[BTCC] Round Seven, Croft 18-19 Sept, Races 19,20&21

[antnee]

The whole topic is a difficult one to balance. Paved run-off areas, etc are put in to improve safety but then drivers push the boundaries (literally!). If you put tyre stacks in place, it could pose a safety risk but should be a decent deterrent as hitting them could cause terminal damage to your car. If you went back to gravel, you end up with more cars stuck and more safety car periods. Or you have sensors and penalties which reduce the quality of the racing - you could deliberately go off circuit to get a run on someone who has been holding you up. That 5s penalty could be quite easy to make up....

[coppice]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Good question, Viv! Because both my son and I said almost together 'What on earth is he doing?'. He just slowed down and came to a stop by the stack. If he did touch the tyres, we certainly didn't hear him tapping them and their weight is such that it took about 6 marshals to move them - usually they called for the tractor or JCB to put it back in place. We thought that he actually had a problem as we couldn't hear his engine, and then he was just off down the straight. Really weird.

I would like to think that the Observer at the marshals' post opposite would have reported it if he did attempt to move it.

Agreed - I saw no such thing . While I maintain that the stacks at this and every other Croft meeting are dangerous anachronisms there's no doubt that some drivers do take advantage , cynically so . Take the other tyres, on the infield side , which were shoved aside early on the Porsche race. Within a lap or two ,most of the field had two wheels on the grass, raising clouds of dust and soil as they drove ever closer to the marshal's post

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

According to TSL, only one time penalty was given, and that was to Smiley in Race 2, a 0.7 second penalty for an unfair advantage.

Yeah strange. He definitely went through the pits at the end of lap 9, and the team's write up of the event says he dropped to 19th for a track limits penalty.
Could it be that he was identified 5 times and received a drive-through?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Yeah strange. He definitely went through the pits at the end of lap 9, and the team's write up of the event says he dropped to 19th for a track limits penalty.
Could it be that he was identified 5 times and received a drive-through?

And from the TSL results, Butcher wasn't penalised for his taking advantage by driving to the side of the chicane at full speed and thereby gaining two places. I thought that he would have done the decent thing and given them back, but he didn't. And one was his own team-mate.

[crmalcolm]

Looking back at results, it seems that if a penalty is served during the race (e.g. drive through), then tsl have no need to include it in the results.
For Brands R1, 2019, Plato received a drive through penalty for being out of position on the grid. The serving of the penalty is recorded in the lap chart for lap 3 with a 'P' (crossed the line in the pit lane) - no other reference is made to the penalty.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I get your point - but Dr Palmer explains his justification for using grasscrete as:

• 'Grass and earth beyond the kerbs was previously permitted to be driven over, and was continually getting rutted and muddy, creating a safety hazard.
• Circuits have an obligation to maintain the safety of any surface that can legitimately be used.
• Circuits were having to frequently repair damaged track margins with tons of replacement soil.
• To avoid the increase in competitor costs that would result if circuits had to spend huge sums replacing earth beyond kerbs with concrete, to withstand continual driving over.
• Many competitors do not want to be pressured into driving beyond kerbs and risking damaging their cars on rutted earth and mud in order to try and set a fractionally better time
• Continual use of grass and earth beyond kerbs has been hazardous because earth, mud and stone debris have been dragged back on the asphalt and caused damage to cars.'

and so 'We have reviewed kerb layouts and extended them in various areas. We have repaired the damaged track margins and put down a great deal of new turf, and added some grasscrete in some areas too. The circuits also look much better – and we want them to stay that way.'

The solution(s) will always be a compromise.

For me you can’t have it both ways. You can’t make it easier for the drivers and expect them not to take advantage of it. After all you wouldn’t leave your door open at night if you were living in a high crime area….

[AnnoyedMoose]

Originally Posted by S griffin

For me you can’t have it both ways. You can’t make it easier for the drivers and expect them not to take advantage of it. After all you wouldn’t leave your door open at night if you were living in a high crime area….

