Altitude Correction?

Discussion in 'The Comp Buzz' started by Matt Harris, Apr 18, 2006.

  1. Matt Harris

    Matt Harris Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    3
    I seem to be noticing a lot of disgruntled racers expressing a displeasure with other racers banging indexes in "MINESHAFT CONDITIONS". Has anyone ever considered the idea of correcting the indexes by the Corrected Altitude Factor, reather than Elevation. If the altitude on Thursday/Friday (depending on National or Divisional) is 0 to 2000 feet or so, then run off the sea level indexes, if it's at 2000+ feet give some back (i.e. Topeka, St. Louis...) and so on. Also, here's a thought, if it's 1000 feet or more below take some away. Make the "Mine Shaft" tracks less dangerous to the racers who can never run there. This would even out the country alot better than just giving back to tracks with high altitude, which doesn't take into account the division 4 & 5 tracks during the middle of summer at 1300 feet elevation and 4-5000 feet Altitude.
    Just a thought.
    Matt Harri 564
     
  2. Will Hanna

    Will Hanna Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    944
    Likes Received:
    45
    correlation

    this would be difficult to monitor.

    have you ever walked over to the pit next door to see what his weather station is saying the air is? point is every one out there reads a little different.

    you can't run the risk of the 'official' weather station going bad, so you would always have to have 2 on site. imagine the fall out if one went bad and did or didn't effect indexes....

    then you have 7 divisions that have to have at least 2 weather stations. the national event tech team would have to have their own probably too. now you have at least 16 different units. then you have the argument of direct vs. indirect sunlight etc.

    different classes in comp are effected differently by the elements that go into the corrected altitude figure.

    the most effective way is for either nhra or a panel of racers to have an index review board that can look at a race and say - well that was a mineshaft, so we're going to give back 'x' index....

    a personal index system would also negate this.
     
  3. Matt Harris

    Matt Harris Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    3
    Granted, there is a risk in a station going bad. Then, if it does, just run off the sea-level indexes without permanent CIC. If that doesn't work then have each track supply a station. If they don't want to, then take the race somewhere else.
    As for direct vs. indirect, as long as its consistent from track to track week to week it really doesn't matter. Direct sunlight is what the cars run in anyway, so I really don't see an argument.
    If you think this idea would be complicated how can you support a personal index system. Could you imagine NHRA controlling 100's of racers indexes for each class they enter throughout the year, or their career. That could be upwards of 1000 different indexes!!! With the "inefficiency" going on now how could anyone exoect them to control that situation?
    Matt Harris 564
     

Share This Page