In regional championship, maximum permitted lateness is 15 min.Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
Printable View
In regional championship, maximum permitted lateness is 15 min.Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
Because in supplementary regulations and itinerary in supplementary regulations it is not allowed... And any similar change must be made by bulletin...Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
The supplementary regulations on Sportity don't have annexes (which include itinerary).Quote:
Originally Posted by PLuto
However, the itinerary that is on Sportity has the early check in allowed. It is listed as comming from 20.10. EDIT: That itinerary says "Annex 1" on top so it looks like part of Sporting Regulations".
What specific procedures are needed for that one to be valid I have no idea, but if anything it is an organizer mess.
Where does it say that lateness is the same as "as earliness" in the regulations? Only mention is that being early does not reduce the lateness. (i.e. being early in one tc doesn't mean you can exceed lateness on next).Quote:
Originally Posted by PLuto
For sure it is organizer mess. Appendix 1 is available on "another" official noticeboard, which was working before sportity was started and was used as platform for entry list - https://www.dmsb-sport.de/25_Interna...er_Aushang.phpQuote:
Originally Posted by mknight
Procedures to be valid are very clear - any change in supplementary regulations or itinerary must be made by bulletin.
And in addition, in rules there is point 44.2.11 - Provided that it has been stated in the Supplementary Regulations of the rally or is indicated in a later bulletin, the organisers may authorise crews to check in before time without incurring any penalty.
For sure this was not stated in supplementary regulations or any bulletin for TC 10B...
Yes, you are correct. Not excluded/retired, but he should receive huge penalty.Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
This "old" itinerary has even the TCS named differently.Quote:
Originally Posted by PLuto
TC10B is Service out, while in the Annex 1 on Sportity it is Service in.
Since the one on Sportity is marked as Annex 1 it is seemingly part of Sporting Regulations and has newer date.
I don't have any idea when the Sporting Regulations are supposed to be valid and how are they distributed besides Sportity. But using the newest Annex 1 there is no breach of rules.
You are wrong, it is breach of rules. Any change to regulations (including appendixes) must be made by bulletin. Publication as "other documents" on sportity one day before the start is not valid, sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
Is that a co-drivers mistake or done on purpose? I mean can crew gain some "advantage" by doing so or its simply a inattention?Quote:
Originally Posted by PLuto
Been there from thursday.
The car looks amazing. Tottaly. The aerodynamics is much more improved. And the old Škoda sound is so much in the bones after all these years, that is really strange to hear new one. But it's also nice though.
The stages were really tricky as always, it's more about surviving than raw speed. There were a lot rain during reece and night before rally.
About penalties - I dont know exact situation, but whole rally organisation is quite messy. There was a huge lack of information, both for crews, both for not local spectators. Some written rules were not followed by a lot of crews and nobody cared. For some crews rules were applied, for other - not. So I'm not surprised about Andreas situation.
You could feel that is a regional rally with a lot of unwrittten rules and niuances.
The intenary supplied as Appendix to the supplementary regulations was followed by the crew.Quote:
Originally Posted by PLuto
Whether they published the intenary in "correct" way is an organizer problem. I don't know if they did or not and doesn't look like you do either. The whole situation looks like you just looked at the supplementary regulations published by wrong website that wasn't updated and created a drama for no reason. (Especially the part where you start claiming they should be excluded).
Advantage gained by the crew by going early into service after the rally is finished is exactly 0.
Going into service after rally is finished early gives no advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lead
(theoretically you could gain an advantage if say your alternator doesn't work and you are running low on battery, but then you would stop the car in the meantime anyway)
But as written in the post before they just followed latest published Itenary, so there was no mistake or intent by the crew.
Missing the refuel and tire marking in the morning was a mistake. By missing the tire marking you could theoretically get away with using more tires than allowed, but doesn't look like tire wear was a problem in this rally. Also dunno if there were any limits on number of tires at all and whether they went back to mark the tires. I agree that 200 euro is a bit ridiculous penalty though. I remember a few times in WRC people would get 10s-ish penalties for similar stuff.
