2013 MSA Proposed Rule Change "Track Limits"

[Dave Brand]

Originally Posted by bella

i have no problem with track limits being enforced more seriously but only where it's clear there's been a time or position gain and it's not been the only option for a driver when the only other choice was clattering into an opponent.

If we accept that breaches of track limits are only committed in the interests of "shortening the track", then by definition an advantage, however small, is gained.

Any off-track excursion, spin, etc. occurring as the result of an attempt to avoid the consequences of another driver's mishap is reported as "in avoidance" & no action taken.

[alias99]

The current rules are fine just not enforced correctly. A car should be able to run 2 wheels over the white line onto kerbs etc.

The main reason why this has come up for debate is Brands in my opinion and more specifically Graham Hill Bend where the plastic grating on the exit allows cars to run all over it. They gave drivers 3 wanting and a penalty on the 4th offence. This rules is used world wide and has been in the UK and no need to change it.

The problem is enforcing it is not consistent enough. All that has to be done is any car that goes 4 wheels over should get a penalty. Simple! Theres no need for a rule change and the confusion caused by it.

An example of bad management by officials was highlighted at Silverstone last year, I won't go into details but the in a drivers breifing a question arose "Cars are constantly running wide at copse to get a better lap time, will you be watching this and handing out penalties?". The clark responded by saying "We don't have enough people to watch every single car so it won't be possible to catch everyone". Once that is said all drivers will naturally take the chance and hope they don't get caught. If the answer was "yes and we are going to be very strict about it!" the drivers would be more cautious and try and stay on the track as much as possible.

The solution to the problem is, highlight the rule and make it a point to the drivers that they will get penalised for running all 4 wheels off. If they still don't listen hand out the penalties.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by MagnetON

I'm sure if we replaced the kerbs with police "stingers" or with something that could detect a car transponder crossing it and automatically apply a 5 second penalty then drivers would suddenly find the "ability" to keep all the wheels on.

Or you have an issue like Alexandré Premat did at Hamilton this year where his transponder was acting up and he got hit for 26 offenses of curb hopping when he actually didn't.

[yesnomaybe]

Originally Posted by alias99

The current rules are fine just not enforced correctly. A car should be able to run 2 wheels over the white line onto kerbs etc.

erm.. you can do that? as long as one wheel is over or touching a white line, the white lines are currently defined as part of the track

i think the current 4 strikes system works quiet well, allthough obviously you need quiet a few observers to impliment it, as a racer id rather they concentrated on outright dangerous driving and contacts, rather then all this effort for wheels off

i think the rule change is good as it makes it much easier for the observers to spot cars that aren't staying on the track, currently you can have 99.9% of your car onto grass and still be within the rules, the new rules mean you can have 0% of your car onto grass / bits that arent kerbs etc without being off the track,

e.g the observers arent looking to see how much of the car is past the white line, they can simply look for wheels onto grass / gravel or non kerbs

with it being easy to spot people who are driving partly off the track, then the reports should be consistent, and knowing this the racers wont use that extra bit of space, as ever though, having the rule is one thing, getting people to stick to it and apply it, is another.

[MagnetON]

Originally Posted by Matt

Or you have an issue like Alexandré Premat did at Hamilton this year where his transponder was acting up and he got hit for 26 offenses of curb hopping when he actually didn't.

In that case he should have been shown a "mechanical defect" and came in to the pits to have the offending item repaired / replaced.

[50-SIX]

For 95% of corners, the penalty itself is running wide. It is usually slower to run onto grass verges, etc. There are only a handful of corners that it is quicker (paddock hill, graham hill, copse, etc) and these could easily be policed. I say keep it as not all 4 wheels off the track.

This one wheel off rule just seems overly conservative and will discourage pushing 100%. A driver will try their upmost to get to the limit and corner as fast as he/she can, which is usually with maximum traction on the exit, which is usually without kerb hopping and grass cutting. However, being human, drivers will go beyond the limit a run wide occasionally, and 9 times out of ten, that lap will be slower. Isn't that punishemnt enough.

We don't want to go down the route of dishing out penalties all the time. F1 stewards can't wait to give a penalty for an 'avoidable incident'. Well yes, a collision after an attempted pass is avoidable, but thats just it, its avoidable if you don't attempt a pass. Over regulating just discourages exciting racing where drivers are pushing to the limits.

[50-SIX]

Originally Posted by MagnetON

In that case he should have been shown a "mechanical defect" and came in to the pits to have the offending item repaired / replaced.

Seems a sensible option - Give up any chance of a result to get your transponder fixed.

[MagnetON]

Originally Posted by 50-SIX

Seems a sensible option - Give up any chance of a result to get your transponder fixed.

If ALL the rules were being enforced then if he DID get a result then the faulty transponder would fail parc-ferme scruitineering.

