Fiestas are brilliant.....
Posted by danster
Jeff Reamer Infallible Moderator Location: Marlette, Michigan Join Date: 08/14/2010 Age: Possibly Wise Posts: 489 Rally Car: Subaru |
Anders Green Godlike Moderator Location: Raleigh, NC Join Date: 03/30/2006 Age: Possibly Wise Posts: 1,478 Rally Car: Parked |
Interesting. I wonder who they were. I was in registration for most of both days and I didn't see anyone staffing the box of equipment. It was a zip-lock back with the stuff inside and a list of teams who were going to use it. (An entry list with some lines highlighted.) The one team that came to pick up their equipment during my registration shift got their bag and a checkmark on our list. We asked around for instructions but nobody knew anything. (There were no instructions in the bag.) Anybody see those guys anywhere? Anders  Grassroots rally. It's what I think about. |
Matthew Conte Ultra Moderator Location: St. Louis, MO Join Date: 06/27/2011 Age: Settling Down Posts: 257 Rally Car: 1991 Subaru Legacy Turbozzzzzz |
John Vanlandingham Mega Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
Out of this dumpster fire Junior Moderator Join Date: 08/15/2010 Posts: 1,236 |
Banned Junior Moderator Location: La la land Join Date: 01/25/2006 Age: Fossilized Posts: 3,740 Rally Car: Not a Volvo |
Banned Junior Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
RallySafe is not a hammer. Think of it as a CNC mill and the CRC as someone who's never used one before.
A big part of their presence at the events was to show how to deal with installations (which are really easy) show how to program the units and the system, show the features of the system to the organisers. From everything I saw and heard, the system ran flawlessly. Yes, there is a learning curve for how it will be implemented, and definitely a temporary install of the system has issues (screen placement and visibility) but overall the reaction was good to it. Some interesting things happened. - We passed several cars that had stopped, or crashed, on stage and in every case we saw the warning on the screen before the first triangle. In two cases, we saw the warning before the crew COULD have placed a triangle. (Neither case was a blockage) - We used 'push to pass' twice in one stage... in both cases the cars pulled over almost immediately and we lost practically no time to them. - I was able to check the 'unofficial' stage times on transits immediately following the stage. By the time we got to the next in-control I already knew where we were sitting. But... we also had a textbook case for the system: A car rolled in the middle of a tight corner, hit the trees and ended up upside down, blocking the road. The crew selected SOS, since they were still in a very VERY dangerous position. The next car got to them before they got triangles out BUT... got the SOS on their display 300m out, and were able to stop before getting to the car. The driver and co-driver say that WITH OUT A DOUBT, they would have hit the car blocking the road and/or had to drive into the (big) trees themselves (at over 100km/h) (We went off on that same corner last year and it is a fast entry into a blind corner into the trees) When they arrived on the scene, they pressed a second SOS, which cause the orgs to stop sending competitors in and send closing and medical sweep into the stage... within minutes of the accident happening. (I haven't seen the actual incident logs, but do know that when I got on the radio, about 5 minutes after the accident happened - we were 3rd on scene - they were already on the move.) Even if you want to dismiss the 'response' time benefit, and say that there are not enough accidents requiring immediate response in North America, a big point here is that even though the crew that went off was eventually determined to be OK, the system saved likely tens of thousands of dollars in property damage, not to mention the risk of injury to the second car's crew. Interestingly, having a HAM radio in cars near the scene was also a HUGE benefit to getting out more detailed information, but importantly - the response had already been started, and they were already thinking about the next steps. First Rally: 2001 Driver (7), Co-Driver (44) Drivers (16) Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4) Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0) Last Updated, January 4, 2015 
|
Banned Godlike Moderator Location: Red Deer, Alberta Join Date: 09/13/2011 Posts: 717 Rally Car: 2002 Subaru WRX STi |
[Devils advocate]Of course, is use of the SOS appropriate for this situation?
