Brands Hatch - proposed changes. Poll Added.

[Piglet]

Originally Posted by mattt

DTM would want Graham Hill Bend changing given the fact that only a couple of the drivers took the corner correctly more than a few times across the weekend. at times it looked like a challenge to see who could be furthest away from the track

Do you know that or are you just guessing?

[Christian Devereux]

I, like most of the old folk on here, loved the old GH bend, and find the current corner awkward and gawky.
So on that basis, if they wont put it back to how it was, I'm game for a change.
As many have said, it should reward a good exit from Druids, but there doesn't look like there's much room for run off, and considering we'll be arriving flat in 3rd or maybe more, there could be a few more visits to the paint shop.

[m1fcf]

Originally Posted by mattt

DTM would want Graham Hill Bend changing given the fact that only a couple of the drivers took the corner correctly more than a few times across the weekend. at times it looked like a challenge to see who could be furthest away from the track

and hands up anyone who thinks they will obey the new track limits coming out of the new piece of track onto the back straight?

[Andrew Busby]

Originally Posted by Christian Devereux

I, like most of the old folk on here, loved the old GH bend, and find the current corner awkward and gawky.
So on that basis, if they wont put it back to how it was, I'm game for a change.
As many have said, it should reward a good exit from Druids, but there doesn't look like there's much room for run off, and considering we'll be arriving flat in 3rd or maybe more, there could be a few more visits to the paint shop.

Precisely

[mattt]

Originally Posted by Piglet

Do you know that or are you just guessing?

i was on post 8 at the DTM meeting so could see how far wide they were going


re-reading my post maybe a retweek to the first few words would have been advisable but its a bit late now lol

"i wouldnt be suprised if DTM would want a change ...." but then again i posted it in a rush so the sarcasm didn't come across correctly

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by johnw

Do though remember races being run in both directions and I drove it anti-clockwise in a single seater on a Motor Racing Stables course.

The Hutchinson 100 bike race was run in the opposite direction.
If it does get altered just leave the original corner there and still use it, the new bit could make a decent run off with cones !

[johnw]

Limited video but as you say Gordon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwINcFAshlM

[terence]

In actual fact,a change of Gh would be quite nice,hopefully the topography will not be altered,ie,a bit of a banked corner would be really good.

[cliveagyoung]

NO NO not another hairpin on a JP circuit.
Looks as if instead of collecting the marshalls post on the infield down from the paddock we will now have the good fun of meeting a spinning vehicle coming off the inside of paddock....
Give us back the OLD "Bottom Bend" Mr Palmer...Please.

[adam46]

Just leave it as it is, to many alterations to a great recipe always spoils anything.

[Andrew Busby]

If you wish to express your view please go to www.sevenoaks.gov.uk and follow the links to planning applications and join the 33 formal objections to the plans already posted......

[Piglet]

Originally Posted by Andrew Busby

If you wish to express your view please go to www.sevenoaks.gov.uk and follow the links to planning applications and join the 33 formal objections to the plans already posted......

... and your valid planning reasons for objecting are?

[ascarmarshal]

Originally Posted by Andrew Busby

If you wish to express your view please go to www.sevenoaks.gov.uk and follow the links to planning applications and join the 33 formal objections to the plans already posted......

I think the public consultation ended in November and the council don't have to take any notice of comments received after the consultation ended. There have been no local objections and the Parish Council are for the plans. So comments placed on the website after the consultation ended can be ignored by the planning committee. I expect the plans to be passed and the work to be done next winter

[Thundersports]

Not going to happen...........

[McMuttley]

Originally Posted by ascarmarshal

I think the public consultation ended in November and the council don't have to take any notice of comments received after the consultation ended. There have been no local objections and the Parish Council are for the plans. So comments placed on the website after the consultation ended can be ignored by the planning committee. I expect the plans to be passed and the work to be done next winter

...as a 10/10th and a town planner (sorry) - any comments made up to the date of the decision have to be taken into account. That said, i've tried to look at the Sevenoaks website on numerous occaissions over several weeks from various computers and never been able to view the application - always says not available. Maybe a 10/10th planning barrister can lodge a JR againt any planning permission on the grounds of failure to consult properly!!!

