According to Crunch’s remarks, if the cage diagrams, measurements and Engineers report have been submitted, with the report showing that the structure is as strong or stronger than that required by MSNZ, then the structure, cage, would be homologated. This all has been done but no homologation certificate has been issued.

No it hasnt.

1. There has only been one Roll Protection Homologation application submitted by Dave. This was declined as it wasnt the right diameter mainhoop.

2. Then I became involved and the Tech Dept said that the old structure by this time (1 year after the cut-off) could now only be homologated as a "free-form structure". Dave commissioned a report by a civil engineer (CHCH) that the Tech Dept knows of, and the engineer said it failed.

3. My reply to Dave is that if a civil engineer fills in the Roll Protection Homologation application of his structure and signs it off to say they are happy, then it will be issued. This is no different to the usual system.

4. The other report Dave refers to is a letter from a civil engineer stating that the material Dave used is better strength even if lesser diameter than the current standard, and I wouldn't disagree. This guy is an engineer. But it is not a Roll Protection Homologation Application, it is a letter detailing the material specs and his informed opinion. I do not doubt it.

5. My involvement is only because we tried to be flexible, contrary to what Mark states above. We have been flexible and found a way to get Dave's structure approved. Every Licence holder (if on email) would have got the Motorsport News issues that mentioned many times that the change was happening, and gave plenty of notice, so I would assume most of those on the fringes of an organisation, club would have known of the changes.

I feel like I'm repeating myself.

[/QUOTE]