Cutting corners when you're told not to is cheating plain and simple. The problem, as with a lot in motorsport, is poor enforcement of the rules.

From cars that break rules that aren't picked up in scrutineering or by any club officials to not slowing down under yellows the level of enforcement is terrible.

There needs to be a clampdown at all levels across all motorsport. Everyone is moaning about poor driving standards at the moment but in my view contempt for rules starts in small places and builds from there.

To use the open door analogy you should be able to leave your door open as there shouldn't be high crime areas if the law enforcement did it's job properly.

[S griffin]

The problem with corner cutting or track limit abuse is that it's too easy to do. And it's gotten tedious. Back in the day it was only if you cut a chicane. Now with too much tarmac runoff it's gone too far. Nothing against tarmac runoff, but only have it places where drivers can't gain an advantage from it

And you still shouldn't leave your door open, as you should still do your own bit to deter crime

[antnee]

Maybe they should fit BTCC cars with 'Lane keep assist' like my road car has - stray over a solid white line and it steers you back into the lane while also applying some brakes

[S griffin]

Or maybe like Microprose GP2, cut power for a few seconds

[Sodemo]

Silverstone is certainly the worst circuit for tarmac run off. Thankfully, most of the other circuits that the BTCC visits doesn't really have a problem with tarmac run offs. I wouldn't mind them so much if there was a minimum of 2 metre grass verge after the kerb, then after that you can have as much tarmac as you want. In terms of Silverstone National the worst corner is Copse by far. I don't think you really gain much by cutting any other corner or running wide.

The thing is decades ago, in a lot of cases they didnt even have kerbs at most corners. Then they introduced raised kerbs, then flat kerbs, then what basically amounts to an extension of the track with tarmac. Its all for giving the driver an easier time.

[billy bleach]

Sadly most of the track changes have been prompted by nasty accidents. Each Rouge being a case in point - currently a ticking time bomb....

[Greem]

Every single time the tarmac runoff issue comes up I feel duty bound to remind everyone that a lot of FIA graded and other circuits are also used by our friends on two wheels.

Some safety changes have come about at the behest of FIM/Dorna or national motorbike governing bodies rather than just those relating to cars.

Tarmac gives riders a better chance of recovery than gravel or grass.

It's a trade off, with multiple inputs and outputs.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Greem

Every single time the tarmac runoff issue comes up I feel duty bound to remind everyone that a lot of FIA graded and other circuits are also used by our friends on two wheels.

Some safety changes have come about at the behest of FIM/Dorna or national motorbike governing bodies rather than just those relating to cars.

Tarmac gives riders a better chance of recovery than gravel or grass.

It's a trade off, with multiple inputs and outputs.

Agree entirely - and I will repeat some of Dr. Palmer's words:

Grass and earth [...] was continually getting rutted and muddy, creating a safety hazard.
Many competitors do not want to be pressured into driving beyond kerbs and risking damaging their cars on rutted earth and mud in order to try and set a fractionally better time.
Earth, mud and stone debris have been dragged back on the asphalt and caused damage to cars.

And to expand on the challenges for two-wheeled users of circuits - the following is from motoforum.net and is a good (IMO) example of a motorcyclist's view (Mods - apologies for the lengthy re-post from another forum, however I felt it beneficial to provide context in this discussion):

'All the kerbs at Snetterton are FIM spec negative Vallelunga ones, designed by Claude Danis to be motorcyclist friendly. In the bad old days, they used to fit them the other way around (steep side facing the traffic) to try and stop the cars from cutting corners. I don't know of any permanent circuit in the UK that still has Vallelunga kerbs fitted like that.

In the modern world, circuit safety considerations do take account of what's suitable for bikes as well as cars, unlike the 70s & 80s where catch fencing and railway sleepers were thought to be something we just had to live with (or not, as the case may be).

