Sign in to follow this  
vcaptmattsmith

Official RTW Race Website Launched, Rules Announced

Recommended Posts

Hi folks-We've created a website for the RTW Race. On this website can be found the official rules for this year's race (minus a few specific points that will be made public shortly before the race), a news section, a pilot resource page, a FAQ, and a few other things that we think you'll find useful. We hope to use the website as a centralized source for race information

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Thanks Matt.Though you must realise that you are restricting Pacific crossings to only 1 specific route (in whichever direction) and Atlantic crossings to 2 specific routes.Allow Maybe it'd be better to allow 2 legs over 1000nm with a total length of no more than 3000nm, with a further restriction that no shorter legs may be found on the chosen route without doubling back. That way you open several more options for crossing the Pacific, making things more interesting for everyone ;).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one:What if someone finds out he can't make it anywhere inside the 2 hour limit?Say I take off on a flight that should be possible in 100 minutes but get hit by severe headwinds adding half an hour to my flight.Then on approach I have to go around a few times because of poor visibility.There's no diversion field available.Example could by Reykjavik-Vagar or Narsarsuaq-Reykjavik. Both are possible in under 2 hours given a fast aircraft and no bad headwinds.But weather up there is often unpredictable, and good conditions can turn to disastrous rapidly.Would the penalty for late arrival be applied in such cases, where no field can be reached within 2 hours when the defined destination could have been except for extraneous circumstances?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Would the penalty for late arrival be applied in such casesI'll pick this one up, that's right it does apply. The time restrictions in a way simulates a tight fuel limit. In real life, there is no arguing with an empty tank, if you have to land.... you have to land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so we'd better start scheduling short legs...Could become a problem as there's areas where there's nowhere else to go like I said (even if that's the only route possible).As I said, these restrictions mandate both a very specific Atlantic and a very specific Pacific crossing, both of which I've already plotted in detail.This makes the whole thing less interesting for everyone involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what we're going to go with this year. We'll see how things go and if we think we can do better differently we'll change the rules for next year.Kindest Regards-Matt SmithOrganizerMSFS RTW Race

