RARA at it again?

[jarrodeu]

Re: RARA at it again?

I think he was talking about different Heats like Bronze Silver and Gold.
Am I right?
Jarrod

[AirDOGGe]

Re: RARA at it again?

I suspect they allowed the owner to subsitute for the broken plane to make sure we have a decent field of racers this year, since many favorites won't make it this year. I don't think there's anything sinister about it. They just want us to have a good race(s).

If it broke during practice or qualifying at Stead, and then they allowed a subsitute, then I would see it differently.

[Hawkeye]

Re: RARA at it again?

The entry for the Unlimiteds had to be postmarked by July 16th to be considered as an legal entry. If you are going to change the rules after that date to allow another A/C in, Why have rules at all?? He could have entered his back-up A/C, but he didn't.
What if you are the guy who doesn't get to race because you've been bumped out of the field as a result of the rule change? if this rule change was introduced way before the entry deadline , then that's ok. But a week before the race?? At least 1 race entry get's hosed over this. Everyone who qualifies behind him will be affected by this. Sure doesn't sound fair to me.

If it was me, I'd not be very happy.

[Race 29]

Re: RARA at it again?

I don't see ant problem with it. The race starts when the green flag drops, not on July 16th. If I'm one of the pilots that's going to finish behind the replacement aircraft, I would just simply push the throttle a little more forward and make sure I finish ahead of that aircraft. It's called racing, not racers on parade. In the interest of the event, I can see RARA's side here. Would we rather have 14 planes or 15 planes? When racing begins on Thursday, not one competitor is guarenteed a finishing position on Sunday. The racers that finish behind that replacement aircraft have nothing to bitch about, and if you personally ask them, I'm sure not many of them would care. It might be them in the same situation next year. It would be different if they were racing Cessnas, that rarely break in comparison to a warbird. Really, why would anyone complain about more racers? The field is dwindling away as it is. If I remember right, Tom Camp qualified slowest last year, I'm sure we'll see him race this year as well. I don't think he's in any danger of being bumped out of the event.

Race 29

[Phantom Samurai]

Re: RARA at it again?

Actually, Camp's Wildcat is in grave danger of not making the field at all. If the substituted racer does in fact show, that will put the field at 26 racers - two over the 24 allowed to qualify. So, unless Camp can figure out how to out-qualify Sparky and Speedball Alice, he won't be doing any racing unless attrition trims the field - a likely probability, but always unpredictable. Basically, it just means that one more racer will have to be sidelined in order for him to race.

As for the fairness of it all, I have mixed feelings. While I understand the consequences for those a/c "on the bubble", I'd also love to see a larger number of participants. And in reality, the man has already paid his money and been allotted a pit area, so I suppose it shouldn't matter a great deal which a/c he races. JMHO.

TPS

[Unregistered]

Re: RARA at it again?

Hi,
Swapping a unregistered plane for an unservable racer does have precidence in history. In the 1946 natinal Air Races, Bob Swanson crashed his origional racer in the time trials for the Thompson Trophy Race. He aquired another P51 but was after the deadline to qualify it. A vote was taken by the other pilots and they let him qualify after the deadline. In his talk at one of our SARH Air Racing Symposiums, Steve Wittman said that agreeing to let Swanson race was one of his worst decisions as it edged him (Wittman) out of the money as Swanson came in before him.

TTFN....Kenn

[Hawkeye]

Re: RARA at it again?

Actually, I'd like to see more warbirds race than more airshow acts. Heck, they could add a "Pweter Class" for warbirds as far as I'm concerned. I just don't like rules that are changed at the last minute that benefit one at the expense of another. I think there were one or two entries that were received by RARA after the deadline for entries. They're upholding the rules there . Why is this different?

Bottom line, If you are going to have rules, enforce them equally.

[Unregistered]

Re: RARA at it again?

We should remember that this is the " Reno Air RACES" Not the "reno airshow" Any true racer wants to win on the course. Crying about subs and postage dates isnt what racing is all about. Settle it in the air like men (or women)

[Leo]

Re: RARA at it again?

