Lands End Date Change 2

I've started a new discussion as the last one regarded speculation that the date was going to change. We now know that subject to ratification it will.

From the responses to the speculation it is clear that a number of competitors would be sad to see this change take place. I know that just about the whole of Cornwall would! As I have said previously the Lands End Trial is an institution that has run unchanged (by modern standards) since the start of the last century. Why change it now?

After discussions with John West (Clerk of the Course) this weekend, it appears that the reason is due to increasing difficulties with organisation. Bude and Penzance in particular are keen to attract visitors on a weekend before Easter when things are quieter. It would also be possible to reopen Penzance promenade for the final special test. (Penzance as a finish does at least look safe for now).There are also said to be concerns over accomodation due to the Easter weekend and ever increasing traffic.

Now before I continue I would first like to say that I think John West has done an excellent job as the Clerk of the Course, and the changes he and his organisational team have made thus far have made the greatest trial in our calendar even better. BUT, as regards the date change, I personally think, this event will lose so much of what makes it special.

The Lands End Trial will no longer be the one trial to do if you don't do any others in the year. Whereas it will never become "just another trial", I honestly believe it won't be far off. It will be just another weekend away trialling but the only thing that will mark it out as being special is the fact that it runs over two days. It certainly won't be so different from the Exeter and Edinburgh.

The reasons for the movement are above all most concerning. To begin with, why do we go to Bude? Is it not just for a speed test? Who cares if the promenade at Penznace is opened for a speed test? We used to do Hobbs Choice speed test on a muddy track in the middle of nowhere. Are the speed test a compelling reason to make any change to the format? Surely these are secondary to the climbing of the hills and the adhering to the route in the correct time! Don't get me wrong I have great fun on these tests but lets get priorities right!

I also believe that sponsorship is provided by these councils, but this is surely another issue altogether. If funds are needed to keep the event going I can't believe that 300+ competitors can't think of a way to raise them. We do of course need to know that this is a problem.

As regards accomodation, I have said it before and will repeat myself. These is plenty of accomodation in South West Cornwall over Easter as long as there is a little bit of forward planning. I usually stay as part of a group of at least 10, and for only one night. This is booked at the same time as the entry form is sent and so far we have always had options as to the final hotel. Of course if people try two weeks before they will struggle but what I am saying is that it only requires a little bit of forward planning.

Traffic? Come on, how much traffic do we see on the routes we take? Except of course around Bude on the way to a special test. But again, what's a bit of traffic? Annoying maybe, but surely worth the sacrifice of keeping this great event on its traditional date.

As Simon Woodall has stated, if we wish to stop this then protests must be directed to John Aley. I would suggest writing as opposed to ringing as this may have the opposite effect if John is bombarded night after night with calls. Everyone should be aware that if they stand by, to see what happens this will almost certainly result in no Lands End at Easter.

I think we can all understand that there are organisational problems and this makes it tough for those running the event and as I have already said, John West and his team do a superb job in overcoming these. I would hate to think that by pushing to keep this traditional date we would see them stand down, but I do think the MCC need to be aware how strong the feeling is regarding this event.

Sorry to ramble on for so long but this is an emotive subject and I don't want to give up yet another tradition without a fight. This event, running as it does, is worth fighting for and I merely wish for the MCC to accept this (and by the MCC I refer to all members as well as the council), and do whatever is necessary to provide John and his team the help they need to overcome the numerous obastacles put in their way.

I would of course be glad to read messages from anyone who believes that this change is for the good. It would be even sadder to think that it changed and everyone thought it a bad idea!

Regards to all.

Giles Greenslade

Special Test Timing

Rather than confuse the Lands End at Easter with the secondary chat about Special Test timings, I have started a new topic - perhaps we could all separate our thoughts.

The Lands End tests do not all count as hill failures because they have been in the past sponsored by the local councils, and therefore, in order to encourage the spectacle rather than have the competitors trundle round slowly to portect their award these do not count against you.    The councils are asking why they bother to sponsor the event, when they have enough tourists at Easter anyway.   If the sponsorship disappears, then the correct MCC rule of you must do the test correctly can be reinstated.

