Jump to content

BCCR/Tech Desk - what takes precedence?


MMiskoe
 Share

Recommended Posts

So how does the tech desk and BCCR work together?  Or do they?

 

The thread about Motor mounts in a swap got me looking at how the tech desk and swap sheet work in conjunction or rather how they don't, which in turn got me looking at the tech desk and BCCR.

 

On the tech desk there are a few items that specifically call out details that are either missing or unclear in the BCCR.  Are these expected to get added to the BCCR at some point? 

 

I'm not wanting to pick on a particular car or mod, but I'm going to do so for example purposes.  And I'm going to paraphrase for simplicity.

 

BCCR says if you don't have a bumper you need a bash bar.  OK, no sweat.  But it doesn't indicate what the bash bar needs to be made from.  Tech desk request posted (by me) to ask what are the material requirements?  Answer back is "match your roll cage tubing".  Cool, we can do that, thanks for clarifying.

 

But now the BCCR is a year old and a new one coming and no indication that this is going to get updated and I see cars on track that are clearly not following the tech desk direction.  So what governs?

 

I'm sure there are similar examples available, but this one is pretty clear and I'm familiar with it.

 

Curious what others have to say about this and if any of the Powers-That-Be are looking at it as a procedural change that might be in the works.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question(s).

 

As I understand it, tech desk rulings should be put into the rulebook the following year.  

 

I believe the tech desk rulings are supposed to expire at the end of the year after being either dropped, or added to the rulebook.

 

I will add that I have seen 1 or 2 tech desk rulings overturned in years past.  Mostly when our former tech person seemed to make judgments based on what he thought, moreso than enforcing what the bccr actually said.

 

So....   ymmv.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Good question(s).

 

As I understand it, tech desk rulings should be put into the rulebook the following year.  

 

I believe the tech desk rulings are supposed to expire at the end of the year after being either dropped, or added to the rulebook.

 

I have seen that opinion from several folks here, but I don't believe it was ever stated in an official capacity.  My E46 has E36 exhaust manifolds (and other items) based on tech desk rulings from several years ago, with no update to the BCCR.  Might be surprised, but I expect those to hold up if questioned at impound.

 

A bit more clarity on how the tech desk is supposed to work would definitely be helpful.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MikeW said:

Not to pile on, but I have never found anything like this hand tool rule in the rule book. 
https://champcar.org/tech/knowledgebase.php?article=8

That was a rule that in the books foe darn near a decade.  It has since been removed.

 

Any ruling with Jay's name could maybe be considered with a grain on salt.  He isn't with champcar any longer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wvumtnbkr said:

That was a rule that in the books foe darn near a decade.  It has since been removed.

 

Any ruling with Jay's name could maybe be considered with a grain on salt.  He isn't with champcar any longer.

So, I don’t have to resurface my head with a file?

Purging obsolete stuff like this would be helpful. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee

Its one of my responsibilities, and I am very far behind.  In this case, it really actually is my fault.  (#blamechris)

 

The goal was to update/migrate the tech desk articles into the BCCR on an annual basis, but the workflow has not been well established and the timeline always seems compressed.

 

I will bring it up at the next meeting and see what the others think.  If there are any "glaring" issues on the tech desk I can address those specifically, please email them to my champcar email.  

 

As discussed in Dana's email, there are two updates needed to the BCCR between now and Jan 1, so if something is important and I can get it approved we can slide it in before the end of the year.  Conversely, if there is something on the tech desk that is obviously incorrect we can withdraw the TD article asap if approved.

 

This forum was toxic to my health so I have stopped coming here and reading as much as I used to, generally only pop in now when I get a PM.

Edited by Chris Huggins
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 5
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee
5 minutes ago, Chris Huggins said:

Some people's accusations and assertions were toxic to my health so I have stopped coming here and reading as much as I used to, generally only pop in now when I get a PM.

FIFY @Chris Huggins

P.S. As a TAC member, I appreciate you working through some very difficult situations, leaning on us for advice, and bringing our thoughts to the rest of the BoD.

Edited by mcoppola
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris Huggins said:

Its one of my responsibilities, and I am very far behind.  In this case, it really actually is my fault.  (#blamechris)

 

The goal was to update/migrate the tech desk articles into the BCCR on an annual basis, but the workflow has not been well established and the timeline always seems compressed.

 

I will bring it up at the next meeting and see what the others think.  If there are any "glaring" issues on the tech desk I can address those specifically, please email them to my champcar email.  

 

As discussed in Dana's email, there are two updates needed to the BCCR between now and Jan 1, so if something is important and I can get it approved we can slide it in before the end of the year.  Conversely, if there is something on the tech desk that is obviously incorrect we can withdraw the TD article asap if approved.

