18 replies to this topic

[Paul Sheldon]

Robert Barker (aka Mr Goodwood) has unearthed a new Formula 1 race. The Sheffield Telegraph Trophy on 19th August 1950 over 10 laos at Gamston. According to the programme, the race was won by Cuth Harrison from Alan Rogers. Does anyone have fuller results, times )or even a grid ?)

[Adam F]

Paul,

First of all, welcome to TNF!

I'm assuming you've already got a copy of the programme.

Here are the reports in Motor and Autosport. I can find nothing in either Autocar or Motor Sport.

[quintin cloud]

First off Welcome to the TNF Paul
No data from my side but it would be great on add it the growing list of missing results

[Barry Boor]

I wonder if there is any listing of the Gamston lap length? It can be calculated if we have race time and speed, of course, but then again, if they had the lap length wrong, everything else will be too.

Why the query? Well, (oh no, here we go again) the listing for the 1950 lap length is APPROX 2 MILES. I know we have discussed the inaccuracies of Google Earth's measuring facility but hang on, I make the circuit 2.86 miles; hardly approximately 2. Approximately 3 would be closer.

[David McKinney]

1.925 miles, according to the latest edition of the relevant Black Book

[Barry Boor]

I think we need to get to the bottom of this one.

If you look at Darren's site, specifically this page - http://www.silhouet....ks/gamston.html - you will see the first circuit, used in 1950. This can be located very clearly on G.E. and this is the one that measures 2.86 miles o.n.o.

Strangely, I am having problems finding the other two.

[arttidesco]

Looking at the runway measurements on the top diagram in this link it looks like the 1950 track might easily have been approximately 2 miles long, but quite unlikely to have been nearly 3 miles long, assuming the track layout is accurate and the two runways in the diagram were used and the lengths given are accurate.

I found the following information on racing sports cars.com, working backwards from the data provided throws a complete spanner in the works so I have included my calculations so someone can high light the errors :-

10 04 50 MG Race

5 laps, 11.265 kms race distance x 0.621371192 = 6.99974 miles /5 = 1.399948 miles per lap ?

10 04 50 Libre Race

8 laps, 16.898 kms race distance x 0.621371192 = 10.499 miles/8 =1.312375 miles per lap ?

19 08 50 Libre Cuth Harrison ERA

10 laps 11.58.00 time 137.985 km/h

137.985/60 = 2.29975 km/min/60 = 0.0383391667 km/sec x race time 718 secs = race distance distance 27.5275216906 kms x 0.621371192 = 17.1048 miles/10 = 1.71048 miles per lap ?

Sorry I thought I could help solve this one

[Roger Clark]

The maps referred to by Barry look very similar to the ones in Peter Swinger's book "British Motor Racing Circuits". They both refer to a meeting on 7th August 1950. I assume this should be 19th August, the meeting that was the original subject of this thread. THat meeting was reported in Autosport Vol 1, no 1. It quotes the lap length of 1.9 miles and the race time and distance for Harrison as in Arttidesco's calculations. They are in miles which could have saved him some work. There is clearly an error in Autosport's figures.

However, in the Autosport of 8th September there is a small item in the Northern Lights column: "On a sketch map the Gamston Course looks simple - two sharp corners and an easier one tied together by straights" This is clearly not a description of the first sketch but fits the other two. I suggest it was one of these that was used for the 19th August meeting.

[Barry Boor]

Well, I don't know. This is all very confusing.

Look at this:



The right hand blue line corresponds to the first circuit on Darren's Gamston page; the left hand one matches the third.

No matter what anyone may think of G.E. measuring, the facts are that the right circuit which allegedly is the 1950 one, is much, much longer than 2 miles. However, the left hand one which is quoted as approx 1.9 miles, measures up on here as 1.8. Which is very close.

So, what do we deduce from this......

N.B. Posted before I saw Roger's post.

Edited by Barry Boor, 13 February 2012 - 18:57.

[arttidesco]

The maps referred to by Barry look very similar to the ones in Peter Swinger's book "British Motor Racing Circuits". They both refer to a meeting on 7th August 1950. I assume this should be 19th August, the meeting that was the original subject of this thread. THat meeting was reported in Autosport Vol 1, no 1. It quotes the lap length of 1.9 miles and the race time and distance for Harrison as in Arttidesco's calculations. They are in miles which could have saved him some work. There is clearly an error in Autosport's figures.

However, in the Autosport of 8th September there is a small item in the Northern Lights column: "On a sketch map the Gamston Course looks simple - two sharp corners and an easier one tied together by straights" This is clearly not a description of the first sketch but fits the other two. I suggest it was one of these that was used for the 19th August meeting.

So no easy division between 1950 and 1951 as to which layouts were used ?

[Barry Boor]

So it appears that my long circuit may, in fact, never have actually been used.

It would make some sense then.

[Roger Clark]

I do find it ridiculous to see race times, speeds and distances from this era quoted to three places of decimals. We all know that the British Grand Prix organisers timed to the nearest fifth of a second, so what should we expect of a northern club meeting?

[David McKinney]

We all know that the British Grand Prix organisers timed to the nearest fifth of a second

...except when they considered the nearest second good enough

[arttidesco]

I do find it ridiculous to see race times, speeds and distances from this era quoted to three places of decimals. We all know that the British Grand Prix organisers timed to the nearest fifth of a second, so what should we expect of a northern club meeting?

My guess is the speeds quoted on racingsportscars.com are to lots of decimal places thanks to post period conversions to kp/h so I have gone along with the same when reverse calculating the lap distance.

[Stephen W]

I do find it ridiculous to see race times, speeds and distances from this era quoted to three places of decimals. We all know that the British Grand Prix organisers timed to the nearest fifth of a second, so what should we expect of a northern club meeting?

I understand that the timing back in the 1950s was done to three decimal places however the regs may well have indicated that the times would be published to the nearest fifth of a second - can't understand why when so acurate a system was in use! Maybe it was a throw-back to the pre-war standards?

[Derwent Motorsport]

I can't see how it is possible to time to three decimal places with handheld stop watches. I've seen timekeepers right into the 80s at race meetings using blocks of clocks but relying on a finger to trigger them!

[David McKinney]

Actually, it's easy to time to three decimal places with handheld stopwatches

But impossible to do it accurately, which I'm sure is what you meant...

[RWB]

I have meetings at Gamston as :-
7-8-50 NSCC
19-8-50 SHMC
26-3-51 NSCC
14-5-51 SHMC
21-7-51 SHMC
6-8-51 NSCC
6-10-51 NSCC
and possibly a 1949 event though I've found no trace.
According to the programmes all these events (including 7-8-50) used the circuit to the left of the GE image and, unless there are any other meetings, the circuit to the right was never used.

[RAP]

And how was the circuit length measured at the time ?? Probably by someone driving their car round it and noting his milometer !