Otto Mechanic

And of course, this is the safety argument taken to the extreme; have someone wrap you in bubble pack, put you in a hospital bed in a steel re-enforced concrete bunker with a TV set and feed you through a straw. It's the only way to be safe.

I've participated in many different extreme sports over my life and have the injuries to show for it. Hang gliding, rock climbing, technical diving, horse racing, skydiving and ski racing to name a few. All of them have guidelines, none have requirements other than levels of certification. For "insurance reasons", a hang glider pilot needs to be qualified to fly at certain sites, though those requirements are never enforced. Similarly, a diver needs a certification card to buy certain gas mixtures, but no one checks your certification anywhere else (maybe on recreational dive vacations and no one ever shows their advanced certs to those people or they get weird).

The point is, individual safety equipment is the responsibility of the operator, not the sanctioning agency. How the motorsports community became wrapped up in insurance concerns that mandate personal safety equipment escapes me; I'm unaware of any other extreme sport that suffers from that particular albatross.

Regardless, the subject of the OP's post was a community opinion on safety equipment for DE events other than a fully prepared race car. The question itself rules out the answer "a fully prepared race car". The continuum of legitimate answers would include those that don't specify a fully prepared race car.

multi21

I agree with the above. A middle ground can be found. The only caveat is what happens when you have a relative novice in a 991 and you're the instructor.... these newer cars today get up to ridiculous speeds, sometimes higher than race cars with no safety equipment at all. Couple that with the fact not all race tracks are equal.... crashing into a wall at Fontana is different than running into the dirt at Buttowwillow and yet I've seen a bone stock M5 go off into the dirt and do five 360s.... luckily the student and instructor walked away but if had been Fontana the ending might have been different.

ajcjr

Thanks again for all the posts, i have learned a ton about different point of views of being on the track. Whats weird is since i raced in a car i want to make sure i have the best safety i can to a point yet i do track days on a bike with no cage lol. I do wear an airbag suit while on two wheels as i feel that is the safest equipment you can buy. A cage wont guarantee you anything but i do find it odd that some people will jump into these supercars and go flat out with jeans and a helmet. I will admit i did one track day in my 997, i knew i wasnt going to push it but it was in the back of my mind about the danger of wearing just a helmet and normal street clothes.

I would most likely not race this car as i would rent a race car in the series i want to run, i thought about putting a bolt in cage , seats, belts, and a few options in my 997 but its a non S and didnt know about dumping $10k into a 05.

Otto Mechanic

And there are even places at Buttonwillow it would have been different. But any good engineer will tell you you can't design for the worst case. If you do, either the economics will kill your project or its "weight" (complexity, presence of mostly useless parts) will.

Ultimately there's no way around admitting the sport itself is inherently dangerous and involves a personal understanding of "acceptable risk". If you can't deal with that, you should stay at home and watch other people race on TV. Of course, then you risk death by potato chips and beer. I prefer the track myself.

Danger is, in and of itself, the price we pay for the experience and nobody cheats death.

LuigiVampa

Despite where people are trying to drag the conversation I believe this thread has been mainly been about where the middle ground is between a fully prepared race race and bone stock, which are the two ends of the spectrum.

The problem is that the sanctioning body, as well as the track, has to be concerned with safety because in order to operate there has to be insurance. The insurance companies have certain requirements in order to issue the policy. That is how they get involved and why it is not up to the individual.

As a PCA instructor I totally agree. The newer cars have high horsepower and a ton of nannies which let green students drive very fast and get in over their heads. I do a lot of instructing at Lime Rock and for a good portion of the track there is no runoff. It can be scary.

Regardless of each of our opinions I think everyone here is passionate and only wants the best for our sport. Better to be in front of a problem than react to it.

Otto Mechanic

How did this happen is my question? When I was a hang glider pilot, as members of the USHGA we each carried $1 million in liability insurance. To fly in County, State or Federal Parks, we were required to be certified as Intermediate Pilots at minimum and to carry that liability insurance. There were no specific personal safety equipment mandates; if we killed ourselves flying the only concern was for damage to other people or property, for which we carried insurance. No personal injury insurance was required.

So how did this go so wrong with motorsports? Why is anyone concerned with my personal safety? I assume risk when I participate in the sport. The level of risk I assume is mine to decide.

Facility insurance? Take a lesson from folks who operate dive boats; they have no liability if I die while diving from their boat as long as it's no fault of the boat. No one checks to make sure my regulator or BC works, I'm supposed to do that.

A private citizen who grants access to their land for my use as a hang glider launch or landing zone assumes no liability for that use. If you've ever landed on the pastures of Washoe Lake in Nevada, killing a cow is your personal liability, not the landowners.

