MS UK Track Limits

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by terence

Why not use them?Because the white line is not on the outside of the kerb,it devides the kerb from the permitted track surface.Time saving par lap using the berbs?Around three tenths.Those three tenths can easily be found overr the next 21klm without the need to drive ANY kerbs.I remember a time when kerb use was regarded as cheating.Drivers values have obviously changed.

Fully agreed.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by terence

rner.
Where I work there are some favorite ,for some,kerbs people like to run over down through Wippermann.Running those kerbs still puts a tremendous shock through the chassis and suspension,as many have found to their expense.Time saving par lap using the berbs?Around three tenths.Those three tenths can easily be found overr the next 21klm without the need to drive ANY kerbs.I remember a time when kerb use was regarded as cheating.Drivers values have obviously changed.

I must pop over and you can show me how it's done before I get too old mate

[Derwent]

The Ingliston Circuit near Edinburgh has Armco round both sides for 90% of the track. even though there was some close racing on a narrow track there were relatively few instances of hitting the Armco.

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by Derwent

The Ingliston Circuit near Edinburgh has Armco round both sides for 90% of the track. even though there was some close racing on a narrow track there were relatively few instances of hitting the Armco.

They hit the toilet block instead iirc.

[Peter Mallett]

It may be worth mentioning that some, if not all of us here, have been pinged for track limits and we've suffered the necessary penalty. As far as I can see, the actual rule hasn't changed, you can still put two wheels on the kerb but you can't cross it. The difference proposed is the imposition of some apparently draconian penalties, when you get more than 2 "pings". Not a problem if you have pits to car radio, but for those in historics where such technology is banned you won't know what you've been hit with until you get to the paddock, and presumably the CoC office.

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Not a problem if you have pits to car radio, but for those in historics where such technology is banned you won't know what you've been hit with until you get to the paddock, and presumably the CoC office.

Exactly, last time I saw the day after that a "forfaitaire DT" had been applied to my race time, lost the fourth place for another one I dont remember. Did not complain about just noticed and in fact did not bother…

[morninggents]

Presumably the penalties are incurred by the 'can't be arsed to move the steering wheel through these esses' incursion rather than the 'oh s**t I've braked too late and oversteered on to the grass' type of incident.


Will they be applied in BTCC races?

[Lancsbreaker]

Originally Posted by morninggents

Presumably the penalties are incurred by the 'can't be arsed to move the steering wheel through these esses' incursion rather than the 'oh s**t I've braked too late and oversteered on to the grass' type of incident.


Will they be applied in BTCC races?

Hopefully


You have to be joking

[terence]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

I must pop over and you can show me how it's done before I get too old mate

You would be more than welcome Gordon.

[terence]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

It may be worth mentioning that some, if not all of us here, have been pinged for track limits and we've suffered the necessary penalty. As far as I can see, the actual rule hasn't changed, you can still put two wheels on the kerb but you can't cross it. The difference proposed is the imposition of some apparently draconian penalties, when you get more than 2 "pings". Not a problem if you have pits to car radio, but for those in historics where such technology is banned you won't know what you've been hit with until you get to the paddock, and presumably the CoC office.

You could always rely on the black flag.

[Paul D]

Originally Posted by morninggents

Presumably the penalties are incurred by the 'can't be arsed to move the steering wheel through these esses' incursion rather than the 'oh s**t I've braked too late and oversteered on to the grass' type of incident.


Will they be applied in BTCC races?

I think this is possibly the crux of the matter, and who is qualified to decide? Do we get penalised, for example, if we run wide because another driver has squeezed us wide on the exit with an opportunistic dive up the inside, and we're given the choice of run wide or have contact? Or, conversely, maybe he comes around the outside, cuts across the front you forcing you onto a tighter line and, as a result, you go over over the edge of the kerb on the apex?

Do we get penalised when we simply make a small mistake, perhaps outbraking ourselves and gaining no advantage (more likely losing time) from the excursion 'over the line'? I'm sure all of these scenarios have happened to us all at some point - certainly have to me.

