Tarmac Rally Definition: Fro Goes Postal!

[fro]

Okay, so I sent some emails off to various CAMS/ARcom people, expressing my concern at some of the poor wording for defining what a Tarmac Rally is. I mentioned it here.

Anyway, the wording in the 2006 CAMS Manual is/was:

Originally Posted by 2006 CAMS Manual, National Rally Code, 1.40

“Tarmac Rally: A rally event conducted principally on tarmac which includes approximately 10km, or more, of total special stage distance on tarmac. Any such events shall be run under the Tarmac Rally Standing Regulations (available from CAMS National Office).”

Now, as I whinged back then (and in 2005, when it was suggested in the ARCom minutes September last year), that's not worded ideally.

So I sent in a few suggestions. In the most recent ARCom minutes, it is now:

1.40 Tarmac Rally: A rally event conducted which includes 10km or more of total special stage distance on tarmac. ‘Tarmac’ is a surface that is sealed with either bitumen or concrete or other similar material. The tarmac stages of such events shall be run under the Tarmac Rally Standing Regulations (available form CAMS National Office). Where more than 25% of total special stage distance is on a tarmac surface the complete rally shall run to the Tarmac Rally Standing Regulations.

This still isn't the best solution.

I'm trying to think about other alternative wording. More to come... my brain needs coffee. And this server needs re-booting.

[rowdytoot]

and I thought the cuddle I gave you on sunday made the bad men go away?

methinks you've come over all diplomatic since Friday night, and Saturday lunch, and ......

it's at least as ****eful as it was before...

I know what your intent was in providing 'feedback' to them, and they've munted it up even more.

what was wrong with making it just this :

1.40 Tarmac Rally: ‘Tarmac’ is a surface that is sealed with either bitumen or concrete or other similar material. Where more than 25% of total special stage distance is on a tarmac surface the complete rally shall run to the Tarmac Rally Standing Regulations.

everything that is 100% tar is covered- so actual chaps rallying is covered and anything over 25 is covered. so 150 km competitve requires 37.5 km of tar.

Everything that is under 25% is free to do as is necessary under the requirements for SS rally. so Bega is fine, BiTB would be fine if it ran again, ex Bathurst State round is fine... no one loses!. OMGWTFBBQone11ONEleven!!!!

not that hard surely. If I be this good this out after 3 beers, and 1 vodka,and no food, surely a Solicitor and his croneys have no excuse!

Rowds

[tortfeaser]

No, its worse than before. Much worse. I could have run an event with a >10km tarmac stage if the event wasn't 'conducted principally on tarmac'. Now I can't.

[fro]

Originally Posted by tortfeaser

No, its worse than before. Much worse. I could have run an event with a >10km tarmac stage if the event wasn't 'conducted principally on tarmac'. Now I can't.

Umm, I doubt that you would have, actually. Particularly after a telephone discussion I had this afternoon. You wouldn't have gotten a permit.

So now figure out how you do want it to read, so that you can run the event you want, without having to use loopholes in poorly worded regulations.

[DaveTrees]

Wouldnt it be easier to just say that any STAGE with >25% tarmac must be run under Tarmac Rally rules (ie. as if it is 100% tarmac ) ?

Do it stage-by-stage rather than on an "event" basis. This would make it more feasible to have a tarmac (or mixed surface) stage in an otherwise gravel event ...... like Alpine 2005. It had one 33km stage on tarmac (less than 10% of total event distance) - but calling it a "tarmac rally" would be a complete nonsense.

[smee]

Fro,
I think you need one of these t-shirts.
That or use this as your avatar....

[tortfeaser]

What you want to do is apply the tarmac rally standing regs to events where the risk profile of a tarmac rally such as Targa, ECC, Mt Buller etc warrants.

The risk profile of an event like the Alpine, BitB, whatever with one tarmac stage or a couple of stages with a bit of tarmac in them is nothing like the Targa events.

So have a tarmac definition that relies on something to do with the permit that was issued or on some percentage of the total competitive distance that is on tarmac.

Having the tarmac regs apply to one stage does no good 'cos you've then got to get a C1 CofC for the whole event and still pay for the tarmac checker to check your one stage.

The initial definition about 'conducted principally on tarmac' was the closest to what we want. It reflected what goes on, that gravel events with a bit of tarmac are much less likely to cause difficulty than an all tarmac event.

[Paul]

Define "a bit of tarmac" 2k, 5k, or 10k where's the limit.

[DaveTrees]

Originally Posted by tortfeaser

Having the tarmac regs apply to one stage does no good 'cos you've then got to get a C1 CofC for the whole event and still pay for the tarmac checker to check your one stage.

As the rules are currently written, yes .....

I am suggesting they be re-written, not just changing the definition of what events they apply to.

Fix it properly, don't band-aid it (which I think is half the reason that TBWB gets so confusing sometimes).

[Spac]

Surely the vehicle criteria alone would be enough: They don't allow typical 'tarmac rally cars' into PRC or Gp N, and they don't allow touring cars into tarmac rallies... Problem solved, really...

[Paul]

That kinda doesn't work either as an example is Dean's Subaru.

They used Dean's 2005 spec car to do the Mt Buller sprint.

The only things they did were re jig the supsension and do a re map and put it back on the Dyno. Plus put some road rubber on. That's what Phil Rodgers told us on Sunday after the event.

MRT use their gravel car for tarmac events as well.

So a Gp N can run as a tarmac car.

I think they are using the same config for Targa as well.

[Kagan]

I believe there was one notable change to the car you may have missed, Dean said on the TV, with a huge smile, we have taken the restictor out of the car which makes it better to drive!!!!

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by Spac

Surely the vehicle criteria alone would be enough: They don't allow typical 'tarmac rally cars' into PRC or Gp N, and they don't allow touring cars into tarmac rallies... Problem solved, really...

I will jump in before Fro does, you will find GpN is allowed in tarmac events, however they have be excluded from Targa. For more info see this thread by Fro.

So Dean could have run a GpN for Mt Buller, but he isn't allowed to at Targa.

[raybak]

The Herridge car had to revert to a standard gearbox to be able to run without the restrictor.

Ray

[Mark]

Why's that, Ray? As in, rules-wise?

Mark