lipo saddle packs, a poll to show feelings

[Jim Spencer]

Originally Posted by SHY

Must admit I also find it a bit curious also that two different proposals were merged. They took our "homologation bit" and merged it with BRCAs size specs etc. In my book if there's two "equal" proposals you choose one of them. (The splitting of our proposal in a way made this plausible)

Don't know about the first bit - there were definatly 2 distinct proposals, one for the specs of the cells and one for the Homologation process and use etc - discussed and voted on seperatly.

As i've said above it was an interesting discussion plenty of qualified input too, learnt a lot about LiPo's myself.

[Jim Spencer]

Originally Posted by _sleigh_

I have since been told the height ammendment mentioned in the minutes is a typo and the height still remains at 23.5mm (chassis protrusions are allowed)

There was a proposed amendment - didn't pass.
But the one to allow larger chassis locating lugs (protrusions) did.

[SHY]

Well, this is what we sent in: LiPo_Proposal1_2008.doc

Had that been kept as is this could have been voted for on a "stand alone" basis for OR.

And touring cars and 1:12 could have had their own specific proposals.

[Jamie B4]

Thanks for the info Charlie - but think I am not alone in just wanting to know what is legal and what is not. Understand that most stick lipos are legal up to 5000mAh but with having a B44 just haven't got a clue what to do with the saddle's. When will the info be available "what is legal by the BRCA" as I'm a bit worried about not having time to adjust anything that needs to be adjusted ie weight, positioning etc. Also we may have the same scenario as last year were everyone will rush to get lipos and some people may have to wait until well into the season.

[_sleigh_]

Originally Posted by Jamie B4

up to 5000mAh but.....

5500mAh

[Cockerill]

Jim, there were definitely enough people there to vote what we wanted, there were also the proposals in that we wanted. Unfortunately for various reason we didn't get what we want. Don't blame the racer's, we did what we were told to do and it still didn't work.

It was also explicitly stated, by me, that we (the racers) didn't want to leave the rules up to the EB as we would end up not getting what we wanted. We had no choice, as the fact we have to use the EB is stipulated elsewhere (although I see that as a technicality that could be passed), and we are now left with what we have, luckily I run stick packs!

To me the whole situation is a farce. All people want to do is use the Lipo cells they have got. We (the customers) screamed for manufacturer's to come out with Lipo saddle's, they did. Then the rule makers go and ban them.

[Jamie B4]

Sorry Phil 5500mAh but again which ones Trakpower, Reedy, Orion. 20C, 25C, 30C, 35C?????

HELP

[Glenn Atterton]

Just a thought but why not try to get an EGM if you want to change something at BRCA level?

page 12 BRCA 2007 handbook (2008 not online)

15. EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING
An EGM may be called at any time if the Executive Committee so decide. The Secretary shall also call a meeting on receiving written request to that effect, signed by no less than 10% of the membership. Such a general meeting shall take place within 28 days of the written request being received and all members shall receive 14 days notice of the meeting, but without the necessity for detailing any further particulars. A resolution of an EGM shall not be valid unless 10% of the membership is present and not unless the resolution be passed by at least two thirds of the members voting

good luck

[_sleigh_]

Jamie,

I wouldn't feel right suggesting a particular make/model of LiPo just in case it doesn't fit the EFRA/BRCA rules. Even down to the cell being "legal" as far as the sizes etc. go, but not being available in enough quantity or not being submitted for homologation.

It was said at the BRCA AGM that, the currect "TC only" list of LiPo's would be used as a basis for the NEW EB list. Any current cells on that TC list that failed to meet the dimensional/capacity rulings would be withdrawn and the remainder would be the initial list. Further LiPo's would be added as and when manufacturers submitted them (assuming they met the rules). There would be a deadline for submissions, but off hand I can't remember the date.

I understand that PW was due to be at the 1/12th & Touring car worlds in Tailand this week, so not much will progress on the EB side until he's back. I'll speak to him early next week.

[_sleigh_]

Originally Posted by Glenn Atterton

Just a thought but why not try to get an EGM if you want to change something?

