Broomstick and TTs

[TM]

While I agree that there are a lot of colleagues in my
field that make torts a mess and to the detriment of the
field as a whole, but track days where helmets are optional
and not requiring certain levels of safety is plain stupid
IMHO.

Taka

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Linkov [mailto:linkov at snet.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 10:40 PM
To: TM
Cc: quattro at audifans.com
Subject: Re: Broomstick and TTs


My understanding of the rule is:

1) A bar or broomstick is placed so it rests on the windshield header
and the roll hoop/bar.

2) There must be 2" of clearance from the top of the helmeted head of
the driver and passenger and the bottom of the broomstick/bar.

So far, the only track I know that makes a point about roll
cages/hoops/etc is Virginia International Raceway (VIR). They state, in
the contract to rent the track, that cars with hoops and such are not
allowed. The only open-topped cars allowed must have "VIR-approved" roll
cages. I'm sure that SCCA approved/legal cages are fine, but VIR must
sign off on it as well.

Tall people have just as much to worry about with fixed-roof cars as
well - perhaps even more. If we weren't such a litigious society it
wouldn't be as big an issue. Heck, in the UK, Audi driver mag runs a
track day where helmets are optional!


On 12/11/02 9:37 PM, "TM" <t44tq at mindspring.com> wrote:

> I thought the "broomstick rule" generally meant you had to have your
> helmeted head under the broomstick, not 2" under.
>
> What tracks require the 2" under rule?
>
> Drive a hardtop car and that rule no longer applies.
>
> Taka
>