TET becomes TED

It seems simple enough except for the endpoint problem.
It basically means everyone will drive as low as they
dare when time runs out. The question becomes: how
low dare you go when time expires and still climb back
out to get home for the bonus? It's particularly an
issue if the day is miscalled or if you individually
are much slower or faster than the expected speed.
In this case you are likely to be a good distance from
home and fairly low.

So if 1000 feet is worth 6 miles, on a 200 mile task
that's 3%. In today's terms that's about 150 points
over the course of a regionals for a pilot who consistently
drives to 1000 feet as time expires versus one who
targets 2000 feet. It costs you 300 points over 5 days
if you shoot for 3000 feet versus 1000 feet, etc.
This presumes those who dive lower actually get away
with it.

I'm guessing that for any given day you could figure
out the optimal altitude to shoot for where the expected
probability of landout penalty (based on average inter-thermal
distance)equals the extra altitude margin penalty -
go lower and the odds are too high that you'll land
out, stay higher and you leave points on the table.
I'm guessing the optimal 'finish altitude' for a typical
racing day is less than 2000 feet, possibly less than
1500 feet, and that some pilots will be making saves
at less than 1000 feet. With some simple assumptions
you can calculate the actual optimum, but those are
my rough guesses.

An alternative is to grant some number of miles per
1000 above field elevation when time runs out and skip/reduce
the get home bonus. That would likely reduce the gutsball
aspect of the finish altitude.

Of course it all adds complexity beyond simple sum
of Total Elapsed Distance (TED).

9B




At 04:30 02 April 2004, Paul M. Cordell wrote:
History repeats it's self. This discussion was entertaining
before
the internet. I can't wait for this to start again.
I was really
getting tired of the VNE thing.