The requirements for an EGM are pretty steep.

10% of the membership need to sign the request. So that's about 600 BRCA members. Even then, 10% need to be in attendance at the EGM.

I find it hard to believe that 600 people made the trip to the AGM.


It's a possibility, but not likely.

[frogger]

All this nonsense is enough to put anyone off from racing. 10% of this and 28 days of that. FFS it's only toy cars! Voting for a new Prime Minister is easier!

[_sleigh_]

I'm sure you'd love all the "hoops" if the situation was reversed and someone was trying to get a rule changed that allowed a "super advanced" cell type that only one racers could buy, allowing him/her to kick everyone's arse.

[Adam Skelding]

Originally Posted by Jim Spencer

Hi Adam

I Race 1/12 circuit - those small things that race indoors..
Never even handled a LiPo pack up until the EFRA meeting, why would I have done? My class doesn't race them.

What i'm getting at is that there must be the knowledge base amongst the users of these products to get the right proposal into the meetings - up front (Though as Charlie says above it could have been amended on the day and wasn't..)

What's happened here is the classic where most folk appear to have sat back expecting somebody else to do things for them and it just doesn't work like that i'm afraid.
As your point above perfectly illustrates.

I can put a proposal into any section (as can any other member) but I would only be confident doing it in 1/12 as I understand the knock on implications of what i'm suggesting - Here we have the opposite the people who understood the implications of what was going on don't appear to have got involved in the process?

Hi Jim.
My point is that at several junctures the BRCA have been made aware of the dimensions that would envelope the current range of LiPO cells that are out there.
I've even gone to the man at the top PW and pointed it out in a very self explanatory e-mail which he seems to have ignored. I given him the benefit of my knowledge at the time, well before the BRCA AGM thus giving him chance to amend the rule himself before going to the AGM. I didn;t think I could really go any further than to the 'Horse's mouth' for want of better words.

I'm not sure how it can be said that 'we've sat back' when I've e-mailed, other people have wanted to discuss the rules at the AGM and we seem to have been 'quashed'

FCS - We are talking about an dimension of a component in a rule that has not been finalised. Surely there needs to been some common sense from EFRA/BRCA in making the available rule fit the current ROAR allowed list, this would allow parity across the pond when some of us guys go racing at worlds euros, or other international events and vice-versa when guys from the US come over here.





Still no-one has found a hole in my original statement. Where was the overall pack dimensional ruling for NiCd / NiMh.

[Lee]

Maybe the EB dont want people using Lipo

[dave g]

maybe they dont want them using a certain make of lipo?

[Adam Skelding]

Originally Posted by _sleigh_

I'm sure you'd love all the "hoops" if the situation was reversed and someone was trying to get a rule changed that allowed a "super advanced" cell type that only one racers could buy, allowing him/her to kick everyone's arse.

But we are not. We are trying to amend a rule that hasn't been concreted to allow normal people who've already spent their hard earned cash to go racing.

Surely that's more important, to keep the current interest in the sport moving along at it's current high level.

This could be the final proof that common sense is not common.

[jim76]

it does certainly disprove that saying that WE are the members and WE can decide all the rules for our own sport.

the members turn up having proposed what they want. EB amend this then tell us we can't vote on the day against their ruling?

surely we can overturn it for misrepresentation or something! lol

[_sleigh_]

Originally Posted by Adam Skelding

But we are not. We are trying to amend a rule that hasn't been concreted to allow normal people who've already spent their hard earned cash to go racing.

Surely that's more important, to keep the current interest in the sport moving along at it's current high level.

This could be the final proof that common sense is not common.

Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant.

It seems that people expect the BRCA to relax certain rules to allow them to race cells they purchased assuming they'd be legal.

ATEOTD, those BRCA members know exactly how to vote new people onto the committee if they feel so strongly that the current committee aren't representing the interests of the masses.

[Northy]

Originally Posted by _sleigh_

ATEOTD, those BRCA members know exactly how to vote new people onto the committee if they feel so strongly that the current committee aren't representing the interests of the masses.

Cue Lee-Mag..........

G

[Lee]

Hiya

G for chairman