| Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Neil
Visitor (new)
Joined: 07 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1090
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:22am |
Just to throw another spanner into the works. Why does the multitrack class have to be unfaired, this restriction does not apply for the ladies or junior classes. After all, a multitrack vehicle does not suddently become un-multitracked just because it spouts a fairing. I would have thought that developing fairings for trikes and quads is one of the easier areas for people to do at home rather than building full streamliners and the presnt arrangements are effectively stifeling development in this area.
Neil
|
 |
jes@gcre
BHPC Member
Joined: 22 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 556
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:26am |
While the class struggle is going on:
Why can't anything with a fairing be classed as "multitrack"?
What are the thoughts behind that rule?
On the occasions which we had pedal cars racing in the BHPC this year, they were usually the first non-2-wheelers but don't count for multitrack because they are faired.
Dropping that rule might also encourage people to fair Windcheetah's as well (thus making them theoretically faster than pedal cars of course).
|
|
Racing is life...
Anything which happens before or afterwards is just standing around waiting to race....
|
 |
jes@gcre
BHPC Member
Joined: 22 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 556
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:26am |
|
|
|
Racing is life...
Anything which happens before or afterwards is just standing around waiting to race....
|
 |
Neil
Visitor (new)
Joined: 07 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1090
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:29am |
jes@gcre wrote:
[oops]
Great minds, eh?
|

|
 |
GeoffBird
BHPC Member
Joined: 20 September 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:41am |
Neil wrote: "I would have thought that developing fairings for trikes and quads is one of the easier areas for people to do at home rather than building full streamliners and the presnt arrangements are effectively stifeling development in this area."
I agree with you, Neil. If you just had a 'practical' and a 'racing' class then a fully-equiped, faired trike could fall into the former category - I argued this abour 3 years ago. The problem is coming up with the rules to define 'practical'...
|
 |
KevinJ
Committee
Joined: 04 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1079
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:52am |
Having just spent a silly amount of time just doing a tail fairing I don't know whether I am keen on making a fully faired or front faired bike. But there probably does need to be something done to the class to inject some energy. Currently it is undoubtably dying.
Perhaps allowing fairings would make it more competitive (no doubt Rob Hague would be keen) but it would seem more sensible. I would be keener at allowing those than that having too may groups. I think we have to be careful about fragmenting groups too much.
Fairings on a trike are generally more practical (day to day) than the fully faired bikes. Are we thinking of front and rear fairings or full? Full would bring in the pedal cars into the group (no bad thing). I (as an unfaired trike) would be keen on this I think - it would certainly inspire the need for more faired bits and hence more speed.
|
|
Kevin Jenkins
Windcheetah
|
 |
AlanGoodman
Admin Group
Club Chairman
Joined: 04 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 8036
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:54am |
GeoffBird wrote:
Alan Wrote: "I don't think that would do much to encourage more juniors to take part...."
I don't understand, Alan - what do you mean?
|
I mean that only having two classes wouldn't give Juniors (or ladies or hand-cyclists) much to aim at (as far as championships go anyway)
|
|
|
 |
Neil
Visitor (new)
Joined: 07 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1090
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:54am |
But even under the present rules it makes no sense. If Darren turns up in his car he has to race in open, and is not eligable for multitrack. If we bring a 14 year old girl racing in that car, she is eligable for open, ladies and junior.
Neil
|
 |
AlanGoodman
Admin Group
Club Chairman
Joined: 04 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 8036
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:56am |
GeoffBird wrote:
The problem is coming up with the rules to define 'practical'...
|
Easy... Anything where the riders eyes are above 105cm... 
|
|
|
 |
Neil
Visitor (new)
Joined: 07 March 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1090
|
Posted: 04 November 2005 at 11:59am |
KevinJ wrote:
Having just spent a silly amount of time just doing a tail fairing I don't know whether I am keen on making a fully faired or front faired bike. But there probably does need to be something done to the class to inject some energy. Currently it is undoubtably dying.
Perhaps allowing fairings would make it more competitive (no doubt Rob Hague would be keen) but it would seem more sensible. I would be keener at allowing those than that having too may groups. I think we have to be careful about fragmenting groups too much.
Fairings on a trike are generally more practical (day to day) than the fully faired bikes. Are we thinking of front and rear fairings or full? Full would bring in the pedal cars into the group (no bad thing). I (as an unfaired trike) would be keen on this I think - it would certainly inspire the need for more faired bits and hence more speed.
|
I dont see the need for specifying how much of a fairing is allowed, the whole point is it is multitrack regardless. On a trike you can improve your speed by making a front fairing with a plastic bag and some chicken wire if you have a mind. You can build a full fairing for nothing if you manage to aquire some old political campaign signs.
It would certainly be a logical step and I certainly cant see the point of both a faired and unfaired multitrack class.
Neil
|
 |