Roll Bar Debate 2018

[JNC]

As do all other TD events !

[Jim 123]

I don’t think any of us dispute that Track Days carry increased risk.  My personal frustration around this topic is centred on the fact that there is a Club rule about Standard Roll Bars on Track Days.  This rule legislates to preclude a very large number of Members from enjoying the full benefit of their subscription.  For me that is simply not fair unless there are good evidence based reasons.

Maybe I’m thick, but I believe the starting point should be to factually establish if the Standard Caterham Roll Bar vehicle installation, is, or is not, fit for purpose in Track Days.   

Correct me please, but it appears that (all?) other Track Day Organisers, Caterham Cars, and insurers, do not have an issue with the Caterham Standard Roll Bar performance.  I don’t think anybody would try to speculate that the FIA Bar is not more robust, but that does not confer that the Standard Bar is inadequate.

If I may share the following. I have an FIA Bar, so the Club Track Day ruling does not affect me.  However during my recent kit build I found myself in a number of depth discussions with CC in Dartford specifically relating to my FIA Roll Bar.  CC were great, and I was clearly told I could attend any Track Day with the Standard Bar.  However I was advised of one exception. I would not be able to go to a L7C Track Day without an FIA Bar.  

To try and move towards evidenced fact, rather than anecdote, this is why I asked in #63 if : “CC issue cautionary warnings or disclaimers about using their Standard Roll Bar installation on Track Days?" 

 

[Ivaan]

Just my thoughts and why I think this is a can of worms.

Imagine that you are a member of the MT and a Director of L7C. You have a report from MIRA saying that the Current FIA bar is stronger than the standard CC one, and will perform better in a roll over situation. They probably won't give an opinion or recommendation. Would you change the current guidelines?

How would you then feel if there was an accident involving one of us and the failure of a standard bar?

Would you then be able to explain that decision to a court?

Say one's 50% stronger than the other? 10%? Will that be okay?  Perhaps they will both perform identically, but I doubt that. Maybe the new standard bar is stronger than the FIA one.

As Ltd company would the Directors be placing themselves in a legally compromising position? 

Remember they are just volunteers. 

Perhaps TDs aren't covered by H & S legislation because we're not " at work", so I don't know the full implications?

As once as a ruling is made on the evidence, that will be the new standard we'll all have to abide by. Will my old single diagonal FIA bar ( with no sticker ) be acceptable.

Clive

[Grubbster]

Do the Club actually run and manage the trackdays or do they buy the 'service' from a trackday company? When I ran the days at Castle Combe I hired the circuit and the services of the staff (including marshalls). I took out liability insurance that was recommended by the ATDO. I paid an agreed fee to Castle Combe then worked out my own ticket prices and sold the places. Castle Combe took care of all other aspects of running the day - so it was in accordance with their rules. If the Club are working this way then I don't understand why the rules need to be 'L7C specific' rather than use the actual TDOs rules?  I'm probably missing something . . . .

[JNC]

Hello Clive,  Question are you happy with your present Rollbar ? with only a single diagonal ? Did you fit the bar ? Are the bolts from under the car in place and tight when did you last check them ? was the Rollbar on the car when you purchased it  has someone welded in the diagonal bar and where is the sticker ? And do you fit  within the two inches below the top edge .Yes it's a can of worms but it"s been long over due a look at just because it's always been the way we do things doesn't make it right for today.

[Ian B]

There is still a risk examples of which are driver error, mechanical failure, track conditions (oil dropped by another car) so all safety measures need to be carefully considered. 

And similar statements made elsewhere in this thread.

That is exactly the issue, it should be up to the individual member to consider and assess their own level of risk.

For example members are allowed to make their own choice with regard to every other aspect of their safety, eg:

• Harnesses: you can choose to use a 3 point belt on a L7C TD if you wish
• Clothing: you can choose whether or not to wear a fireproof race suit, helmet liner, gloves, etc
• Extinguisher: none is "required" but you can choose to carry one, or have a plumbed-in system
• HANS device: personal choice

But when it comes to a non-tested (without the petty strut) "FIA" bar vs a non-tested variety of other bars, members are restricted by a historic decision made by MT members who at the time simply referred to the regulations contained in the Motorsport Associations Blue Book that governed the Club Sprints, as they felt they needed to regulate that particular aspect of Club TDs. 

(and I am fully aware of the circumstances that led to that perceived need, and it is often mis-stated).

ISTR in the past, when exclusive "L7C" sessions at Brands Hatch were arranged and paid for directly to MSV, then their (MSV) rules applied and any roll bar was fine. Perhaps there is a market for returning to that model? (or simply align the Clubs TDs to all others!). 

And how does all this square with the 620 from CC offering passenger laps last year on L7C TDs with a reportedly non "FIA" rollbar? (I wasn't there so am not sure if this was the case, but it was reported as such on previous threads by those that were).