The Geo-Block type run off that's being fitted at Brands Hatch is again designed to stop a steep drop off being created behind the negative Vallelunga kerbs. Drop offs behind kerbs are a big problem for motorcycles as dropping sharply off the back of a kerb on corner exits can cause the front end to get crossed up whilst simultaneously digging in. Obviously this is disasterous for the rider concerned as well as anyone following closely behind.

This erosion is caused by cars dropping two wheels over the back of the kerbs and the geo-block is there to stop that happening. The holes in the block sections are meant to be filled with earth up to about 20-30mm from the top and grass is seeded into it to partially fill the gaps and keep the run off looking like grass. Because the roots are protected in the little holes, the cars can run over the top without ripping the grass out or creating a drop off.

The half tarmac/half gravel run offs work very well on corners with extensive gravel traps and often means that you don't actually crash when you outbrake yourself, simply run on upright and rejoin a few places down. However, if you lose it on the brakes going into the corner there is less gravel to slow your bike down before it reaches the tyre wall. In my experience it's a fairly even balance on the total amount of machine damage caused over a full season at corners that have been modified in this way.

Strangely enough, the damage to riders seems to be less with the 50-50 areas I am familiar with. I was one of those who thought it would cause more injuries when they first started doing it back in 1999, so I was pleasantly surprised when I was proved wrong.

It remains to be seen whether or not Druids is a good location for this 50-50 solution or not. It may be that the extent of the run off isn't large enough to make it a suitable solution, on the other hand we could all end up pleasantly surprised.

The latest incarnation of something being put in to stop cars cutting corners are FIA "Hot dog" kerbs. These look like a long concrete sausage around the back edge of the normal kerbs about 5-6 inches high. On the inside kerbs they are not a problem for us as long as they have a smooth ramp on the leading edge, but a lot of European circuits are starting to use them behind the kerbs on corner exits. This is an issue, as a rider sliding on his back towards them could easily do massive pelvic, cranial or spinal damage where they would normally just slide straight over a negative Vallelunga kerb. Keep an eye out for their appearance over here.....'

For more on the circuit requirements for bikes, the FIM standards are the place to go. Included in this (of relevance to Croft/TOCA package corner cutting):

'Verges (and on the outside and/or inside of bends, kerbs and run-off areas) represent the outer parts of the transversal profile of the track.
They are absolutely necessary, from the construction point of view, serving as a limit and shoulder for the superstructure of the track.
They contribute to higher safety by improving visibility and use of the track over its whole width. If they are of a sufficient range, they offer more room for a vehicle to stop.'

'Verges and run-off areas have a flat surface which is less even than that of the track itself. They must be kept free of any debris and stones of a diameter bigger than that of the grains of the gravel beds and should preferably be grass-covered.'


Which goes to the heart of the problem - how does a circuit designer accommodate cars and bikes, allowing all levels of competitor from international series down to club racer, as well as being used by track days, solve the problem of what to put on the inside of a corner?
Whatever solution is reached will have to be a compromise - if tyre bales are not suitable, we have to accept that other solutions may be far from ideal?

[S griffin]

The bikes actually prefer gravel, it's easier for them to slow down than on gravel. With tarmac it they just keep the momentum going. And tarmac runoff only works if the car is actually working with all four wheels in the right direction, otherwise it just keeps going. For me it's gone too far the other way and it's about time we don't have tarmac runoff in places where people can gain advantage. It's becoming tedious hearing track limit warnings and 'laptime deleted'

[AnnoyedMoose]

Be even more tedious having red flags to drag them out of the gravel.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by S griffin

The bikes actually prefer gravel, it's easier for them to slow down than on gravel. With tarmac it they just keep the momentum going. And tarmac runoff only works if the car is actually working with all four wheels in the right direction, otherwise it just keeps going. For me it's gone too far the other way and it's about time we don't have tarmac runoff in places where people can gain advantage. It's becoming tedious hearing track limit warnings and 'laptime deleted'

Bikes prefer gravel to grass in situations where they might clout a barrier, yes, but wide expanses of tarmac in some places mean they have a chance to return to the circuit if they run wide. It's the same for cars, oddly enough. That's not so much the case with gravel.