There is no sense to continue in discussion with you...Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
For sure it is mistake of the crew.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lead
The derfinitive schedule is the one shown on the time card - not the roadbook or any other published schedule. We do not have that to look at. As Pluto says above, it can only be changed by an official bulletin. It sounds like the organisers of the event need some training in the regulations!
eWRC is still showing Mikkelsen as the rally winner with no DQ or penalties applied.
https://www.ewrc-results.com/entryin...-2022/3525980/
A handful of photos from Lausitz Rallye:
https://rallypl.com/fotgalerie/foto-...ausitz-2022-3/
https://rallypl.com/fotgalerie/foto-...ausitz-2022-2/
https://rallypl.com/fotgalerie/foto-...ausitz-2022-1/
Look! A works Volkswagen! ;)
https://rallypl.com/wp-content/uploa...1DSC_0179a.jpg
And a video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJ_DGce-HTU
Interesting "rescue actions" start at 5:04 :)
You can see on the videos from Lausitz that where the rear end of the old car would step out and need correcting, Mikkelsen could fling the new car into a corner and hold a line more easily.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Hyundai Rally2 possibly being pulled ...
https://www.iltalehti.fi/ralli/a/12a...4-bf2db5b70cba
Sounds like it is a slaughterhouse at Hyundai Motorsport these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
When will they show us the Yaris Rally2?
I thought it was so finished and ready, that they would run it as a course car, or outside competition, to get "in anger" data.
But I guess it is more of a concept car they will reveal?
That would be very bad news. Hyundai's Rally2 car is not perfect, but Suninen's results show that it isn't that bad. Are they going to pull the plug now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Very short sighted if so as so many of their importers in countries unlikely ever to see a WRC round or Rally 1 car have been able to use the cars. Ok so most days its not a Fabia beater but its as good as if not better than the Fiesta.
I think it was just one stage on the Saturday night it will do a demo runQuote:
Originally Posted by Sulland
What? So how does that work? Vw dont do new Polos, Msport cannot build new Fiestas, Hyundai will stop the i20s...
Is Citroen doing cars yet?
Can the teams still race these cars for a few years (until new gen?)? Where they can find parts to replace after crashes?
If it continues like that, all Rally2 competition will soon turn into a Skoda Fabia cup...
Skoda Fabia RS Rally2 lookalike liveries are already made for DR 2.0...
https://www.racedepartment.com/downl...rally-2.55807/
https://www.racedepartment.com/downl...ye-2022.55924/
To look like the new bigger car, I change the aspect ratio to 14:10 making it seem longer, lower & wider... :)
https://i.imgur.com/aY3hFc2.jpg
https://www.facebook.com/groups/grup...9028928448525/
Here is a picture of the Yaris. Looks quite finished to me
https://www.wrc.com/en/news/2022/wrc...-yaris-rally2/
I don’t know if it’s the colour scheme or what but I’m really disappointed with that, it looks bloody awful. I know this will be a development car and not necessarily what the final product will look like but the AP4 version never had the same problem - maybe that’s because it was only seen in all white then in TGR colours
Edit: found a video, confirming a 3-cyl engine https://youtu.be/T-3EIsXQ1as
Looks like a effective rear!
video testing yaris rally2
https://twitter.com/LPaanala/status/1591365388381880321
Immediately improved by seeing it in that test livery
bigger video with yaris rally 2
https://youtu.be/q-LAmxkMaWM
Possibly they used that black livery to emphasise that it's still only a demo car and far from the finished TGR item.Quote:
Originally Posted by HKSjbg
And a pity there was no photos in tarmac-spec which would've looked pretty mean.
Interesting going for the 3 cylinder engine! The driver seems to upshift very early and in the demo run in Japan it sounds like it's hitting the rev limiter too.
A lot of development to go yet if it won't debut until 2024. It seems Toyota will do it properly instead of rushing at least.
Who do they use as development/test drivers for this one?Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii