Start Anywhere

Kirk wrote.............
my simple single-cell brain tells me that someone who is
2000' above, and started behind me, is going to have a slight initial
advantage! *

Yo Kirk, The guy that was 2000 feet above you, didn't start behind
you. His clock started when he went through the top of the cylinder
and his 2000 foot climb was 'time on course' for him. He just found
his first thermal earlier than you did. Launching at the back of the
grid can be a problem, but we all take our turn back there, don't we?
I find these little start inequities pale in comparison to one little
bad decision out on course. I like the new start anywhere rule and
have gone out the side in the past because that was the closest route
to the nearest Q. My post saying I didn't think it was worth the
hassle was actually in reference to the older 'start out the top'
rule, not the new 'start anywhere' rule.
My thanks to all the members of the RC, you guys are doing a thankless
job, well.
JJ

JJ,

Yeah, I can see how out west when there is a big difference between
the MSH and top of lift, and plenty of opportunities to use it, a
whole new set of start considerations come into play. There really is
no longer any way to compare how you are doing with someone else in
real time. Bit of a shame, that.

And as you say, decisions on course should overwhelm any start
advantage - as long as the CDs give us nice long tasks!

But to continue playing devil's advocate (an I want to emphasize that
I like the new start, this is just a winter discussion of possible pro/
cons, after all!), John in an earlier post stated that it is suggested
that the MSH be set 500' below cloudbase or top of useable lift -
which is not what you guys are describing out at Parowan.

I hope I get a chance to try starting out the top this year - last
year it was more like start at release altitude at the contest I flew
in!

Maybe we can convince John to write us a nice explanation of the
various tactical advantages/disadvantages of side vs top starts with
high or low MSH and strong/weak lift!

Merry Christmas, all!

Kirk
66

Merry Christmas, all!

Ba humbug! (I'm at my office staring at a motivational poster CH gave
me. It has Dilbert sitting in his cubicle, placed outdoors, and an
eagle way overhead dropping a load on him. The caption is "SOARING --
One more thing you're not doing right now!")

66 I think you will like new start-anywhere. I didn't get to use it at
Parowan but during the a few ASA contest flights earlier in the year
it provided some welcome flexibility inside the start cylinder.

My first preference was to start *when* I wanted to, out the side,
like in the previous rules. But when I was loitering about, killing
time between the task open and that ideal start time, and stumbled
into a butt thumper, I had the option of taking it out the top
instead.

I found it made for less stressful starts, and certainly less
stressful first legs, and less stress is a good thing. Just ask
Dilbert ...

..02NO

On Dec 24, 8:57*am, Tuno wrote:
Merry Christmas, all!

Ba humbug! (I'm at my office staring at a motivational poster CH gave
me. It has Dilbert sitting in his cubicle, placed outdoors, and an
eagle way overhead dropping a load on him. The caption is "SOARING --
One more thing you're not doing right now!")

66 I think you will like new start-anywhere. I didn't get to use it at
Parowan but during the a few ASA contest flights earlier in the year
it provided some welcome flexibility inside the start cylinder.

My first preference was to start *when* I wanted to, out the side,
like in the previous rules. But when I was loitering about, killing
time between the task open and that ideal start time, and stumbled
into a butt thumper, I had the option of taking it out the top
instead.

I found it made for less stressful starts, and certainly less
stressful first legs, and less stress is a good thing. Just ask
Dilbert ...

.02NO

Interesting comments.

The one thing that happened a bunch of days at R9 in 2008 was that on
a northbound first leg you sometimes had to cover 35-40 miles over low
country where there was mostly 3-5 knot lift before you got to the
mountains where the lift was 7-10 knots. This meant a good thermal out
the top of the cylinder allowed you the range to get there without
having to do some combination of getting low and taking weak lift
along the way. That could easily save you 3-4 minutes right off the
bat - not to mention reduce your initial stress level. Start anywhere
just increases the probability that you'll be able to find that good
first climb inside the cylinder.

Under more uniform lift conditions if you don't get a climb out the
top, you just start out the side and head out - where you will either
connect to a decent climb on course or turn back for another start.
Under this scenario there isn't much difference between a climb-then-
glide and a glide-then climb strategy - except for the pucker factor.

9B

Maybe we can convince John to write us a nice explanation of the
various tactical advantages/disadvantages of side vs top starts with
high or low MSH and strong/weak lift!

Alas, there's not much to say. The RC is very determined not to
introduce rules that require lots of strategizing and have secret
tricks to them. I can't think of anything clever to do with this one.
Much of the attraction is that it removes a lot of tactics and
geometry.

In most contests, thermals are weak near the top of the start
cylinder, or the top is near cloudbase, so there really isn't much to
be gained by going out the top. Then, the most important consideration
is to pick a start position that lines up well to clouds or lift
sources on course.

If there is wind, being on the upwind side of the cylinder is
advantageous. Other things equal, the optimal start point is directly
into the wind. Other things aren't equal of course. It will take a
howling wind to get me away from a good looking cu that seems to line
up with energy on course.

With the old start system it was to your advantage to glide quite a
long way inside the cylinder to the exact optimal point. The loss of
altitude was more than made up for by better distance with the clock
not running. In this one, that's much less vital. Try to start near
the top somewhere on the upwind side, and don't worry so much about
the exact upwind point.

If there is a very strong downwind first leg, starting out the top and
floating over the start cylinder may pay off by giving you a few more
miles of downwind flying. But it's a tricky maneuver, and it's not
clear to me that the traffic, cloud clearance, and worry about sinking
in the cylinder make this any better than starting out the side. It
needs a MSH substantially below the top of decent lift to make it pay
off.

Going through the top is likely to pay off only in places like
Parowan, where the optimal lift band for that time of day already
extends 1000' or more above the top of the cylinder. As Andy points
out, you either climb and glide or glide and climb, so the main
advantage of going out the top is less pucker factor. It could also
pay off if the lift in the cylinder is high, but you have to cross a
stretch of bad lift before connecting again, for example a task set to
the west out of Parowan.

If you do go out the top, or go out the side 90 degrees off course,
make sure you stay out of the start cylinder, and keep your eyes
peeled for other traffic.

The main complication is you need to think about where and when you
started. On a MAT/TAT, make sure you get minimum distance, including
your start point choice. If you drift into the cylinder, your "start
point" could be 5 miles further down course than you thought and you
might not make minimum distance, or you might come in 5 minutes under
time unwittingly. Understand how your flight computer tracks the start
and measures distances.

Can't think of much else to say about it. I haven't had the pleasure
of trying it, but I'm looking forward to doing so this year.

John Cochrane
BB

John,

Thanks - great summary!

And a fun winter discussion from all. It had definitely increased my
knowledge of the new start.

Cheers,

Kirk
66