As for legal liability of Directors if they bring the Club rules into line with ALL other professional TDO's, only professional legal advice can inform that, and that advice will depend on how the question is asked, in the same way the results of the current tests will depend on the questions asked of the testers.  Attempting to quantify which bar(s) are acceptable and which aren't is a futile exercise IMO: will that test be repeated in the future every time a slight spec or manufacturing change is made to one of the several different types of bar available? - and how will the Club even know that a design or manufacturing change has been made?

As has been stated, it would be far more practical, enforceable, and sensible to check and enforce the 2" helmet clearance guideline on Club TDs (although again what is the evidence that 2" is adequate? Perhaps 1.5" is ok, or maybe it should be 3"  ). 

And for reference, I have an "FIA" bar so the rule doesn't affect me, but I fully support those members that would like to be able to make the risk assessment for themselves.

[Tony P]

This won’t help to move the debate forward in any significant way, but for sake of accuracy, the ‘rule’ for roll-over bars on Club days was first instituted at a time when our events were organised on our behalf by an established Track Day Organiser - and at their behest - rather than as a result of an arbitrary decision by the MT of the time, or from any direct follow-on from speed events requirements.

(As far as I’m aware, that TDO still has misgivings about the then ‘standard’ bar; though what they think of the later iterations, I don’t know (I never used anything other than the so-called ‘FIA’ bar or ‘FIA+2’ bar on their events - or any others).

[AndrewB]

Playing devils advocate for a second.  With self scrutineering at L7C trackdays, could I attend if I were to glue some 32mm gloss black UPVC tubing into a cross frame pattern onto my standard roll bar?  I'll sign the form to say I meet the club requirements.

As a few have said, it is not about whether the half FIA bar is better than the standard bar, it is about people taking responsibility for their own safety.  Everything else left to the driver and so the roll bar should be aswel.  

[Tazio]

In this litigious age I am not convinced that 'accepting personal responsibilty' cuts it anymore, as I am pretty sure that in the event of any serious accident, the ambulance chasing lawyers will jump in very quickly. I say this from personal experience, as I was called as a witness to a trackday accident ( bikes), where one of the instructors 'brushed' a customers elbow, causing a serious pile-up....and life changing injuries.

IMHO the Club needs to take what ever measures it deems necessary to protect trackday users and itself.

[Ian B]

Hi Tony, As I said, I have looked into the history in some detail, and made enquiries outside the Club as well.

The TDO you refer to was indeed hosting a Club track day, and simply "asked" the Club to look at the suitability of the rollbars in use at that time by "some" cars on the track. They did not mandate a change and did not ban the Club as has previously been claimed.
They also are still in existence today, and allow any seven on the days they run now, no matter what roll bar is fitted.

The cars they were concerned about at the time were running the "original" roll bar, which is simply a near vertical hoop with no rear braces (and no lateral bracing either).

The MT at the time reacted to that simple request to look at the suitability of the bars in use by referring to the MSA Blue Book that was used by the Club Sprint series at the time, as it was the only "specification" available, but that relates to Competition Motorsport, and not recreational Track Days. 

As I said, there has been a lot of mis-information circulated about the reasons the Club is shackled with the current situation. 

The key is who is taking responsibility. If the Club are mandating something then they are. If they provide the information, and perhaps a "recommendation" to members, then the member can make that risk assessment for themselves   

[Tony P]

Well - ok, thanks Ian; if you’ve looked back in that detail, then fair enough.

I was just recalling how it was described to me at the time, when I was helping to write general guidelines for members embarking on track days. I remember discussing things generally with that particular TDO (and his personal feelings on that particular matter). 

(Just to be clear, this was long before my time as LF editor, I was not on the MT than and was in no way involved in that decision.)

Although I have a particular view on this subject, rather like you I don't really have a personal stake in it, other than the smooth and harmonious running of the Club! 
I am, though, surprised to hear of that TDO's current position.

[JNC]

Ian ? Why after all this time has this information not been used ? How come you are the only person from the then MT to know these facts ! And why are the rest of the then MT keeping quiet ? This last year was an uphill struggle for me and the Rollbar thread !! I had the five usual partners putting me down at what seemed every new post or enquiry I made and now it seems the club rules were from the back of a fag pack so to speak . 

[Shortshift]

JNC (and others)

Do you believe everything you read on the internet?  I would advise a degree of caution before accepting all 'facts' that are posted in online forums...

James

[Ian B]

No worries Tony. Unfortunately some of the mis-information on this subject has been recirculating for so long that it "becomes fact" 

John, just to be clear, I wasn't on the MT at that time, but I did quite a bit of digging when it last came up when I was on the team. All I can say is there are people with very strong and very blinkered views, who want to resist any change at any cost, and without considering alternatives.
I'm not the type who accepts "statements" as fact unless I can see the evidence, which is why I made independent enquiries when I was told things I didn't believe. 

You'll have to ask the MT regarding their response or otherwise, but they have stated a report will be published in LF this month so I suggest waiting to see what that says (and whether it repeats any of the "myths"  ).
I believe the current MT have a policy of not engaging in discussions on here. That policy was something I, and a few others, disagreed with and campaigned against (along with publishing Minutes etc), but as they say, "I'm Out"!

