Carrera51

This is a good discussion and I hope some good comes out of it. None of us is getting paid to PCA Club Race. We all pay to be there, buy our own tires, brake pads etc. If our car gets hit or has an up close and personal with the armco, the money to fix it comes out of our own bank account. We all want good clean racing when we take the green flag. We don't want the rules so tight that club racing turns into DE.

I think the PCA officials are listening. They changed the 13 rule because we all wanted it changed. I remember seeing guys have there weekends end because of single car incidents. In the old days, if you went off by yourself on cold tires in a practice session and hit the tire wall, your weekend was over. We got that changed. Lets keep the dialogue going. This thread is a step in the right direction.

winders

Charles,

I am right there with you. Personally, I always back off a inside pass attempt if I don't think the driver I am attempting to pass does not see me.

I have gotten the nose of my car to the steering wheel of the car I am trying to pass and backed off because I didn't think the driver saw me. He should have, but probably didn't.

Here is what the PRC racing guidelines have to say:

Similar Speed Cars Racing for Position

Responsibility for sharing the space in the corners rests with both drivers. Any move that creates an overlap between two cars will be considered a pass in process, and the adjustments required to speed and trajectory for two cars to safely negotiate the corner without contact, should be made by both drivers.

In assessment of an incident, majority blame for the incident (and 1st candidate for penalty) will be allocated to the driver with the trajectory and speed deemed least likely to succeed in negotiating the corner. This can be an assessment of line, speed or deviations. Information will be collected from both drivers; flag marshal witness, radio communication to Race control of the incident and from any witness and any in car video if appropriate images are available.

A driver who regularly positions himself or herself on the single car qualifying line is inviting a racing line pass by similarly competitive cars. The qualifying line is not considered the racing line and an overtaking car accepting the invitation down the inside will not be unfairly assessed for racing. The car going down the inside must demonstrate they have adjusted their speed and line accordingly to allow them to safely negotiate the corner from the inside line. The driver on the outside must accept they have left the door open and the car going down the inside will need sufficient space to negotiate the turn - even at reduced speed. The car on the outside will need to adjust their speed to safely negotiate the corner without taking their qualifying line to the apex - if this is obstructed by the overlap created by the car on the inside.

Scott

hf1

^ Beautiful PRC guidelines. Almost 100% the same as the ones enforced by Skip Barber and very close to the emerging consensus in the two threads on the subject here.

I'd copy them word for word in the PCA rulebook and repeat them at every driver's meeting during the first 1-2 years.

consolidated

If something like that were adopted I believe the number of incidents would go down once understood and applied.

flatsics

Link to PRC guidelines

http://www.nasaproracing.com/rules/P...-Challenge.pdf

Appendix C: Guidelines for Racing pages 23-30

ProCoach

I have a problem with this. It sounds like something Scott wrote!

I don't have a problem with this statement: "We will be looking for all drivers to accept responsibility for making safe passes."

I DO have a problem with prohibitions against going more than "2-wide" at the start at a majority of Eastern and Southern tracks PCA Club Racing races include. Can you imagine? Half the field at Sebring, COTA and the Glen would be thrown out!

Keep reading and you'll find all kinds of difficult to mediate transgressions.

Also, if I do my job correctly and am on the most desirable, proper and data-supported entry geometry into a corner, I am certainly not "inviting a pass," nor will I stand for reckless behavior resulting from an over-opportunistic dive-bomber getting off scott-free (pun intended ) taking a line in next to me that FORCES me to think for the BOTH of us!

Without GPS-based mapping, incident trajectory plotting and looking over data traces for speed, longitudinal deceleration g's over distance and time, I can't see any way to administer this. I certainly don't see the additional workload required for non-profit group like PCA, as opposed to the for-profit group that penned this.

The diagramatic last few pages seals the deal for me.

Racing is not like this. You cannot choreograph down to the last detail, trajectory and geometry EVERY conceivable passing scenario. You CAN say, "don't hit each other" and provide for penalties if that happens.

You CAN also say that we're there to take care of ourselves first, our friends on the track second. You can also say that there exists a fault-based system to assign blame to identify people who just don't get it and to allow for greater scrutiny for a limited period of time those who made an honest mistake.

