Ugo
Sounds like your saying that the main consideration is the conditions
under which the record was set. The one hour turn around being the biggie.
But what about the running on Pendine Sands, Bonneville, Daytona Beach,
Black Rock desert, Lake Gardiner or the Autobahn, these all represent
different conditions in one way or another. Keeping everything absolutely
equal is not only impractical but impossible.
My point is that the standard should be: 'making two runs in opposite
directions over the same measured distance within twenty four hours',
period. Very simple, and can be used around the world under a variety of
conditions and events.
As for classes. Let me pose this question. Since FIA doesn't recognize
cars with different body classifications where would George Fields "record
holding" 300.509 MPH '37 Simca fall in the grand scheme of things? Does
this become a "National" record simply because FIA doesn't recognize this
type of car or because he didn't do it with in one hour?
I'm sorry if feelings around the world are getting hurt here, but this
is a valid and important topic. I still believe there is a better way of
doing this "World/International" record thing than the way the FIA has been
doing it for the last (80 - 90?) years.
John Beckett, LSR #79, Worlds Fastest Chevette
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ugo Fadini" <ugo.fadini@abc.it>
To: <Land-speed@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 11:07 AM
Subject: sanctioning, FIA, etc
> Hi list,
> I just went through all the messages on the topic of sanctioning and
rules,
> all in one drop, and may I say the whole discussion is nonsense?!?
>
> But discussing and arguing is FUN (as an italian I am most qualified to
say
> that: we have just about 35 million soccer coaches over a population of 30
> million males, and about 60 million would-be prime ministers over a total
> population of 60 million - yes, that includes infants) so I will add my
own
> opinions...
> Also, I am not a racer, and the "interested spectator" point of view is
> vital, isn't it?
>
> Oh, by the way, I see that understanding between americans and british has
> not made any progress: "two countries divided by a common language"...
> Well, italians have a very bad opinion of themselves and spend a lot of
> time and energy in self-insulting; and this bad opinion is generally
> endorsed in international circles, so spare any nasty comments my words
> might prompt for a better cause, please!!!
>
> It seems to me that the opposed groups (pro-FIA and against-FIA) speak
> totally different languages (just like americans and british...) without
> being aware of it. Which makes mutual understanding a little difficult...
>
> The SCTA and USFRA (not to forget the other early organizations that
> eventually disappeared) were set up to organize land speed "racing": i.e.
a
> form of competition, that was born spontaneously several decades ago to
> fullfill the desire of hot-rodders to go fast with a minimum of
> restrictions, for fun, for sheer love of speed, to prove their technical
> abilities, for personal prestige in their circle of friends and so on.
> In the same way the NHRA and AHRA were formed to organize drag racing.
> Land speed as a racing activity is based on a single measured distance
(the
> flying mile) and the sanctioning organizations change rules and classes
> rather often to suit current technical trends and to overcome practical
> problems.
> The fact that the records would be recognised in wider circles than the
> racing community, or not, was not an important issue, at least for a long
> time. The records are there to be broken by the next racer and that's what
> counts (and getting in the 200 Club, of course!). So much so, that those
> who did care for international recognisement stayed at Bonneville the week
> after Speed Week, when the AAA had their own speed week under FIA
sanction.
> For a long time there were no problems.
>
> The FIA does not organize "racing" in this area: strictly speaking, it
does
> not consider record breaking a racing activity, it just holds a book of
> records based on a fixed set of rules that change very little over the
> years, to allow direct comparison of technical achievements over long
> periods of time. They allow only four different categories (production
> automobiles, special construction automobiles and special vehicles -
thrsut
> evhicles, that is -, plus drag racers) because these are classifications
> that will be good for ever (or for as long as the automobile, or anyway
> free-rolling land vehicles will exist).
> It certifies records on many different distances and times, in addition to
> the flying mile.
> And it is a fully internationsl body, in that it has affiliated
> organizations in most countries of the world. It is based in france, but
it
> is not a "french" or a "european" organization, it is a world organization
> that organizes not just the motoring sport, but all spects of the
> automobile culture and life (well, at least in theory). It was formed
> because the differnt local Automobile Clubs wanted it to exist, and the US
> have been represented in it since 1927, by the AAA first, and then also by
> USAC, NHRA, IMSA and others.
>
> Do we need them both? Of corse we do, because they fill different needs.
> Could they co-exist? Yes, and indeed so far they did for half a century.
>
> So? Where is the problem?
>
> No problem regarding timing reliability: we all know SCTA/USFRA timing is
> as good and as reliable as the FIA version (Did anybody question this? Not
> that I am aware of, so why do so many people insist on this point???)
