.

.

Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: JK C 43 Aelos chassis is NOT USRA Approved

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    illinois
    Posts
    1,445

    JK C 43 Aelos chassis is NOT USRA Approved

    To the USRA Membership

    As of today the JK C 43 Aelos chassis is NOT USRA Approved and any past statements or posts claiming the chassis has been approved by the USRA, have been posted without authority of the USRA National Director.

    While this chassis is in the process of being approved, several rules have not been followed in this process and I will explain this in the following.

    ARTICLE IX EQUIPMENT APPROVALS

    2. Manufacturers must submit one piece of each component for which they seek approval to the respective Divisional Tech Director by July 1 for evaluation and inspection.

    3. Each Divisional Tech Director will report their findings and decisions directly to the USRA National director. The manufacturer will be notified accordingly. Approval will be pending subject to the Manufacturer having product in production to begin filling orders by October 1.

    6. When submitting new products to the USRA, manufacturers must provide a written request including a definitive description of the product and if it supersedes a previous product or if it is completely new. If a product is similar to a previous product the Manufacturer will also provide information that will assist a Tech Director in identifying the product.

    In regards to #'s 2 & 6, I as the National Director, have seen no proof of submission to the Scale National Director ( Current Jason Hooper ) nor have I been copied on any written request from JK Products for USRA Approval of the chassis in question.

    In regards to # 3, neither the Scale Tech Director not the Assistant Scale Director notified myself, the National Director "directly" and/or prior to the Scale Assistant Tech Director's first posting and such posting was not authorized per the National Director. The "intent" of "directly" notifying the National Director is by e-mail, phone, message, letter and then the manufacturer will be notified accordingly. It is the National Directors responsibility to notify the manufacturer of approval or non approval and NOT the Tech Directors job to do so, unless he/she is authorized by the National Director.

    First the current Assistant Tech Director, who has no authority at this time to approve any products or post any announcements, made an announcement and it was removed promptly.

    Second, the current Tech Director, copied and pasted what was originally posted, again he has no authority to be making such posts and his post was removed promptly. I am not even sure at this time if he actually has a submitted chassis on hand or that he even did the inspection in the first place.

    I had the posts removed from the OWH regarding the approval as it was not authorized or coming from the National Director.

    Products are not "approved"until inventory is checked at the distributors prior to Oct 1st. This is the month of May.

    I also notified JK Products the chassis has not been approved on Wed May 17 after the unauthorized posts were made and have yet to hear from JK Products regarding this issue.

    ARTICLE IV OFFICERS

    TECHNICAL DIRECTORS (Wing Car & Scale Divisions) The Technical Directors will be responsible for the review of technical specifications proposed in rules changes and for the technical inspection for rules compliance of entries in National Championship events. He/she will be a member of the Committee reviewing equipment modifications (which have not been approved by membership vote) for acceptability in USRA competition, and will head the Technical Committee.

    No where in the description of the Tech Director, does it state not mention, ANY authority to post approval or non approval of submitted products.

    NATIONAL DIRECTOR

    The National Director may appoint an assistant to function as a Communications Director. The Communications Director will assist in the USRA custodial requirements of record keeping as required by law or the USRA Bylaws and communicating public announcements as necessary. He/she will be responsible to publish all of the following in accordance with the USRA Rules and in a timely manner: current rulebook, BoD decisions, proposals, and vote results.

    While I as National Director, have not appointed a Communications Director, I am the current Communications Director and as stated in the by laws, it's my job to publish the above mentioned items. When a new product is approved, the rulebook is updated to reflect those approved products and at this time neither the JK chassis has been approved and/or included into the 2018 Scale rules/rulebook.

    Again, this will not take place until several months down the road and if the chassis is approved and within the required deadlines per the current rules.

    No where in the By Laws does it state the Assistant Tech Director is involved in Product Approvals let alone making official announcements of ANY kind on behalf of the Organization. Assistant Tech Directors do not sit on any BOD in the USRA.

    The current Scale Assistant Tech Director is Jon Madtes and in no way has the authorization to post any approvals nor is he to be involved in the approval process at this time per the by laws and rules.

    SELECTION OF OFFICERS

    Each officer will remain in office until a successor to such office has been elected and qualified. The Scale Division changeover date will be June 1.

    Jason Hooper is the current Scale Tech Director and is outgoing effective June 1, 2017.

    Jon Madtes is the incoming USRA Tech Scale Director effective June 1, 2017.

    Matt Bruce is the current Scale Division Director and is outgoing effective June 1, 2017.

    Rob Voska is the incoming Scale Division Director effective June 1, 2017.

