I noticed at Daytona quite a few of the Bikes had a single rear number plate across the top of the tail section...
Any chance of CCS going to that format in the future? It would be nice with tail sections getting smaller and smaller...
Bikes had very small/no place for numbers when I started racing. We attached rectangular number plates. Perhaps that is what will happen in the future.
Quote from: tzracer on March 27, 2007, 02:26:12 PM
Bikes had very small/no place for numbers when I started racing. We attached rectangular number plates. Perhaps that is what will happen in the future.
THats what they are supposed to do if theres not sufficient enough space for on-body plates.
I thought the single number up top looked and worked out great for all sides but I'm not sure it will work for clubs racing at tracks where the scoring people do not have an overhead view of the start/finish.
I spoke with CCS about this yesterday and it was very clear that CCS will NOT be adopting that single rear number plate. According to CCS the AMA was disappointed with how it worked for them and are considering doing away with it.
I figured it was just a Daytona thing with S/F being banked and the best view coming from the top of the bike if the front was shielded by another rider... sure would make fitting 3 numbers on my tail easier. But I dont see how it would help with most tracks in the MW/GP.
The only lap scored at start/finish by a person is the last lap. All others are scored in turn one. That's just to show the rider completed the lap.
I should have specified "at Daytona " on that last post.
Quote from: weggieman on March 28, 2007, 07:40:50 PM
The only lap scored at start/finish by a person is the last lap. All others are scored in turn one. That's just to show the rider completed the lap.
I should have specified "at Daytona " on that last post.
Actually turn 1 scoring has not been done for 3 years, with the advent of electronic scoring for all classes we have the "backup' scoring all done at start/finish at Daytona now.
And just FWIW, WERA feels the same as CCS. We may change where we allow the side plates ot be placed, or the size, but we will need them on both sides.
Aren't the rear numbers more for the cornerworkers than for the scorers?
Quote from: tzracer on March 29, 2007, 01:17:53 PM
Aren't the rear numbers more for the cornerworkers than for the scorers?
Yes and when we used turn 1 scoring at Daytona it was used there.
That is #1 reason we do not see a change to this rule and the problem AMA was seeing well at least cornerworkers were complaing about during AMA races at Daytona this spring.
Really hard for them to be positive who cut the track etc when the number is on top.
Quote from: Mongo on March 30, 2007, 09:24:22 AM
Really hard for them to be positive who cut the track etc when the number is on top.
Isn't that one of the reasons why we have radio communication between corner workers?
I'm sure there are times when the corner worker can't see the number clearly even now, using the current display method.
I mean, we could all think of a reason why the change shouldn't be adopted and it's always easy to criticize change.
Maybe there are some positives with this new change to rear number display?
Spotting numbers is always difficult. Some corners you are not on an elevated platform, so the side panel #s make it at least a bit easier for a CW to spot the correct rider, especially if there are similar bikes through the turn.
It's important to remember that the numbers are not there for the rider, but to allow officials and workers to do their job effectively. As a rider, yes, I'd love to have one # plate on the back, but if the placement on either side of the bike allows workers to make accurate calls, I'm good with that. It would suck for two blue bikes to go through the same turn, but the wrong rider gets penalized because the CW could not ascertain rider numbers correctly.
Quote from: Team_Serpent on March 30, 2007, 12:34:18 PM
Isn't that one of the reasons why we have radio communication between corner workers?
I'm sure there are times when the corner worker can't see the number clearly even now, using the current display method.
I mean, we could all think of a reason why the change shouldn't be adopted and it's always easy to criticize change.
Maybe there are some positives with this new change to rear number display?
Bike blows the chicane at Daytona, even if the next corner is over by pit in you can't guarantee the bikes are in the same order. So you get a radio call about the blue and white GSXR1k, now which one is it? Expecially if you have a few of them in a row.
The only positive change is they look cool from an overhead tv or still shot. That's it from all the input at Dyatona where they were used.
Quote from: Mongo on March 30, 2007, 05:05:11 PM
Bike blows the chicane at Daytona, even if the next corner is over by pit in you can't guarantee the bikes are in the same order. So you get a radio call about the blue and white GSXR1k, now which one is it? Especially if you have a few of them in a row.
Agreed, but as I said, it could happen even now with our current display rules. Here's why -
Since you use the GSXR in your expample let's take a look at this pic http://webhosting.web.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=560&linkpath=http://www.scooterphoto.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/IMG_037019Explusone1.jpg&target=tlx_pic5gu5 (http://webhosting.web.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=560&linkpath=http://www.scooterphoto.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/IMG_037019Explusone1.jpg&target=tlx_pic5gu5).
Now, I'm not as familiar with the bike as you probably are but from looking at this picture it doesn't look like the rear number would be easily visible from the side. The tail section seems really flat on top. On my R6 the numbers on the sides of the tail can be seen easily because the tail section has a better area for display.
All this discussion is really moot if the corner workers and officials feel they could see the majority of bikes better with tail side display, and since you are an official of some capacity I'll just be quite and go away now :biggrin:
Personally it's not that big of a deal either way, I'll do whatever the rules are, was just trying to get any positive feedback that might be out there as everyone was being so negative towards the change, maybe there are no positives 8)
Just out of curiosity, why are you posting on the CCS Rules and Reg forum? I thought you had your own sandbox to play in, why do you care about what goes on here?
I'm on the fence on all this. Number display opportunities suck on current bikes. I don't see it getting better. We were required to have 8" numbers front and rear. Now, those numbers have been allowed to become smaller. At one time, the FIM used to require specific colors for specific classes. That's gone too.
Jason, yeah, I have a hard time seeing the side/rear numbers on the current GSXR's.
There was a time when one was required to have their number on their leathers.
I don't know what the answer is.
As for Mongo...he always brings a different perspective.
We're looking at changing the rules to get the numbers better given the shape of the newer bikes without going to a numberplate. I agree that both sides isn't great but it's still better than on top.
I'm here because racing is what I do and I'll take ideas on making it better wherever I can find them. Just like Eric posts on our board.
Which way are you going with plate rules?
what about number display on the lower faring ala toseland?
Quote from: robsob on April 03, 2007, 03:48:11 PM
what about number display on the lower faring ala tosland?
interesting idea but the upper and lower are prime realestate as far as sponsors go.
Would the tail offer more opportunities? It's wasn't so long ago (LOL!) in my racing life that number plates were on the sides of the fairings.
(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.eurosport.com%2F2007%2F03%2F04%2F341988-1812888-317-238.jpg&hash=63ac44bb703e15cd09f55c6ae89965e0b9936e1d)
vs
(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com%2FSiliconValley%2FHaven%2F7226%2Fns500.jpg&hash=4cebb2ad90b9f03787ee7f5025b1d4fb711a4924)
Currently, CCS rules wouldn't allow these kinds of plates. They did at one time. Can't say when that changed though.
Quote from: Mongo on April 03, 2007, 02:27:25 PM
We're looking at changing the rules to get the numbers better given the shape of the newer bikes without going to a numberplate. I agree that both sides isn't great but it's still better than on top.
Cool, number plates would kinda suck
Quote from: Mongo on April 03, 2007, 02:27:25 PM
I'm here because racing is what I do and I'll take ideas on making it better wherever I can find them. Just like Eric posts on our board.
Understood big guy
I thought you would have said something like - to make it easier for customers racing both orgs it would be good if both orgs had similar rules regarding number display.
Quote from: Super Dave on April 03, 2007, 04:29:35 PMWould the tail offer more opportunities?
Not really if we're already having problems seeing simple numbers.
Both orgs tend to agree on things like this because we're doing the same job running races and see the same stuff work or not work. Notice we're both saying no way on the single plate rule :D
Smaller 4" or so numbers on the lowers is a very definite possibility. I like the idea of numbers on leathers however this is hard for riders running multiple orgs. I'm leaning towards the lower personally, and yes I totally understand the sponsor issues which is why I haven't said this is the way we're going.
Basically I'm going to look at it for the rest of the season, talk to the AMA peeps because they're having the same issue, talk to Eric and Kevin and other orgs and go from there.
I agree about the # on the leathers thing, even though I could profit from it. :biggrin:
I have riders that run AMA, WERA and CCS/ASRA, along with a few who run club roadracing and supermoto. Very few have homogenized numbers. Swaping stickers is easier than looking for a leathers solution, which is harder to fix after a crash, (and you need to run another race that weekend), and more costly.
This seems so simple to me. Everyone just needs to slow down!! I can only imagine how hard it is to read these numbers at these insane speeds and lean angles. :blahblah:
Sorry, I couldn't help it.
i saw a picture some where of the number on the tail turned 90 degrees to where we normally have them and it looked cool across the top of the tail. not sure what good it would do but it looked cool
AMA bikes are still running single # plates on the rear tail section...they sure do look cool... 8)
Quote from: extrakt0r on June 05, 2007, 04:48:03 PM
AMA bikes are still running single # plates on the rear tail section...they sure do look cool... 8)
But it was very difficult to figure out which bike was which while spectating at Road America, especially when watching from the outside of the track such as turn 5.
I would think tosland's real estate on his fairing is quite expensive and I bet they had a real discussion on this( like at a big table with everybody raising there hands). how about on the back of the helmet you could paint or use stickers plus by the time the corner worker figures there's a problem your going away from them. I'll go either way but please no plates their for dirt bikes marc
Quote from: spyderchick on April 03, 2007, 07:29:15 PM
I agree about the # on the leathers thing, even though I could profit from it. :biggrin:
I have riders that run AMA, WERA and CCS/ASRA, along with a few who run club roadracing and supermoto. Very few have homogenized numbers. Swaping stickers is easier than looking for a leathers solution, which is harder to fix after a crash, (and you need to run another race that weekend), and more costly.
velcro patches
Maybe we could put something like a level where the number rotates based on which way you're leaning.... yeah..... :lmao:
hook it to a gyro my bike needs one anyway
Just FYI to whever said 8" numbers are required, both CCS and WERA rulebooks allow for 6" numbers on the tail.
