Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: mskala Jun 3 2014, 07:08 AM

What kind of morons have they let loose to design courses. This is a ludicrous speed for safety.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lsDkIEAJms

Posted by: Racer Chris Jun 3 2014, 08:12 AM

NO, NO, NO...
God damn it!

I can't imagine running an autocross on a narrow lane like that, especially with barely any runoff on one side.
Way to easy to end up with a rollover, or worse...

Posted by: J P Stein Jun 3 2014, 08:27 AM

I dunno who is the bigger fool, the designer or the driver.
I had to watch the vid twice to see why he lost it. Typically more speed than good sense. He was well into 3rd gear. He should have been ready for the section and made at least one lower speed pass at it.

I've seen some gawd awful course designs and this was just another. The speed potential was too high for the typical driver........unless the racing surface was wide open. All the NO, NO,NOs in the world are NO help, A designer has to make safety allowances for idiots like that. Most guys aren't fools enough to put a vid like that on the net.....Just IMO.

Posted by: ww914 Jun 3 2014, 08:42 AM

After I watched it the second time, I think the driver was way over his head from the beginning. He never really had control of the car. I think all the NOs were at himself for doing this and messing up his car. Who knows if he even had an instructor with him on that course before he went out. I would say not. And, Chris is right, that could have been really bad with no margin for error, especially at the end of a fairly fast part of the course.

Posted by: Randal Jun 3 2014, 08:49 AM

Real smart. A narrow road where there is little to no spin room and they set up a high speed slalom?

Only way to run that section would be to let them do a bit of third gear (straight), then have a tight (40 foot) 8 cone slalom that slows them way down.

That's how they do it at Cascade Lakes after the fastest place on the course, i.e., last year was going 96mph before braking for the very tight slalom entry.

Posted by: Randal Jun 3 2014, 08:55 AM

And I don't think anyone should be allowed to design an autox until they read this:

http://www.houscca.com/solo/courses/Course_Design_4-1-2.pdf .........

and can reiterate what is contained in the book.

Posted by: Seabird Jun 3 2014, 09:27 AM

Watching that video makes me feel like sh!t. Having a bout of food poisoning this weekend is probably not helping matters though.

Not that I have ever done ax before but it certainly seems like he had little actual control over his car. By 20sec into the video he has already lost control of the car at least once. Lets correct that by increasing the speed!

Wait sounds like my first HPDE

Posted by: mskala Jun 3 2014, 10:29 AM

Imagine the things that had to happen before this. First, whoever's in charge allows
somebody (probably inexperienced and without the guidelines) to design it like that.
Then, everybody there walks the course and says yeah, 75 paces between cones,
that sounds nice and slow and safe. Then, probably a bunch of people run before
this guy and are not fazed by the trees coming at them at 80mph just a hair to the
left.

Posted by: Jetsetsurfshop Jun 3 2014, 12:43 PM

I thought my autocross this weekend had a bad lay-out. At least we had lots of space for my random spins!!
At least he didn't hit a tree or something. Lucky.

Posted by: Seabird Jun 3 2014, 01:38 PM

just rusty barbwire

Posted by: Randal Jun 3 2014, 01:40 PM

75 paces? In the video way longer than that.

Posted by: Woody Jun 4 2014, 06:31 AM

We have a local track that will set up an "Outlaw Autocross" several times a year. I've been once. Essentially you run the track and there will be some high speed slaloms set in key areas. I almost went off in a very bad spot but was able to get it settled back down. Others were not so fortunate, as there was a bunch of cars that did go off and were damaged. Its one thing to be running a track with ample run off room, its another when you add elements that change where you would run off. That barbed wire fence is nasty. What if that was an open car?

Posted by: charlesmac Jun 6 2014, 08:54 AM

Aren't (two lane) roads designed with a peak in the middle to allow for water run off? With every lane change the car seemed to increase body roll so the off camber slalom surely helped him lose control, I would think.

Posted by: Andyrew Jun 6 2014, 03:46 PM

That was way to much speed for that small road... That guy was likely on street tires.. Imagine a hopped up vette with slicks... Get a hair wide and he's off at 80mph...

That section needed boxes, Not directional cones.

Posted by: NORD Jun 6 2014, 11:33 PM

I remember that a AX course is to be designed so that the fastest car do not exceed 70 MPH max.

Posted by: 396 Jun 7 2014, 11:57 AM

At the end of the day.....it's up to the driver to make the critical judgement call.

Posted by: Randal Jun 7 2014, 04:38 PM

If you go to that Roger Johnson SCCA link I posted above and start reading about page 127 there is some good information about speed.



Actually an autox shouldn't be designed where cars are exceeding 60mph. Now the fast modified cars are probably pushing that.

Interesting Roger says "Pure straights much over 400 feet in length are iffy; much longer ones are just plain irresponsible."

Posted by: Rand Jun 7 2014, 04:47 PM

Ok, the designer screwed up. But isn't it really up to the driver? Don't they "walk" the course first so they know it? Why shouldn't the driver be the one to adapt to the course? Blame the course? Really?
Just asking.

Posted by: Randal Jun 7 2014, 06:21 PM

IMHO course design was flawed. You don't run a high (high) speed slalom on a narrow road with no run off. And cones that you have to go around mean what, that the road becomes narrower still and even more suspect. Any mistake or spin and you are going off.

That is why course designers usually walk the course with the "safety management" so that a second set of eyes can look for safety. Doubt this was done with this course and if so someone should be getting a serious lecture about safety and how to properly set up a course.

Think about the liability if that barbed wire had seriously damaged the person driving.

And he should have been wearing polarized sun glasses. All that shade will definitely screw with your ability to figure out where you are going.

Posted by: Joe Ricard Jun 8 2014, 05:38 AM

Other than the drive running out of talent I don't think it is the drivers responsibility to go anything but all out. When I autocross the pedal has one position flat on the floor. Unless I am braking then it is HARD brake and back on as much gas as the rear tires support.

60 ft slalom is 22 paces for me. I count each of them to see if they get longer or shorter through the string. Those were 100 ft or more. And Scca lives by 25 ft to dangerous things. 50 ft for karts.

Been to a few PCA ax's and I was not impressed with layout. in fact I pulled the PCA HMFIC of the event aside and recommended he change this or that. Then whipped the snot out of them in a silly Miata of street tires.

Posted by: mskala Jun 8 2014, 06:28 AM

Of course any person _could_ have said he doesn't want to drive this layout due
to safety.

But IMO autocross is not like going on the track or wheel-wheel racing; you don't
need any special license, you don't need to go to a weekend school first, you don't
need to take an instructor, you don't need any special safety equipment in your
car (other than helmet and sometimes roll-bar in a cab).

So, this must take into account beginners, over-aggressive types, and also that
there are course workers standing out there (also could be beginners). It is up
to the club to make the thing _safe_ excepting totally ridiculous unpredictable
circumstances.

If you start a club that only allows 'pros', then feel free to do whatever.

Posted by: veekry9 Oct 5 2014, 07:55 AM

Thanks for posting.
Serious ball contraction moment there.
"Narrowly escapes high speed rollover into trees."
I know the feeling.
Educational.