Otherwise, think i'll carry on turning left at the same old place and send MSVR a packet of grass seeds.

[Tim Falce]

All the objections seem to be from racers or spectators so I doubt they'll be taken into account from a planning perspective. To try and stop it I would think we need to lobby Dr J but if everyone is like me then apathy will rule.
For what my opinion is worth I now like the look of the revised layout apart from the hairpin.

[Chigley]

For God's sake leave classic circuits alone!!!! It's not an unsafe corner so they can't use safety as an excuse. Hasn't enough damage been done to classic circuits already. Look at the carve ups at Sillystones and Snett.

[Andrew Busby]

Originally Posted by McMuttley

...as a 10/10th and a town planner (sorry) - any comments made up to the date of the decision have to be taken into account. That said, i've tried to look at the Sevenoaks website on numerous occaissions over several weeks from various computers and never been able to view the application - always says not available. Maybe a 10/10th planning barrister can lodge a JR againt any planning permission on the grounds of failure to consult properly!!!

Otherwise, think i'll carry on turning left at the same old place and send MSVR a packet of grass seeds.

Determination date was 27th December at which point there were 31 objections lodged on the website. You say they will need to be taken into account; presumably the thoughts of spectators / competitors don't have as much weight as local Parish Council or neighbours or do they? Would also be interested to know if 31 objections is a high response rate?

You're quite right the website is often down but this morning it appears OK.

In response to Tim's post, I have created an online petition at www.twitition.com/9dsmc where you can add your name to the 177 already there.

I understand that following their interview with JP before Christmas MotorSport will be running a piece on this in their next issue.

Regards & thanks Andrew

[m1fcf]

Originally Posted by Andrew Busby

In response to Tim's post, I have created an online petition at www.twitition.com/9dsmc where you can add your name to the 177 already there.

In the interest of balance, do you have one for those who agree with the changes?

Yes, its quite a change
Yes, it looks drastic
but, Yes, it looks like a hell of a challenge and could be quite entertaining.

[Andrew Busby]

Originally Posted by m1fcf

In the interest of balance, do you have one for those who agree with the changes?

Yes, its quite a change
Yes, it looks drastic
but, Yes, it looks like a hell of a challenge and could be quite entertaining.

Hmmm petitioning both for & against something simultaneously.....I'm not a politician I'm afraid

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by m1fcf

In the interest of balance, do you have one for those who agree with the changes?

Yes, its quite a change
Yes, it looks drastic
but, Yes, it looks like a hell of a challenge and could be quite entertaining.

It looks quite unimaginative as well, you could make that quite challenging and given the terrain very exciting without the need for another hairpin.

[NJH]

Just adjusting cambers would be interesting, off camber in, heavily cambered exit etc. Loads of interesting variations possible.

[JimW]

Originally Posted by cliveagyoung

. . . Looks as if instead of collecting the marshalls post on the infield down from the paddock we will now have the good fun of meeting a spinning vehicle coming off the inside of paddock....
. . .

Are you suggesting that JP/the MSA will not instate appropriate barriers to stop this sort of coming together?

Regards

Jim

[Andrew Busby]

I received a letter from Sevenoaks District Council today advising that there are revised plans - amended site location showing all the land affected by the plans and also that the deadline for any further comments is 26th January.
What was startling were the two aerial photos which the council have included in the planning documents one contemporary and one from 1964
http://pa.sevenoaks.gov.uk/online-ap...964-659240.pdf
http://pa.sevenoaks.gov.uk/online-ap...OTO-659239.jpg
Spot the difference!

[Tim Falce]

It says document unavailable.