I'm with Glen. It's simpler than we're making it out to be, but the NASA rules aren't it.

Any of you race with them in the East? Wonder how THAT is working for you?This codification has been in existence for some time, and it's not being enforced because most of the staff at these events this side of the country don't have time or resources.

Yes, I do race with NASA and yes, I do win and NO, there is AT LEAST as much egregious contact as I have witnessed this year at PCA CR Sebring/Road Atlanta/COTA.

Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater...

Gary R.

You are kidding, yes?.. Lets see who guesses who I am talking to..

ProCoach

Kimi. YES!

Kimi admitted that he can trust some drivers and not others.

“I mean sometimes you have to be with some guys, because you cannot trust them. If I take the top maybe five guys, you trust them, and you know if you are there they are not going turn into you, or they are going to race fair.

“We can be hard but we can be fair. It’s OK to be aggressive, but you have to have some idea behind an overtaking maneuver, even if you are aggressive, and not just have a hope, ‘He’s going to move over.’ You know certain guys will race hard and fair, but some guys for sure you know what to expect.”

rkirshner

I'm relatively new at racing and have learned a ton by this discussion.May i ask a question about racecraft. i understand that if there is significant overlap in a corner the overtaken car should leave racing room for the overtaking car. when this happens ,or at least when i have done this ,there sometimes are a number trailing cars that see this and follow the first car through . So how do you allow room for the first but not the others .
i know one of the answers is that if the others are there they are probably faster but this is not always the case ,eg at the start .
thanks

Gary R.

It's called a "train" and once you are caught out there is nothing you can do but race side-to-side until you get an opening. Or ram your way back in, but that won't work out well..

hf1

I only referred to the quoted passing guidelines and not the whole book. After reading it again, I think even the quoted passage was a bit wordy and could be made leaner and simplified but I thought it contained the basics around which a consensus was starting to form in the two threads here:

1. Co-exist
2. Leave racing room when overlapped

IMO of course, but the above two concepts would lead to the least loss of momentum, improved flow, and minimize incidents because of less abrupt steering, braking, and weight transfer which is when most unplanned mishaps and surprises occur. But this is just IMO.

I agree.

Mahler9th

The text Scott posted was apparently taken out of context.

1. The Appendix in the PRC rules are guidelines. They only apply to PRC races under NASA sanction. These only take place in NorCal and at two tracks: Sears Point and Thunderhill.

2. They weren't written by NASA. They were written by a veteran racer with extensive experience. He has been racing since 1965. And he has had access to folks involved in serious pro racing, e.g., IMSA and GrandAm. Folks involved at high levels with teams supported by PAG. And stewards for groups like GrandAm.

3. They "work" well for us... they haven't been changed in 10+ years. But they don't work by themselves. We have frequent discussion, and as I said, we have twice had to have mandatory meetings (separate from driver's meetings) to remind everybody of what they are supposed to do.

My previous reference to the Guidelines and Scott's posting weren't intended to suggest adoption by PCA. My personal belief is that PCA has a fine program and expectations are well-communicated. But if PCA Club Racing officials and participants feel it would be even better to have something in writing to which to refer, our Guidelines can be taken as an example of one possible approach in terms of format.

Mahler9th

I don't believe that there are striking differences between what NASA is trying to accomplish as compared to PCA. The PRC has a close relationship with NASA's leadership team and race officials here in NorCal. In fact several of our wives are NASA officials. What people want is safe and fun racing. That isi true for everyone I have ever met with NASA and with PCA Club Racing.

And as for "enforcement" of PRC guidelines for racing, there is none. They are guidelines. They create an opportunity to be on the same page in terms of expectations and create a vehicle for communication. We have no 13-13. We do have incidents and "consequences."

I think one thing that I would encourage if I were part of a racing sanctioning group like SCCA, NASA, BMWCCA and PCA would be to visit the other folks' events and share best practices. See "how they do it," with an eye toward continuous process improvement for my organization.

As the writer of rules since the beginning, that is a practice I followed. And I think our chief steward has done so informally as well.

esscape26

The PRC guidelines are intrusive. Go back to the earlier or the basic (not sure) NASA appendices on what constitutes an incident. Those made more sense.

winders

That may or may not be true depending on the corner. You do understand that, don't you?

Scott