[Shortshift]

As I say, best not to believe everything that you see written on bulletin boards.

James

[JNC]

James, My problem is I don't know who is singing from the right sheet !! as you said the more I ask the less lightly people are willing to help ? Why is this ? is it because of my reputation ?

Apparently telling the truth on here is not allowed and MT members can remove posts that show this is the case ! After messaging Christine I feel I have made the right decision .

 

 

*** MODERATED  DUE TO BREACHING DATA PROTECTION RULES - C Bramall 01/01/2018 ***

[CaterBram]

As both, James and Myself have pointed out, the review process is ongoing and an outcome will be published in due course.

As both myself and James have commented on here and both are on the MT it does question the stance that the MT never posts, but we do try not to enter into pointless arguments when establishing the facts and decision process has not yet been completed.

What I will say is that the MT is trying to ensure that the Trackday review team takes a fair and reasonable approach to the safety standards required on Trackdays operated by the Lotus Seven Club.

There are vacancies on the Management Team, and in due course additional posts will become available due to rotation. so anyone with views they can do better and is willing to put themselves forward to fullfill the requirements of the job role and be part of the management team is welcome to apply.

Most on the Management Team were not in place when the original decision was taken, however as advised previously the Management Team are assessing the requirements in an open and honest manner despite what some may try to portray.

 

[Ian B]

Chris, can you confirm who is on the Trackday review team please?

Also, when do you expect the decision process to be completed?

[CaterBram]

Ian, all I will say is that I am not on the Trackday Review Team, and it is not my place to disclose who has volunteered to be on the Review Team as not all are MT members.

James has already stated that any changes will be communicated in time for the 2018 trackday program, the exact time line i can't say as i'm not involved in the Trackday Review Team, however I'd be surprised if trackday safety is not on the Agenda at the next MT meeting.

[Grubbster]

Just thinking, if the Club rule mandates an FIA roll bar as a minimum (because this is considered the safest option) and someone suffers a nasty injury on a club trackday due to inadequate rollover protection - would that person be in a good position to sue the Club as it was the Club that suggested it was 'adequate and fit for purpose' for trackday use?

I still think it is better for the Club to leave the responsibility for safety with the driver rather than try to legislate on this, and also make sure there are correctly worded disclaimers in place. 

[Ian B]

Thanks Chris. Perhaps, in the spirit of openness, James can confirm the above in that case?

[Shortshift]

Happy to confirm, as both Christine and I have done in recent posts, that we will be publishing an article covering the work that the Club has commissioned in this area shortly, with the January edition of Lowflying (and a timely posting in BlatChat) being our objective.  The members and organisations involved in this activity will be identified in the articles.

James

[Ian B]

Thanks James 

[christinecsr7]

This was discussed openly at the AR Conference but for the benefit of those not present Chris is correct in that the composition of Rollbar review team led by James is composed of MT and non MT members including a senior representative from Mira who conducted the tests.  I am uncertain why it is  necessary to publish names before the release of the report especially those not officers of the Club. If it was deemed necessary then it would not happen without their consent.  

The team  have experience and expertise in automotive engineering and or in scientific research. Their task was to consider the highly technical 147 page report we received on the results. This is an objective exercise based on factual information from an independent highly reputable company who are recognized leaders in the field.  They are tasked with reaching a conclusion objectively using the data presented and presenting that in a way that the rest of us can understand.  There has been a long standing debate on this issue  and we  committed to invest in this rigorous exercise in order that we do get an independent objective result, We are doing just that and the results are imminent. James has committed to publish the results in Januarys edition of Low Flying and simultaneously here on Techtalk. 

Lastly and importantly - I was dismayed to see the comment stating that it was club policy that the MT do not comment on threads on Blatchat. There has never been such a policy in my time , it has never been suggested and frankly to suggest one does exist formally or informally is extraordinary and incorrect. 

Chris (tine) 

 

[Ian B]

Lastly and importantly - I was dismayed to see the comment stating that it was club policy that the MT do not comment on threads on Blatchat. There has never been such a policy in my time , it has never been suggested and frankly to suggest one does exist formally or informally is extraordinary and incorrect. 

Sorry Christine, naturally not a written Policy, but perhaps "team practice" is a better term.

As you know I wasn't on the MT for long (in relative to my tenure) since you took over the helm, so hopefully that practice hasn't continued. Unfortunately I'm afraid it was the case under previous Chairmen. 

The practice of MT members not responding to discussions on blatchat was raised and discussed on quite a few occasions on both the previous MT forums, with the general theory being that it just prolongs any threads and members should instead be encouraged to use the "Ask the Team" email so they could be responded to on a one-to-one basis.

I for one opposed that approach as I believed that only effectively answered one single member at a time, whereas the issue they may be raising could well be of concern, or the answer relevant, to many more members, and the Club forum was the place to have that discussion.

Perceived poor communications between MT and Members, and the desire to improve it, was one of the main reasons I joined the MT when I was an AR.

Sadly the MT forums, that contained a lot of history and background information such as this, that could be of use to newer MT members, have either been lost or aren't searchable on the "new" website platform.