Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Speed\s+Creep\s+\-\s+Powers\s+to\s+Be\s+Opinion\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Speed\s+Creep\s+\-\s+Powers\s+to\s+Be\s+Opinion\s*$/: 19 ]

Total 19 documents matching your query.

1. Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Robert M. Pickrell Jr." <brnrubr@alltel.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 07:40:44 -0500; You folks never cease to amaze me. I generally ignore team.net posts, as so many of the posts digress into personal conflicts and name calling. Then we have these statements of fact dreamed up inside; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00400.html (10,278 bytes)
2. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: TeamZ3@aol.com; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 09:29:16 EDT; I never did say I was speaking for the SCCA or the SSC, I was interpreting the rules as I read them. I'm sorry, I have to disagree with the SSC if any of it's members considered the Ft Worth Tour eve; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00403.html (9,287 bytes)
3. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 09:12:34 -0500; As another event entrant who presented my views earlier, I offer the same qualifier. The apocalypse is near. I agree entirely with the above statement. I've already made my views known on this subjec; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00404.html (9,783 bytes)
4. RE: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: knuckledragger@kcweb.net; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 09:24:52 -0500; but I do not go along with any assertions that the course design was unsafe. == One thing to remember, and my only comment on this thread, a fast course can be considered (there is no 100% though) "s; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00405.html (8,387 bytes)
5. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 09:53:33 -0500; That's entirely correct. However, the upper speed limits as stated in the rules present several problems: 1. The phrase "should not normally exceed" leaves lots of room (maybe too much) for interpret; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00407.html (10,997 bytes)
6. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: Smokerbros@aol.com; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 12:04:58 EDT; The only thing that I thought was inappropriate last year was the South course's "Larry Park Way" was headed right at the grid. I don't think anyone exceeded our maximums on that straight, due to the; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00411.html (8,742 bytes)
7. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Patrick Washburn" <washburn@dwave.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 12:13:05 -0500; Thanks for your comments Rob. It is good to hear from one of the decision makers. You should not be too surprised, however, that conjecture and imaginative "fact" stating will occur when there is lit; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00414.html (9,313 bytes)
8. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Patrick Washburn" <washburn@dwave.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 12:29:34 -0500; One thought. While this is a good discussion about max speed, my interpretation of what Rob was talking about was a more "general" speed creep. Meaning that a singular moment of unopredictable termin; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00415.html (9,564 bytes)
9. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: William Loring <bloring@tirerack.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 13:50:47 -0500; How to understand the "speed creep" argument in three easy steps:* 1: open your rulebook to page 2 (page 22 in the PDF). 2: Read section 1.6. 3: Repeat step 2 until you see that there's more to this; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00418.html (8,809 bytes)
10. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:03:33 -0500; than safety. Whereas there are always competitive equity issues involved in any consideration of course speeds, the SSC (that's the Solo Safety Committee, get it?) has now taken an interest in the ma; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00419.html (9,508 bytes)
11. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: William Loring <bloring@tirerack.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:57:21 -0500; I respectfully submit that you left step three prematurely. :^) IMO, 1.6 covers all aspects of this argument. It explains why the SSC is involved, and why Howard is allegedly concerned. Both for saf; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00420.html (9,998 bytes)
12. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Rick Brown" <free2000@quixnet.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 13:29:31 -0700; OK, I'll throw out my opinion (having designed courses for probably close to 20 years and driven them for almost 30, not to mention having been a Safety Steward). I personally feel a straight finish; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00422.html (10,606 bytes)
13. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Brad Cox" <COXB@tmfhs.org>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 15:58:22 -0500; Here are some of my (rookie) impressions of the courses... The finish lights on Saturday were at the exit of a 5 cone slalom (I think it was 5), with each cone a little further from the last. I may; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00425.html (11,238 bytes)
14. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: William Loring <bloring@tirerack.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:11:51 -0500; A well reasoned opinion, and one I find myself in total agreement with. Thanks. Best regards, William Loring; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00428.html (10,906 bytes)
15. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Paul Foster" <pfoster@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:23:49 -0400; <<<While I am talking to you Paul, incident reports are going to be available to the general population when we can: 1. Get the information reliably, (Like if you fill out the incident report and sen; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00430.html (8,958 bytes)
16. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: TeamZ3@aol.com; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:44:36 EDT; My personal opinion is that your post as a representative of the SSC was presented in a totally inappropriate way. I'm not aware of any stock class cars reaching or exceeding 70 mph at the Fort Wort; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00431.html (9,962 bytes)
17. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: The Narbys <narby@centurytel.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 17:17:22 -0500; In the light of official interest by decision-making bodies in our club: As a member and officer of the club, I once again call for publication of verifiable data showing that "speed creep" is actual; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00435.html (8,204 bytes)
18. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Scott Peterson" <scott.peterson2@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 20:09:55 -0500; finish, that's that I would rather finish a course under power in a straight line with an appropriate amount of run off (slow down) room. Stop Boxes, finishes on curves, and finish slaloms are produ; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00444.html (10,017 bytes)
19. Re: Speed Creep - Powers to Be Opinion (score: 1): Author: "Mike Smith" <msmith2@columbus.rr.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 21:26:49 -0400; Yeah, I remember a particularly windy event that kept 're-aligning' our timer boxes for us. (I was T&S chief at the time). So, we had to weigh down the timer boxes. The course had an 'S' right in fro; /html/autox/2001-04/msg00447.html (9,053 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 19
Page: [1]