Actually, what IS RSI ? It's not a standards-setting organization. From their own statement of mission:
1. Confirms that test results for safety products are certified by independent testing laboratories.
2. Summarizes test results in a manner useful to consumers, be they racers or sanctioning bodies, with references to industry standards where applicable.[/b]
Think "consultant". Someone who, when you ask them what time it is, asks to borrow your watch.
That's not a replacement for what SFI
should be, which is a standards-setting organization that would adhere to a clear process for creation and maintenance of motorsport safety standards. SFI ain't that now, and RSI doesn't propose to be that, so what's the point of RSI ?
Why shouldn't we demand that any organization creating standards, used by sanctioning bodies we participate with, be required to conform to ANSI and ISO standards protocols ? What would this get you ? Well, to sample from ANSI's own "statement of mission" (see here -http://www.ansi.org/standards_activities/overview/overview.aspx?menuid=3 ):
The process to create these voluntary standards is guided by the Institute’s cardinal principles of consensus, due process and openness and depends heavily upon data gathering and compromises among a diverse range of stakeholders. The Institute ensures that access to the standards process, including an appeals mechanism, is made available to anyone directly or materially affected by a standard that is under development.[/b]
Multi-billion dollar industries rely on these standards...and have faith that there was logic and equity involved in the development of those standards. Why shouldn't WE have those same benefits ? I can't think of any reason why SFI shouldn't be able to conform their standards practices to ANSI/ISO standards....the big question would be "Do they want to ?"
ANSI & ISO standards development info can be found on-line at:
http://www.ansi.org/standards_activities/d...w.aspx?menuid=3
http://www.iso.org/iso/standards_development.htm
Is it sometimes a pain in the ass to conform to all the requirements ? Yup. Same pain in the ass to endure an audit of your standards developement processes ? Yup. Big time. Seen it myself a lot.
It would take the mystery out of SFI processes...(we'd know more about the "2 year belts" thing)...and maybe take away the "black helicopters" arguments from the conspiracists.
SCCA members are part of a "members-driven" organization. Members, in sufficient number, could demand that any adoption of a "standard" by the club be a "standard" from a ANSI/ISO-certified standards organization. Anybody like the flavor of that ? I do.
But that's just my opinion.
BTW - M.Hurst...does "Cute Car" mean anything to you ? You got Karl/Gail's old car ?