rick_bostrom
Onda Kattan Racing
mmmmm ...... Pabst.
(Easily distracted)
(Easily distracted)
Why is that your hope? Is it your assertion that sailboat rigging is not a safety-related product?2) I was really hoping it was just a wives tale and we weren't really making important safety decisions based on the aging of sailboat rigging.
.... "Any information not supplied herein shall be taken from Aerospace
Standard "SAE AS 8043 - Torso Restraint Systems" which does have an "Environmental Standards" reference which addresses testing for light exposure with and without water and a standardized salt spray exposure and accelerated aging.)......
Jeez, you rule guys are killing racing for me!
The belts in my car are now five years old, been in the car about six race weekends (never actually been "used",) and otherwise have been sitting, covered, in my garage. You can't tell them from new. I literally did not attend the race in Spokane this year because the cost associated with doing a single race are prohibitive to me.
Likewise, I've been racing 20 years averaging about 1.5 races per year and have had to buy four helmets (OK, so one of those got "used", but the others are as new.) ....
....Is the "recommended" expiration date documented (on the belts) as month/year? It may be necessary to make a note in the vehicle log during the annual tech, and then monitor that date throughout the year (every event) for compliance....
I'll quote myself:What is the REAL risk to conference or the tech inspectors if a belt failure were to occur during a racing event?
The issue here is really simple: Presently, Conference rules do something different than the manufacturer's recommendation. Whether that recommendation makes sense or not, whether the tests they used to determine it make sense or not, whether our conditions are wildly different from those in the tests... none of that matters.
I suffered a solo bicycle accident back in July. Some weeks after my insurance was done paying out for my medical expenses, I got a letter from a company they'd hired to investigate whether anyone else was OR COULD HAVE BEEN at fault. Why do you think they did this? To see if there were grounds for a lawsuit that would help them recoup their (perfectly valid) payout.
And so, if someone crashes their car in 3 year-old, SFI-rated belts, belts that seem to be (and probably are) in as-new condition, makes a perfectly-reasonable claim on their insurance for a broken wrist, and then the insurance company finds out that ICSCC allowed the insured party to use a harness that was outside the manufacturer's recommended lifetime... well, what do YOU think is going to happen? Conference is gonna get sued for negligence by the insurance company.