Sep 3, 2009 I submitted the following changes to the 2009 streamlining rules for 2010:

"My work on tails has shown that there has been no detrimental effect to handling with a tail in highway conditions up to 75 mph, into 35 mph winds. At Bonneville where speeds are greater, the tails get longer.

I do not see why FF machines are seen as acting differently than “standard” motorcycles.  Therefore, simplify and standardize rules for FF and other configurations while making it easy to determine if the machine meets specs. My suggestions are c,i, j, k &  l below.

6. Existing 2009 Streamlining

 The streamlining of solo machines must correspond to the following specifications. Feet forward configurations within the criteria listed below are permitted.

a. Air foils or spoilers may only be fitted when they are an integral part of the fairing or seat. They must not exceed the width of the fairing nor the height of the handlebar. Sharp edges must be rounded off with a minimum radius of 8mm.

b. Any part of the streamlining which faces rearwards must be finished with round edges of 3.5mm minimum radius.

c. Was: The rider must be completely visible from either side, except for the riders hands and forearms which may be obscured by bodywork. The depth of the seat base can be as deep as the seat hump permitted on a motorcycle (150mm) and the riders hips may be obscured to that extent.

c. Proposed by Vetter: The rider must be completely visible from either side, except for the rider’s hands and forearms which may be obscured by bodywork.

d. The front inclination where the number plate is fixed must not exceed an angle of 30 degrees to the rear of vertical.

e. The ground clearance when loaded must not be less than 100mm.

f. No part of the bodywork may come into contact with the ground when driven at normal racing speeds.

g. Bodywork must not exceed 1000mm in width at any point.

h. Bodywork must not protrude more than 50mm in front of the front wheel.

i. Was:  Bodywork must not protrude more than 200mm beyond the rear wheel.

i proposed by Vetter: I see no reason for any such limitation.  I would like to gradually increase this overhang but I am aware that you don’t want tails.  Could we double this length to 400?  I am confident that there is no down side.  The bikes will simply go faster. 

j. Was:  The maximum height of the back of the rider’s seat is 150mm. This will be measured from the lowest point of the rigid base of the seat to the uppermost part of the fairing behind the rider. For feet forward configurations bodywork behind the rider must not be higher than the rider’s helmeted head.

J. proposed by Vetter: The maximum height of the back of the rider’s streamlining bodywork must not be higher than the rider’s helmeted head in “at speed” racing position.

k. Was: Bodywork in front of the rider must not be higher than the rider’s shoulders.

K proposed by Vetter: Bodywork in front of the rider must not be higher than the rider’s shoulders head in “at speed” racing position

l. Was: Total side area behind the rider must be at least 20% greater than the total side area in front of the rider.

L proposed by Vetter: Delete as it is unnecessary.  Besides, it is impossible to calculate in field conditions

m. Mirrors, if fitted, must be shatterproof and fold back without damage when the vehicle is one side. The mirrors must retain the normal configuration when the vehicle is upright.

n. No movable or fixed aerodynamic devices are permitted. (Note see also a. above)

o. The minimum width of the handlebars is 450mm."

Designers and engineers of the world: This is our opportunity to solve the problems that worried the FIM so many years ago, leading to the outright ban on streamliners.

One of the little known reasons real streamlining was banned in 1957 was this: Existing motorcycle manufacturers did not like the new streamlined race bikes beause the bikes they were producing did not look like them. They were afraid that fans would not make the connection between what they saw on the track and what they saw in the showroom.*

Today streamlining is being allowed on electric machines because there is no organization of electric manufacturers with a "status quo" industry to protect. It is all new. The electric folks I know want streamlining because they understand that their batteries will take them farther and faster with streamlining.

The big lesson here is that the FIM is willing to change. For that, I am grateful and encouraged.

Isn't offering to help better than complaining?

"The love of money is the root of all evil"

Where have you heard that before? While wanting the extra profits that come with bigger bikes may not be "loving money" and may not be "Evil" it certainly has been responsible for burning more fuel. I think we can all agree that consuming more fuel than we need to has not been a good thing.