|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#21
August 9th 03, 11:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
#22
August 10th 03, 04:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Eric Greenwell wrote in message
As I mentioned, I prefer assigned tasks, not the PST or the TAT, so I'm with you on this one. Me too. That's why any rule that starts playing with simple "fastest wins" is bogus to me and my racing friends. I hate the PST, which is why I won't race in sports class. As far as I'm concerned, a PST task is just a bunch of guys going cross country. It in no way resembles a race! (reminds me of the Monty Python idiots race skit). I still don't understand what you are talking about: in a PST, there is no "distance to go", it's a "time to go". Converting the time left to distance is where I have problems, because there are two components to the calculation: 1) cross-country speed (anticipated thermal strength, so it's a guess) 2) final glide speed (depends on altitude available, AND anticipated thermal strength, so it's a guess,too). So, while I'm trying to race (getting the best XC speed I can), I'm also juggling turnpoints, trying to figure which ones will make the task long enough so I can fly as fast as possible, but still get home just at the minimum time. We were talking about AAT (TAT here in the US). I don't even want to think about PSTs. Yuck. But I really do not understand why people are worried about making the minimum time. Geez, before GPS, you really had to navigate; now we just follow the needle and presto we get around the course. Having to make a specific arrival time adds a little more challenge. Car rallying, which absolutely depends on going fast and hitting a time to the second, is an international professional sport that is WAY more popular than soaring, by the way... If I were sitting at home, it'd be an interesting problem to work on, but I don't think it's fun in a sailplane. With the 15 minute rule, I feel I can drop the calculations and just concentrate on going fast, because it's easy for me to pick a task that takes long enough, though it might be 15-20 minutes longer than the minimum. But the point is you can't! Despite what Cochrane and other 15 minute supporters claim, you now have to factor in your speed, the thermal strength, distance remaining, then decide whether to go slower but farther, or faster but shorter. And the fastest glider does not always win! THAT IS WHY IT IS A BAD SOLUTION TO A NON-PROBLEM! I'd also prefer lower starts (5000' agl, say), and it might be safer when the thermals are going higher, because there wouldn't be the crowding at the top a thermal as every pilot tries to eek out the last foot before starting. I like lower starts, but if the thermals go higher, then you end up in a weird "wind-up" at the top of the start altitude, camped out in the thermal at high-G trying not to climb! I think we should go to a start arc from the first turnpoint, with a max start height (like the old start gate, but use GPS) but no limit on how high you go before starting. I start anywhere on the line, below the line. At redline if I want. If I misjudge, I go back and do it again. I'm pilot in command, if I bust my ass it's my problem. It's a race, after all! Over the years (25 in my case), at least in Regionals, it seems the trend has been to shorten the task time. At Ephrata, we often have 3 hour tasks on 6 hour days. I'd prefer longer tasks of at least 4 hours, so we aren't flying only at the peak of the day, and spend some time in weaker conditions. I totally agree! And once you get to starting early (no high starts) and finishing late (long tasks) you don't need no stinking 15 minute kloodge rule! Kirk 66
|
|
#23
August 10th 03, 04:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message news:lT9Za.172
I was at in contest with a bunch of obviously REPUBLICAN racers who hated the 500 foot rule so much that they browbeat the CD into using a GPS finish gate instead. Oh boy, nothing I like more than trying to hook the gate while avoiding gliders coming at me from THREE different directions, then having to watch out for people going UNDER me while I'm making a minimal pattern. Now, that's RACING! Damn, that sounds like fun! People doing their own thing, and nobody getting hurt. Yep, Republicans, probably. And maybe a Libertarian or two, also... Kirk
|
|
#24
August 10th 03, 05:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kirk Stant" wrote... "Marc Ramsey" wrote... I was at in contest with a bunch of obviously REPUBLICAN racers who hated the 500 foot rule so much that they browbeat the CD into using a GPS finish gate instead. Oh boy, nothing I like more than trying to hook the gate while avoiding gliders coming at me from THREE different directions, then having to watch out for people going UNDER me while I'm making a minimal pattern. Now, that's RACING! Damn, that sounds like fun! People doing their own thing, and nobody getting hurt. Yep, Republicans, probably. And maybe a Libertarian or two, also... Naw, Libertarians won't race unless they can figure out a way to make it pay... Marc
