> Consider a "typical" region and assume an average entry level of 150
> competitors. That's probably a bit larger than "typical," but, as we'll
> see, that assumption tends to make autoxing look safer. Let's say the
> average course length is 3/4 mile, and competitors get four runs per
> event. That's 600 runs * 3/4 mile = 450 vehicle miles per event.
Since perception by the site owner seems to be the relevant statistic,
then miles is the wrong metric. Time is a better one.
> There was recently a Tour held at a site that had been lost to the host
> region for several years due to incidents at Solo II events.
Is there more information on this, or was this the sole significant
factor? Is this situation representative of the typical site having
problems?
> We aren't entitled to use of people's pavement, we have to persuade
> them to let us use it. Accidents ALWAYS threaten that, whether you like it
> or not.
ALways?
Sites that also hold open track events, road racing or drag racing
couldn't possibly have this problem since accidents are likely to
happen at least once every few events.
> A safe course does not have to be boring.
The current SCCA rules of the fastest Stock or Street Prepared cars
running in the mid 60's is an objective standard that is reasonable.
Doom and gloom over a roll over once in 13 years is not.
|