As for a timed climb of Darracott, ah how times have changed, the current MSA rules states that a trial cannot have a timed test of more than 100 yards.   The reason behind this is that if there was no limit to the test length, it would be possible to organise a cheap special stage rally on a trials permit by making all the stages "special tests".   They would also be able to take advantage of the lower PR requirements that a trial enjoys with their known status as a quiet sport.   so is all swings and roundabouts.

Rough, Tough ratings

Hi,

Over on the Classical Gas "Rough Guide" I have rated events 1 to 3, both for their Roughness and Toughness.

I would appreciate your comments either on the system itself or in the way I have rated the events. I believe this will be useful information for people when choosing their program, especially for beginners.

Michael

Dunkirk 'Little Ship' Basil de Mattos

I have posted a photo on the album of a vessel that is one of the Dunkirk 'little ships'. I am sure that I have read an account that links the late Basil de Mattos MCC President from 1978 to 1991 with this vessel the 'Southern Queen', can anyone throw any further light on this.

Photo no 18 (from Paul Malin)

Hi everyone,

Received this e-mail from Paul -

michael

The photo number 18 on your web page is actually a photo of my dad (ROY MALIN) in his sprite, he still owns the car and plans to start competing in it again later this year. If you need anymore information please feel free to contact me. There is also a picture of an old pop on your site we seem to think it was driven by my uncle Ken Malin.

Regards

paul malin

SANDFORDS - gone forever?

I understand that due to an internal dispute within the landowners family  'Sandfords' [the opening hill on the Cotswold Clouds] may be lost forever. If this is true then it will be a sad loss.

Perhaps someone who knows the full story can post it here.

I believe the hill has been in use since the 1930's - can one of you historians detail the history of the hill?

Murray

 

 

 

Northern Trial Photos

AT LAST!!! I've just managed to attach half a dozen more photos to the Northern Trial file. I must have tried 10 times. Thanks for the advice, it finally sank in.

If you view the piccies and know the competitors, add a title.

I have added my surname to my title, but it seems a little formal.

 

 

 

Trungle Mill

Looking through the Lands End results I wasn't suprised to see that all cars were "clean" through Trungle Mill. I expected the restart to be on the sharp right-hander.

What did suprise me was that around 30% of the bike entries failed this section. I can only assume that the conditions were much worse early on.

I'd be interested in their comments - any bikers out there on the community ??

80 DAZE n!

Hi Everyone, now there no events to enter at present how about looking at this site to see how the "around the world group are@ - the reports section make interesting reading!

http://www.carnet.co.uk/rallyoffice/html/around_the_world.html

(PS don't know how I managed a dns at Crackington )

Community Rules

Hi everyone,

I would like your opinion on a "rule" I am considering introducing here on the community.

I am concerned about people who both use nicknames and do not declare their e-mail address in their member profile. The problem is there is a danger of "slagging-off" people, events, clubs or whatever without having to stand up for your statements in front of your peers.

While its is "Escorts" post that has made me think about this I don't want to criticise his/her views and hope you won't feel that I am getting at you because that is not my intention. It is to avoid the "flame wars" you see over on usenet.

It is possible for me to set membership conditions so that I have to approve them first. However, I have always said this is your place and I do not want to screen membership or sensor or edit contributions. I just want people to stand up for their views.

This is my proposal:-

1. If a new member neither declares their real name nor their e-mail addreess I will ask them (though a public post on the community) to either add this information to their profile or if they have a genuine reason to withhold it to let me (as the community manager) have this information.

2. If the new member does not wish to go alog with this I will change their status so it is not possible for them to post messages to the community.

3. If in the meantime they have made critical posts that I consider go to far I will remove them from the message-board.

I would appreciate your views, either by replying to this message or e-mailing me at mleete24@hotmail.com

Michael Leete

Offical Delays

Could someone perhaps enlighten me about the process of delays being made "official" and who is aware of this information during the trial itself ?

