| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
SeanCostin
USA
32 Posts |
 Posted - 09/19/2012 : 19:48:13
|
The 15 Meter rule which is under review. Please make comments on modification or removal of this rule it it's two forms.
3.2.3 Starts
3.2.3.1 Standing Start: A standing start is defined as an unassisted start from the stationary position, except that the vehicles which are unstable at low speeds may be assisted by one assistant for not more than 15 meters. The assistant may not push the vehicle.
3.2.3.2 Flying Start: A flying start is defined as a start where the vehicle may be assisted by accelerating before entering the timed portion of the course. Push assists by one or more persons are permitted. Pushers may not assist the vehicle for more than 15 meters. |
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2012 : 12:36:49
|
3.2.3.1 Standing Start: A standing start is defined as an unassisted start from the stationary position, except that the vehicles which are unstable at low speeds may be assisted by one assistant for not more than 15 meters. The assistant may not push the vehicle.
recommend changing to:
Standing Start: A standing start is defined as an unassisted start from the stationary position. Vehicles may be assisted by one or more persons. Assistants may not push the vehicle. Assistants may provide balance of the vehicle during the starting process, not to exceed one minute duration.
Rationale for change:
Low-speed stability of speed-record vehicles is usually not that good unless one uses a tricyle or other statically-stable vehicle. Speed records are not usually intended to be practical-vehicle records where rules such as being self-supporting at launch are more important. Launch distances are more difficult to measure than launch times and one minute is a reasonable duration.
3.2.3.2
Flying Start: A flying start is defined as a start where the vehicle may be assisted by accelerating before entering the timed portion of the course. Push assists by one or more persons are permitted. Pushers may not assist the vehicle for more than 15 meters.
recommend changing to:
Flying Start: A flying start is defined as a start where the vehicle may be assisted by accelerating before entering the timed portion of the course. During launch, push assists by one or more persons are permitted. Pushers (assistants providing propulsion) may not assist the vehicle for more than 15 meters. Assistants may only provide propulsion through running. Motor-driven devices or catapults may not be used. Assistants may provide balance of the vehicle during the starting process beyond 15 meters, not to exceed one minute duration.
Rationale for change:
We don't want vehicles to fall over at the start of an event such as the WHPSC. Assisting the rider with balance doesn't externally provide proplulsion. Assistance in balance may allow the rider to provide more propulsion rather than struggling to maintain balance, but that's fine; it's the rider that's providing the propulsion. I'd like to separate assistants providing propulsion, calling them pushers, from the assistants providing balance. Limiting the distance is good as it is the rider that should be providing the propulsion, not the pushers. I would be fine to reduce or eliminate propulsion of the vehicle through outside assistance altogether. I am not sure about the one minute duration aspect. If that is left out or someone else can propose better wording or a different idea, that would be fine.
3.1.5
Integrity: No vehicle may discard any part after beginning motion.
recommend changing to:
Integrity: No vehicle may discard any part after beginning motion. A launch cart that supports the vehicle during start may be used provided it is controlled by an assistant and does not provide propulsion.
Rationale for change:
This covers the use of launch carts. Launch carts are no worse than folks using in-line skates helping to balance the vehicle. The carts do not (and should not) provide propulsion. The original rule was written so that a vehicle could not eject parts and dump a bunch of weight as it approached the timing traps to improve its acceleration.
Larry Lem |
Edited by - Larry Lem on 09/28/2012 08:00:39 |
 |
|
|
Don S
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2012 : 19:26:35
|
Comments on the flying start.
A really fast runner may be able to push the vehicle until it's speed is somewhere between 15 and 18 mph regardless of the distance. If he pushes it a quarter mile it's not going to make the vehicle faster through the trap. There are similar physical limitations on how long or how far a person on foot or on skates can provide stability without impacting the final speed. Getting a streamliner rolling and providing low speed stability during the critical starting moments only serves to increase the safety and the efficiency of the event.
I propose eliminating all references to distance or time that a person or persons touching the vehicle may assist the vehicle as long as no mechanical devices are used by the assistant that will aid in propulsion of the vehicle.
"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS |
|
|
|
SeanCostin
USA
32 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2012 : 20:31:22
|
Dave Kennedy, former IHPVA president says that in the early days the 15 meter rule was instituted because teams were on shorter tracks and they were getting very powerful track team members to push the bikes up to speed.
Personally I'm not comfortable with launch dollies since it is an ejected part of the vehicle. Id rather have the rollerbladers because they are more successful at launching and they are not part of the vehicle.
Someone was going to take notice how many seconds the launching took, so we might be interested in time of launch support, rather than distance.
How about something like " vehicle starter cannot be in contact after 10 seconds from start for the run to be considered official. vehicles can stop to restart their launch clock.
|
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/28/2012 : 21:00:30
|
I'd rather use a rollerblader too, but my last vehicle was awfully heavy and the shell wasn't that stiff. The next one will hopefully be lighter and stiffer, but I doubt that a rollerblader could handle the launch.
But what was the original intent of the vehicle integrity rule? (And if we discover the original intent, that doesn't necessarily mean it's a good rule). Are we worried that vehicles will shed parts as they travel down the course? Of course we don't want garbage on the course that would create a hazard, but do we need a rule for that? No one's designing a Saturn V rocket with multiple stages. No one is designing a boat ala Thunderball. http://www.flickr.com/photos/30203703@N05/8036579052/in/photostream
I suggest deleting the rule on vehicle integrity altogether.
3.2.3.1 Standing Start, recommend changing to:
Standing Start: A standing start is defined as an unassisted start from the stationary position. Vehicles may be assisted by one or more persons to balance the vehicle during the start. Assistants may not push or provide propulsion to the vehicle.