If you think it's tedious hearing the race control end, you ought to stand with me at a track some time. At a (not BTCC) meeting three or four years ago I was the named track limits Judge of Fact at Silverstone's Club corner. I recorded and reported more than 800 transgressions across a two day meeting; the guys at Copse and Stowe did about the same. I could hardly speak on the Monday.

Every time I now marshal at Donington I thank my lucky stars MSV put in the pressure pad & camera system!

Anyway, I should be at the Donington meeting in a few days so I'll see what happens...

[mattt]

Originally Posted by Greem

Bikes prefer gravel to grass in situations where they might clout a barrier, yes, but wide expanses of tarmac in some places mean they have a chance to return to the circuit if they run wide. It's the same for cars, oddly enough. That's not so much the case with gravel.



If you think it's tedious hearing the race control end, you ought to stand with me at a track some time. At a (not BTCC) meeting three or four years ago I was the named track limits Judge of Fact at Silverstone's Club corner. I recorded and reported more than 800 transgressions across a two day meeting; the guys at Copse and Stowe did about the same. I could hardly speak on the Monday.



Every time I now marshal at Donington I thank my lucky stars MSV put in the pressure pad & camera system!



Anyway, I should be at the Donington meeting in a few days so I'll see what happens...

I absolutely hate track limits.

As I'm sure you can appreciate, Greem

When on radios in race control it can be an absolute nightmare trying to keep a track of them all, pass the info to the clerk's and back to chief flag point to get all the signals out.

I will also be hating them this Saturday at Donington on the chief flag point trying to display multiple black and whites and penalties to the entire field. There must be an easier way that can be developed.

Numerous drivers get away with more track limits than they should as per Motorsport UK rules as they need to be shown each level before moving to the next one. Some even do multiple track limits on the same lap which most clerks only count as one.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[Greem]

Originally Posted by mattt

I absolutely hate track limits.

As I'm sure you can appreciate, Greem

Having done all of those roles at some point in the last couple of years, I completely agree. From reporting, to receiving, to passing on, to displaying penalties. TL infringements generate an *enormous* amount of work.

(I still have a dodgy elbow from doing penalty flags at Donington 3 years ago)

[Alfaholic]

Originally Posted by Greem

At a (not BTCC) meeting three or four years ago I was the named track limits Judge of Fact at Silverstone's Club corner. I recorded and reported more than 800 transgressions across a two day meeting; the guys at Copse and Stowe did about the same. I could hardly speak on the Monday.

WEC or Blancpain GTs? Possibly the same meeting where, at the end of the first free practice session, I joked in passing to the marshal doing the Copse track limits that I didn't envy his job and he wearily replied that he'd already reported over 150 transgressions!

[antnee]

Removable 'sausage' kerbs? With suitable anchoring, they could be put in place and bolted down for car days, then removed and replaced with some flat profiles when the folks on 2 wheels venture out.


Flat bed truck with a little hoist on, could see changeovers in an hour or so I would think....

[Greem]

Originally Posted by Alfaholic

WEC or Blancpain GTs?

The latter! A fun weekend it was not.

[antnee]

Interesting idea being used in F1 this weekend. One a corner with lots of run off - if you find yourself on the run off (after going over a sausage kerb), you have to go through a small chicane made of the polystyrene boards before rejoining the track. Very simple idea!

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by antnee

Interesting idea being used in F1 this weekend. One a corner with lots of run off - if you find yourself on the run off (after going over a sausage kerb), you have to go through a small chicane made of the polystyrene boards before rejoining the track. Very simple idea!

Yeah and caused even more incidents than if they hadn’t had to go through there last year

[Mike Harte]

I had meant to mention this earlier, but as a spectator I found it somewhat annoying that the race commentary in pretty well every race was interrupted during the first few laps by someone introducing the podium ceremony of the previous race. It was quite unnecessary, in my opinion, as it was at that point more important to know what was going on on other parts of the circuit of the race that was actually happening.