Andy, why not just penalize the altitude gain and distance along course made during the engine run? It would all be in the log file and you wouldn't need to worry about what did it.

On Sunday, December 24, 2017 at 12:33:07 PM UTC-8, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Sunday, December 24, 2017 at 11:58:40 AM UTC-8, jfitch wrote:
That is not entirely true. Some 'cruisy' type races allow engine runs with a penalty. There are assumptions made as to the advantage of the engine run. One interesting consequence was a 1st place due to motoring the entire course (I think it was the Ensenada race). One contestant brought a peculiar sailboat that could plane running a huge outboard motor and he did the course at 20 knots, far faster than the penalty contemplated. Maybe we will see 13.5m gliders with big jet engines and 8m wingspans....


It occurred to me that any penalty system might need to contemplate potential differences in the climb rate that would result from using the MOP. If you can climb at 5 knots instead of 2 knots under power the penalty might need to change. A 5 minute penalty per minute of MOP use would overwhelm the differences versus a glider that didn't use their MOP (and therefore discourage MOP use for purely tactical purposes), but between two gliders using MOPs with varying climb rates there would be a difference in outcome that would need to be addressed.

Again, to clarify, this is NOT a proposal for rules regulating motor use in mixed pure glider, motor glider racing. This is for 100% motorglider events (specifically, electric motorgliders).

I think it's an interesting concept. It's clearly not for those who see the risk of outlanding as a major part of the appeal of the sport. Vive la difference!

9B