Race 2017 ?

[srgalahad]

The Executive Committee for the RTWR has given long and careful thought to the viability of the event for 2017 and beyond. Declining numbers of participants, technical issues with secondary software, increased experience with the known format and it's options have all raised questions of whether the current format can continue. At the same time a basic desire is seen to exist for an ongoing "bigger than average" event that retains the mystique and challenges of years gone by.

In response, the Executive Committee proposes changes for 2017 (and beyond?) that will reduce the burden on teams and individuals as follows:

1. The event will be hard-capped at 48 hours in length, starting on Friday February 17th and ending on Sunday February 19th. (The first to finish wins. If no one has finished at the 48 hours deadline, the teams revert to their last full stop landing and the closest to the finish wins.)

2. The overall circuit will be set up so that minimal strategic planning will be necessary. Accordingly, the routing details will be made available only a few hours before the start time – as was common in the early years.

3. Penalties will be reduced and served by the teams' standing in place in real time.

4. Team events will be altered this year to ease the pressure to field a great number of pilots. However, larger teams will still benefit from having more participants to do the flying.

5. The emphasis will return to "normal racing legs" with only a small number of longer "over-water legs" to be involved.

6. No significant changes are anticipated regarding the well-known allowed aircraft from previous years, although some revised limitations will be required in the adjusted format.

To facilitate these goals the route would be modified and not require a complete circumnavigation of the globe. If the proposed changes result in satisfactory participation and enthusiasm it is conceivable that the circumnavigation would still be accomplished over a multi-year cycle.

Obviously these changes have to receive the support of the community and thus we are requesting a serious expression of support before we continue with rules development. A thread has been started on the FSRTW Race forum where we would appreciate your yea/nay responses. A decision will be made based on input received by January 16th.
https://www.fsrtwrace.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=196

Thank you for your support.

The Executive Committee

 

[MaddogK]

Not to sound crass, but a hard time limit to 'closest to finishline' effectively eliminates almost all the bottom tier normal race aircraft. It makes the RTW race a thoroughbred / jet race.

Am not sure even thats enough to spark interest in those standing on the sidelines.

 

[Spookster67]

As per Rob's request I've responded in the other forum, but it's also copied here for info.

Firstly, thanks to the Executive Committee for trying to find a format that will keep the race going.

As a concept, I think this is a good way to try to keep the race alive. The current format has become quite complex, which is fine for those of us that have participated in many previous years' races, and know the rules inside out, but much harder for newcomers or those who haven't raced for a while. I like the idea to get it back to a simple race that is easily understood by anyone that wants to join in.

From a personal perspective, I'm disappointed the pre-planning phase of the race will disappear, as I find that just as much fun as the racing itself. However, in that regard, I'm probably in a minority. Most people probably just want to fly, without having to spend many previous days strategizing. That's fine.

In theory, Friday to Sunday (by which I assume you mean Friday evening US time to Sunday evening US time) would work fine for me, without meaning I need to take time off work. In practice, that weekend isn't good for me as I'm travelling, so I'll probably only manage 2 or 3 flights. But that's just bad luck for me - I'll do as much as I can for the team.

Regards, Martin (Spookster67, Team Sim-Outhouse)
FS RTW Race pilot 09/10/11/12/13/14/15/16

 

[PRB]

This is what I wrote:

I'm ok with this. Bring on the rules. My first pass at criticism would have been to eliminate "stuff" that requires more than one pilot per leg. Formation flights, team flights, wingmen. No team will have enough pilots for all that nonsense! But, Rob's point about rewarding teams that manage to recruit lots of pilots has merit, and I realized that my bad attitude about pilot recruitment (waste of time, nobody cares) is basically on me, so I won't make that criticism after all...

 

[Moses03]

Appreciate the racing committee submitting something different in the face of the ever-changing FS landscape. I am interested in this new concept.

 

[Kowalski65]

I put my 2p worth there too,even if I may not be able to connect(taken 10 mins just to post this! Not a good idea when passing batons:

As said, better A race than NO race,& I will fly if I can get online


My initial query would be over the possible conflict between 1 and 2...if no one finishes & you measure who is closest, then a straight line measure may not be legally flyable, nor may it give the best indication of who is closest to actually finishing(*)... and if the route is fixed(which would enable you to see who is closest) that would cut out any planning of the route,either "on the fly" or strategically(& for me that is one of the best bits)


Furthest distance flown could be used, although Im sure certain compulsory landings(either a specific airport , or a choice of 2 or more in an area,to enable more strategy to get in there) would be needed to stop anyone going just A-B-A-B-A-B-A-B-A-B indefinitely Not that they would of course


(*) eg Team A are 1000nm away as the crow flies but need 3 tricky landings in the mountains to finish,against Team B who are 1300nm away with 3 landings at well lit international airports