[whpva] Re: Vote on change of rule 3.3.1
- From: Theo Schmidt <sus2006@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: whpva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2017 13:36:42 +0100
Dear Giovanni and all,
Am 02.11.2017 um 11:50 schrieb Giovanni Eupani:
...
About the vote, I think it will be fair that the call for a vote will be
made from the president or in any case from someone that do not indicate
in which direction to vote...
You are quite right. I didn't read our constitution
http://www.whpva.org/constitution.html which in article 3.4 gives the
proper procedure. I used the procedure given in article 4 which is for
amendments to the constitition itself. This is wrong and nobody else
noticed either. The proper idea is that the Record and Rules Committee
presents the proposed amendments and this is formally approved by the
board. In this procedure, the RRC develops the amendment to the
satisfaction of at least its majority and recommends its approval, and
does not represent split roles like Toni formulated so well in his vote.
...
- Several people think that the new rule will make it harder to
find good sites. The opposite is true.
...
So I discover that, since appendix is now gone, and most important since
Earth is _NOT_ flat, the only way we have to make a record attempt
following this rules is to make a hill climb race, or to be clear for
everyone (since NO tolerance is admitted) to race on the way up...
I'm sorry I still havn't been able to explain the physics in an
understandable manner. I try again:
No tolerance is admitted with respect to elevation of the start and
finish, but *infinite* tolerance is permitted for the points in between,
provided they do not give a better speed than would occur on a
theoretical course of perfectly equal elevation*.
This is the case for any timed course which has no points lower then the
start and for any run-up which has no points higher then the start of
the timed section. There are a *great number* such courses, even though
they may not be usuable for other reasons (mainly being too short).
This does not mean that unevenness the "wrong" way round will necessarly
invalidate a record. Local bumps up to 3 m should be no problem. For
example the course in the Po delta near Mezzogoro: I attach the diagram
I sent you on 8.10., which shows a 3 m overpass in the middle,This
doesn't mean that this course is good enough in other respects, but the
single 3 m "bump" changes the speed only imperceptibly in my Velocipedio
simulation and so would not be "illegal".
So we have lots of roads to chose from. They may be unsuitable for other
reasons (too short, too windy, no permission, bad surface, etc) but NOT
be dissallowed by the "new" rule.
...which to allow the streamliner to reach speeds well over 100km/h
must be at least 15 km long... and this is not fair anyway!
Such long available roads are very rare, but many coutries have
motor-proving circuits like the Dekra Oval. These are not perfect, but
they allow records under both the old and the "new" rule. In the case of
the old rule, they are not competitive to the Battle Mountain course,
but this doesn't matter as this is "high altitude" and most circuits
"low altitude". In the case of the "new" rule, they are not perfect, but
the best option so far.
...
However, looking at the list of records on our site, we may notice how
it is not up to date, as long as we are not waiting to trash it directly...
You are right, and the RRC is just today discussing what to do about this.
Best, Theo
* This is a geoid and not the same as a really flat course, which
probably only exists in one place in the world. See:
http://www.dvhn.nl/groningen/Eindelijk-komt-er-een-echt-rechte-weg-21940525.html
It describes probably the only really flat long surface on earth, that
is FLAT and not a geoid!
Artist John Körmeling and owner of a dike, built a 9 km long, 1.2 m wide
surface on it, just for artistic pleasure! It has to be raised
1.6 m at the ends as difference to the dike, which follows the geoid.
Attachment:
mezzogoro.png
Description: PNG image
Other related posts:
