Two-lane Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 1 hour ago, Derek Flint said: If it recall correctly there was an arbitrary speed limit of 90mph was placed on inspection and roads open cars. Not sure who picked that figure, or why, but it was intended to rein in some of the more 'flamboyant' laps. Absolute speed limits are easy to set, but are not the complete answer - and I do not have the answer. I have a photo (admittedly not taken recently) of a course car going over Ballough Bridge with both rear wheels clear of the ground. The mentality of the driver is very important, but that cannot be measured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 2 minutes ago, Two-lane said: Absolute speed limits are easy to set, but are not the complete answer - and I do not have the answer. I have a photo (admittedly not taken recently) of a course car going over Ballough Bridge with both rear wheels clear of the ground. The mentality of the driver is very important, but that cannot be measured. I remember seeing a TR7 collapse upon landing after getting massive air there, and that was the end of that " roads open" car. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 11 minutes ago, Two-lane said: Absolute speed limits are easy to set, but are not the complete answer - and I do not have the answer. I have a photo (admittedly not taken recently) of a course car going over Ballough Bridge with both rear wheels clear of the ground. The mentality of the driver is very important, but that cannot be measured. The cars are limited to 60mph (80mph on the mountain). Even at speeds of 30-40mph mph you can 'get air' on several parts of the course, but that does not imply a lack of control. All in all, I consider these course cars safe within those restrictions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 1 hour ago, Derek Flint said: It was clear in the early days practices were primitive. Many years of experience policing it, investigating racing incidents and general involvement didn't change my mind. There was a step change in 2007 and it's marched really well in the right direction. The current involvement of the likes of Nigel Crellin has made the marked difference. Those are the sort of people that influence change. And they are both Manx. It's not about being Manx or not. The point is the changes are nothing new. I remember very significant changes that happened well before 2007, and they were nothing new either - pretty much the only constant in the event's history is change, it's always happened, and it always will. You talk about the early days - the point is , they weren't the early days. In TT terms they were very recent. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, it's easy to look clever with its benefit, we can all do that. It's very easy to dismiss those without such a luxury as "amateurs" or "primitive" , it's much harder to predict the events that you criticise them for not anticipating. Which is presumably why you do a lot of the former, but none of the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 22 minutes ago, Two-lane said: The mentality of the driver is very important, but that cannot be measured. The skill and course knowledge of the driver equally so. There have been some very talented and competent course car drivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Flint Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 1 hour ago, WTF said: i knew about the 90mph limit but that doesn't tell us what speed the car was actually travelling at , and to be honest 90mph or more there in a quick car in that location when both carriageways should be available isn't pushing it as far as i'm concerned. It's positively pedestrian. I've had a few closed road runs and it's a totally different dynamic 20 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: It's not about being Manx or not. The point is the changes are nothing new. I remember very significant changes that happened well before 2007, and they were nothing new either - pretty much the only constant in the event's history is change, it's always happened, and it always will. You talk about the early days - the point is , they weren't the early days. In TT terms they were very recent. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, it's easy to look clever with its benefit, we can all do that. It's very easy to dismiss those without such a luxury as "amateurs" or "primitive" , it's much harder to predict the events that you criticise them for not anticipating. Which is presumably why you do a lot of the former, but none of the latter. Along with others I contributed to change as things progressed, wherever I could. An example was a researched paper which contributed to the withdrawal of police officers from the circuit. I also convened the review of emergency response in the Paddock and environs. You? Wherever risk prevails the question is 'how can we do better?' 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 9 hours ago, On The Level said: I'm sorry Derek but Counsell had no business driving at that speed when the rider originally involved had already died. He did so solely for his own excitement and therefore must bear at least some responsibility. The thought of him receiving any monetary compensation is galling. My understanding from previous posts Derek Flint has made is that because it was a fatal accident then it was considered of utmost importance that the police be at the location of the accident ASAP to commence a fatal accident inquiry. Hence Counsell drove as quickly as he felt appropriate in the circumstances. He would - of course - have had no idea that some unnamed individual had directed riders to ride travel towards him counter-clockwise around the course and would not have expected to meet traffic coming in the opposite direction. I don't know him and he might be a complete twat and utter cunt but in this case he does seem to be a victim of crap TT organisation. