If I were still track chair and I had an entrant who had 2 spins and an incident in one day I would send him packing. That he eventually hit the wall would be an almost inevitable outcome of his obvious inability to drive at the pace he was trying to. To somehow imply that it was his instructor's fault is pushing it IMHO. I assume you thought the instruction given was "turn the traction control off and try to drive "flat out"". Isn't it much more likely he was told to "turn it off and drive very cautiously unitil he feels the difference"? The fact that he only heard half the instruction can hardly be blamed on an instructor.

Would you rather have the student thinking he was a driving genius as he hauls around the track bouncing against his TC or would you prefer he learn't the limits of adhesion and the importance of smooth driving? Although the outcome of this driver's actions are regrettable I would hope he left the track a wiser man/woman.

I think I mentioned earlier that I do not believe that elecronic interference does anything to make us better drivers.

 

Psst, He was running TC off because the instructor told him to. I would differ in that the instructor was pushing him beyond his limits and the Instructor has the responsibility to reign the Student in if he is getting over his head.

You don't need to wreck a car to become wiser, that only makes you poorer in the $$$$.

Peter

 

I have confirmed the PCA has no formal policy. That means its up to each region to decide for themselves how to handle this issue. Having had this conversation, I think it makes a good topic to discuss over the winter (for us).

There are few rules at apply to every driver/instructor situation but I think its clear that this technique of instructing should only be used on a vary limited basis and only for the Most advanced driver, who has otherwise mastered his vehicle. So I would lean toward a rule that still puts the discretion on the instructor as to who, and when, but the guidance should be that its used on only the most advanced student.

We can't control what they do when we are not in the car, but we can when we are, and that is how I would recommend to our region we go about it. Criticisms?

 

I may have made a foolish assumption here. When you talked of this liteny of incidents I assumed you were talking about an advanced student (ie no instructor actually in the car). If an instructed student had 2 spins and 2 incidents in 2 days I would have plenty to say to the instructor and the student. As I said earlier if a Green or Yellow student are using their Nanny to survive then they are probably going too fast (for their level of skill).

I didn't however say that you need a wreck to become wiser. My only hope was that if a wreck occurs that the driver learns something from it.

 

[QUOTE=todinlaw;7916380]There are few rules at apply to every driver/instructor situation but I think its clear that this technique of instructing should only be used on a vary limited basis and only for the Most advanced driver, who has otherwise mastered his vehicle. So I would lean toward a rule that still puts the discretion on the instructor as to who, and when, but the guidance should be that its used on only the most advanced student.
QUOTE]

My only concern would be that (and you would need a lawyer to figure it out), if the descretion belongs with the instructor then so to dosen't the liability.

If it were me I'ld still make it clearer and simpler. Green and Yellow always ON. Solo groups at the driver's discretion. If the instructor thinks he is going to die because of control OFF tell the student to slow down. If that doesn't work tell the student to pit and get out. If the instructor thinks the student is suffering because of control ON tell the student why you think they could benefit, tell them that if they do go without they should slow way off pace until the know what will happen and then leave it to the driver to make their own choice. A willing student will hear a good instructor.

 

[QUOTE=jittsl;7916922
My only concern would be that (and you would need a lawyer to figure it out), if the descretion belongs with the instructor then so to doesn't the liability.
.[/QUOTE]
This is an excellent question. When you are instructing in PCA you are in effect an employee doing the work of the region. The Key is as long as you are following the rules and exercising good judgment you are OK. Meaning the PCA 10 m policy will cover you. It is only when you do not follow the rules of the PCA and the region that you expose the club to risk. This is the short answer but you are golden with this issue if you stay within your job description and its rules. (PM sent with the long answer)

As to discretion of the instructor, just about everything an instructor does is discretionary in terms of the judgment calls you make with a few exceptions. The judgments you make about the student's ability, if they are safe to solo, or even take the next lap without pulling in. The only thing that I can think of off the top of my head that is not discretionary is allowing a pass without a point.

 

The only cars I've actually experienced where the electronic systems were effecting proper car balance was at Pocono in M3 BMW on the full Banking. I believe some of the Mercedes also had situations but that was years ago. So much more sophisticated now. Use it as a tool when coaching.