+- TT Website Forum (https://www.ttwebsite.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Isle of Man TT Website (https://www.ttwebsite.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: TT Related Posts (Only) (https://www.ttwebsite.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Another TT course change (/showthread.php?tid=5803)
Pages:
1
2
Another TT course change - cargo - 13-10-2007
One wonders what sort of lap speeds we'll see next year.
http://www.energyfm.net/news/bulletinstory2.htm
Two birds - ian huntly - 13-10-2007
Well it could be dedicated to Geoff Cannel and increase the lap speed all in one go !!
Surely that section was a true TT road, and I suggested some time ago that it could be called after Joey...
Is it all losing character ????
- andy21aa - 13-10-2007
I agree with Ian, the character of the course is of paramount importance. Would the powers that be at Spa straighten out Eau Rouge? I don't think so.
Also I think Geoff deserves a more tangible memorial, something that can be seen as a tribute to the great man, not just a stretch of tarmac.
Just my 2p.
- Chris Maybury - 13-10-2007
What will be the nett effect on the mean overall distance of the TT Course if this proposal is instituted? (Remembering also other significant "improvements").
- Arthur Lawn - 13-10-2007
Why alter the original coarse? The DOT offered to leave it intact for race use. This must raise the question 'why are the ACU getting involved? as the way I see it although they issue the coarse permit if nothing changes then there is no reason not to license the existing circuit.
With talk of changes to Hilberry,apparently now an accident blackspot due to greater speeds through Brandish, comparisons of lap times through the ages are becoming meaningless. Just an opinion
dedication - ian huntly - 14-10-2007
It was supposed that the commentary tower at the grandstand was named after Peter Kneale, but it is also called Dukes tower after the proliferation of Duke banners.
However the press office has "references" to Peter and therefore Geoff must be added to this.
The point I am making is that Peter and Geoff deserve true dedicated memorials to their contribution to the TT from the angle of commentaries and press officer involvement and not a name on a piece of the TT Course.
- samwise - 14-10-2007
andy21aa Wrote:Would the powers that be at Spa straighten out Eau Rouge? I don't think so.
Eau Rouge is on a closed-road course, isn;t it? The Nook to Governor's is a normal road and they get changes as and when required, although I wouldn't have thought that section would need much maintenance by the DoT to keep it at a racing standard if no traffic is using it normally.
Moving the TT course to follow the new road would seem an unwarranted move, really, as the old road was/is going to stay.
Arthur Lawn Wrote:With talk of changes to Hilberry,apparently now an accident blackspot due to greater speeds through Brandish
Surely that's a separate issue as the 40mph limit comes in about 2/3 of the way to Hillberry from Brandish, so the speeds being attained at Brandish should have no effect on accidents at Hillberry, if people are observing the speed limit.
- PeterCourtney - 14-10-2007
I have always understood that the "twiddly bit" down the dip and up onto the Glencrutchery Road was not public highway, but a private bit of road?
As for the Hillbery situation and other changes, my feelings have been well documented here before! I await the announcement of the perfectly oval 1.2 mile TT "Indie" circuit, for use by so-called "superbikes", with breath that is less than bated!
- MV - 15-10-2007
Peter, although you exagerate to prove the point, you are, sadly on the money!
We who are described as old fashioned or at the very least, traditionalists are actually all joint custodians of TT history.
They must NOT be allowed to remove that section.
Dropping down the hairpin and keeping the engine on the boil before blasting out onto the Glencruthcery road is surely a part of the TT that MUST remain??
- PeterCourtney - 15-10-2007
I am reminded here every day of the course that I knew - the minor roads here that we use to nip to the shops (9kms) are so much like parts of the Island - bumps, off-camber and positive-camber, tight bends, open, fast bends, past little hamlets and dirt roads where you have to watch for loose rubble after rains. Thankfully, they do not melt in the summer 40+ degree heat, unlike the 13th Milestone section that killed Santago Herrero in 1970.
Non-TT hazards are a problem though sometimes - the odd burro or horse loaded with harvested produce, with its owner walking alongside (usually chatting on a state-of-the-art mobile!!), dollops of concrete dropped from the many mixer lorries, right on the "racing line", little old men on mopeds - no helmet, little silencing, and doing less than 20kph. Helen and her fellow marshalls would have great fun clearing that lot out of the way before the roads could be closed! :wink:
- Arthur Lawn - 15-10-2007
[quote="PeterCourtney"]I have always understood that the "twiddly bit" down the dip and up onto the Glencrutchery Road was not public highway, but a private bit of road?
