Jump to content

CCES Tech Committee Red Flag video


Recommended Posts

Haven't seen this posted here, but @chisek discusses the BoD's plan to form a Tech Committee. As the author of the petition requesting this, I am certainly appreciative of the BoD's plan to move forward with this even with changes from the original concept. Hopefully this committee will bring better communication, more timely feedback and responses and clarification of relevant BCCR provisions. 😁

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee
2 hours ago, Snorman said:

Haven't seen this posted here, but @chisek discusses the BoD's plan to form a Tech Committee. As the author of the petition requesting this, I am certainly appreciative of the BoD's plan to move forward with this even with changes from the original concept. Hopefully this committee will bring better communication, more timely feedback and responses and clarification of relevant BCCR provisions. 😁

 

 

I too, am glad to see this is coming to fruition. I wrote to Phil and Mike last week. My email was titled "ask Phil." I should have titled it "DON'T Ask Phil" because my message to them was that IMO we need this Tech committee in order to alleviate Phil's burden. Nobody working a full time job AND working our race weekends has the time to field all the questions that our membership points people to Phil to answer.

 

Furthermore, as we've seen, these decisions, rulings, agreements, etc. all need to be documented for all members to see. There are also areas of the BCCR that need to be cleaned up and/or expanded upon further. A perfect example is the fact that you can run full aero - splitter, diffuser, rear wing, and full undertray - for 40 points. By reading the BCCR, you would never get that implied meaning. These are the things that Mike mentioned that the committee would work on. He also did touch base about this committee helping to create a "bible" for each vehicle type, and helping with input regarding VPI values. The 'Bible' would list items such as standard diff ratio vs. one that should have points assigned, etc...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being on the Board, we are working on it NOW.  A job description is being worked on, and we are deciding on terms and roles.  My understanding is that the committee will make recommendations on the VPI table, rules issues, interpretations, etc.  They will not be making law, only recommendations the Board or parts of the Board will consider.  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mcoppola said:

 

I too, am glad to see this is coming to fruition. I wrote to Phil and Mike last week. My email was titled "ask Phil." I should have titled it "DON'T Ask Phil" because my message to them was that IMO we need this Tech committee in order to alleviate Phil's burden. Nobody working a full time job AND working our race weekends has the time to field all the questions that our membership points people to Phil to answer.

 

Furthermore, as we've seen, these decisions, rulings, agreements, etc. all need to be documented for all members to see. There are also areas of the BCCR that need to be cleaned up and/or expanded upon further. A perfect example is the fact that you can run full aero - splitter, diffuser, rear wing, and full undertray - for 40 points. By reading the BCCR, you would never get that implied meaning. These are the things that Mike mentioned that the committee would work on. He also did touch base about this committee helping to create a "bible" for each vehicle type, and helping with input regarding VPI values. The 'Bible' would list items such as standard diff ratio vs. one that should have points assigned, etc...

I thought there was a movement to add 100-200 / team to fund me as a full time employee.

 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee

 

18 minutes ago, Mopar 63 said:

I thought there was a movement to add 100-200 / team to fund me as a full time employee.

 

That sounds like a good retirement gig. I would apply for that job.

 

 Seriously though this would probably be money well spent, as the head tech job is probably, if not more important as our media person's job. 

Edited by mcoppola
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Jer said:

They will not be making law, only recommendations the Board or parts of the Board will consider.  

I'm glad to see you make this statement. This was exactly the intent. Several people mistakenly called this a petition for a "Rules Committee". One even messaged me, concerned that this was intended to be some sort of "trojan horse" that would end up taking over the club. Not what I was hoping to see at all. 

They should be providing interpretations, recommendations and feedback to the members. I think the last part is important. I also think it's important not to get the BoD, CEO, etc. caught up in some of the lower level minutiae such as "how many points for this", "what the VPI on that", etc., etc.. 

S.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mopar 63 said:

I thought there was a movement to add 100-200 / team to fund me as a full time employee.

 

I proposed that and I stand behind it.  What's 25 or 50 each on a race weekend?

 

#freephil!

Edited by wvumtnbkr
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mopar 63 said:

Yes they will and the VPI table will be updated yearly.

