RaceCafe..#1...Tipsters Thread.... Share Your Fancies For Fun...Lets See Who The Best Tipsters Here Are.
Happy Sunrise

Mobile at Addington

Recommended Posts

You would have thought after the first go it wasn't safe, but no, let's go again and make it even more dangerous.

Health & Safety takes a holiday :o

The track was so bad I thought I was betting at any number of galloping tracks around the country!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the vehicle has suitable tyres on both front & rear.    Perhaps in the slushy conditions some air should have been let out of the tyres to allow the vehicle to have settled lower.    As you may appreciate there is an unusually heavy load on the back of these vehicles - all the machinery is aft.    This was similar to the instance at Pukekohe on the grass a few years ago except that yesterday the starter still had control when the vehicle slewed whereas at Pukekohe the control had been taken over by the vehicle driver in the front.    Yesterday's incident looked worse than it really was as Lamb still had the field behind the vehicle and when the mobile changed course he would have still been in voice contact with the drivers.    I also thought the mobile driver, who was steering only, straightened out and held his line particularly well in the circumstances.     As we know "accidents can happen" but I really feel the whole incident looked worse than it really was.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eljay said:

I'm sure the vehicle has suitable tyres on both front & rear.    Perhaps in the slushy conditions some air should have been let out of the tyres to allow the vehicle to have settled lower.    As you may appreciate there is an unusually heavy load on the back of these vehicles - all the machinery is aft.    This was similar to the instance at Pukekohe on the grass a few years ago except that yesterday the starter still had control when the vehicle slewed whereas at Pukekohe the control had been taken over by the vehicle driver in the front.    Yesterday's incident looked worse than it really was as Lamb still had the field behind the vehicle and when the mobile changed course he would have still been in voice contact with the drivers.    I also thought the mobile driver, who was steering only, straightened out and held his line particularly well in the circumstances.     As we know "accidents can happen" but I really feel the whole incident looked worse than it really was.  

I disagree.  That  was so close to being a disaster it was not funny.   Yes the mobile driver  and the starter did correct it well,had they not then you would have had carnage.  Lucky they were experienced horses and drivers as well.Surely there must be an independent inquiry into how this situation occurred and what steps are required to prevent it happening again.   just google that terrible smash they had at freehold raceway in 2014 to see what can happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whata - I haven't condoned the situation (if that's what you mean).    Perhaps you should read my post a little more slowly.    I say "yes" to everything you say EXCEPT "close to being a disaster".     Unless of course your idea of a disaster is a couple of broken sulkies and a few drops of blood and maybe a broken bone or two.     To me a disaster involves serious injury - perhaps even death - to either drivers (plural) or horses (plural).    I'd say if you went to 10 meetings your chances of seeing a bruised or battered horse or driver would be high.    That's to be expected where you are moving at speed with horses in close proximity.   I do not see this incident is any worse than the countless numbers I have seen (in both codes) over a long period but I do say one crash, smash, or medical incident, is one too many but unfortunately they have, has, and will occur.     I also think in this particular instance we should be thankful that no harm was taken and praise the skill of those concerned rather than look for  what could have possibly occurred but didn't.     I'm sure an enquiry will be held as it did with the Pukekohe incident and if any of the recommended  conclusions from that incident weren't being adhered to then suitable action will be taken with the person(s) responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The incident was a hairs breadth awake from being a disaster. A mixture of driver skill and sheer good fortune saved the day. If the mobile had turned a few more degrees, it was gone, along with half a dozen horses and drivers. To fob it off as an acceptable risk is equal parts naivety and stupidity!

It's always amazed me the type of vehicle used in NZ for mobile barriers. A ute is pretty much a sedan chassis with a bit of extra suspension. Certainly not designed for having a 20m wide mobile arm hanging way off the back of it. The base vehicle should be a light truck capable of bearing the load with ease, especially under adverse weather conditions.

The stipes report puts the incident down to a "loss of traction". Nothing could be further from the truth. It was a "loss of steering" due to excessive overhanging load behind the rear axle. The front wheels simply lost contact with the ground under acceleration.

Even in dry conditions, the front wheels have miminal contact with the ground when the arms are fully extended. That contact with the ground becomes less and less as you increase speed and as the track gets wetter, to the point where we see what happened yesterday.

The track conditions (on all weather tracks at least) would be virtually irrelevant if an appropriately load rated vehicle was used, instead of a modified family sedan!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack - forgetting whether a 'disaster" was narrowly averted - do you then think there was "human" error on the part of the starter.   i.e. because the ground was slippery, should he have increased the speed of the mobile a lot earlier and in fact at the point of despatch been some distance ahead of the field due to his speed.     By doing this he would not have had to suddenly apply the power meaning the mobile would have had ample traction for some distance from the start.     Incidentally also remember that each "unit" had two pair of eyes meaning the horses I imagine would not have charged the arms willy nilly.    You see this often when a false start is called under normal circumstances.      The Pukekohe incident was far more "frightening" as it occurred some distance after the start and the mobile actually rotated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eljay said:

do you then think there was "human" error on the part of the starter.

Yes, because they tried for a second time.

Last summer, I backed a horse, drawn 8 or 9, over 1950m at Addington. I am sure (watched it a few times) the mobile vehicle slid a fraction which caused the barrier to swing, especially on the outside of the arm. My horse was right up on the gate and it had its nose banged and promptly lost several lengths. Stipes report said it was off the gate!

For the life of me, I can't remember the horse. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Yes, because they tried for a second time.

Last summer, I backed a horse, drawn 8 or 9, over 1950m at Addington. I am sure (watched it a few times) the mobile vehicle slid a fraction which caused the barrier to swing, especially on the outside of the arm. My horse was right up on the gate and it had its nose banged and promptly lost several lengths. Stipes report said it was off the gate!

For the life of me, I can't remember the horse. 

 

Exactly any starter with half a brain for the safety of the drivers and horses would have said to the stipes  (which is funny as he is a stipe also )straight away its not safe to try again unless  track  consitionschanged .which after 5 minutes it was never going to change .  But we all know peter lamb prefers to hear himself on the microphone instead 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Yes, because they tried for a second time.

Last summer, I backed a horse, drawn 8 or 9, over 1950m at Addington. I am sure (watched it a few times) the mobile vehicle slid a fraction which caused the barrier to swing, especially on the outside of the arm. My horse was right up on the gate and it had its nose banged and promptly lost several lengths. Stipes report said it was off the gate!

For the life of me, I can't remember the horse. 

 

Funny you say that. In 2010 a horse trained by a good trainer we knew had an incident where a horse of his was hit in the head as a result of the barrier making brief contact with the outside fence.  The horse had been supported on the tote by some.  The trainer was advised by his driver what happened and protested. Apparently this was denied by the starter with the protest looking like it would be dismissed until the trainer insisted the driver  be spoken too and the video scrutinized closely.  Sure enough the horse was late scratched.   The same trainer then had another horse drawn 1 in a stand latter in the day. Kawarau king was its name.  2 February 2010..  Just before the start that horse swung around and faced completely the wrong way on the infield grass and the starter let them go.  Not even late scratched. You can still clearly see it on the video.  Not  sure what the moral of that was.                                     

Strange thing happened with the horse that got the bang in the head.  He won about 3 starts latter,one of those $3000 Tuesday races paying a very nice dividend.    I noticed the horse for the next couple of days seemed a lot more settled and friendly,as if he knew he had done well.  Then for some unknown reason to everyone except the owner, the owner came with his horse float and took him away to another trainer.  I don't think he ever raced again as he was rather highly strung  and had taken a lot of time and effort to get settled with his winning trainer.  I felt sorry for the horse. Moral of that story was horses are more genuine than some people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agree with hsv man, these things can happen, but to try again with same result defies commonsense. Starter should have been stood down and fined heavily for stupidity . Later in day after several trials the mobile may have been ok. Also the attractive young passenger should have been removed for the second risky slide as anything could have happened !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are those "attractive young passengers" there for anyway?      Is it to deter the starter from swearing at errant drivers or are they qualified co-pilots.     Surely the starter has enough to do without an additional worry.     And from the video it would appear that neither starter or her were wearing Hard Helmet, or Vest  which I would have thought mandatory bearing in mind no seat belts.        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The replay you guys have been watching on hrnz does not show the test run the starter had between the two failed starts where the mobile went alright. But before you bag me I'm only stating the facts. I'm not sure if the test run was shown on trackside either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had no idea that they'd had a test run between starts, but unless that test run precisely simulated the hard acceleration of an actual race start, it would have been pointless. It's that acceleration, where the rear end of the vehicle dips and the front wheels rise that causes the loss of steering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry just giving you the facts again.They made an announcement on coarse stating the mobile was going to accelerate away from the field slower on the second attempt so all the horsemen were informed of that along with everybody on coarse.Should have bought a holden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dont know how going to have aslow mobile start would work with both drivers and horses geared to get out faster than competitors  . just a disaster waiting to happen.... I knew a test was run but as stated conditions were exactly same 2nd time and third time .  I watched and waited for the mobile to start sliding in the rerun and crossed fingers for the horses and horsemen which worked !! It did happen to us at Hutt park a few times and we did have the wet weather sets added andlowered pressure on rear tyres and we got away with it .  another thought in the flying non mobile start. how were drivers to know if another false start. obviously the galloper couldnt keep up ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.