Question about a Proposed Rule Change for 2011

Bluevee33

Well-known member
Here's the proposal:
1105.H (E) A HANS device must be worn at all times while on the track or in the hot pit lane.


Does that mean if you wear one it must be worn until to your pits or everyone must wear a HANS at all times?? That's another financial hit that could take away at least one race off my schedule next year if I have to buy one now.
 
The Hans device must be worn while on the track or in the hot pit lane. You are not required to wear it in the padock area. The reason for this rule change is safety and to be consistant with the other sanctioning bodies in the racing community that mandate the use of this device, ie SCCA, NASA, NASCAR, etc. Although I prefer the HANS device, I think the rule should be modified to include any other certified Head and Neck restraint device, if they exist.

Just my two cents worth.
 
I don't understand the need for the "in the hot pit lane" part: So long as it's required when on track, what's the justification for requiring it anywhere else? (And another thing: What's considered a "hot pit lane?")
 
Steve, my 2 cents worth.

If you have to pull into the hot pits (ie: where the black flag/meatball check-in point is and is a NON - pre-grid area, or a NON paddock area) during any session, and someone else comes in at a higher than normal hot-pit speed (no brakes etc.) you can be a sitting duck, just like if you were on the track.

An impact with another car, especially if you are stationary, still has the potential for injury.

What's the chances of that happening? Wouldn't want to be the first one to find out.

It may seem unneccessary and a bit of overkill but.........."There's always the first time for everything"

Like I said, just my 2 cents worth.
 
What if it's not a HANS, but other manufacturer of an some equivalently rated device?

Besides, those things look like a pain in the neck to put on and take off even when outside of the car. I know that it's possible, but it certainly takes both hands, so chances are the car's not moving. And we attempted to formulate a regulation that required safety gear to be worn when...(read it).

I'll read further too, but is this a flanking manuever to mandate the use of a HANS (specific) device?
 
Last edited:
So, if this goes through we all have to have a Head and Neck Device?? SCCA has decided on that but are still giving all the drivers another year plus before it's manditory. I am all for safety but I'm not a fan of the way the HANS fit's or it's price! The Defender is a lot cheaper and looks a lot safer to me too!
 
The use of "Hans" may be, might be a generic/catchall term???? Rule change or "the Intent" of the rule change??
There could always be the last minute alteration of the wording of the rule that may take place, that is not so restrictive.
Maybe??
 
Steve, my 2 cents worth.

If you have to pull into the hot pits (ie: where the black flag/meatball check-in point is and is a NON - pre-grid area, or a NON paddock area) during any session, and someone else comes in at a higher than normal hot-pit speed (no brakes etc.) you can be a sitting duck, just like if you were on the track.

An impact with another car, especially if you are stationary, still has the potential for injury.

What's the chances of that happening? Wouldn't want to be the first one to find out.

It may seem unneccessary and a bit of overkill but.........."There's always the first time for everything"

Like I said, just my 2 cents worth.

I guess, from a practical matter, requiring it on track means you'll be wearing it if you come into the hot pits for some reason. If you're in the hot pits and you're still in your car, either your HANS (for example) is still attached or your helmet's off. There's no practical reason to remove a HANS when you're sitting still with your helmet on, so it doesn't seem necessary to include that wording.
 
Steve, I think it's called trying to tighten loop holes or mitigating the chance of interpretation.
Some of our rules have loop holes and some rules are rather loose and can be interpreted depending on one's point of view.
"That's not what the rule says....that's not what the rule means" type thing.

I am now up to 4 cents worth. (cdn)
 
Okay, so in the interests of "mitigating the chance of interpretation," what's a hot pit lane? I guarantee someone will claim the road down to pre-grid is a "hot pit lane" at some point...
 
If the rule passes, and due to the different track configurations, this is something that might be covered in the club's Sub-Regs.
Just for clarity for those that actually read them.

Man.......6 cents now.
 
Regardless of when, and where, the regulation, even though it's only presented as a subset of 1105. Safety Equipment. adds the HANS as an apparent MUST wear.

No alternatives presented, and would then be required per 1105. Safety Equipment "All required driver’s safety equipment must be worn while on the track and in
the hot pit area while under power. (Fall 2009)"

The closest 'definition' for "hot pits" (at least in the ICSCC Regs) is...

1607. All persons in the racing “hot pit” (i.e., over the pit wall), shall wear long
pants, shirts that cover the shoulders, and shall not wear open toe shoes or
be barefooted. This rule applies during practice, qualifying and during
races.

Wanna know where the "pit" wall is?

That may be in the supps as it may be in a different place than other tracks, but that's pretty much irrelevant to the regulation change intent, I think.
 
You could make it easy.

All Drivers must wear a Head and Neck Restraint Device that conforms to SFI 38.1 starting on (date)

NASA wording
Use of a head and neck restraint system or device, carrying an SFI 38.1 certification
label, is mandatory for all drivers as of July 2, 2008. References and information can be
found in “Appendix D,” section #29.0 of the CCR. Additionally, HANS brand devices with
FIA 8858-2002 or FIA 8858-2010 certification labels are acceptable in lieu of SFI 38.1
labels. Older HANS devices with the J-clip/D-ring helmet attachments or post type
anchors with no SFI or FIA approved markings must be upgraded to the anchors marked
as being SFI or FIA approved.
 
Last edited:
Is this 'mandatory' proposal being driven by insurance concerns or just someone who thinks this is a good idea?
 
I did check it, and the proposal was submitted by the Stewards. While I do respect their opinions I do not believe Conference should make this mandatory. A HANS is a personal choice and some drivers simply do not like to wear them or do not want to spend the extra $$.
Roll cages, seat belts, fire systems yes; but making this mandatory without discusssion or a trial period as SCCA is doing is wrong.
 
You could make it easy.

They did. But I don't think that they made it vague enough for the general population to swallow.

The safety advantages of the HANS, and like devices, goes without any further Q&A, as a positive move, and the positioning within the ICSCC Regs is good..

BUT...

The end users, the drivers, have to buy into it now. And all the time knowing that the Exec Board could use a plunger if the swing went about that way.

I may need an extra bag of peanuts for the meeting. The suspense should be worth the wait.
 
Head and Neck devices are now recognized as basic safety equipment, and mandated by numerous sanctioning bodies. Not following that trend could I suppose be argued as negligent in court? Not only does the adoption of newer technologies seem logical for a safety standpoint, but also to keep legal exposure of conference in check. What would make this piece of safety equipment voluntary versus mandatory? How is it differant than Nomex driving suits? Did conference wait to mandate fire retardant clothing until after someone in an ICSCC event was badly burned? Should conference wait until someone is injured or dies of a basal skull fracture to justify making this safety item mandatory, so we can then all discuss what we should have done? Ask Lou Greenburg what he thinks of mandating a H&N device. His certainly saved him from much more severe neck problems when his car rolled last year at PR. Or, how about Manfred Duske at ORP earlier this month? I've seen his in-car video, and saw how hard his head snapped forward only to be caught by the straps on his HANS. Frankly, I'm all for it.

There. That oughta light the fuse.....
 
Last edited:
I wear a H&N restraint regardless of which race car I am driving. That is my personal choice. I keep it on until I enter the pits when I disconnect it from my helmet to facilitate the extra vision required to navigate the pits. The cost of these devices do not compare to the extra safety they provide when they are needed. I do not accept the cost argument. If cost is the argument I would also question the competitive nature of the car you drive...
 
Back
Top