This situation has yet to be explained to me. Why is a track owner liable for my actions while I'm using it? My personal safety? It seems patently absurd.

LuigiVampa

Because "when in doubt sue everyone" has become pervasive in society. It's the same reason why a ladder costs so much and has tons of warning stickers on it. It's the same reason why criminals sue a homeowner when they fall on the property of the people they are trying to rob.

If I were to let hang gliders use my property I would require a release. Sadly, it is the way things are now.

Otto Mechanic

No doubt on the release, everyone does that. I get a release to allow anyone on my property, unless I have a release they don't have permission and are trespassing. Trespass still has significant legal weight.

But of course we all sign releases when we use tracks so that's not really a problem because we're talking about liability for personal injury. If I carry insurance in the event I harm you or your property while I'm doing something, you claim against me, not the landowner. The landowner has the release indemnifying him/her against any claims I might make for personal injury. If the terms of the release include me having liability insurance, the landowner is safe against anything other than negligence. If, by my action, I harm anyone else or their property, it's my liability. The only person liable for injury to me is me.

This model works quite well for everyone else. Why is it a problem with motorsports?

Other sanctioning bodies make this work. It's not new. If I fall and seriously injure myself while participating in a US Ski Team sanctioned Men's Downhill racing event at Soldier Mountain Idaho (which I have personally done), I can't sue Soldier Mountain. That's just the way releases work? Soldier Mountain doesn't check my bindings before letting me run. They don't have to. They don't care if I strap my skis on with deer hide and bear fat.

Olemiss540

To say "people sue and it's just the way the world is" is a copout and inherently denies each of us (as members of these different car clubs and racing bodies) our responsibility in this hobby to maintain logic in our opinions instead of "its safer so its better" as a general rule regardless of car type, ability, and cost.

How anyone can speak so definitively on the risks of HPDE (not racing) is amazing when incidents are shrouded by a cloud of mystery and data is not readily available.

A brand new Z06 in the wrong drivers hands is an extremely dangerous situation compared to a brand new stock Miata driven by a pro. We have to recognize there are different ends of the spectrum and should not speak in blatant generalities sometimes IMO. Inclusion is the only thing that is going to keep this hobby progressing regardless of the "lawsuit culture". More enthusiasts, driving more events, and feeling a part of the larger group is what should drive our decisions with safety a VERY critical component.

ace37

Otto Mechanic

You had a passenger? In that case I'd say the "angry widow" problem is related since if you had a fatal accident on the track with someone other than your wife I'd expect her to be angry?

Putting humor aside just for a moment, I, like you, can imagine situations in which other people will do unreasonable things and make unreasonable claims. Both fortunately and unfortunately there is no law in these United States that can ever prevent you from bringing a law suit before a court; it can't be done. Just as there is no equipment you can install on your car that will make you immune from injury while operating it at the limits of its abilities. You were wise to pit in the situation you describe and I've done exactly the same myself. Congratulations on surviving the Darwin test.

But that isn't the point is it? It's not even the subject of this thread. The question concerns what community standards regarding reasonable safety measures might be taken in a DE prepared car. For my money, there's no reason to believe anyone is qualified to answer that question with authority and it belongs solely to the driver because the decision doesn't effect anyone else. In short, it's no one else's business. In long form there's no hard data to support any opinion.

So we can make recommendations. Relate anecdotes. We are in no position to make rules.

LuigiVampa

Let's back it down a notch and perhaps we can agree that everyone here is passionate about protecting our hobby, albeit with different ideas on how it should be done.

One of things I have learned on Rennlist is you never know who you are speaking with. I once was debating something with a guy who turned out to be a professional driver - boy did I feel like a dope trying to explain to him my thoughts on racing as I only race with PCA.

The point I am trying to make is this is the internet and we all have our opinions. I like to think that some of my opinions are based on the incidents I have seen at the track over the years, observations as an instructor, and having worked in the world of insurance as an attorney years ago. Do I have all the answers? No. Am I right about everything? Just ask my wife - of course not. But I think my opinions are informed and I am not just speaking out of my a$$.

As to your remark that my answer was a "cop out" I would only state that the fact that the US has a lawsuit culture is very well documented. To deny that this culture has a bearing on DE events is a cop out. I've spoken and exchanged emails with the PCA's attorney about liability at DE events regarding a certain issue. Trust me - insurance and liability do drive decisions!

Who do you think makes the rules and how do you think the rules are made? What data do you think is used?

If you think some of these important decisions are made much differently than the debate we are having on this thread you would be wrong. Talk to some of the PCA honchos and ask them how they come up with the rules. It's a bunch of people from different zones and regions debating like we are right now.

jdistefa

I'm late to this thread. Is there something I can argue about?

multi21

What oil do you use?

LuigiVampa

/thread