Changing a long-established practice is never easy. However positive the new proposal sounds, there will inevitably be some who believe that the traditional method is best. That’s why, for a change to be successful, it needs to be tested, considered and discussed with the key stakeholders, rather than being rushed into. And that careful process is exactly what Motorsport UK is undertaking when it comes to revolutionising its approach to scrutineering.
Autosport outlined last year how the governing body was trialling a new system where, instead of the pre-pandemic situation of every single car at a meeting being given a six-minute check before qualifying, 25% of entries (either chosen randomly from all competitors or all cars from certain categories are selected) are given a more extensive 15-minute examination. Around 100 events were run in such a manner last year and there was some very positive feedback. The trial is now continuing into this season, ahead of Motorsport UK finalising proposals for 2024.
But, alongside the method of scrutineering being assessed, a new scrutineering vehicle database is also going to be piloted in the second half of this year. The database is designed to provide a record of faults found on a particular car, and means that, for machines raced across multiple clubs, instructions from scrutineers are not lost when the driver subsequently competes elsewhere.
“The consistency of keeping on top of the standard of vehicle preparation and making sure issues that are identified are resolved can become quite disjointed if there isn’t the same scrutineering group each weekend with super short-term memory to remember every fire extinguisher that needed a service the last week to make sure it’s been done,” says Motorsport UK technical director Ian Smith. “So this centralised scrutineering vehicle database is going to give all of the scrutineers an opportunity to access a digital record for each car.
“We would absolutely encourage scrutineers to apply some pragmatism and a little bit of leeway where it’s appropriate and this gives them a way of doing that with some reassurance. If a scrutineer says to a competitor, ‘You must sort that by next time’, they’ll be held accountable because there’s a record the next scrutineer can check.”
For the initial launch, the focus is very much on simplicity. When consulting with the race committee on the plans, there was a clear message about the need to avoid any additional burden on competitors, clubs or scrutineers. Therefore, initially, the database will just record the make and model of a car and give an event history of any faults found.
“The point is, it doesn’t matter who the driver is, it’s a very simplified record that is associated with a unique identifier for that vehicle,” explains Smith. “Keeping it simple makes perfect sense, but there’s the opportunity to expand it as far as we feel, collectively, we want to go.”
Further down the line, there is perhaps the potential for competitors to be notified when a fire extinguisher is due to expire, but those discussions will follow once the system is running successfully. MotorSport Vision Racing chief scrutineer Nigel Thorne has built his own prototype database that he has been using for the past two years and says it brings clear benefits.
“What it gives me is records, which I’ve never had before,” he says. “I can look and see the last time I saw these cars, these are the cars with failures. This time, we need to target this and this and this because we’ve not seen them or they needed to replace that because it had a problem last time. That is working – the word goes round the paddock and, when you tell them to fix it, they fix it because they know you will come back to them because of the database.”
Having such a system could be a game-changer for the scrutineering process and fits perfectly with an approach where cars are no longer being inspected before every meeting. And the feedback on the 25% trial has so far been good – from clubs, competitors and, importantly, many scrutineers.
“The big thing for me is club motorsport is a hobby and spending your precious hobby time in a queue pushing your car to scrutineering every event just seems really backward now,” says Classic Sports Car Club director David Smitheram.
“None of this is about catching anybody out, it’s about making sure whenever someone presents their vehicle they’ve got all the information they need to make sure it’s compliant and safe" Ian Smith, Motorsport UK technical director
“We would be the first to say it’s not working if it was allowing unsafe vehicles through, but we’ve not really noticed any increase in incidents or breakages through not having 100% scrutineering. At the last round, of the series checked, I think more things were picked up because they had a little more time.”
Scrutineer Nigel Jones certainly believes that having those longer 15-minute inspections is useful.
“For the cars that need a little more attention, scrutineers have the time to talk with the entrant/driver/mechanic and explain why things need to be corrected,” says Jones, who scrutineers for a diverse range of categories and clubs, including the Historic Racing Drivers Club, British Formula 4 and British Rallycross.
“That doesn’t impact on the scrutineering programme because you’ve got a 15-minute window. Another plus is competitors don’t have the early morning start and have to queue in the pouring rain. It starts their weekend in a calm and controlled way.”
And Jones is adamant that not seeing each car at every event does not mean standards have decreased.
“It’s totally the opposite,” he says. “Instead of saying, ‘that needs fixing’, and send it away, you can spend more time with people. Also, there are still spot checks in parc ferme and you can have a look around in the assembly area.”
Regardless of whether you vehemently believe in traditional 100% scrutineering or are in favour of the new system, Smith stresses that Motorsport UK is not looking to implement a one-size-fits-all approach. He also says there will be a focus on education and an examination of the common faults found by scrutineers.
“None of this is about catching anybody out, it’s about making sure whenever someone presents their vehicle they’ve got all the information they need to make sure it’s compliant and safe,” he concludes.
Every tool to help achieve that objective is undoubtedly worth exploring – even if it does mean a new way of working.
