"Ah! It's the old hidden collision trick!" (To misquote Maxwell Smart once again.)FatSebastian wrote:I should have said "necessary repair." You already addressed it to some degree here. Basically there may be a subjective determination as to whether a trip to the pit area is "necessary" - who makes the decision that the car has become "non-competitive" (your words)? For example, after an unfortunate encounter with the stop section, the racing team may notice a slow down in their car over the next heat or two (being most familiar with the car) indicating a "bent axle" (misalignment) but the "damage", although real, may not quite be an obvious change "from its inspected state". I suppose this is another topic entirely.Stan Pope wrote:Not sure of the meaning of "necessary replacement".
If there is a time record that can be viewed, then it would be an easy call. (A car turns in heats of 2.483, 2.489, and 2.574, for instance.) I don't think I could overturn the heat in which the issue was recognized on the clock, because the owner/driver was up close and personal to view and hear and visually inspect the car at the time of the collision. That was a missed opportunity for which he must bear some responsibility. However, having recognized the damage, a closer inspection should show the exact nature of the damage and it should be easy to convince the appropriate track official of the need for repair. If the race car's design contributed to the risk, the time for repair may be limited, etc., but probably an opportunity to repair should be granted. For the record, I don't think that being too fast for the stop section is a "contributor!"
)