Safety and rescue committee.

[Fast Jack]

My previous post asked if any accidents were caused by poorly maintained Kevlar or if drivers could not be located due to poor helmet paint . After 838 + views there was not a single post of a specific problem. Please post your research on the agenda items pertaining to these 2 items.. We dont need solutions to problems that dont exhist. Shawn Cavanaugh

[Dave M]

An Idea

Call Wart and a couple other key players on the Safety Committee. I am sure they have file folders FULL of support data and research................

[Fast Jack]

No reply

With 180 views I had hoped for some answers. Is there research to support the proposed new rules?

[ricochet112]

With 180 views I had hoped for some answers. Is there research to support the proposed new rules?

Seriously, contact Bob Wartinger.

[Racerkyle20]

Bob wartinger is your man. He does not post on this website. He is the Main man in UIM for safety.

http://bobwartinger.com/

[reed28n]

geez don't stop there

My previous post asked if any accidents were caused by poorly maintained Kevlar or if drivers could not be located due to poor helmet paint . After 838 + views there was not a single post of a specific problem. Please post your research on the agenda items pertaining to these 2 items.. We dont need solutions to problems that dont exhist. Shawn Cavanaugh

Rounded pickles, cock pit sides, fire extinguishers in trailers in Thompson, conn, Water foil permit in Maine, seat belts in air planes, stop signs, traffic lights......

Rick Management is a culture. Being safer may not always produce an immediate measurable result but its cumulative effect will be reasonable insurance premiums and reduced incidents.

I don't believe in the global warming alarm, but I think we should emmit less bad stuff into the air.

[PRO-MOTIONRACING]

Let's see if I have this straight, $70.00 to have a jacket cleaned and certified and $80.00 to have a suit cleaned and certified, at last years prices, is this correct?, and this is now going to be mandatory?.
So for me this would be two jackets and three suits plus a new helmet or $370.00 +helmet, +shipping this year just for new labels.
I might need to think about this one.

[blueskyracer]

Let's see if I have this straight, $70.00 to have a jacket cleaned and certified and $80.00 to have a suit cleaned and certified, at last years prices, is this correct?, and this is now going to be mandatory?.
So for me this would be two jackets and three suits plus a new helmet or $370.00 +helmet, +shipping this year just for new labels.
I might need to think about this one.

Really, what happened to common sense. Folks wonder why the sport is dieing?

[aojesus]

The only place I found a rule 3 paragraph 6 pertaining to safety equipment was safety rule 3 on page 22 of the printed rule book. The last sentence of paragraph 6 states that The referee or inspector has the power to prohibit the use of any helmet or life jacket that he/she determines to be potentially unsafe.<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <woNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->

The motion that carried..... <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <woNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--> Motion made to add to Saftey rule 3 paragraph 6 the last sentence. Cut resistance driving sleeves and pants. The SORC feels this rule is adequate. Motion Carries



I interpreted it to mean that the last sentence would read <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <woNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <woNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1"/> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->The referee or inspector has the power to prohibit the use of any helmet, life jacket or cut resistant driving sleeves and pants that he/she determines to be potentially unsafe.

I also interpreted that the helmet motion failed and DOT helmets would still be allowed. The only other thing I thought changed was the addition of only being able to use a helmet for 10 years.

Somebody please correct me if I am wrong because I will be very disappointed in the "system".

[mike ross]

All the stuff we voted on was a recomendation from the Safty Committee. It will go back and we will see how it rolls out. You have what we passed to the tee. We added the cut suit to be added to our current rule. DOT helmets we felt are still a viable helmet choice. Mikey

[ricochet112]

Trying to lighten things up a little...

Data, we don't need no stickin' data!