I'm in no way advocating, or even defending, those who habitually go beyond track limits to gain an advantage. But some clarification of exactly how, and by whom, this will be enforced, would be useful. If it's going to be black & white, measured absolutely and with no mitigation considered then, to me, that's unacceptable. We're driving at speed, often on the limit of adhesion, and occasional indiscretions are going to occur. If they don't, then you're not trying hard enough!

As to the other thing - no, of course not, don't be silly. Are you serious?

[Woolley]

The problem is, there's not enough deterrent, especially with tarmac run-offs, and it spoils the racing. Running a little wide doesn't slow you down, and in many places makes you faster. How about if you run wide you have to take an automatic drive through? Or where there's a full run off you have to take a detour before you can come back on.

[The Fat Clerk]

I don't have a problem with the principle, the problem I will have as a Clerk are the practicalities.
I will use a race @ Silverstone last year as an example.

It was a 90 minute race for the 750MC 1 series BMW's. The meeting wasn't being run by the 750MC but by the Classic & Modern. It was on the National circuit and there were an adequate number of Marshals, meaning that there were enough in the Pit Lane for safety, but certainly not enough to monitor driver changes, i.e which driver was in a given car @ a given time.
With regards to Track Limits the standard of driving was abysmal, even after a race specific briefing, we were getting calls from the Marshals Posts of cars 'going over' on the green flag lap!

During them 90 minute duration, we had over 100 calls reporting the offence, there was no way the Chief Flag Marshal could show the Driver Warning Flag to every offender and I had one Clerk just going from Race Control to the Timekeepers every couple of minutes with a list of penalties.

By the Chequered Flag 5 cars had been excluded from the race, and when i spoke to all of these drivers individually I was very surprised by their attitude.
One saying it was only his team mate doing it, one denying everything, and the other 3 putting their hands up saying that they'd be getting away with it all season and thought they would again!

[terence]

Biggest problem is many drivers see it as being OK to emulate F1 BTCC or Eu saloon car racing.Fill something to the top and it spills over.Track limits should be brought under investigation at all levels,regardless of what the Series organisers allow.

[The Fat Clerk]

Originally Posted by terence

Biggest problem is many drivers see it as being OK to emulate F1 BTCC or Eu saloon car racing.Fill something to the top and it spills over.Track limits should be brought under investigation at all levels,regardless of what the Series organisers allow.

Hear, hear, every Clerk will tell you a Driver has said to them that they saw it on the tele.

[Peter Mallett]

Ok, just to be clear, the following are the proposed changes. As you can see the rul;es concerning the track limit itself are unchanged, its the penalties and their application which have changed. As to black flags? By the time you get that, as @fatclerk says, it's all too late anyway.

Section Q – Circuit Racing
Q.12.21.2. Drivers must use the track at all times and may not leave the track without a justifiable reason.
For the avoidance of doubt:
(a) The white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track.
(b) A driver will be judged to have left the track if any part of the tyre wheel of the car goes completely
beyond either the outer edge of any kerb or the white line where there is no kerb.
Q.12.22. Breaches of 12.21.2 may be reported and/or determined only by:
(a) A duly appointed Judge of Fact and/or
(b) Senior officials through the use of suitable equipment under the control of the organisers.
Competitors may not protest each other in respect of breaches of track limits (C.5.1).
Committee: Race Committee
Date of Meeting: 16th January 2023
Closing date for consultation:
Email for comments: raceconsultation@motorsportuk.org
20th February 2023
Page 2 of 2
Q.12.22.1. Breaches of 12.21.2 may be penalised using the following as follows:
(a) In qualifying if the lap on which the breach occurred is faster than any previous lap then that lap time
should be disqualified will have 5 seconds added to that lap time. Note Any added times must should be
made on the result sheet of any times disqualified.
(b) During races the following scale of penalties should will be applied:
1st breach – no penalty a 1 second penalty added to race time
2nd breach - warning flag an additional 2 second penalty added to race time
3rd breach – an additional 5 second penalty added to race time
4th breach – a drive through penalty (12.26.(h)) in addition to the preceding time penalties10
second penalty added to race time
5th breach – black flag drive through penalty (12.26.(h)) in addition to the preceding penalties 6th
breach – black flag
(c) For any race that includes driver changes track limit breaches are per driver (per stint)
(d) Any race over one hour duration may allow for driver track limit breaches to be reset after each hour.
Care should be taken to ensure that all signals (flag and board) must have been displayed to the driver
concerned before moving up the penalty scale. Where possible it is recommended that drivers be advised
of penalties during the race and all All penalties applied should must be noted upon the result sheet.

