Yup make sure the course can contain three or more cars is easy to do before
the first car right?
----- Original Message -----
From: Pat Kelly <lollipop@ricochet.net>
To: Talley, Brooks <brooks@frnk.com>
Cc: <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: 2000 Winter Slush Series-revised
> The basic problem was we could not start another car until the first was
> just about finished...a safety problem with the course; the two sections
> came too close together.
> --Pat Kelly
>
> "Talley, Brooks" wrote:
> >
> > Kevin Stevens wrote:
> >
> > >I don't understand what you're getting at here, Barry.
> > >Can you expound?
> >
> > >IMAE, differences between fast/slow cars are usually
> > >handled by the starter by changing the overlap point
> > >a bit. Waiting a few seconds to send a fast car after
> > >a slow one is offset by being able to start a slow car
> > >quickly after a fast one.
> >
> > Sure, I'll expound, but don't call me Barry :)
> >
> > Adjusting the overlap point may makes sense*, but I haven't really seen
it
> > happen at the events I've been to. Definitely not at GGF this past
weekend,
> > and I'm pretty sure not before... at least in my run groups and the ones
I
> > worked.
> >
> > I'm sure it depends on the starter person, and their knowledge of the
class
> > they're working, and their experience in judging that kind of thing, but
it
> > means they have to pay attention to the cars finishing as well as
> > starting... it just seems to be asking a lot for that worker position.
> >
> > I'm not even suggesting that staggering fast/medium/slow cars is worth
> > doing, just that in general it would allow cars to run closer together
(or
> > more frequently, really, given your valid point about cone retrieval and
> > whatnot). The they would be to reduce the number of times that a slow
car
> > takes a long time getting to the overlap point, thereby making the next
car
> > wait longer.
> >
> > -b
> >
> > * On second thought, does it really make sense? If you have slow car
> > followed by a fast car, surely you don't move the overlap point sooner
on
> > the track, right? Unless you're expecting the slower car to suddenly go
> > faster halfway through... the way I see it, alternating slow and fast
cars
> > will mean a normal (25 second) gap at start after each fast car, and a
> > longer gap after each slow car. Am I missing something? Are the
differences
> > here too minute to worry about?
|