 

That is interesting,  now the platform that they drive will come into play.  As the committee members will be voted in you'll want as many people as you can get with the same perspective as you, especially if they are going to be elected to 2 year positions.  I guess I'd also like to see some questions posed to the applicants such as e30 weights, 944 swap values, e30 rear gear ratio's, etc..  This way we can see the direction they would be voting.  Exciting stuff, it's like appointing our own supreme court justices.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee
16 minutes ago, Aquafi Racing said:

 

That is interesting,  now the platform that they drive will come into play.  As the committee members will be voted in you'll want as many people as you can get with the same perspective as you, especially if they are going to be elected to 2 year positions.  I guess I'd also like to see some questions posed to the applicants such as e30 weights, 944 swap values, e30 rear gear ratio's, etc..  This way we can see the direction they would be voting.  Exciting stuff, it's like appointing our own supreme court justices.

There will always be naysayers - people who shoot down or criticize others' attempts at making improvements. Change isn't easy but sometimes it's needed. 

The following quotes need to be kept in mind regarding the ADVISORY board members' role. (Yes, advisory, not 'rule making')

 

16 hours ago, Jer said:

Being on the Board.....

 My understanding is that the committee will make recommendations on the VPI table, rules issues, interpretations, etc.  They will not be making law, only recommendations the Board or parts of the Board will consider.  

 

15 hours ago, Snorman said:

I'm glad to see you make this statement. This was exactly the intent. Several people mistakenly called this a petition for a "Rules Committee". One even messaged me, concerned that this was intended to be some sort of "trojan horse" that would end up taking over the club. Not what I was hoping to see at all. 

They should be providing interpretations, recommendations and feedback to the members. I think the last part is important.

 

For those of you that are afraid of this advisory board, perhaps you need to be racing with 24 hours of Lemons, where each team is assigned point values based on how much you kiss the judge's behinds. 

 

Those of us in favor of the advisory board are trying to move our club/racing series AWAY from that nonsense. We would like the same rules to apply to each team, and to communicate the rules to ALL teams, not just the select few that happened to be 'in the know.' That is the intent of the petition that was written. 

Edited by mcoppola
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Aquafi Racing said:

Exciting stuff, it's like appointing our own supreme court justices.

That's actually not a bad analogy. They don't make rules, they simply interpret and provide "rulings". 

S.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this will be very interesting. I would be happy to see current Tech's individual rulings collected and incorporated as approved by the board. That would be a big win in my opinion. There can only be one rulebook. I am concerned about preserving 'creativity' - everyone is always looking for that competitive edge. We humans like to do that. If everything is locked down, it kinda takes the fun out of it. Besides you guys need something to complain about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ron_e said:

Agree, hopefully the tech committee is astute enough to say whether materials used to duct air between a stock or fabricated nose piece/air dam is points or no points for materials.  

Well it won't help much with things like this.  This is not a committee that will be involved with post-race tech, generally speaking.  There might be a question the marquee expert might be able to answer if he or she is reachable, but this is more forward looking than rule enforcement at a race.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excited about this, I think it is a good idea. 

 

I write tech opinions to Mike a few times a year. I imagine the committee would be doing the same thing. For example I am a strong believer in fuel to weight parity, and I emailed mike a large list of data on popular cars to show where we currently are. I didn't explicitly say "set this value" or "give these allowances", but I showed the hard numbers, where some cars have an advantage and some are screwed, and let him draw his own conclusions. Mike, Phil and the rest of the board are pretty smart guys, and most of the time when I really don't agree with what they decided (like turbo size being open) I think the difference was not having all the technical facts at the time the decision was made. 

 

I guess that makes us technical "analysts", which might be the best way to look at it. If we need to make a list of allowable "non swap" gearing that is the job of the analysts, like any company the senior guys just check it at the end and stamp it. 

 

I would be willing to help out.

 

To Ron's question, I think the committee would instead help the process by thinking of the lists of possible combos ahead of time. Phil would assign it, but imagine if we went " hey phil, what do you think of..."

Splitter only = ?

Splitter + air dam = ?

Splitter or air dam + ducting to rad = ?

 

We can sit in the air conditioning and think of all the weird combos and give tech a heads up of what they might see in the wild. Tech give values and we could have a list of "practical rule enforcement values". If people ask a question we can give them an estimate on the norm, but tech always decides the value on race day. Our running tally of what tech decided helps them keep in straight in the future, and helps teams know what to expect. Some sort of database for all the stupid stuff we ask, that doesn't need to be pages in the BCCR. 

Edited by Black Magic
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jer said:

Well it won't help much with things like this.  This is not a committee that will be involved with post-race tech, generally speaking.  There might be a question the marquee expert might be able to answer if he or she is reachable, but this is more forward looking than rule enforcement at a race.  

 

Not sure where you are thinking I said anything about impound support.  Just the current discussion in another thread with some teams thinking it should be free while others say points for ducting between a nose and rad and getting a ruling before a race.  

Edited by Ron_e
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...