SO Hull, Safety and Racing Rules

[BROCCOLI]

Nick, Andrew,

I'm learning to like the roll-up myself.

Tampering with the rules seems to get people a little huffy. Why not mandate a minimum of one right turn for each race course. It's been a while since I have rolled up a hydro.

Craig

[Fox]

impact

check out the opc rule for pickle forks.

It is easy to cut the pickle back 6inches add a min. 3/4" bulk head to cover all the stringers and then add a rounded dense foam over the bulk head.

I am confused about the side wall strength for outboards. We obviously have it when you are strapped in a capsle and even with one of the best capsle I reinforce mine with extra stringers and more kevlar but in a outboard I have never known anyone to have a side impact and try to hide behind the cockpit wall. If there is a side impact the boats are so low to the water that the boats just ramp over one another and the drivers are too big to hide in the cockpit. besides that there is not enough structural support to hold the cockpit wall for pushing in even if it couldn't be punctured. The best place to be is BEHIND/under your boat in the water.

Jay

[BP125V]

Harrington

Why did Ed crash at Wakefield? Was it set up or something else? Just the facts please.

Bill III

[HYDRO21Z]

Details on my cockpit const. and crash

I was very surprised to see my right coaming broken the way it was due to
the way it was constructed.
First.. my coaming was constructed of a laminant of two layers of Carbon Fibre, and two pcs. of 3mm Okume plywood all in different grain configurations, for what I believed was nearly impossible to break. I even stood on the panel between two saw horses, and never heard a complaint from anything but the horses. .
The overal thickness of my coaming was approx 5/16".
Second.. the accident.... I stuffed the boat in the second turn, and the broken coaming was a result of the impact between the water and the the panel. Nothing else hit the boat.
I was thrown clear of the boat, some 10' in front of it.
The impact broke the panel clean at the transom and 20" in front of the transom. Looked just like a saw was used....two clean straight lines.
Hope this info helps feed your food for thought.
Dennis 21Z

[22W]

Did somebody say roll 'em up??? I am in!!!

[reed28n]

Rules

Three heat format would be great if the commission could reduce the number of National Classes. The cock pit sides could be changed sooner than 09 great idea.... no point in changing the points on boats and

Keep our discussion to sustainable obtainable goals.....

[Big Don]

Aside from adding a massive amount of extra headache for inspectors, the fact that Ed Harrington crashed at nationals RUNNING ALL BY HIMSELF DOWN A STRAIGHTAWAY proves that the rules doesn't work. If a guy is determined to set up his boat in an unsafe way that causes him to crash, apparently you can't stop him. Let's give the inspectors a break, they have enough on their plates. Tony

I believe Ed crashed because whoever put his transom handles on used 1/2 in long screws. The handle pulled out of the transom. I went over and looked at it and that is what I thought happened. Maybe Ed can clarify????

Let me just say this...I personally don't care what you guys do to ASH setups but in just playing around with an ASH this year for fun, I don't think the current rule is unsafe????

[CSR4C]

The UIM cockpit rules can be viewed at http://www.uimpowerboating.com/vsite...-0-file,00.pdf
pages 180-183

[Composite Specialties]

Tips

The purpose of changing the sponson tips is to reduce the ability to puncture. With pointed tips, you can still puncture anything, wood and composites. Rounded tips would reduce the puncture factor for wood as well as composites.

[39R]

I’ll jump in here with some other topics not presented yet; my friends the Kelly’s are looking for support for what appear to be some reasonable and common sense changes that I believe are worth some discussion. Please take a look at the following where they (we) propose 3 changes, all based in part to actual situations seen this past season.

Not wanting to cut anyone’s good input off after I have just asked for said input, I anticipate the common remark to the proposed overlap rule change of “if you don’t like it, then don’t race PRO”. While certainly a valid remark, I would like to see some serious discussion as to why what to me appears to be an obviously dangerous situation is needed in the PRO class? I can think of no other professional (hence PRO) motor sport where such is allowed and at the speeds that PRO boats compete at, it seems almost suicidal.

Here are Jeff and J. Michael's proposed rule changes we would like
submitted at the APBA National Meeting.


APBA General Racing Rules

Rule 28.11 Inspectors and Duties
Remove/Delete- "the engine and boat shall be assumed to have been raced
in the same condition in which it appears during post inspection."

Replace with- If the equipment is determined to be illegal, the
participant shall be disqualified from the heat of which the inspection
took place.

Reason- Assuming is not factual. Participants should not be disqualified
from a previous heat if no inspection was accomplished. It should not be
assumed that equipment was illegally raced without an inspection.


APBA Outboard Racing Rules

Safety Rule 7.3 and 7.5 Accidents/Flips
Remove/Delete- "unless the driver is clearly out of danger."

Reason- Anyone in the water during a race is in danger. The driver could
be injured and may not be seen by other drivers. Stoppage of the heat
for driver safety is more important then finishing a heat.