|
|
#25
August 10th 03, 07:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Snead1" wrote in message
I am currently flying with a Cambridge GPS NAV and a L-Nav. I would like to up grade or add equipment to help me fly the Turn Area Task. What works well and what are the important features that can aid in making correct decisions while flying the Turn Area Task? Bill Snead; 6W "Mike Borgelt" wrote in message ""A pair of dice, roulette wheel or random number generator would be an appropriate decision making aid for this task."" Mike Borgelt Borgelt Instruments. __________________________________________________ ______ Good point Mike, and probably no one who helped to create the scooring system, described in the FAI SC S3 / ANNEX A ever has thought through the consequences with the eyes of a competition pilot. Officially we have now - RT Racing Task (classic task, fix distance for all) - AST Speed Task - Assigned Areas (var. distance, minimum time) - PST Speed Task - Pilot Selected (var. distance, minimum time) - TAT Distance Task - Assigned Areas (var. distance, maximum time) - TPT Distance Task - Pilot Selected Well - even if you are told what kind of tasks the competition will contain, you will not really know what you get, because 3 different possibilities of scoring are applicable. A. 1000-Points Scoring System: The Score is expressed in points (the maximum available daily Score is 1000 points). B. Kilometre Scoring System: The Score is expressed in kilometres (the max available daily Score is equal to the best Distance of the Day) C. Place Scoring System: The Score is expressed in places (the maximum available Place Score for the Day is 25). D. Or you might have local scoring rules and formulas. Most competitions use the 1000point system - lets have a look. RT Racing Task is the classic task with 2/3 of the max points for speed and 1/3 for distance, if enough competitors return home. I still like it, especially the Australian version with different start points. They give speed points only and if you messed up a day completely you better land short of the home field, even if you could make it home, because you will get more points) AST Speed Task over Assigned Area turn points PST Speed Task over Pilot selected turn points - for both tasks distance is variable a minimum time applies - The winner points are splitted 2/3 for speed and 1/3 for distance. - Finishers get the same distance points as the pilot with the bigest distance even if there distance is smaller! - Finishers returning home too early get the speed calculated with the minimum time given. In my opinion this kind of scoring is just nonsense! If more points are given for speed than distance, every pilot will fly the shortest distance to minimise the risk. After the experience of the SA preworlds the IGC created the minimum time - what a stupid idea!! For variable distance speed tasks the points should be given equally for distance and speed (50/50%). That would give the pilots a reason to fly as far and fast as possible. Each pilots gets points for his own flown distance and his speed. If done so, the minimum time, which gives the pilot headache to optimise the task, is not needed anymore. TAT Distance Task over Assigned Areas turn points TPT Distance Task over Pilot Selected turn points - for both tasks a maximum time applies - distance points are given only - no penalty is given, if you return home too late, but only the distance taken, flown until the max. time has been reached. I can live with TAT. TPT is fine as long as the weather is more or less homogenious in the competition area. The only problem is, that normally the task manager will give you a task like that, if weather conditions are very unpredictable. As a result you might in Switzerland have turnpoints in the mountains, in the flat region or towards the Jura, regions with very different weather pattern. Then it is like throwing the dice - where shall you go? If selecting the wrong region - you are fu....ed. Personally I do not like PST and TPT tasks. Unpredictable weather pattern can just make it a lucky game. I prefer tasks where pilots have to fly in a given sequence to certain areas, and every pilot faces about the same problems. But with the current formulas for AST and PST tasks, I will not fly any competitions using them. It is just a crazy scoring way to compare pilots abilities. I do not need this kind of experience. Then I prefer to spend some nice days flying for fun and declare it in the OLC. Chris Hostettler Melbourne
|
|
#26
August 11th 03, 03:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marc, you are the first person I've heard from who actually likes the
15 minute rule, so the "WE" was only my exposure to the 50 or so I like the 15 min rule. Todd Smith 3S
|
|
#27
August 11th 03, 06:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#28
August 12th 03, 06:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#30
August 13th 03, 04:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Kirk Stant) wrote in message . com...