    Once again and per the By Laws, none of the above officers have the authority of posting on behalf of the USRA or the National Director.

    In regards to the intent of the current bite bar rule in the USRA rules that current Scale Director Matt Bruce has posted, here is exactly was proposed and voted on by the membership in 2015.

    To allow racers to change from the stock bite bar diameter supplied by the mfg from a minimum .039 up to .062" maximum diameter.

    The bar must be steel, straight, round, no bends, no flats and does not deviate from stock.

    Discussion prior to the proposal being moved to the membership for a vote:

    "The bite bars are piano wire not manufactured by the chassis maker. Knowing that they vary to begin with from batch to batch, the racer can argue he never changed the bar but is using the one that came with it if it measures different from the others. That's the gray area. I only proposed this to cover the USRA's a$$ if somebody got cute and wanted to argue it. Obviously there is a conflict so my proposal is there to remedy any misunderstandings."

    While Matt claims there was no intent to apply this to manufacturers, there is no mention of this at the time, in the proposal or discussions, the rule was to be inclusive of MFG's. If a MFG was to have made a bite bar with bends in it in 2015, 2016, it would have been not approved as the rule clearly states the bite bar can have no bends and bite bars at that time, in the approved chassis, were round with no bends.

    Moving into Feb 2017, Matt proposed the following:

    "I, Matthew Bruce submit the following rule change to the USRA rules under the following category of Scale Car Specifications. Item letter (O) regarding the bite bar of flexi chassis. I wish to change the current wording which reads, "The bar must be steel, straight, round, no bends, no flats and does not deviate from stock", to change to and read, "Bite bar/Retainer must be metal and not deviate from manufacturers stock configuration or shape. No interchanging of bars/retainers between manufacturers chassis or different manufacturers chassis.

    The current rules intent was to restrict racers from manufacturing bite bars which deviated from stock configuration based around the popular JK chassis line, due to another organizations rules (ISRA) which allowed such a change.

    The intent of the new rule wording is to allow manufacturers the ability to create new chassis designs requiring various shapes of stock bite bar/retainers while still restricting the racer from fabricating custom designed bars which deviate from a manufacturers stock design and intent."

    This proposal did not go to vote as the member proposing the vote was not present at the nats which is required in the by laws for rule changes to classes.

    This 2017 proposal also shows that the original rule of no bends could possibly keep out future designs with bent bite bars and this 2017 proposal clearly shows NEW intent of rule wording to allow MFG's to produce bent bite bars as the current wording, in fact, will keep out bent bite bars. Again, there is no intent shown or discussed that makes the current wording MFG exempt. If it did or does, there there would have been no need to propose new rule wording for 2018 to be voted on.

    This talk of 2015 intent, was simply not there in 2015 when the current wording was proposed and passed by the membership.

    In closing, going back the 2015 proposal and wording, the wording was not specific to racers or manufactures. The wording simply states:

    "May change stock bite bar diameter supplied by the mfg to a bar with a diameter to .062 maximum to .039 minimum diameter. The bar must be steel, straight, round, no bends, no flats and does not deviate from stock.

    That wording allows both racers and MFG's to change the stock bite bar diameter supplied, provided it's straight, round, steel, no flats, no bends and does not deviate from stock.

    While the current Scale Assistant Tech Director and Scale Director posted that the J Bar Pack was approved, 2 of the 6 J bars in the pack DO NOT meet USRA rules regarding diameter, so therefore, the J Bar Pack is NOT approved and can not be approved until some more specific language/wording is written prior to moving on with the approval process.

    While while it has been mentioned I am trying to "undermine" what has been written, it is also my job to follow the rules as written and voted into place by the USRA membership.

    I have the best interests of the membership and rules in every decision I have to make and while I realize that will not please everyone, I will go by the rulebook.

    While we are trying to move forward on these issues, this can not be done without cooperation of the officers and manufacturer.

    When there is more to report, I will make any and all Official Announcements as they happen.

    Sincerely,

    Roger Schmitt
    USRA National Director
    Roger Schmitt





    MidAmerica Slot Car Raceway LLC
    109 1/2 West Monroe st.
    Bloomington, IL 61701

    630-484-8574

    Mid America Raceway Naperville
    1223 E Ogden ave
    Suite 139
    Naperville, Il 60563

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,487
    The above decision/comments sound very fair to me.

