Scruitineering of Roll Cages - a change in interpretation by the MSA

Geraint Owen · 26 Feb 2018, 10:20 (Ref:3804010)

This is a word of warning following my experience at VSCC Pom at Silverstone this weekend. I was in an ex Kuhmo Cup E36 M3 that has done over 200 races, so it is a car that has been checked once or twice in the past.

Anyway, within the last few weeks it seems the MSA have issued a "clarification" to the scruits about roll cage mounting of the main hoop and front stays to the floor. They are insisting on a foot welded to the main tube that is then welded to a reinforcing plate welded to the floor. It has been practice for many car builders to build a "box" for the cage to sit on about 6" high up from the floor for increased strength. What the scruits are now saying is that it is unacceptable for the main tube to be welded to the top of the "box", instead there must be a foot on the tube welded to the top of the box. There is no specification for the size of the foot, so in theory it could be the diameter of the tube, but in practice you may get rejected for that. The alternative is to have a reinforcing plate under the box.

If in doubt read this
http://www.awmmc.org.uk/images/infor...crutineers.pdf

AdrianM · 26 Feb 2018, 15:39 (Ref:3804093)

If the enforce this they are going to have 99% of cars failing scrutineering imo. I've never seen a fully welded-in cage (bolt-in yes) with a separate foot like that and a quick look at the instruction videos/documents for the major players in the market don't show any either.

Bruce Chambers · 27 Feb 2018, 14:17 (Ref:3804301)

Thanks for the information, can anyone suggest any benefit from compliance with this clarification or is it simply yet another ill-considered missive from the MSA which will be retracted a few weeks down the line?

**Mike Bell** · 27 Feb 2018, 14:34 (Ref:3804315)

Think I’ve only got one welded in cage, but that car may be subject to questioning, reading the blurb. I’m certainly not rushing to modify anything, best to see what transpires. The car isn’t due to race this season anyway, so lucky there’s no pressure......

Geraint Owen · 27 Feb 2018, 14:48 (Ref:3804322)

I spoke to one of the roll cage manufacturers today.

Their advise was do nothing for now. The cage manufacturers have all gone to the MSA and said you have got it wrong. It is said the MSA will issue an update, but no one there is prepared to sign off the change. Watch this space!

Colin Parkinson · 27 Feb 2018, 15:06 (Ref:3804332)

Bruce that sounds about right!

One has to ask why the MSA have suddenly looked at this issue, when cars have been scrutineered over and over again without issue.

I cannot see an easy fix, except welding a plate on the outside of the car under each mounting, but I am not sure if that will comply.

The bulletin form the MSA to scrutineers has not told them what would be an acceptable solution.

Most welded in cages will have been fitted as the car is being built and there is no easy fix as far as I can see.

Some competitors I know are already talking about jacking it in. More bureaucracy and more cost to the competitor.

Then there is the fire extinguishers............!

I believe this will affect most race and rally competitors with welded in cages.

lotustwincam · 27 Feb 2018, 15:54 (Ref:3804348)

"Some competitors I know are already talking about jacking it in. More bureaucracy and more cost to the competitor."

Its not just existing competitors that are affected, it also puts off prospective new competitors.

How many ROPS failures have there been that the "feet" would have prevented?

Simon Hadfield · 28 Feb 2018, 07:05 (Ref:3804482)

This is the issue that concerns me, why are the discussions being taken, and on what basis? Why is the rank and file competitor not being consulted, as far as I am aware even scrutineers have not been asked, so why the seemingly constant tinkering with regulations that seem to have been working well up to now? I would make the point that this is not specifically a historic issue, as in theory it could affect every type of car that has had a roll cage fitted.
Also, what would adding a plate under the shell do? How on earth does that better serve the structure than a box welded over many inches so as to feed the load into both side and bottom of the shell structure? Very odd.

Colin Parkinson · 28 Feb 2018, 08:14 (Ref:3804498)

Is this anything to do with Safety Devices having a go at the MSA for some reason?

**Mike Bell** · 28 Feb 2018, 08:19 (Ref:3804500)

Totally agree with Simon. Let's hope that the cage manufacturers can get the MSA to see some sense......

andy97 · 3 Mar 2018, 17:16 (Ref:3805494)

The MSA have had to issue a clarification about fire extinguishers, essentially changing the interpretation of the regs isued just a few weeks ago, and now they are having to re- examine their recent interpretation of the ROPS regs because the manufacturers have told them they are wrong.

You could not make this up. Confusion reins. Have the MSA not heard of consultation?

I hope that David Richards can get a grip on this.

Colin Parkinson · 3 Mar 2018, 21:28 (Ref:3805542)

So the interpretation on fire extinguishers is .........?

I have not seen anything yet.

andy97 · 4 Mar 2018, 04:45 (Ref:3805625)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colin Parkinson

So the interpretation on fire extinguishers is .........?

I have not seen anything yet.

I received the following e-mail from the MSA technical dept, in response to a direct question. The change is in the recognition that there is no maximum age limit of 10 years for extinguishers and that a qualified fire extinguisher,but non-manufacturer agent, can service the bottles, as long as you do not need the extinguisher to retain homologation, which you don't in uk club racing until 2022.

Dear Andy,

There is no maximum life for an extinguisher in either MSA or FIA regulations. Some manufacturers will give their systems a maximum serviceable life but this is a commercial decision for that manufacturer. A non-FIA homologated system can be serviced by any suitably qualified person, however we would recommend that the manufacturers service schedule is followed.

Best Regards
Michael

cid:image001.png@01D1DFA5.A18EE730
Technical Department
Motor Sports Association, Riverside Park, Colnbrook, SL3 0HG
T: +44 (0)1753 765000 | technical@msauk.org
cid:image008.jpg@01CE62D5.D4FE8850@msauk cid:image009.jpg@01CE62D5.D4FE8850/msauk | www.msauk.org
The Royal Automobile Club Motor Sports Association Limited, trading as Motor Sports Association.
Registered in England and Wales 1344829. For full email disclaimer, please click here.

From: Andy
Sent: 12 February 2018 16:57
To: Technical <Technical@msauk.org>
Subject: Fwd: Fire Extinguisher Servicing

Good Morning

The recent regulation change regarding fire extinguisher servicing states that extinguishers are to be serviced in accordance with manufacturers guidelines.

Some manufacturers have decreed that they will not service extinguishers that are 10 years old.

Please can you tell me categorically whether this is an absolute rule, that extinguishers are now lifed to 10 years from date of manufacture and then have to be discarded or whether it is possible to get an extinguisher serviced by a qualified and competent Fire Extinguisher engineer and still be useable (albeit none homologated) even if it is over 10 years old, as long as it passes the test and service regime.

Thank you

Andy

Colin Parkinson · 8 Mar 2018, 11:28 (Ref:3806836)

MSA told scrutineers to take no action (unless clearly poor workmanship) until advised. No idea how this mess will be sorted out but at least scrutineers now covered!

Quote from an un-named source!

Colin

lotustwincam · 5 Apr 2018, 10:45 (Ref:3812960)

Did this get clarified? We will be fitting a Cortina cage in the near future and would like to avoid any hassle.