2010 Snowbird Nationals
02-05-2010, 07:27 PM
#526
I'd like to thank both Mike Blackstock and Josh Cyrul for helping adjust the on-road layout before practice started on Monday. When we arrived on Sunday a prediction about the previous sweeper design was made for Larry Fairtrace by his good buddy Jason Schreffler:
| + YouTube Video | |
02-05-2010, 07:33 PM
#527
Dear Xtreme RC,
I don't read magazines, but I'm buying a subscription to yours. Thank you for one of the best race videos (perspective wise) from a big event in a long time. If you have the other races, we'd love to see them.
Mod Rubber A-Main
I don't read magazines, but I'm buying a subscription to yours. Thank you for one of the best race videos (perspective wise) from a big event in a long time. If you have the other races, we'd love to see them.
Mod Rubber A-Main
| + YouTube Video | |
02-05-2010, 07:46 PM
#528
This is the first I have heard about Mike's transponder being in the back of the car (other than speculation). And now Mike says Hupo's was even further back. There have been numerous incidents of this happening before, though not many at this level and not all of them can be blamed on transponder position.
Someone else mentioned that other racing series mandate the location of the transponder. This is true, yet they still review the photos in the case of close finishes.
I remember watching an NHRA race years ago. The loser according to the lights was clearly ahead by a good couple of feet at the line, so they reversed it.
Since the club announced that they would go by computer only, then I guess my comment that it "went the wrong way" is sort of wrong. I just think it's unfortunate when there is clear evidence that the computer is wrong. But those are the breaks and it doesn't affect me anyway so I will drop it.
Someone else mentioned that other racing series mandate the location of the transponder. This is true, yet they still review the photos in the case of close finishes.
I remember watching an NHRA race years ago. The loser according to the lights was clearly ahead by a good couple of feet at the line, so they reversed it.
Since the club announced that they would go by computer only, then I guess my comment that it "went the wrong way" is sort of wrong. I just think it's unfortunate when there is clear evidence that the computer is wrong. But those are the breaks and it doesn't affect me anyway so I will drop it.
Last edited by wingracer; 02-05-2010 at 09:27 PM.
02-05-2010, 09:03 PM
#529
Dude chill. This is the first I have heard about Mike's transponder being in the back of the car. And now Mike says Hupo's was even further back. There have been numerous incidents of this happening before, though not many at this level and not all of them can be blamed on transponder position.
Someone else mentioned that other racing series mandate the location of the transponder. This is true, yet they still review the photos in the case of close finishes.
I remember watching an NHRA race years ago. The loser according to the lights was clearly ahead by a good couple of feet at the line, so they reversed it.
Since the club announced that they would go by computer only, then I guess my comment that it "went the wrong way" is sort of wrong. I just think it kind of stinks when there is clear evidence that the computer is wrong. But those are the breaks and it doesn't affect me anyway so I will drop it. How would you feel if this happened to you? I bet you would be raising more of a stink about it than Mike is.
Someone else mentioned that other racing series mandate the location of the transponder. This is true, yet they still review the photos in the case of close finishes.
I remember watching an NHRA race years ago. The loser according to the lights was clearly ahead by a good couple of feet at the line, so they reversed it.
Since the club announced that they would go by computer only, then I guess my comment that it "went the wrong way" is sort of wrong. I just think it kind of stinks when there is clear evidence that the computer is wrong. But those are the breaks and it doesn't affect me anyway so I will drop it. How would you feel if this happened to you? I bet you would be raising more of a stink about it than Mike is.
02-05-2010, 09:06 PM
#530
.
Last edited by wingracer; 02-05-2010 at 09:19 PM.
02-05-2010, 09:15 PM
#533
Fine I removed my posts are you happy?
I did not start any trouble for you to have to do that. I mearly stated my opinion on the subject and was told to chill out! I really don't give a darn about it and you can bet that I won't be enetering my opinion again. you guys need to grow up!!!!!!!
02-05-2010, 09:18 PM
#534
Hey I wasn't there anyway and Mike seems OK with it so it's all good. Maybe I'll make it down next year.
I am curious though, did anyone get pics of both cars without bodies? Would just like to see if there was more than 4 inches worth of distance in their transponder locations.
02-05-2010, 10:34 PM
#535
Sometimes when you put text down on the screen it doesn't come out right or is taken the wrong way. Believe me, you are not the only one as I have done it many times...just like my previous post.
I apologize if I offended you.
02-05-2010, 11:00 PM
#536
Yes dad
Hey I wasn't there anyway and Mike seems OK with it so it's all good. Maybe I'll make it down next year.
I am curious though, did anyone get pics of both cars without bodies? Would just like to see if there was more than 4 inches worth of distance in their transponder locations.
Hey I wasn't there anyway and Mike seems OK with it so it's all good. Maybe I'll make it down next year.
I am curious though, did anyone get pics of both cars without bodies? Would just like to see if there was more than 4 inches worth of distance in their transponder locations.
02-05-2010, 11:52 PM
#537
02-06-2010, 05:15 AM
#538
While I agree Mike's car crossed the line first I would say the transponder would have to be what rules. Most races don't even have a camera at the finish line and trying to interpret who crossed first in such a close finish is too subjective.
That said, wouldn't it be nice if cars left a place for the PTs to be installed that was standard? Kind of like the CRC cars have? It is one of the few things in RC that is standard in size. I guess it is a little tricky on a TC because they all have open spots in different areas but I guess it could be figured out.
That said, wouldn't it be nice if cars left a place for the PTs to be installed that was standard? Kind of like the CRC cars have? It is one of the few things in RC that is standard in size. I guess it is a little tricky on a TC because they all have open spots in different areas but I guess it could be figured out.
02-06-2010, 07:03 AM
#539
Are there any pictures from the WGT cars especially the BMI?
02-06-2010, 08:25 AM
#540
Tech Fanatic
I haven't searched through all the posts on the transponder issue, but it seems position is the issue being discussed. However, bear in mind that certain computers, and certain race-count software systems, take a long time to process the signal. It won't be the first time that two cars sending a signal at almost identical times have had their positions transposed.
It isn't good to assume that the problem is transponder position, as it might be due to processing issues in the computer, or the software. It's just like 2.4 Ghz - if you don't leave the Tx on for at least 10 seconds before switching on the Rx, you can risk not picking up clean channels for the radio to work on.
Still, I'd rather have a PT and its system than go back to ten people behind a desk punching a button to recored laps at races!!
It isn't good to assume that the problem is transponder position, as it might be due to processing issues in the computer, or the software. It's just like 2.4 Ghz - if you don't leave the Tx on for at least 10 seconds before switching on the Rx, you can risk not picking up clean channels for the radio to work on.
Still, I'd rather have a PT and its system than go back to ten people behind a desk punching a button to recored laps at races!!