We're not supposed to use the redcross to stop people on stage, proper protocol would dictate a triangle no? Its been made very clear when the appropriate signals are supposed to be used. So if the team had hit the triangle response feature, would the team have slowed down as much and/or not hit them?[/devilsadvocate] At the end of the day, smart move on their part. Of course, I am glad you put so much weight on specific anecdotal evidence of them "without a doubt" hitting the other car whereas this situation has happened (relatively) a lot in the past decade and car on car collision has been extremely rare. And finally, bringing dollar figures into this basically means its insurance. Pay $xxx per event to avoid car on car collisions, what a deal! 
I actually was overall disappointed in the system for live viewing. It was neat, but I don't really care for any of the features besides the "safety" ones. Would be neat to get a cheaper system with only safety specific features, but I doubt it would be much if any cheaper. |
Brian Johnson Infallible Moderator Location: Park City, UT Join Date: 12/17/2006 Posts: 166 Rally Car: Co-Driver - Old School Motorsports WRX |
Banned Junior Moderator Location: La la land Join Date: 01/25/2006 Age: Fossilized Posts: 3,740 Rally Car: Not a Volvo |
Jeremy Livingston Professional Moderator Location: Edmonton Alberta Canuckistan Join Date: 05/23/2013 Posts: 277 Rally Car: 1990 acura integra, 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe |
Banned Junior Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
Nope. There will be another tracker being tried there, apparently, that is GSM based but doesn't have any car to car function. First Rally: 2001 Driver (7), Co-Driver (44) Drivers (16) Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4) Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0) Last Updated, January 4, 2015
|
Banned Junior Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
Don't forget this is a new tool, and not quite subject to the same rules. In reality, the way the signals are used will need to be considered and developed as a part of implementation, if we decide to use the system. In this case, until the triangle is out and the crew is safely away from the car I'd say probably yes, it is an appropriate use.
Agreed, in principle. There was another incident in this event that was very similar, but with more room to get around the car and the crew was out, and working on triangles. Earlier this year I was in a car that chose stuffing into a snowbank instead of hitting another car. I can think of several other examples of the same thing happening. I wouldn't agree with 'extremely rare.' The features you are interested cost little, to nothing, to implement but also present a chance to 'market' the system to sponsors. First Rally: 2001 Driver (7), Co-Driver (44) Drivers (16) Clerk (10), Official (7), Volunteer (4) Cars Built (1), Engines Built (0) Cages Built (0) Last Updated, January 4, 2015
|
Banned Godlike Moderator Location: Red Deer, Alberta Join Date: 09/13/2011 Posts: 717 Rally Car: 2002 Subaru WRX STi |
Well you wouldn't agree because what you are agreeing/disagreeing with has nothing to do with what I said and you taking my words as a completely different context.
I said "car on car collisions" are extremely rare. I am fairly confident in this statement. I never said avoiding one is rare, but I would also hazard an extremely uninformed guess that avoiding one where great value in damage occurs (>$5k) is also "extremely rare". I never argued the fact that a feature with "CAR BLOCKING THE ROAD STTTTTTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHP" wouldn't be extremely useful. Completely agree. But there are varying circumstances where the exact scenario that happened may not be how it pans out (following car has been catching up, people in the crash don't have the ability or place of mind to instantly hit "road blocked" signal, etc). So I take issue with the "without a doubt there would be a crash without this feature" and "this system single handedly helped avoid this incident". |
steve czwalga Infallible Moderator Location: Pittsburgh, PA Join Date: 09/16/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 376 Rally Car: 95 awd celica |
My old celica was totaled by a car on car colision at NEFR this year. When I was still driving the celica, we caused a car behind to us to wreck because we went off and couldnt get out before the next car came. (24 mile stage, just passed them so there was only about 20 seconds between us) They end up ditching and rolling right behind us. I've also had a few close calls at snodrift over the year, spinning and the engine turns backwards and takes a while before the car wants to start again sitting right in the middle of the road. Hoping it starts in time, while attempting to get out is a dangerous situation. That's just my personal dealings over the year, and why I like the system (not arguing over what price etc...) i'm just saying it would have prevented all of those situations provided the system worked properly. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2014 10:22AM by czwalga. |
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.