Damm...
Mickey is going to get writer's cramp...
Abhi
Who will break up the fight in the "impound compound" when all the parties arrive at the same time to fill out the form?
Damm...
Mickey is going to get writer's cramp...
Abhi
There was an interesting discussion this weekend during the Ne Div convention. Apparently Nasa has something at events called Contact Impound designed to make drivers accountable for metal to metal contact. The suggestion that evolved was to have an area in the impound are that if you have any metal to metal contact at the end of a session you need to stop briefly and fill out a short form describing the situation. No interrogation but just a brief what happen, who was at fault in your opinion and was it a big deal. After you turned in your form you would be free to leave.
Would you guys view this as a positive thing?
Dick
Very interesting subject ... and great responses.
I have looked at this concept during this year and had already made a decision to implement a process of this nature at all TreadZone Pro IT events next year. My plan is to have standard SCCA witness statements available from our staff and Tech. Everybody involved with car to car contact (regardless of perceived 'fault') will be required to make a statement describing the incident. As much as possible, collaboration will be encouraged to fully understand / explain the contact.
Aside from the 'deterrence' effect of additional paperwork , I expect two benefits from this policy. First, it will certainly encourage drivers to discuss their contact, hopefully lessening lingering resentment / protests resulting from a lack of communication. The second obvious benefit is that it will give me a ready 'database' of incidents so that I can quickly identify and react to significant problems without chasing lesser matters across the paddock. All contacts will be a matter of record to track trends and tendencies.
I'm looking for this experiment with a small subset (Pro IT) to give us insights into the process and resulting benefits.
See ya at the races
Terry
Absolutely.
Rob Thiele: My only concern is that sometimes it takes a breather after something happens. If you force to document things immediately when emotions are still high, it may cement uncompromising positions that may otherwise look different after a paddock conversation and views and advice from other people later.
Andy Bettencourt: It would facilitate 'discussion' as well...sometimes better left until cooler heads prevailed, sometimes better to discuss right away,
Dan Sheppard: Although cool down time may be good, more often drivers never get to talk about what happen or nothing gets done.
Chris Raffaelli: I suggest that they be submitted after a cool down period. I assume that these will be used as evidence should there be a protest and to track a pattern of behavior.
Anyone who says a checkbox type form won't work, call me... Most large transportation companies use mostly checkboxes in the "Accident" reports they use. A small part is a picture and/or written statement that generally is very biased.
Raymond
Except it's contrary to the regs and subject to the same sanctions as all other metal-to-metal contact...regardless of intent and consensus. - GATake as an example an SM race at the Glen. It's entirely possible to do a little consensual bump-drafting with 5 or 6 different cars during a 9-lap race. No big deal...