Lindsay Wilson wrote:
> AND, did you notice the question(s) about having 4 runs instead of 3
> resulting in a longer day?
This must be a trick question.
The question reads:
Which would you prefer (choose one):
__ Three (3) runs, as we do now
__ Four (4) runs with slightly shorter courses
__ Four (4) runs (same course length) and have the day extended
Course length has nothing do to with how long the day goes. All that
matters is how often you can start a car.
If a course is 45 seconds long, and you run 750 runs in a day with a
starting interval of 25 seconds, it takes 18795 seconds (5:13:15) of
running time before the day is done.
Change nothing but the course length -- make it 60 seconds -- and now
it takes 18810 seconds (5:13:30) -- exactly 15 seconds longer. That's
because it takes the last car an additional 15 seconds to reach the
finish; it started at exactly the same time either way.
Now, make it four runs -- 1000 runs instead of 750 -- and it takes an
additional 1:44:10 to complete the day.
If everything runs as smoothly as it did this year, then we can afford
the additional time (under two hours). But if it runs like last year,
we sure can't afford it -- we finished around 6pm at least one of the
days. Far too risky.
We generally do a pretty good job at Nationals of starting a car every
25 seconds or so -- and starting interval is pretty much all that
matters. 20 seconds is pretty unrealistic -- especially with the number
of cones Roger and Karen are using on the outsides of turns these days!
Mark
P.S. Lindsay, if you want me to write all this with my evaluation,
let me know... I'm hoping this is good enough.
|