usage of Safety Cars, how about the grief caused at Pukekohe when the SC was launched immediately after Bowe's accident because it was actually needed. There were complaints that it did not "pick up the leader"... What a joke.

[storyline]

The SC does NOT have to pick up the leader if used correctly - I have said, and others have as well - the SC when needed should just GRAB the field regardless of who they have behind them.

If those in Race Control are competent enough (and the current incumbants are not) they should then let the SC circulate and FIX THE PROBLEM on the track first and foremost. Then, once the incident that required the safety car is under control (not necessarily fixed) then, and only then, should race control start tosort out what needs to be done to cars behind the SC.

The unfortunate part of SC use in this country is that those that KNOW how to use it properly, ie NASCAR, are shunned by the likes of those who control Australian Motor Sport - they would do well to have someone (and not Schenken) go over to the States and be taught PROPERLY. That person(s) should then be brought back and when a SC is called for, he, and only he (or she) should be the one in RC who then sorts out what to do with the train behind the SC.

The problem is that some people in this country believe that they know how to use it - and so very obviously do not.