There are often delays during a trial but only sometimes are they deemed official and the only sure way of knowing seems to be after the event has finished. I have on a couple of occasions on previous LE events asked marshalls at sections and time controls if an official delay has been declared and they've not been able to give an official definitive answer. I tend therefore to work on a "rule of thumb" where if I'm travelling late but still seem to be in roughly the correct running order (or even moved forward slightly) then hopefully there's been an official delay somewhere and I should be ok. Is this a reasonable assumption ?

If this information was communicated during the event it may prevent un-necessary high-risk overtaking manouvers described elsewhere on these pages! Use of mobile phones between marshalls and some simple message boards at the beginning of sections would be a quick and easy way of doing this.

Are delays determined by the travelling marshalls who record time arriving at , and completing a section, or something similar ?

By the way I thought it was an excellent Lands End Trial and would like to thank everyone involved. I'm a keen to "keep it as it is" !

Regards,

Keith.

Lands End Date Change????

Michael,

Thank you for your comments regarding the Lands End. I am however a little disturbed at the rumours at the end of your message. Do you know if it is anything more than a rumour at this stage? I hope not.

The idea of the Lands end running on any other date than Easter seems almost laughable. Why would anyone want it to change. Am I the only one for whom the Lands End is an Easter tradition? Has it ever run on another weekend? I am fairly certain it hasn't since the mid-60's!

It worries me to think that it is being moved merely to appease those who have to drive great distances home on the Easter weekend. I know that this is a headache with the traffic today. It took me almost double the length of time to return to London the following Monday! However I would gladly spend that time sitting in the car with everyone else and keep the Lands End at Easter. Its all about the adventure that so many Clasical Gas members have referred to. I think moving from Easter would in some way detract from that adventure. After all part of the adventure is recounting what you did over Easter, to everyone else who sat inside and watched TV for four days!

Is it a concern over accommodation? Surely not. Provided plans are made early enough this shouldn't be an issue. The one time I couldn't get accomoadation (my own fault), I had to drive another 200 miles at the end of the event. Admittedly I was shattered but again it was all part of the adventure.

I hope I am not the only one with this view, and further I hope this is only a rumour that the ACTC committee will laugh at when they hear it.

As for moving back to Newquay. Again I ask why? The Lands End should finish at Lands End. If this is not possible, then as near to it as possible. Why on earth finish it at Newquay of all places? The only advantage I would see is that maybe Bluehills would be the final hill again. However I would like to think we would still do Flambards which is a real MCC stopper.

Again I hope all this is a rumous but rumours have their way of becoming the truth. Maybe it is time for tradition to change? But what's next? Running the Lands End as a day trial?!

 

Did he break the Rules?

In a previous posting I commented on the Red Pop that jumped the queue at Hoskins. I would like to come back to this. Was he breaking the rules?

We saw the three Pop’s at the Cattle Market and I even helped the Red one pull a cone he ran over from under his car. On the way to Hoskin we saw him (Red upright Ford Popular, Number 254, registration number 746 ECV, crewed by Harvey Waters/Norman Tomkin) stopped by the roadside with his head under the bonnet. We were in a long queue for Hoskins and saw the other two Pop’s some twenty cars ahead when they had their go at the hill. There were at least fifteen cars ahead and half a dozen cars behind us when the Red Pop arrived, but instead of taking his place at the back,drove straight to the front of the queue, attempted the section (which he failed) and joined his mates.

I was so astonished I didn’t say anything to him but my buddy Neil Bray had a few words at the Flambards holding control as the same guy had also jumped in front on Neil on the Exeter. The driver told Neil he "was running a team and needed to get back in formation". He was bit sheepish which is more than can be said for his passenger who was very lippy.

Questions.

1. Were they breaking the rules or just convention?
2. Should the marshal at the foot of Hoskin have allowed them to go to the front?
3. What should you do if you see this happen?
4. Does anyone think they did no wrong?

I would be interested to hear other people’s opinions.

Michael