    Maybe the Fox News Channel could give is an alternative view
    Zippity

    "Rules are written by FEAR; and that Racers are motivated by the Fear that somebody may have something that gives others an Edge." - Rocky Russo



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    886
    As Scale Director of the USRA Div 2, I wanted to shed some light on why posting this approval by Jason and Jon has such significance. JK Products had submitted their new C-43 chassis for USRA competition approval. It was approved by both technical directors, namely Jason and Jon. It has however had attempts to be blocked by the current National Director Roger Schmitt. Attempts by both Jason and Jon to post its approval on OWH have been met by deletion because of certain influences. Rogers position against the USRA Boards approval decision revolves around the design of the C43s bite bar.



    The rule he refers to, which was written by Jason, Jon, and myself in 2015 was proposed and passed by the membership under Scale Car Specifications Item 1 line "O" and it reads:



    May change stock bite bar diameter supplied by mfg to a bar with a dia. .062" maximum and .039" minimum diameter. The bar must be steel, straight, round, no bends, no flats and does not deviate from stock.



    This of course was centered around basically the only manufacturers' chassis being run at the time (JK product line) that utilized the same style bar in all their chassis to that date. Jason and Jon were concerned that in years past they had seen many attempts to change the design of the stock bars by racers, sometimes altering a cars handling and in some cases made the bars use differ from its overall intended purpose. Being at that time there was nothing in the rules outlining bite bars, it was decided a rule needed to be created to stick to the manufacturer's intent and not deviate from stock which would also keep inline USRA's rules of no modifications. They gave a diameter tolerance to the bar so racers could experiment with different handling characteristics. This was good for both racers and manufacturers while also keeping it very simple and fair.



    The intent of this rule was to restrict the racer from manufacturing bars which deviated from manufacturers stock for which was submitted and approved by the USRA in its form. It's intent was never to limit a manufacturer's design of a flexi chassis and say a chassis can only utilize a straight bar. This is why the rule reads "does not deviate from stock." Stock means whatever the manufacturer produces and deems as their product design.



    Instead the National Director, disrespecting the purpose behind the rule and the intent of those who wrote it, has chosen to undermine its purpose and intent and in fact shows no regard for the very USRA BoD who wrote it.



    In doing so, we on the USRA Div 2 BoD feel he is not serving in the best interests of either the USRA membership or its manufacturers.
    Jason, Jon and myself have only the best interest of the USRA membership who we represent and who elected us to these positions.



    The USRA is not meant to be a dictatorship, steered by outside influences or for ones own personal gain.



    It is meant to be a racer-run organization that works with both its membership and manufacturers to provide an organized and fair competition for the racing of slot cars.

    Matt Bruce
    USRA Div 2 Scale Director
    Sincerely,

    Jeff Strause

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Citrus Heights, California
    Posts
    291
    Just curious... How does the Mossetti chassis' bite bar comply? Seriously, just curious. Not trying to stir up more ****... It's certainly not piano wire... And the original bite bar isn't "steel", but brass...
    Michael Colvin

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    886
    I sat and actually started reading the original post and it doesn't even sound like Roger, it sounds like someone else putting words in his mouth.
    Sincerely,

    Jeff Strause

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,487
    Quote Originally Posted by glueside View Post
    I sat and actually started reading the original post and it doesn't even sound like Roger, it sounds like someone else putting words in his mouth.
    So what?!

    You are starting to sound and behave an awful lot like POTUS
    Zippity

    "Rules are written by FEAR; and that Racers are motivated by the Fear that somebody may have something that gives others an Edge." - Rocky Russo



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,201
    I though the same thing . This is like deja vu. flash Back BOW
    Motors By Mic B
    Balance By PoppaPower
    A Clean Slot Car is a Happy Slot Car
    Garden State ISRA Club Home of the Anaconda
    Tires by the Hermanator
    www.TheISrausa.com

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Chesapeake, Va.
    Posts
    803
    Better watch out or the racers may deem the USRA not approved, wouldn't that be a kick in the butt.
    I've done so much with so little for so long it seems like I can do anything with nothing at all.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Stratford CT
    Posts
    1,881
    Scale racers are now facing the same situation that wing racers faced last year. The solution is probably the same as well, ignore the USRA except for the one race a year it sanctions. If you want to attend it follow their rules for that one race if not ignore them and find other races to attend.
    MON THE BIFF !!!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    163
    Utilize local rules at your local track. Utilize other rules like ISRA, IRRA, NSCSRA and others.

    Simple enough....The USRA is imploding?
    CK DaBoer

    Knocked you out of the slot!

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Long Island,N.Y.
    Posts
    976
    Not approved? Who cares. I bought two. I'll be racing them along with my Mossetti at my local tracks.

    I know what and where I won't be buying.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,487
    I love my two C43's
    Zippity

    "Rules are written by FEAR; and that Racers are motivated by the Fear that somebody may have something that gives others an Edge." - Rocky Russo



Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •