Replay? The Business of Motorcycle Racing—By Kevin Cameron

Photo by Gold & Goose

In the years immediately after World War II, aviation’s new international range made rapid overseas travel possible. But the need to operate in existing conditions led to a series of terrible crashes during landings in bad weather. The airlines had to operate in poor weather to maintain schedules, but the crashes were giving the enterprise a bad name.

In a parallel manner, in 1987, ’88 and ’89, 500cc Grand Prix racing was confronted by serious highside crashes occurring on corner exit. In the 1950s and ’60s, crashes and even fatalities were dismissed as “part of the cost of doing business,” but by the 1980s, public sentiment had changed. The FIM feared that government regulation might be imposed on them if they did not take action to make crashes and injuries less severe and less frequent. There was also the danger that news media might focus on such crashes, denouncing racing as “a commerce in human sacrifice” as had happened after Pierre Levegh’s famous 1955 auto-racing crash at Le Mans.

The aviation business defended itself by developing electronic automated landing systems. These were eventually able to safely and reliably land commercial aircraft in Category 3C conditions. This means that the pilot’s “decision height”—the altitude at which the runway first becomes visible through the overcast—is 50 feet or fewer. Surely, there was some back-and-forth between pilots and system developers as the bugs were worked out of such systems, but they were made reliable and are now routinely used.

The FIM defended itself by imposing a minimum weight of 130 kilograms (286 pounds) for 500cc machines, with an understanding that intake restrictions might come next if the crashes did not abate. This measure had two purposes. The obvious one was to improve rider safety. The other was to protect the newly profitable business of racing just as automatic landing systems protected the business of aviation.

The response of the makers of 500cc GP bikes was to develop the first electronic torque controls and anti-spin systems for the 1990 season. There were no claims at the time that this technology made racing a bore or somehow drained essential testosterone from the endeavor.

Today, because highside crashes are not currently at crisis levels, such systems do draw the above criticisms. Shall we then replay 1987?

  • http://winopso.org fredbob

    I have been pondering all of racing lately, to the point I almost have a chip on my shoulder about defending it to anyone who might type, “commerce in human sacrifice.”  The Lenz tragedy, and subsequent fallout from those who will never understand why he raced, has touched me personally, even though I no longer race.  As for electronics…  I like my bikes now much better than I did then, and they are easier to ride.  I do not feel that the electronics will remove the courage or skill racing takes, but they will change it, much like the change from two to four strokes changed things.  While age brings nostalgia out of me, I AM NOT going to jump on my XR75 and clank around some track thinking, “Yeah, it never got any better than this.”

    I keep saying it, racing needs to be put back in the hands of the people who do it if it is to improve.  Basically as it is, with factories et al, we practically know the results before the start and it’s really a matter of who is hurt and who is healthy.  I’ve long thought it almost unfair that the best riders get all the best equipment… it seems logical, but they don’t need any more help.  Production rule?  No, never.  Still have no answer, but maybe if racers were required to travel in an old van, like Mert in On Any Sunday, things might get a bit more even in the pits.  As it is, privateers aren’t racing to win, they’re racing for the factories attention, struggling for consistency so maybe one day, maybe, if they don’t get too old or busted up, someone will hand them a bike that can win.  

    Is that the best we can come up with?  

  • http://geezerwithagrudge.blogspot.com/ T.Day

    Racing is expensive. Regulation of technology for safety’s sake or to level the playing field is still regulation; might as well do it for a rational reason if it has to be done. Civilization has not, yet, become so degenerate as to ignore the irrational loss of life. Imagining that we have the right to ask young men to kill themselves for our entertainment and for an escape from poverty is the path to societal decay. Even the NFL has to pretend that it cares about the end results of regular concussions.
    Now that liter bikes have whipped past the 200mph checkpoint, it will be interesting to see if fatal crashes also accelerate or if some new regulation is imposed to keep those young bodies intact.