During quali's and practice I could see it. In 76 they had a short field because of breakage, weather and no-shows. Rara literally begged several "spectators" to field planes that were not intended to race and there were last minute additions, including an F7F. The end result was Lefty's win in Thunderbird.
So there is some precident for filling the ticket in the interest of giving the crowd a show, after the entry date.
But what is to stop a Mike Brown style owner from breaking his bronze class F7F and substituting his gold class September Fury? If the rules keep this kind of thing from happening, I could care less what they race as long as the planes are in the air.
And I say qualify all 30 if that's what shows. Just only allow the the 24 fastest to race, moving others up to fill slots as attrition takes hold.

leo

[speeddemon]

Re: RARA at it again?

Kinda like Wiley Sanders substituting the B-25 when Jeannie broke.

I don't want to split hairs, but you're talking two separate incidents. Jeannie broke in '82. Wiley brought the B-25 in 1984.

[Leo]

Re: RARA at it again?

Hypothetical. As I recall they were never there at the same time.

Leo

[speeddemon]

Re: RARA at it again?

I'm hearing that RARA is secretly changing the rules to allow an unlimited competiter to substitute his broken racer with another aircraft that was not entered. When you enter, the entry is for the A/C, not the pilot. Why are there rules if they're going to change them at the last minute, to the detriment of the other racers who have followed the established requirements for entry. RARA hasn't even made their new rules available to the participants yet they reqired a signed statement with each entry that said we would abide by the Rules of Competition and agree not to bring any legal action against RARA in a Nevada court or any other court. Since it's an election year, I guess it's not suprising that "Politics as usual"
rears it's ugly head again.

I'm still trying to figure what your vested interest in this subject is. Do you own/fly/work on one of the planes that could possibly be effected? Or is this a case of 'outrage' from a fan's standpoint?

All of your comments thus far on this subject express how unjust and unfair it is for those effected, yet you haven't provided any particulars at all...no names, no classes, no details. I just received the Unlimited Division Newsletter in the mail the other day, and there didn't seem to be any 'outrage' on their end. None of the class representatives seem to be making much noise about this 'travesty'. Most pilots/owners/crews, while competitive and wanting to win, also want to have a good field, want to win it 'on the race course', and most important are there just to have fun.

It seems to me that your complaint would only effect the guys at the bottom of the qualification ladder, anyhow. Do you REALLY think Tom Camp is gonna be pissed if he doesn't get to race all four days? When was the last time you can remember in the recent past when someone DIDN'T get to race at least once during the weekend, due to the attrition of others?

Heck, I remember back in '83 when Leeward was having a bitch of a time with Spectre. He couldn't qualify the thing. But at one point during one of the heat races, he substituded Spectre for Cloud Dancer. Nobody really cared then either.

If the pilots/owners aren't concerned about it, why are you so jacked up about it?

Not trying to antagonize here, I'm just curious as to what your involvement and motivation are.

[Unregistered]

Re: RARA at it again?

Do you REALLY think Tom Camp is gonna be pissed if he doesn't get to race all four days? .

Simple one word answer from someone on the inside, YES!!!!


Mike

[Pylon1_Mark]

Re: RARA at it again?

Well, personally I feel that most everyone comes to Reno to see/be in the races... and if it takes a few subs to fill the field due to attrition then who is it to say that this isn't a good thing. The air races are a revanue generating enterprise, and it is the perview of RARA to not only do their best to put on the best show possible, but to also insure it's continuance (hopefully) for years to come. Having a full field on Sunday can only benifit the sport - making rule changes to allow that to happen is the smart play. Just MHO of course... no offense meant to anyone who has an opposing view... just adding my $.02 to the thread.

[speeddemon]

Re: RARA at it again?

... just adding my $.02 to the thread.

I'm sorry Mark...but you're money's no good. We don't serve your kind here.

Gonna miss you (and Wayners) this year. What happened to the plan for everyone to head out to the road for 'a day in the truck'? Guess I'll have to settle for Scotty G.....