 

This forum was toxic to my health so I have stopped coming here and reading as much as I used to, generally only pop in now when I get a PM.

Sounds like you need help.  You don’t have to do it all by yourself.  There are lots of members and probably even some willing to help.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't start this to pick a fight or beat someone up.  I hope it didn't come off that way.

 

It is frustrating that the journey from the BCCR then through swap sheets and the tech desk can lead you to a tech inspection at the track that flunks you for something that isn't well spelled out.  I've been there a number of times and to be honest, getting the car through tech at the first event is one my highest stressors of racing with Champ.  In SCCA the book is well documented and followed, getting a car through tech may be time consuming but you almost never have an item that is contested.  It either is or it isn't.  Champcar has some holes in the book that allow far too much interpretation. 

 

This thread was an effort to understand where the goal posts are.

 

Chris - you're not alone in feeling that the on-line forums turn into a witch hunt.  I've seen it in other series too.

 

A purge of the tech desk would be the starting place, easier to remove than add.  I can understand where it is hard to do the migration from TD to BCCR, many of the TD items are not worded in a manner that allows them to translate from one to the other.  If the TD questions were formatted for a Yes/No response it might be better.

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MMiskoe said:

I didn't start this to pick a fight or beat someone up.  I hope it didn't come off that way.

 

It is frustrating that the journey from the BCCR then through swap sheets and the tech desk can lead you to a tech inspection at the track that flunks you for something that isn't well spelled out.  I've been there a number of times and to be honest, getting the car through tech at the first event is one my highest stressors of racing with Champ.  In SCCA the book is well documented and followed, getting a car through tech may be time consuming but you almost never have an item that is contested.  It either is or it isn't.  Champcar has some holes in the book that allow far too much interpretation. 

 

This thread was an effort to understand where the goal posts are.

 

Chris - you're not alone in feeling that the on-line forums turn into a witch hunt.  I've seen it in other series too.

 

A purge of the tech desk would be the starting place, easier to remove than add.  I can understand where it is hard to do the migration from TD to BCCR, many of the TD items are not worded in a manner that allows them to translate from one to the other.  If the TD questions were formatted for a Yes/No response it might be better.

 

 

 

Not to take away from your very valid question in the OP, but I don't think you have to worry about getting turned away at tech for your first race. They are just looking at safety stuff that is spelled out clearly enough that anyone engaged enough to start this topic is going to pass or at least be given a one-race exemption. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter if you get turned away or you spend 8 hours in line because you had to fix something, meanwhile your test day clock ticks down. 

 

The first race happened years ago and pretty sure we sailed through.  Since then I've been hit up to change the window net, the harness attachment, rear bumper, roll cage bars and been questioned on my fuel piping.  Car's I've raced but not owned have been hit for lap belt attachment, fuel line material, seat bracing.

 

And all of these are on cars that have been through tech multiple times before the issues were raised and the final decision came down to tech "not liking it".  Now we appear to have publicly documented protests that are questioning the interpretation of things.

 

The subjective-ness is what sucks.  So anything that can be done to clarify things is a good step.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, MMiskoe said:

Doesn't matter if you get turned away or you spend 8 hours in line because you had to fix something, meanwhile your test day clock ticks down. 

 

The first race happened years ago and pretty sure we sailed through.  Since then I've been hit up to change the window net, the harness attachment, rear bumper, roll cage bars and been questioned on my fuel piping.  Car's I've raced but not owned have been hit for lap belt attachment, fuel line material, seat bracing.

 

And all of these are on cars that have been through tech multiple times before the issues were raised and the final decision came down to tech "not liking it".  Now we appear to have publicly documented protests that are questioning the interpretation of things.

 

The subjective-ness is what sucks.  So anything that can be done to clarify things is a good step.

 

 

100% agreed, I've been in all those situations too. Was afraid you were a new guy getting scared off. Carry on :)

 

Unfortunately instability is the nature of the beast. We turn over the BOD, CEO, and Tech every couple of years and just keep going...sideways. Not sure how else to put it, not really better or worse, but definitely not sitting still. I'm sure everyone is trying to make things better, but being human, they have different ideas what that is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ABR-Glen said:

 

Unfortunately instability is the nature of the beast. We turn over the BOD, CEO, and Tech every couple of years and just keep going...sideways. 

We need a unifying, clarifying unwavering, mission and vision to guide the series like an ethos.  I see progress but I'd like to see this used more and prolific within the series.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LuckyKid said:

We need a unifying, clarifying unwavering, mission and vision to guide the series like an ethos.  I see progress but I'd like to see this used more and prolific within the series.