(Todd Smith) wrote in message . com... 1) I believe both the analysis and experience that claims that finishing exactly at the minimum time gives the best score. (for PST's or TAT's) True statement. It is also true that finishing at exactly field elevation at the correct Macready speed for your last thermal gives you the best speed. With an AST you only have to worry about getting back faster than the next guy. PSTs and TATs add the requirement to get back as close to a specific time as you can. It's the price paid for the flexibility of these tasks. The 15 minute rule doesn't change that - it just obscures it to the point where it is no longer a simple matter of crossing the finish line as close to a known time as possible, its now a matter of juggling how the flight is going then figuring out what the optimum time and distance is the best to finish. Practically speaking, for most racers it probably doesn't make a difference. But intellectually it sucks. As a aside, I actually kind of like the navigation challenge of nailing the final glide in two dimensions (altitude and time). But then, my background as an Air Force navigator may have something to do with that! I agree, the price paid for the flexibility of PST/TAT tasks is extra complexity. Having to nail the finish time exactly is an UNINTENDED result of the implementation of the PST/TAT tasks, not a desired goal. So the implementation was changed to remove the unintended side-effect. I think that 15 min rule obscures the effect into practical insignificance, and I'm not concerned about the intellectual elegance. As an engineer I like the practical elegance, it's simple and achieves the goal. 2) The ability to time a finish to exact time is not what I want scored. Then we shouldn't have timed events. It is the price paid for them, and the 15 minute rule doesn't change that! In some other sports, solving a problem at an exact time is common. Sailboat racing has the start line crossing, which you have to hit at the preferred end of a limited start line, at full speed (which takes a while to get to in a sailboat), and if you are a second too fast you have to do a penalty 270 turn. Car rallying - huge international sport - has controlled time checkpoints. So it's not like we are inventing the wheel here. Car rallying sounds so boring, I don't want sailplane racing to be like that. I want sailplane racing to be a balls to the walls hunt for lift and distance The ability to find strong lift, the guts to ignore weak lift and the brains to know the difference. I don't want it to be about nailing a time-speed-distance calculation from 50 miles away with my guess about the thermals that I will find. Sailboat racing on the other hand is fun and exciting. The start line dynamics are pretty tight, BUT the distance and speeds are such that a helmsman can eyeball them and get them right. No computers or GPS required. 3) The 15 min rule, greatly reduces the effect of 1) It obscures it. But the effect is still there, and the result is quite a few pilots have been beaten by someone who flew a bit further but a bit faster. Since the calculations to optimize ones finish time under the 15 minute rule is way beyond what most people will probably want to do inflight, they will just ignore it and just "finist a bit over the min time". In my opinion, that is just to "fuzzy" to be a valid racing technique. I realize we are talking about just a few points here, but it only takes one point to lose. Reat Moffat's book, especially the parts about low loss soaring. Giving away any points to "chance" is just not acceptable, IMHO. Currently the only way to hit the finish time exactly is to use a computer. I doubt many racers can juggle the predicted XC speed, and the final glide speed, and how far I should head to and from my next turnpoint (PST) or into the turn area (TAT) without using pad, pencil and sliderule. It might be an interesting intelectual game, but its not what I want to be doing. So I would let some final glide computer tell me "head home NOW to finish at 3:00" Since I'm letting the computer do it for score=distance/time. I'll let the computer do it for score=distance/(time+0:15) The only difference is that the pilot without the computer has an easier job, just "finish a bit over the min time" and he is probably very close to the optimum. 