> No problem regarding integrity and respectability: we all know the SCTA
and
> USFRA do a great, professional job (again, did anybody question this?)
> No problem regarding the technical skill of the racers who build highly
> efficient and often extremely well contructed and (pardon me) highly
> sophisticated vehicles.
>
> Of course, the problem comes when people call "World" records those set
> under SCTA/BNI/USFRA sanction. And in particular when one of these records
> is faster than the equivalent FIA record: which, in the end, given the FIA
> rules, mostly applies to records set by streamliners (and occasionally
> lakesters)
> A good example is the current SCTA/USFRA record for Turbine engined
> vehicles, which is quite a bit faster than te FIA record (still belonging
> to Donald Campbell's Bluebird in 1964!!)
>
> Now, anybody can call their records whatever they feel like. After all,
the
> Guinness book, which is a perfectly private (and commercial) group,
> "sanctions" thousands of records in all fields: some people respect them
> while others do not pay the slightest attention. And evrybody is happy.
>
> If the holder of an SCTA record in any category or class that has no
> equivalent in the FIA rule book wishes to call it a "world" record, that's
> fine. I would maybe object that if a particular type of body or engine is
> only used in the USA, or if in other countries racers could not set
records
> according to those rules the claim would be unfair, but it would still be
> up to the record holder to decide wether it is fair or not. (May I remind
> that till a few years ago SCTA and USFRA had different rule books and two
> separate sets of records: which ones should have been considered "world"
> records at that time??).
>
> The problem arises when we compare records set under different conditions,
> but which, from a vehicle classification point of view, could be
sanctioned
> by either organization (basically: production and streamliners).
> Now, if we forget for a moment the definition the FIA gives of a World
> (i.e.: unlimited) record as opposed to an International (i.e.: class)
> record (or a National, or a local...), sincerely, I don't see why, if
> conditions were the same", we should not consider Vesco's SCTA/USFRA
record
> a "World" record, superseding the Campbell one.
>
> The point is all here: "IF CONDITIONS WERE THE SAME". Now, the one hour
and
> the two way rules are enforced on ALL records set on flying distances by
> the FIA, while they are not by the SCTA and USFRA.
> Do these rules make a significant difference? Pardon me, I know some
people
> do not agree, but yes, I think they do. Back to my example: Vesco was in
> fact ready to comply with the FIA rule, as FIA sanctioning was available
at
> the World Finals, but COULD NOT make a return run in the opposite
direction
> in time. If you are looking for a confirmation that the FIA rule is more
> restrictive - that is: it makes the record more difficult to achieve -
> there you have it. The same thing happened to Mickey Thompson in 1960 and
> to many other people over the years, both sides of the ocean.
> (If it was the other way around, and the SCTA/USFRA rules were more
> restrictive, who would care about the FIA sanction any more?!!?)
>
> From what I read, some of you americans agree about this and would welcome
> the one hour rule and only dismiss the two way within one hour part only
> because it is unpractical for Speed Week.
> In fact, FIA sanctioning has always been available at World of Speed and
> the World Finals, but I also remember it was available at Speed Week not
> many years ago and indeed, Al Teague's still-standing record was set at
> Speed Week in 1991.
>
> Maybe it could be set up at Speed Week again: after all by wednesday
> activity at Speed Week is usually pretty slow, and there would be plenty
of
> time to allow those interested to set records under FIA sanctioning.
> Or eventually the SCTA and USFRA might just sanction records using exactly
> the FIA rules: the FIA would still not recognise those records, but I am
> sure nobody in the racing community, either side of the Atlantic (and
> Pacific !) would ever object over calling those records "World" records,
> once set in the same conditions.
> As Beverly Stanley (I believe it was her) pointed out sometime ago ago,
> that was the very idea that drove to setting up the LSA: too bad that
> opportunity was wasted, but I do not see why the same path could not be
> walked again.
>
> Until then, I guess we europeans (but some americans too), will still be
> objecting whenever we will hear an SCTA/USFRA record called "world"
record:
> it does not mean we don't consider the american organizations respectable,
> reliable, serious, professional or whatever (if we did, we would not come
> to Speed Week, we would not seek the friendship of american racers, we
> would not even get involved in these discussions): it is just that we need
> the words we use to have one and the same meaning for everyone in the
whole
> world, if at all possible, just to know what we are talking about. Other
> than that, they are just words and a record set under SCTA or USFRA
> sanction is as respectable and "offical" as an FIA record, just different.
>
> Ok, hope this is a useful contribution, specially towards a more relaxed
> approach to the problem. Otherwise, as I said, we italians know that we
are
> always wrong. (Let us be happy with our great loosers, Ferrari and Luna
> Rossa!)
>
> Ugo Fadini
>
>
>
>
|