APBA Outboard Racing Rules
Safety Rule 5.3.b Overlap PRO
Remove/Delete- PRO Overlap Rule. Combine with Stock/MOD

Reason- Unsafe Overlap rule.
The Lead boat has the RIGHT OF WAY and can close the door/cutoff the
trailing boats on the inside, because the overlap of COCKPIT to COCKPIT
was never established.

Example- PRO Nationals, a full field of OSY 400 boats approach the
starting line at the same time. The boat in lane 12 has the lead
approaching the first turn. He can go to lane one and close the door on
the 11 boats on the inside, because none of the 11 boats had established
a PRO overlap of COCKPIT to COCKPIT. This can happen any place on the
race course from 12 boats on down.

This is the way the rule is written, interpreted and enforced.

There needs to be a minimum boat length and not cockpit to cockpit for
an overlap.

Rules 5.3.b)2)
3.b)3)
3.b)4)
3.b)5)

Do not apply to the Lead boat, only to the Overtaking boat. All this is
UNSAFE for open cockpit outboard racing.

SO/MOD- Overlap states "The lead boat shall not alter its course across
or into the established path of the rear boat"

Thank you
Jeff Kelly #6108
J. Michael #6012

Ken Kaiser #1141
Commodore
Columbia Outboard Racing Association

[reed28n]

overlap

The overlap rule has been discussed for many years. The rule should be worded such that we can enforce it from our current access to view the infraction. The chop is rarely called and is difficult to see at best. Revise the rule to be not too wordy and not too flowery and cock pit to cock pit might be as good as it gets. It all depends on if your looking back or looking ahead as to the seriousness of the infraction.

Racing rules should all have an underlying implication that racers want to race the best at their best and beat them within the rules. One assumption of cheating and everyone believes everyone is cheating. Many of the rules are written for the advances made by the benders of the rules.

Suggestions and discussions are great make sure that you can enforce them without killing all of volunteers and their time.

[laddies]

Hey Craig....I think if you stick with that roll up thing who knows.....someday you might get good at it..... ......I hope you come to Top O again....I have missed you along with many others...Nick.

[Joe J]

Kenn:

I know you are posting for the Kelly's.

That being said, I happen to think that the Pro overlap is fine. I think that "cockpit to cockpit" is easier to determine that "1 boat length". Also, shouldn't this be presented to the Pro commission, as opposed to the SORC?

As to the inspection point, our volunteer inspectors are overworked as it is. If your proposal were to take effect, the work load would double. Since most of the inspectors also race, this would restrict their ability to do so. I can tell you if this passed, I would no no longer inspect myself.

Joe Johnson

[14-H]

Kenn:
*** I think that "cockpit to cockpit" is easier to determine that "1 boat length". ***Joe Johnson

It might be easier to determine for the patrol boat judge but it is unsafe. Ed.

[39R]

Thank you Joe, your comments are appreciated. You are correct of course that the PRO overlap rule is a PRO commission issue and most likely inappropriate for this forum, but I didn’t want to break up the text sent me by Jeff Kelly and so I kept it included. Nonetheless, it is still dangerous if taken to the extreme ability of someone to chop the field. That no one has done so yet without deadly consequences is only a matter of luck, not skill.

Reed28n also makes a good point if I understand the reply correctly; but in this case I think it will be too little too late if we actually wait for someone to take it to the extreme as the rule is written today. We have had this discussion for many years because the action that the rule as written today would allow is blatantly dangerous and people recognize it for what it is. If there where no fire, then there wouldn’t be smoke.

Again I would ask for an example of any other Professional motor sport where it is acceptable to intentionally come in on another driver when any overlap is known to exist?

On the issue of inspection that you and Reed28n warn against over working the inspectors, I suggest that you are reading to much into the suggested change; the number of heats an inspector inspects would still be at there discretion, but in the event an infraction is discovered in the setup, disqualification would be for the one heat not all. A great example as many of us are well aware of is the case when Mike was running my sons hydro at the end of last season and the boat simply disintegrated due to undiscovered damage that was caused in the horrific rollover accident it was involved in as my family and I took a sudden detour off the highway that late night into a Washington field.

In that case the damage to the boat caused the engine to hang loosely on the transom and thereby did not pass inspection, but that damage was not present in the first heat. To assume that it was and thereby disqualify him for that heat also was correct as the rule is written, but completely unfair in that instance and it almost cost him a hall of champ’s entry.

The same situation raises with our J drivers when they are having difficulty getting on plain, the quick fix is to bring then in quickly and take a few turns out of the kick out bracket and send them right back out. Such action could also set them up with an illegal setup, but if this where the second heat would it be fair to assume that it was illegal for the first as well if no inspection was done?

As Jeff points out, to assume that the setup found to be illegal has been for all previous heats is a bad assumption; this is analogues to being pulled over for speeding and have the officer just assume that I speed every day and throw the book at me, when actually I made a one time mistake. I think a good argument has been made that to disqualify for infractions not proven to be present for every heat is a stretch for accuracy.