Your right Peter it is a bit of road not normally used as I understand it.But I believe it was part of the original coarse road untill it was straightened many years ago and has been maintained to keep the coarse original.
- alf885 - 15-10-2007
A petition has been started (opened) by Richard @ http://greenonline.cc/ to urge the authorities to retain the course's original route. alf
- Don Simons - 16-10-2007
But Alf, who are the authorities?
The ACU?
- PeterCourtney - 16-10-2007
Well for what it is worth, I have signed it, pointing out that without the effect of the virtual stop, and controlled entry to the Glencrutchery Road, there could be a dangerous high-speed right-hander with its dangers to spectators, plus a much higher entry speed and subsequent top speed past the pits and towards the top of Bray.
There is simply no need to replace that part of the course, it could merely be by-passed except for the races, preserving the old road as the rest of the course should be, as a Heritage Site.
Imagine the row if someone decided to dismantle part of Stonehenge to create a car park or recreation area! The Isle of Man should decide now what it really wants to do about the races - preserve the unique heritage they hold, or just pack it in.
- Don Simons - 16-10-2007
This thread will be branded as reactionary by the forces of change that for whatever motivation want to modernise the TT.
Unless there is some very pressing, local, everyday reason for the realignment it seems to me this is a retrograde step which will further dumb-down the TT.
I suppose it gets down to who is running the show?
Like F1 used to be run by various countries as GPs now it is "managed" and is on the brink of being manipulated out of existence.
A stronger stance is required by those who "own" the TT when "consulting" with the ACU.
In any field of human activity if you give the "Regulators" an inch it just seems to go to their heads. (If I may mix the metaphors for Mr. Foster)
"There is nothing like returning to a place that remains unchanged to find the ways in which you yourself have altered."
Nelson Mandela (1918 - ),
- DCLUCIE - 16-10-2007
Hi Peeps,
Just to clear a couple of things up.
The ACU need to be contacted before any work can be carried out on the course to make sure that they have no real impacts on the course liscence.
The Governors Bridge section is not privately owned, its just never used in the normal day to day travel of Islanders.
Maybe they could keep the section much the same as they keep the 'dip' and only use it for the races, but this also has problems. The 'Dip' section is really bad for moss and sap from the trees, and so I think this could cause more problems for keeping the section as is and not using it in the day to day travel.
I think that the changes are made being made for the safety of the general public during the other 48 weeks of the year when the races aren't on. I have to admitt it is a little narrow down there when coming up and having to breath in when a lorry is coming down the other way, plus with the developement of the housing estates up that direction more and more traffic will be using this section.
My only thoughts are if we want to keep it then make it one way on that section and use the new road in the opposite direction. Simple, easy to use and also it fits the needs of everyone, or is this too simple.
At least if you are going to shout about something come up with an alternative rather than just saying I don't like it.
And here was me thinking us Manxies are crabs lol
- cargo - 16-10-2007
DCLUCIE Wrote:My only thoughts are if we want to keep it then make it one way on that section and use the new road in the opposite direction. Simple, easy to use and also it fits the needs of everyone, or is this too simple.
Brilliant idea DCLUCIE.................... the prefect solution
And cheaper too cos the new bit will only need to be one lane wide
DCLUCIE gets my vote for Minister of Transport
- thewitch - 16-10-2007
A constructive idea! Lets have more of those!!
- Arthur Lawn - 16-10-2007
Hold on a minute, the DOT in there original statement said they would be keeping and maintaining the exsisting road so as not to alter the TT coarse.However it was reported that after dicussions with the ACU,the ACU indicated on the grounds of safety they would wish to use the new road as part of the TT coarse. The DOT responded by saying good we can dig it up and grass it over thus saving maintenance monies.
Without seeing the actual plans its difficult to comment from a distance on the overall effect on the coarse but Governors Bridge/Nook is more of a TT coarse landmark than other areas were road improvements have occurred
- PeterCourtney - 16-10-2007
Arthur - at the risk of being accused of nit-picking, can I just say that my sense of humour is coarse, but the Nook is part of the course. :?