Dear Theo and Toni,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this interesting topic. It is
always a pleasure to read your well thought-out contributions - and very
inspiring. Trying to summarize the ongoing discussion I think it is safe
to say we share the idea of defining a new record category to compare
top speeds achieved by merely human powered vehicles, i.e. without
gravity assistance. The discussion revealed that we need at least these
constraints:
1. Altitude of run-up section finish must be higher than or equal to
altitude of run-up start. Altitude of timed section finish must be
higher than or equal to timed section start.
2. The slope of the run-up (and timed section) must not exceed x% (to
exclude hills in run-up section).
I think we agree on this.
Unfortunately, and much to my regret, these constraints are not enough.
They would favour tracks with long run-up sections raising with x% from
the start and then declining with x% towards the end of the run-up
section (the timed section does not matter much as it is always short
compared to the run-up section). Tuning this slope threshold is unlikely
to offer a solution: either things get worse or unrealistic (it is hard
to find decently "flat" tracks, even in the Netherlands, as Toni pointed
out). One might think of increasing the number of altitude check points
along the run-up. This approach has the disadvantage of decreasing
feasibility (think of surveying effort/costs). Another idea would be to
add symmetry, e.g. by demanding a track to be used twice (once in each
direction). I have thought about this but can't see how this would solve
the problem.
I have come to the conclusion that there is no way of defining such a
category in a way that the goals are met (no gravity assist, feasible,
not bound to particular location). In my opinion, our rules should be
(and are) guided by the principle that record attempts can be carried
out anywhere in the world at affordable costs and therefore are open to
anybody. I would go as far as to say that it is preferable to drop a
category (or live with the current status quo) if it can't be defined
accordingly rather than compromising the guiding principles.
Having said this I wish someone proves me wrong. Any suggestion as to
how to define the "top speed pure human power" rule in a way that the
goals are met (no gravity assist, feasible, not bound to particular
location) is very much appreciated. I would personally appoint the
candidate of a valid proposition "hero of the day". Take the challenge
and think about the problem!
Kind regards,
Edgar
(WHPVA record and rules committee)