Of course none of this would ever happen, just like this rule and any others like it will be talked about until the end of time and there will still be some drivers that will argue with how it "should" be and how it should be implemented. Anyways, I'm out of this thread, enjoy!

[Matt]

Originally Posted by MagnetON

In that case he should have been shown a "mechanical defect" and came in to the pits to have the offending item repaired / replaced.

V8SA didn't figure out the transponder was broken until after the race.

[Turby]

I think, in this instance, a couple of diagrams in the regs could be worth a thousand words.

I guess the issue of consistency in which the regs are being applied, won't be known until its too late to do anything about it...

[oldfriend]

Apart from the issues of interpretation the other problem with any rule change in this area is that series like F3 will race with different rules in the UK than at Spa etc. Or F3 will run to the FIA code on that same weekend as series running to the amended MSA rules. Try to explain to a F Ford driver (for example) that it is OK for F3 but not for you....Great way to confuse young drivers. If they want to make the change the MSA needs to persuade the FIA.

[vector-pat]

This is obviously a hot topic! Having changed sides from "Poacher" to "Gamekeeper" I can appreciate where the circuit owners are coming from but there are ways to ensure that cars stay within the track limits. With the new, flatter kerbs at the Thruxton Chicane, cars in pre-season testing were over a second under the lap record. We've now installed some "speed humps" that still allow a little margin for cutting the corner but deter anything excessive (even BTCC respected them!). My view is the current regulation works well, providing it's policed well. However the new one is, I feel unworkable for both drivers and officials. If you have a view on the proposed 2013 regulation then you do need to email the MSA at raceconsultation@msauk.org as without your comments this change will come into force next year.

[terence]

Really dont understand why this should be such a 'hot topic',keeping between the lines,staying off of the kerbs takes more skill,is more of a challenge,so why reject that challenge? Everyone knows how slippery the kerbing becomes when wet? Just pretend its raining! NO,you dont need to use the kerbs IF you get your lines right.

[ivanalesi]

Using the kerbs surely makes it more difficult for driving and setting up the car, not the other way around! The white line should be at the end of the kerbs, but I think they try to avoid situations where most drivers use the run off area like at Brands Hatch. This is very dangerous because you're increasing the cornering speed & in the same time narrowing the safety area. T1 at Hockenheim is the same story, both very are dangerous "racing lines" if you suddenly have contact with the car next to you and crash head first into the barrier.

[dtype38]

Ok, I've read this through twice and the regulation at least half a dozen times, and I think both MGDavid and MagnetON could be correct depending on whether using the EDGE of the track is legal or not.

a) The EDGE of the track is defined by white lines or kerbs.
b) If any wheel is no longer within the TRACK then the car has left the track.

But it doesn't say if the track is defined by the inside of the edge marking of the outside. What it needs to say is either:

MagnetON's interpretation:

c) A wheel is deemed to be outside the track if it TOUCHES the edge. (as in say the top edge of a squash court where any touch is out)

OR

MGDavid's interpretation:

c) A wheel is deemed to be outside the track if it CROSSES the edge. (as in say the lines on a tennis court or football pitch where the whole thing has to be fully outside to be deemed out).

I don't know which is intended, but I think if it's the first then Clerks will be talking to pretty much every driver at every event in the country! Personally I think the second makes more sense. Ie like football or tennis, you can touch the line/kerb but you can't put a full wheel outside it. Which for me is a good idea and progress on the current situation where some drivers seem to get away with most of the car being across the line/kerb.

[Dave Brand]

Originally Posted by dtype38

a) The EDGE of the track is defined by white lines or kerbs.
b) If any wheel is no longer within the TRACK then the car has left the track.

But it doesn't say if the track is defined by the inside of the edge marking of the outside. What it needs to say is either:

The current wording is very clear on this: "the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not". The proposed regulation appears to be extending that to include the kerbs, but it's very vaguely written.

[dtype38]

I bow to your greater knowledge, as I didn't read that bit.

So, a vote. Who thinks this driver will be breaking the new rules:

[Dave Brand]

Originally Posted by dtype38

I bow to your greater knowledge, as I didn't read that bit.

That's in the current Blue Book, not the proposed version!

So, a vote. Who thinks this driver will be breaking the new rules:

Definitely not!

[Bodysnatcher]

Originally Posted by dtype38

So, a vote. Who thinks this driver will be breaking the new rules:

I don't

[dtype38]

Originally Posted by MagnetON

Regulation clearly states that the track is defined by the white lines, if one wheel leaves the track (the tarmaccy dark bit between the white lines, does that make it clear enough?) then the car is deemed to have left the track.

Hardly rocket science.

I think according to MagnetON's interpretation it would, or am I misreading that?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by dtype38

I bow to your greater knowledge, as I didn't read that bit.

So, a vote. Who thinks this driver will be breaking the new rules:

What game?