[Woolley]

Really it needs an Indy-style tower which can show all the numbers which have been reported and the number of strikes!

As someone who sometimes does the reporting, we can sometimes miss one because we're writing down the other 12 cars that transgressed. And sometimes the view can be blocked or unclear (Silverstone post 29 has a new light board right in the way) or we're looking the other way, or waving a flag for something else and can't write numbers at the same time,or we'll give benefit of doubt because it's not 100% certain. So on the example above you can probably add 20% that weren't reported.

Frankly it's a mess, and it ruins the racing because an average driver can match a good one by effectively cheating, even if unintentionally.

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Woolley

Frankly it's a mess, and it ruins the racing because an average driver can match a good one by effectively cheating, even if unintentionally.

True! Not mentioning drivers making an advantage of the FCY procedure. It seems that not all the odos show the same speed sometimes.

[terence]

"B" seems a bit odd as the White Line is in-between the track and kerb????

[Lancsbreaker]

Originally Posted by terence

"B" seems a bit odd as the White Line is in-between the track and kerb????

Unfortunately, Peter's quoted regulations above show all the text, whereas in the original some of the text is highlighted in red (new rules) and some is struck out (has been replaced).


For example (b) should have "wheel of the car" and "completely" struck out.



Best to read the full MSUK text here:


https://www.motorsportuk.org/wp-cont...Limits-3-1.pdf

[Peter Mallett]

Yes, apologies, but I did suggest it's best to read the original text.

[Adam43]

Seems clear enough. With the details being how it is detected.

I’m all for it if they make it work. Things have moved on. Back in the day we didn’t need white lines to tell us where the edge was. There was obviously a generation that needed this for some reason. Perhaps drivers were of a better class back in the day

The thread has amused. I’m enjoying being a cheater with low values for instance!

And the various examples of what would stop doing it. Of all these things there is a clear odd one out;

Armco
Kerbs that damage your suspension
Rocks
Trees
A slippery and slower surface
Concrete filled oil drum (why does it need the drum? )
A white line.

All but one are a choice, but one you don’t want to make, or at least you heighten the risk if you go there by intent or accident.
One is arbitrary and artificial.

We have made great strides in circuit safety. Hurrah! So we now have this artificial limit, which over the last few years we’ve got round to saying it is a limit. Cool.

Let’s solve the problem of detecting it, consistently. If it’s tech, then great, but that comes with expense. If we mean it. I suspect that the governing body would welcome actual constructive engagement. What in Motorsport?! I feel for them.

[Paul D]

Having read, and then carefully re-read, the proposal, I've compiled a draft which I've sent to MSUK for their consideration! Will anyone there actually read it? Who knows, but at least I've tried. Can't really complain about it if we don't at least try to influence those who rule our hobby.

For anyone who's interested, below are the observations I've made. You need to read the MSUK proposal very carefully, including the struck-out text, and the new red text. Then some of what I say may make sense. Or maybe not! But we all have our own opinions, these are just mine (apologies in advance for the length of what follows):


With reference to the proposed changes to the track limits rules, I would like to make the following observations:

1) There are a couple of instances where the word 'should' has been replaced by the word 'will' in what appears to be an intention to apply these rules in a stricter manner. If this is to be applied 'absolutely', with no room for interpretation of circumstances or mitigation, then what happens in a situation whereby, for example, a driver has another car alongside, and the other car begins to move across, giving the first driver the choice between putting a wheel, or wheels, off the circuit, or contact with the other car - potentially at three figure speeds? Do we now go for the contact, hope for the best and argue about it later?