3.2.3.2 Flying Start, recommend changing to:
Flying Start: A flying start is defined as a start where the vehicle may accelerate before entering the timed portion of the course. During the start, vehicles may be assisted by one or more persons to balance and/or to push the vehicle. Assistants may only push the vehicle by means of running. No catapults or motorized devices are allowed to assist in propulsion.
3.1.5 Integrity, recommend deletion of the rule
Larry Lem |
Edited by - Larry Lem on 09/30/2012 08:36:30 |
|
|
|
Don S
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 09/29/2012 : 20:35:49
|
quote:
" vehicle starter cannot be in contact after 10 seconds from start for the run to be considered official. vehicles can stop to restart their launch clock.
o.k. Rider A is assisted by a person on roller blades for 9 seconds but has not achieved stability and falls over thus stopping. He is picked up and restarted and the launch clock restarts. After 10 seconds his assistant releases him going 20 mph and he is on his way to a record breaking run.
Rider B's assistant is also on roller blades. Rider B starts slower and his assistant fails to take his hands off the vehicle until 11 seconds have passed. Rider B is successfully launched going 15 mph and goes through the traps faster than rider A but is disqualified?
It could logically be argued that any limitations on launch time should be left to the event organizers and should be limited to "go" or "no go" decisions for the launch but any rider allowed to launch should not be subject to disqualification based on how long or how far he was assisted at the start.
It would seem that the key words of 3.2.3.2 are that quote:
the vehicle may be assisted by accelerating before entering the timed portion of the course. Push assists by one or more persons are permitted.
The reference to distance should be removed from the rule.
"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS |
Edited by - Don S on 09/29/2012 20:36:48 |
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/30/2012 : 08:54:03
|
One thing about rules is that they stick around a long time, and whether good or bad, and whether anyone remembers the original intent and spirit, they are hard to change or get rid of once they are written.
If a time limit were applied now, would we just be saying how stupid that rule is a few years from now, and "Oh, I never liked that rule." and "That's one rule we've always wanted to change."?
Larry Lem |
|
|
|
Alan Krause
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/30/2012 : 12:27:47
|
| then why change the rule at all would be the question. the current record (s) were set observing this rule, without a launch dolly. are we discussing this because we don't like the rule, and which rule is next? |
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/30/2012 : 13:34:36
|
What are you talking about, Al?
Do you want to take a few steps back and discuss whether rules should be changed?
What happened at the IHPVA general meeting? I did not attend and have not seen meeting minutes.
From what was said at one of the WHPSC debriefings, 3 things were going to be decided on in 30 days, the 15 m launch rule, and adding junior age groups and a trike or multi-track vehicle category.
Is this not true or are we going to discuss whether such changes are needed? I thought it was decided and now folks need to agree on the verbiage of the rules.
I added discussion about vehicle integrity because I had already done so a year ago. These subjects and more were brought up a year ago via this IHPVA forum, went nowhere and seem to have been ignored at the IHPVA general membership meeting. Again, I would have liked to have attended the meeting but the goal of the week during the WHPSC is to focus on breaking speed records, not holding IHPVA meetings even if it seems convenient because so many members are at the same motel.
Larry Lem |
|
|
|
Alan Krause
23 Posts |
Posted - 09/30/2012 : 21:24:30
|
Alice here -
There is some confusion about the inclusion of the 15 meter rule in the motions made by the board.
The motions were: (paraphrased) "to accept trikes and Jrs as record categories with a deadline that the board adopt the language for the rule requirements within 30 days of Sept 12, 2012. (we tend to procrastinate...a lot) Also with the provision that any record can be recognized retroactively if the correct data is provided to the rules committee.
The 15 meter rule was tabled for a later date. |
|
|
|
onetonpump
Australia
129 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2013 : 21:35:27
|
I am glad to see METRIC MEASURES being used.
In Australia metrication was adopted about 30 years ago,it is such a pleasure after the apalling mathematical factors in the foot//pound system;I hope you adopt it for all records.
Water // water // water |
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2014 : 11:18:47
|
"the current record (s) were set observing this rule"
Is there is documentation to support this? Perhaps someone has video recordings or records were set with statically-stable vehicles or launch carts on 15 m ropes.
The records at the WHPSC site only show whether wind conditions were legal at the finish line when the vehicle was in the trap. There is no "legal start" column.
The 15 m rule only started getting seriously policed in 2013 and 2014.
Larry Lem |
Edited by - Larry Lem on 09/19/2014 11:21:10 |
|
|
|
Larry Lem
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2014 : 11:27:43
|
What was discussed at the IHPVA general meeting held at the WHPSC 2014 concerning launch rules? I was again working on my bike and did not attend.
I heard that the loophole of having an unlimited number of assistants "pushing" the vehicle for 15 m was discussed.
Are we considering "tightening up" the rules to limit how many folks may be involved and what equipment may be involved? If we are to follow modified rules for WHPSC 2015, we need to have these rules in place now as folks are actively designing/building vehicles for next year.
I'm back to designing landing gear just to preclude any start rules issues as I'm almost positive that such a design won't be outlawed.
Larry Lem |
|
|
|
Don S
USA
88 Posts |
Posted - 12/18/2014 : 18:17:56
|
Rules excluding landing gear equipment incorporated into vehicle design for the purpose of allowing a rider to self start and self stop would defeat the concept of allowing a rider to launch himself thus necessitating launch assistance. If the independent launch is to be achieved than landing gear seam an appropriate option.
Don S
"it's important to understand what makes them fast. It's more important to understand what keeps them from going faster." DS |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