EDIT:  See the next post after this one - we apparently have a mission statement.

 

ORIGINAL POST:

Although I find most “mission statements” corny and/or misguided, I agree with you that one would help.  The series has evolved a lot, and I often feel like we are unclear on exactly what we are trying to be.

 

I will try to write one during petition season.

Edited by Racer28173
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LuckyKid said:

We need a unifying, clarifying unwavering, mission and vision to guide the series like an ethos.  I see progress but I'd like to see this used more and prolific within the series.

Not much action posted, but there is a thread for that:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/30/2022 at 10:09 AM, Grufton said:

A bit more clarity on how the tech desk is supposed to work would definitely be helpful.

My understanding is that once the new BCCR comes out, if the ruling didn't make it into the new year then it's obsolete. Tech desk had a ruling stating extended lower ball joins were 5 pts per corner and had to change it to 10 pts per corner. 

 

Hard to plan out how much points some things are when you have to reference the tech desk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cowboys647 said:

My understanding is that once the new BCCR comes out, if the ruling didn't make it into the new year then it's obsolete. Tech desk had a ruling stating extended lower ball joins were 5 pts per corner and had to change it to 10 pts per corner. 

 

Hard to plan out how much points some things are when you have to reference the tech desk. 

Not saying your wrong but I can't remember many getting moved to the rule book and if that makes them go obsolete then thats a problem for any team building or changing their build. 

 

Maybe that is why Chris stated he is behind in moving things over. Maybe some clarification is needed.  @Chris Huggins

Edited by 55mini
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone were to ask the tech desk: "Do tech desk rulings only apply for the BCCR under which the ruling was created?"

And the TD says "Yes", and the next BCCR doesn't incorporate this idea (like most tech desk rulings):

At the end of the year, when the new BCCR comes into effect, we are back to square 1 because that TD ruling from last year no longer applies ----> It doesn't matter in the long run what the TD says about itself, it matters what the BCCR says. 

We could either ask the same questions at the beginning of every year (the answer to the spam prevention question is 'dog') or update the BCCR

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One aspect to consider here is a lot of the tech desk items are really just clarifying the intent of the BCCR.  Would be nice if the wording of the rules was crystal clear (and not 1000 pages), but it is what it is.  Doesn't make much sense for semi-official clarificactions to expire if the underlying rule hasn't changed.

 

Other items are point assignments for stuff not in the rules.  Again, would be nice if those made the rules too, but doesn't make much sense that those should expire unless superceded by something else.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I thought of the deck desk for one reason in 2019. It was to get all the backroom decisions out in the public eye. At the time, staff were forwarding their emails outside of our systems, and we had no backup, or evidence of what had been said via email.

Nothing more. 

It was never intended to be part of the rule book. And the CEO/Board Chair at the time agreed. 
Any tweaks, clarifications, or changes would be put into a revision of the rulebook where it would become a permanent rule.
But that never happened.
It's much harder now that we don't make regular revisions to the BCCR like we used to do. 

 

Now I just did a word search in the 2021 (Term first use in BCCR), 2022, and 2023 BCCR. Looking for TechDesk and Tech Desk. The term does not appear in the 2019 or 2020 BCCR. The two word version only appears three times in rule # 4.2. Basically send VPI questions to the Tech Desk.

No where in the BCCR does it state that the tech desk takes precedence over the BCCR. Only the Event Supps can do that (1.2.2.).
By-Laws>Event Supps>BCCR

Take this with a grain of salt as I am just the Director of Marketing.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bill Strong said:

I thought of the deck desk for one reason in 2019. It was to get all the backroom decisions out in the public eye. At the time, staff were forwarding their emails outside of our systems, and we had no backup, or evidence of what had been said via email.

Nothing more. 

It was never intended to be part of the rule book. And the CEO/Board Chair at the time agreed. 
Any tweaks, clarifications, or changes would be put into a revision of the rulebook where it would become a permanent rule.
But that never happened.
It's much harder now that we don't make regular revisions to the BCCR like we used to do. 

 

Now I just did a word search in the 2021 (Term first use in BCCR), 2022, and 2023 BCCR. Looking for TechDesk and Tech Desk. The term does not appear in the 2019 or 2020 BCCR. The two word version only appears three times in rule # 4.2. Basically send VPI questions to the Tech Desk.

No where in the BCCR does it state that the tech desk takes precedence over the BCCR. Only the Event Supps can do that (1.2.2.).
By-Laws>Event Supps>BCCR

Take this with a grain of salt as I am just the Director of Marketing.


 

Salt taken

 

How do we "fix" this?

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...