- This topic has 45 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Sure, nothing stopping anyone from sending us a suggested course design. It’d have to pass Dave and Jeff’s review for safety because we are ultimately responsible for that. Post it here even if you’d like. Justin, you should design one too and post it.
This club is quick to discount the amount of talent in the bay when it come to making the club better. If a course doesn’t walk well then change it before the first car goes out. There’s no reason to suffer through a overly tight/constricted course with the size of the site were using. We just finished a fantastic SCCA course by Josh S that had 80ft slaloms. AAS is running a full weekend event at Marina which we’ll be attending. You guys need to come down and see their courses to get a feel for the flow. When you walk the course you’ll see several x’d out boxes where changes were made after setup to make it even better.
I believe Jack asked for course maps… we’d like to see them.
Since I’ve been keeping track we have over 350 people who have participated in our program. People run with us for the friendly competition and the social atmosphere. After all, we are a social club by definition. We have a certain vibe going here and folks who don’t fit in usually don’t come back. And that’s OK. We can’t be everything to everyone, nor should we try to be. You don’t go to a vegetarian restaurant expecting a steak. We stay true to our long standing values.
The BMW CCA has a clearly defined charter: “As part of its goal of promoting driver education and safety, the BMW Car Club of America, Inc. (BMW CCA) supports autocross programs conducted by its chartered Chapters and as an element of its national events (e.g. Oktoberfest). An autocross event is a non-speed driving skill contest such as, but not limited to, autocrosses and slaloms. These events are run on short courses that emphasize the driver’s ability and the car’s handling and agility.”
I get it that we have a handful of folks who come to our events to practice for other competitions. I think that’s great. Our program isn’t like those others and based on our numbers, it seems we’re providing what our members want.
[quote=”HalM3″ post=1656]This club is quick to discount the amount of talent in the bay when it come to making the club better.[/quote]
Come talk to me Hal with your suggestions, we are taking time to respond to the forums aren’t we? I don’t recall any of our past conversations resulting in a quick dismissal. You and Diane have always been happy and excited when I’ve talked to you both.We are all here trying to make this club better. “Better” does not just mean “faster courses”. Unless folks want to become co-coordinator and receive actual responsibilities, active participation helps the club most: volunteer some time to set up the course, pack up, design a course, train the course workers, register people, coach people, talk to newbies, run the timer/computer, take pictures, post tips, research better technologies, inspect helmets, tech cars or just ask (as many already have) “is there anything I can do to help?” This results in smoother operations, a welcoming club to all makes, friendly competition, newbies learning a lot, people having fun and socializing = better. The charter Jeff posts also says a lot about the main goal of this club (social, education, safety).
Thankfully many regulars do this every autocross and have been the biggest help (THANK YOU Ryan, Eric, Mike, Stephenx2, Daniella, Diane, Mark, Davex2, Timx2, Brian, Rodger, Praniel, Napua, James, Rob, Matt, JeffC, Ratko, Brad, Christian, Cliff, Paul, Chiu, Frank, and many many others I’m forgetting) Hal and Charlie, you’ve been very helpful in the past as well.
Off topic again… The courses need to flow. Once a course is designed on paper it is still just a guide. When cones start hitting the concrete changes may be necessary for better flow. To run the tight, confusing course because it is already written is foolish. I believe I’ve been completely clear on this point.
[URL=http://s3.photobucket.com/user/justint5387/media/MarinaCourse_zpsc6e882c8.jpg.html][IMG]http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y55/justint5387/MarinaCourse_zpsc6e882c8.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
[URL=http://s3.photobucket.com/user/justint5387/media/MarinaCourse2_zpsa83c8259.jpg.html][IMG]http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y55/justint5387/MarinaCourse2_zpsa83c8259.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
Hmmm, not bad. I like the grid better than the other one. Though, these would have to be adjusted to start, end and pre-grid on the length-wise (right side) area. Our club can no longer start, end or grid near the parking entering/exiting paddock, too much traffic and liability concerns. Is the “M/H” the trailer? If so, we’d have to move that.
I think we’re talking history and perspective, here. When I moverd to Northern California 30+ years ago, I was surprised that all the clubs out here had courses completely lined with pylons. I was used to “gated courses” in the Midwest. Since then, SCCA, AAS and some other clubs have been exposed to this kind of course marking and have adopted it. when larger sites are used, clubs don’t have enough cones to completely line the course, and the setup and teardown time is much longer even if you do have enough cones. Fewer cones are hit, course workers are exposed less, course workers are less fatigued, timing and scoring is not as hectic, there are fewer opportunities for scoring errors. When done properly, courses are easier to read. Admittedly, I’ve seen courses many years ago with too few cones, too much direction change from one gate to the next, etc. and these are things to be avoided. I haven’t seen a confusing gated course in a long time (10 years?) Of course, lining is needed.
There are NorCal clubs who have not adopted this type of course. UFO is one. The organizers have a very limited perspective, by their own choice. They also have a really strong “anti SCCA” passion and stubbornly refuse to do anythin SCCA does, “just because.” I don’t think current GGC management, or some regions of PCA, are actively choosing to not try different things, I think it is Northern California autocross history and just not being exposed to the way that autocrossing tends to be going nationally. I see videos from all over the country, marque clubs, autocross clubs, etc. and I only see courses completely lined with cones in Northern California.
In addition to cone usage, I really don’t think I ever see slaloms at 40-50 feet anywhere but at GGC and a few local PCA events. Most people just don’t enjoy them, in addition to the exposure problem I mentioned in a previous post.
Jeff and Jack, thank you for listening. We can continue to work on this and make an even stronger program. I’d love to see you give an AAS course a try. I think it will open your eyes.
Charlie
I completely agree with you Charlie. I for one am not resistant to changing how the course is coned, especially if it results in fewer lost people and easier pack up time!
Any other maps you can share? In my opinion, last months GGC course map was more interesting than either of these two. If you want to go with these two as your top designs to try out, then move the grid and trailer and send it in for a final review.
Maybe you should broaden your horizon and actually drive the course irl with other clubs, or we can use the simulator.
These same elements have been used before at Marina in our own courses, it’s not difficult to imagine how they would run. If I drew a big square and said that was the most fun, and you said it wasn’t, I could say “yeah but you haven’t driven it yet so how do you know?”
So you didn’t answer my question, are these your favorites you want to submit?
Edit: Also talk about broadening horizons, you don’t like our courses, you’ve said so yourself!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.