2) The changing of the wording from a whole wheel off to any part of a tyre concerns me. We, as drivers, may be able to gauge when a tyre has fully left the circuit, although it's certainly not guaranteed. But to be able to feel when just a fraction of your tyre, as little as half an inch perhaps, has gone over a line, could well prove to be nigh on impossible at the speeds concerned. So to be receiving a penalty for such potentially minor infractions, without warning and without any leeway, does seem rather Draconian.

3) Q.12.21.2 may well leave no doubt as to what is considered as part of the track, and what isn't - and when we will be judged to have departed from same. But it provides us with precisely no information as to what may be considered a 'justifiable reason'. Who gets to decide what is a justifiable reason? The JoF reporting the incident? The CoC? A camera? And if the penalties are imposed immediately, during the race, then how does a driver get to put his argument across that an incident may have been 'justifiable'? Where is the potential for mitigation? Now, it may be said that penalties for this type of offence have always been applied instantly, during the race, so that won't change under these proposals - but that's not true, because what will change is the way these penalties are decided. Up till now, it appears such penalties have been imposed with a modicum of common sense applied, but it appears that this may be going out of the window. So, can we have a definition of 'justifiable reason'? Because without that, I fear all we have is anarchy!

4) It's interesting to note that some of the changes which will work against the driver will go from an advisory 'should' to a compulsory 'must'. But in one area that could assist drivers by informing them of a penalty applied during the race, it's been deemed acceptable to go from 'must have been displayed' to 'Where possible it is recommended'. I'm sorry, but that is unacceptable, you couldn't make this stuff up - although, someone obviously has. In essence, what we're being told here is that, not only are track limits rules being tightened up and applied without warning from the very first infringement, but also that, whereas before, we had to be told with a message on the pit wall, now we may be informed, if it's deemed possible and anyone can be bothered? One of the reasons given for the proposal is 'sporting fairness'. Can someone please explain to me how the aforementioned is 'fair'? To impose penalties for infringements a driver may well not even be aware of, and to not even be compelled to bother informing said driver at the earliest possible opportunity? Doesn't exactly seem 'fair' to me!

5) A final point: the ruling about how these penalties will be applied in two driver races makes no sense to me. If I, as a single driver in a race, are deemed to have left the track three times during the entire race, then I receive, cumulatively, one, two, then five second penalties: total of eight seconds, with the next excursion netting me a drive-through, which must typically be what? Another 30 seconds? Meanwhile, a driver sharing the race - perhaps someone I'm fighting with for position - can have the same three digressions in just half the race distance, netting him the same eight seconds - but then he can change drivers, and if his partner goes off once during his half of the race, it earns them just one extra second in penalties while I get a drive-through for the same 'offence'. 'Sporting fairness'?

I would like to finish by saying that, despite how it may seem from the above comments, I in no way condone or defend those who deliberately and repeatedly go beyond track limits to gain an advantage. But I do feel that we need some balance between that and the occasional, unintended drift off-line - that unexpected moment of over- or under-steer which necessitates a course correction that may take a wheel momentarily over the line. We are, after all, supposed to be 'racing' which, by definition, entails trying to go faster than the next guy. Dumb it down too much and we're in danger of it simply becoming a procession of cars being driven comfortably within limits for fear of being penalised because we tried a bit too hard.

[Paul D]

I've put my fireproof overalls on, ready for the flaming!

[MGDavid]

Great response Paul, I'm sure you'll let us know if you get a reply.
On a different tack, how confusing to some will it be, that these are MSUK rules and there's no mention of whether they've been agreed by FIA at the higher level to apply at all circuits. For someone like myself who already from choice does most racing abroad, where the 3 off / 1 on the circuit AFAIK still applies (Spa etc) I'm questioning why I'd want to race here at all. As you alluded to, I'm not good enough to keep all 4 on the track 100% of the time. And as I do my own build, prep and repairs I *will* go off track to avoid contact. Far simpler to take my few thousand spent on UK meetings to somewhere where you are made to feel welcome rather than just a nuisance to be legislated against and penalised at every turn (pun intentional).