4) The 15 min rule is simple, easy to implement and has no bad side effects. All other rules that have been proposed are more complicated or have other bad side effects. I disagree. It sounds simple, but the secondary effects are subtle and not intuitive; and they are definitely "bad side effects". What other rules have been proposed? Mine are not rules, but procedures: longer minimum times (at least 3 hours) and/or lower start heights (5000 agl max). And less emphasis on timed tasks other that as a weather option. We disagree about the negative side-effects of the 15 min rule, and I think I have described why. Other proposed rules (not by you, per se) have been. Variable time offsets depending on actual start height. Having racers finish at start altitude. Starting at very low altitudes (3000 agl). The variable time adjustents would be far worse that the fixed 15 min rule, really complicated to score. The other rules just seem to make it less fun, maybe a better race, but less fun. I would like longer tasks if possible. Now about the less emphasis on timed tasks. It seems us eastern pilots allways are flying on questionable weather. At Region 1 this year, the CD/weatherman made their best guess and sent us off, if the tasks weren't MAT/TAT's we would have either had to abandon the tasks or land out. We just don't seem to have the precictable weather that the west seems to have. Thats about it for this specific rule. Now let me make a comment about the possible background for this intense dislike of this rule. Forgive me if I misconstrue your opinions or reasons. It seems that you dislike the PST or TAT tasks in general, and since the 15 min rule is designed to fix a problem with the PST/TAT that you allready dislike, the reaction is "ARRGGH, stop tinkering with the damn PST/TAT and just let me fly AST !" You are somewhat correct. I do dislike the PST and will not fly them - I don't think they are a valid race task. If I was flying a 1-26 I might feel different about them, but I race a 15 meter. MATs with intelligent turnpoints are fun. I do not mind TATs, but they just don't feel as much as a race as the old ASTs where you knew when someone started and could tell during the race how you were doing. With the new 1 mile AST turn area you can barely do that anymore. Otherwise, TATs can be fun, but they do put a premium on have a really good computer/moving map (which I don't currently have, but will have soon), and on fine-tuning final glides and finish times. Hey, if I didn't like the challenge, I wouldn't be racing. I like to race and go fast, preferable faster than someone else, and I like having other gliders around me - the more the merrier. So I obviously dislike any task change that further spreads the field out. The ARRRGH is really for the attempts at legislating safety via rules - 500ft at one mile, for example. I am a firm believer that the pilot is responsible for his safety, not the rules committee. And until there is a demontrated danger (and racing finishes aren't, despite what JC says) there shouldn't be any preemptive rules. Note I say danger, not risk. There is definitely risk. But I can (and it is my responsibility to) manage my risk. I would like the rules not to encourage dangerous activities. Current race finishes require (for best score) you to fly at MC speed for the last thermal all the way to the finish line. Thus you are about 1 mile from the airport at 80 knots and 200 feet. That sounds like no fun at all ! Now, I am a new racing pilot, flying a lower performance glider (Grob 102) in the northeast (weaker, less predictable lift) so I want flexibility in tasking so I can get home when the day tanks. (I don't usually have crew) I also want my fellow club members to get home, they don't have crew either. I started racing in our club's G-102 - fun little ship. Getting home is important, no doubt, so there is a place for flexible tasks like MATs and TATs. It's their implementation that I (and many of my racing buddies) object to. And we race just about every weekend out here, even if only two of us show up, so we have plenty of experience with the new rules! Maybe you have too much experience with the rules ! Us low time guys see the 15 min rule as having this effect: It used to be that I had to finish exactly on min time, but not less ! Now I should just finish some little time after the min time, but it's not so critical. That's simpler in my book, but I give away alot more points than the 5-10 I might lose with sub-optimal finish time. We should have a long discussion about the goals of racing (as has been suggested here allready), since the different goals you and I have probably drive the difference between our desired rules. Agreed - which is pretty much what these multiple parallel threads have turned into. Good discussions, that hopefully will focus our racing goals. Fly fast, fly far, have fun, win the Worlds, then do it again. Kirk 66 Have fun. Todd Smith 3S
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Hardware and software for motion platform | [email protected] | Home Built | 0 | November 4th 04 10:57 PM |
Linear Mode