And, my $.02, why not allow numbers on the side, aka Toseland, as has already been asked? That would be a lot more convenient on my GSX-R. I know the rulebook doesn't allow it. But, why not?
Quote from: StuartV666 on July 27, 2007, 01:45:17 PMAnd, my $.02, why not allow numbers on the side, aka Toseland, as has already been asked? That would be a lot more convenient on my GSX-R. I know the rulebook doesn't allow it. But, why not?
Not all bikes have side fairings. Plus if bikes are side by side, the side numbers wont be visable. Tail numbers at least are. Also it would be a real PITA for workers to see numbers if they were in 2 different places on bikes.
BTW the rules used to be 8"
By rules, you MUST have a 10"X12" space for number plates on both sides of the tail and front fairing. If thers not adequate space on teh bodywork, a PLATE must be mounted (ie dirt bike style plates). Theres ALOT of numbers and plates that arent by the book but yet are getting through tech.
I heard this past weekend at JGP that the single rear tail # will be allowed but only for CCS FL.
CRA had some people using it. I'm unsure how well it can be seen.
Quote from: kl3640 on May 08, 2008, 03:05:42 AM
I heard this past weekend at JGP that the single rear tail # will be allowed but only for CCS FL.
i started this post a few weeks ago http://www.ccsforum.com/index.php/topic,20353.0.html
and we never heard from HD he was too busy picking on the amateurs about the unlimited GP payouts
so who knows if it is legal in fla region
i run the FL region, i was racing this past weekend in jennings and i was running single plate in the tail.
looked better, easier to deal with and didnt hear a problem about it with the corner workers.
i think that most of us try to do a nice job with the numbers but newer bikes are not dual plate number friendly at all.
I just found out that CCS Florida is running a test on allowing the top mounted tail numbers.
I have requested a report from the corner marshall staff in the meantime yes it was allowed to run the non-conforming numbers at FL events other than Daytona.
Quote from: Eric Kelcher on May 08, 2008, 09:49:00 AM
I just found out that CCS Florida is running a test on allowing the top mounted tail numbers.
I have requested a report from the corner marshall staff in the meantime yes it was allowed to run the non-conforming numbers at FL events other than Daytona.
Thank you - HD was who I heard it from this weekend, but didn't want to post anything "official sounding," based on a conversation, regardless of the source.
I'm painting my 1098 but not really sure what to do on the tail. Sure isn't any room for numbers on the sides. I have to paint half of the windscreen to make the front work. I'm thinking I will put one set like AMA and if I have to Zip tie number plates at the races I will.
Quote from: Garywc on May 08, 2008, 08:23:13 AM
i started this post a few weeks ago http://www.ccsforum.com/index.php/topic,20353.0.html
and we never heard from HD he was too busy picking on the amateurs about the unlimited GP payouts
so who knows if it is legal in fla region
I think the Amateurs should be allowed the single plate on the tail because we're unimportant and inexperienced and fall down a lot. That way with the bike on its side the # on the tail would be easier to read. Experts should still have to have # on both sides of the tail because they are so fast and important the corner workers need every chance they have to recognize them. :ass: :biggrin:
here are some examples if it help.
this were taken this past weekend at jennings GP
i think it looks way better and easier to spot, but thats just my opinion.
(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi19.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb156%2Fs4orce2001%2Fjennings%2520oct%25206-7%2Fth_300-02copy-1.jpg&hash=28ccb108792771e42ca30f37385430941882dac2) (http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b156/s4orce2001/jennings%20oct%206-7/300-02copy-1.jpg)(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi19.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb156%2Fs4orce2001%2Fjennings%2520oct%25206-7%2Fth_300-04copy-1.jpg&hash=5288100a8fa9c5d172624d94c347a1756b9c5efc) (http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b156/s4orce2001/jennings%20oct%206-7/300-04copy-1.jpg)(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi19.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb156%2Fs4orce2001%2Fjennings%2520oct%25206-7%2Fth_300-08copy.jpg&hash=db7000f4ef9fb20fc4564748db73c6c39acd327b) (http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b156/s4orce2001/jennings%20oct%206-7/300-08copy.jpg)
(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi19.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb156%2Fs4orce2001%2Fjennings%2520oct%25206-7%2FJenningsCCS272.jpg&hash=fb8e217cd9927237fad7d19a82e8f7d06e99f023)
I think that it makes it harder to see your number. If you were straight up and down it would be impossible to see, ala front straight where the scorers sit. I can see the conversation, "Was that #200 or #300?" "No I think it was #304..." d
for i was told in the front straight they dont look at the side numbers only front number ;)
"told by corner workers and HD also" so problem solved.
Well if they miss you because you are part of a 9 bike train all going 160 mph they may have to look at your side number.
Don't some series allow the rear numbers to be placed on the aft end the belly-pan?