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 8 hours ago, Gladys said: Has he had training in emergency vehicle driving? Does having two police officers in the car change anything? They are not in control of the vehicle. As I've said in my previous post, Derek Flint has posted several months if not years ago that because there had been a fatality then the police needed to be in attendance at the accident scene ASAP. (Whether that is true or not I don't know - but I beleive that is the gist of what Derek has previously posted...) Counsell was doing what he thought he should be doing... He could not reasonably have expected to meet riders coming the wrong way around the circuit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 8 hours ago, On The Level said: I've personally witnessed him driving when there was NO incident, simply 'course inspecting' so i don't think it's too much of a leap to presume he was driving in similar, or even faster, manner. Whether there was belief the road was clear or not, he should have been able to stop safely for whatever reason. You can't reasonably believe that somebody in these circumstances should be expected to be ready to stop when nobody should be travelling in the opposite direction? The only person at fault here is whoever directed the riders to go back counter-clockwise around the circuit. Oh - they aren't the only person. There's all the other marshalls they must have passed and should have thought "Hold on! What's happening? Why are they going the wrong way?" 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 8 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: As usual with these case, everyone is busy announcing that someone is guilty or totally absolved on the grounds of considering them a complete dickhead or one of their mates respectively. But we don't know what the circumstances were what the behaviour and instructions were. And we won't because the ACU refuse to release its report on rather flimsy grounds, especially as they have now settled with Mercer. Hasn't this been discussed ad nauseum? The circumstances, behaviour and instructions are never going to be made public because the report will clearly point the blame at whoever instructed Mercer et al to return the wrong way around the course. That will be a named indidual or individuals. On as small an island as the IoM it would be invidious to name anyone - or to allow anyone to be identified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 5 hours ago, Derek Flint said: I've always referred to him as Sean. We've also had our differences over the years. However, from the outset of the Mercer incident I recognised him as a victim. He deserves every support. You should start an appreciation society. Or a GoFundMe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Flint Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 5 hours ago, Barlow said: You should start an appreciation society. Or a GoFundMe. Why? Should I do that for everyone I identify as a victim, based on the available information? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 12 hours ago, Derek Flint said: Gus Scott. Single human factor that shouldn't have happened. Why we will never know. Jeffrey- alleged oil spill? Can't recall. With regard of these four posts; If it recall correctly there was an arbitrary speed limit of 90mph was placed on inspection and roads open cars. Not sure who picked that figure, or why, but it was intended to rein in some of the more 'flamboyant' laps. It transpired that there was a lack of clarity in the legislation as there was some conflict between the road races act and the road traffic act or something? Wasnt it successfully argued that the vehicle was being used for a 'policing purpose' and was therefore exempt? As I suspect you'll know, the exemption is on the vehicle rather than the driver so SC driving wouldnt be an issue. In the past there was a requirement to hold a police class 1 or a competition licence. I think subsequent drivers did undergo some high speed instruction. Might be wrong? Just no. It was clear in the early days practices were primitive. Many years of experience policing it, investigating racing incidents and general involvement didn't change my mind. There was a step change in 2007 and it's marched really well in the right direction. The current involvement of the likes of Nigel Crellin has made the marked difference. Those are the sort of people that influence change. And they are both Manx. Agree, Gus Scott was a human error, nobody knows what went through April’s head when she dashed across the road. It did lead to more stringent controls about setting foot on a live course, which has created problems of its own. David Jefferies clipped the left hand wall while slipstreaming Adrian Archibald. This flipped him across the road to his right. There was no oil on the course from a retired machine, it wasn’t leaking oil! Everyone was quick to blame the marshals, the comms system etc because a random person rang race control to report the accident and was asked to identify themselves. The press had a field day blaming everyone they could, except for the actual reasons. It was made worse when the official reports didn’t reach the right conclusions for political reasons! 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Colombe Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 It seems pretty clear cut that Mr Flint is correct on this one. However reckless and macho a driver and however objectionable a character Mr Counsell might be, the fact remains he was sent into oncoming traffic when he shouldn't have been. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizo Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 1 hour ago, Max Power said: There was no oil on the course from a retired machine, it wasn’t leaking oil! Are you saying John McGuinness is a liar then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.