This is true, Kim, but one should normally never have to begin braking before the finish line in order to avoid a DNF in the runoff zone after it.Kim Crosser wrote:...if you go too fast on a straight into a turn, you are going to eat cones or DNF anywhere out there. Finish or not, you need to balance speed against your ability to complete the next turn.
lrayner wrote:Personally, I think the monday morning quarterbacking on the forum (even though it is only Sunday) is not the best way to address perceived safety issues. General design suggestions perhaps.
JERRY B wrote:Anyone that notices a safety issue should immediately report it to any of the chairs, We're all safety officers, and need to look out for each other
I don't think anyone here, myself included, has said that this was an outright safety issue, although it never hurts to look at every aspect of the course design in terms of the "unforeseeable" (total brake failure, stuck throttle, a driver having a seizure or heart attack, etc.) happening. I am trying to make a general design suggestion, based on principles of AX course design I have seen practiced for years in our club and others, namely to include slower segments at the start and finish to maximize safety, conserve wear and tear on equipment (clutches, transmissions, tires, brakes, and timing lights) and to minimize cone carnage, which can cause delays in the event while the course is reset/rebuilt. There is also a "fairness" element to these suggestions, as higher HP/weight ratio cars benefit from a "dragstrip" start, and less skilled drivers in later cars with ABS can certainly benefit from the kind of shutdown that was required after the finish at the last two events.
TT
My initial plan was to run nearly the same course but in reverse, but with the parking lot exploding under us I am not sure its a possibility.