[sceptic]

Originally Posted by kimbo

Taken from the new regulation:

(b)

Should any wheel of the car no longer remain

within the track, defined in (a) above, it

a driver

will be judged to have left the track

I'm already confused - do they mean if any ONE wheel no longer remains within the track i.e one wheel 'off' = car off the track, or one wheel 'on' = car on the track.
As per usual, slackly written and therefore ambiguous.
Or is it just me?

Kim

Unlike the second part, this is not ambiguous at all.

Originally Posted by Dave Brand

The current wording is very clear on this: "the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not". The proposed regulation appears to be extending that to include the kerbs, but it's very vaguely written.

Yes it appears to be extending the track to include the kerbs, BUT under the current regulation you are off the track if all four wheels are outside the white line. Under the new regulation you only need to put one wheel over the line to be off the track.

[mark_l]

Originally Posted by MagnetON

Regulation clearly states that the track is defined by the white lines, if one wheel leaves the track (the tarmaccy dark bit between the white lines, does that make it clear enough?) then the car is deemed to have left the track.

Hardly rocket science.

Looking at Old Hall corner at Oulton Park, the white line on the apex of the corner is between the tarmac and the edge of the kerb, so if you run a wheel over the kerb on the entry to the corner you will have been deemed to have left the track.

Should be interesting to see if anyone finishes the first race of next season without being black flagged.

[tristancliffe]

"the edge of the track shall be defined by white lines and any kerbs"

Therefore the kerbs are part of the track.

"Should any wheel of the car no longer remain within the track, a driver will be judged to have left the track"

So one wheel off the other side of the kerb, or going over a white line where there is no kerb is considered off the track.

"Repetition of serious mistakes or the appearance of a lack of control over the car (such as leaving the track) will be reported to the Clerk of Course and may entail the imposition of penalties up to and including the exclusion of any driver concerned. "

Do it more than two or three times and you're likely to get a penalty.

It will influence drivers, and hopefully avoid drivers taking shortcuts (outside wheels on kerbs, for example often seen at Knockhill), so will take the drivers some conscious thought to begin with. And lap times will increase slightly. But the racing will either stay the same or improve, and there is still allowance for genuine, one-off, mistakes or misjudgements. And the corner marshals will take into account stuff like being forced off the track by another competitor etc.

I don't see the problem. This rule just clarifies that the grey bit and the red and white bit is "track", and stops the silly "2 wheels off" rule that allowed considerable liberties.

[MotorSport Vision]

With the consultation period ending on 31 July we thought it would be helpful if the situation was clarified in case anyone wants to comment, or comment further.

The current regulation on track limits means that providing a car has one wheel within the white line, the other wheels can use any surface that exists beyond it. Given that on all UK circuits most kerbs are a lot narrower than the track width of the cars, this means that cars can legitimately drive repeatedly on the grass that borders the kerb (or asphalt track if there is no kerb), whether on the exit or apex.

The problems with this should be obvious. To mention some main points, the grass very soon wears to earth that becomes mud when it rains, it becomes rapidly rutted, it looks unsightly, it requires expensive maintenance to try to keep safe, it damages cars, it favours those rough drivers that don’t care about the risk of damage to their vehicle, it drags dirt and mud on to the track, requiring more track sweeping. And it looks silly to see happen!

Now this problem can be addressed by digging out grass and earth in vulnerable areas and replacing it with an area of concrete, usually painting it green. But this is a major cost in its own right – concrete costs about £100 per square meter to install, so an area 25m x 2m on an exit to just one corner would cost £5000.

Not surprisingly UK circuit owners are very unhappy with this situation, which unnecessarily inflates costs, is detrimental to safety and the presentation of their circuits. Circuits therefore want the MSA regulation changed to allow the track limits to be either the white line or, where a kerb exists, the outer edge of the kerb, so permitting its entire use.

From this thread it is clear there is considerable misunderstanding about the matter, which hopefully this post addresses. It does indeed seem that the exact drafting needs to be amended, to improve clarity, and the MSA will no doubt react to this point.

Some posts here comment on the enforceability of a track limits regulation. This is undoubtedly an important matter, though a separate one. The first issue is to establish a sensible rule, the second to improve enforcement. And anyway it is surely easier to see if a car has its outside wheels on the grass, beyond the kerb, than its inside wheels beyond the white line?

If the regulation is not revised to protect areas beyond the kerbs, the considerable cost to circuits of ongoing runoff repair and ultimately the installation of more unsightly concrete or grasscrete surfaces on the inside of vulnerable apexes and many corner exits, will inevitably result in increased circuit hire rates, and higher entry and test fees. All quite unnecessary with a sensible track limits rule.

Hopefully this is food for thought. Please support the regulation change if you think it makes sense, albeit perhaps with wording that makes it clear the kerbs can be used but nothing beyond.