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A point of clarification, if you please, gentlemen.In regards to Rule #5:5) Crashes.If you crash your aircraft for any reason, you must create a post so stating. The next person to pick up the baton begins from the airport you began at. If your computer crashes, you may either declare the baton to be free or restart from the airport you originally departed from. Note that the two-hour time limit counts for the total time you have the baton (including time used before your computer crash).Let's say I claim the baton at 1300z and fly for 1 hour. My computer crashes at exactly 1400z, and I choose to restart my flight from the original departure airport of that attempted leg. It may then be assumed that I may only fly and possess the baton until 1500z without incurring a penalty. Is that interpretation correct, or does my remaining hour begin from my second "I have the baton" post?Further, let's say that I defer to another pilot waiting at said departure airport and free the baton for her to pick up. Does she now have two hours to complete her own flight, or is she bound to the one-hour constraint by which I was bound myself?Thanks,Kevin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 2 hours are yours. If you give up someone else starts from scratch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, then here's the mandatory route...I've included a shortcut across northern Canada to make flight planners happy, apart from that this is the only allowed route from Japan to Europe (or vv of course) based on the rules as set out.Nakashibetsu RJCNYelizovo UHPPEareckson AS PASYAtka PAAKCold Bay PACDKenai Mun PAENMayo CYMAJean Marie River CET9Kasba Lake CJL8Coral Harbour CYZSPangnirtung CYXPNuuk BGGHKulusuk BGKKKeflavik BIKFNordfjordur BINFVagar EKVGAny other route will go over the limits set, even this one will require a miracle to not go over it at least once and that's using the very shortest leg for that part of the route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin, Jeroen is correct.If you start at 1300Z and get a computer crash, you can retain the baton until 1500Z. If you hand it over to Jane, she has 2 hours from the moment she claims the baton. Essentially, she's starting a whole new leg.This came up last year. Imagine you are flying late at night with no fellow pilots. You take off and experience a sudden computer lockup. Under last year's rules, the baton would return to the original airport and wait until another pilot showed up--hours later it turned out. Similarly, say you had been waiting all day to get your chance to fly but you get the same lockup on takeoff. Now you can simply recommence, having lost only the time before the computer crash. For strategic reasons, you probably don't want to restart the leg when you have less than an hour remaining--unless you are the only pilot around.Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeroen,You are essentially correct here. But please do observe that, for flights in the 2-3 hour window, the team merely incurs a penalty. It is only for flights longer than 3 hours that the flight is invalidated.For strategic reasons, the team may be willing to accept the "triple cross" penalty. This is a matter of choice. Unexpected weather delays will occur and, presumably, the team will take a small penalty to allow the pilot to land. Or, rarely one supposes, the team may schedule a flight designed to last longer than 2 hours in order to bridge the gap between suitable airports.One hopes that the triple cross penalty is sufficiently severe that teams will not consciously violate the 2-hour limit often or by large amounts. Exceeding 2 hours (but not 3 hours) is not a violation of the rules--or in some way unsporting. I'd be surprised if there were no such penalties incurred during this year's race.More severely limiting are the absolute 3-hour and 1,000 nm limits.Best,Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The race organisers have created a system in which the race can NOT be flown at all without incurring penalties.That's plainly irrate, as it means they've created the rules in such a way that the ONLY way to complete the race is by breaking the rules!That can't be right...It's getting to the point that I'm starting to think this is all a tremendous waste of time. Either you try to stay within the rules (as we did last year) with a little leeway in case of unforeseen conditions, or you deliberately don't in which case you're out.I don't want to be forced to break the rules in order to meet our objectives...Sure there's an option for a longer leg still within the rules BUT incurring a penalty (which means it's outside the rules but tollerated, and not witin the rules at all).But as the organisation forces us into a situation where that leg is mandated in a specific place (and thus on all teams in that place) the fun of planning the whole thing for best efficiency is gone.Once the departure point is known everyone will have the most efficient route to the entrance points of the mandatory ocean crossings within minutes and from there it's just a big follow the leader in which the only way the team with the fastest aircraft will not win is if they run into trouble finding pilots...That's not the spirit of the race as it has been for the last two years, and is not something I want to take part in to put it bluntly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, technically the forum does have a choice which direction to take, and a choice of airports to handoff at in areas where airports are numerous, but the general route is still roughly the same, since all forums will be looking for the most efficient route to hit all continents and lattitudes within the required ocean crossing routes (or should I say "routes going around the northern end of both atlantic and pacific oceans because they're the only routes that break the rules the least")Still, I have the feeling all 3 forums will choose the same direction around the world, therefore making this roughly a follow-the-leader race... I personally think we can still have some fun in this, but part of the fun in this race has always been planning the route, finding shortcuts, choosing where best to use the wildcard, etc., particularly finding interesting ways to cross the ponds. At least for the issue of crossing the ponds, the fun of planning flights and finding shortcuts is effectively eliminated. All teams must effectively take the same route, possibly only with different handoff points along the same effective route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the scarcity of airports (not counting a few dirt strips incapable of supporting a race aircraft) in those parts of the world, all but one or two of the fields I mention are mandatory.Given the other restriction (45 South) which forces one of another 6 or so airports on a team and all those close together, there's very little variation in routing left.The organisers could as well dictate the exact route and a set of diversion points, as the only difference will be decisions like whether to stop at Newark or La Guardia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see a dynamic flight planning for the race. Mandatory routes makes this a NASCAR event, with everyone flying the Avanti in the same pattern. I'd like to be able to fly my 235kts GS Navajo knowing that my flight would be planned nicely to offset the slowness of the aircraft. Under the current rules, as I understand them, flying a Navajo or Cessna 310 would be a HUGE disadvantage since everyone would be flying the Avanti. I think less rules would make the race more fun. Less rules but better rule enforcement I think. Anyways, I'll start flying the Cheyenne or Cessna 441 or something to practice with...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, maybe we need to wait and see what the special requirements and other "features" will be. Seeing the straightforward rules so far (I hope there won't be any "lets try it and see if it's legal afterwards" this year), I imagine the real work will come when they disclose the rest -- I don't think it will just be a "do one leg in a helicopter" :).Sure, there's only one pacific crossing possible, but 3 atlantic crossings + 2 possible continents to reach S45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there's only 1 Atlantic crossing John. The other one has 2 legs of over 1000nm each.Effectively there's just one continent to reach 45 South as well because the other one (unless the starting position is there, reversing the situation) would make for too much of a detour and force the team choosing it to make several illegal legs.That all forces a single route on everyone. There is no wrong or right route where there's only 1 route available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, the wildcard leg is useless under the current rules.You're going 2 hours over the 2 hour limit, imposing a 6 hour penalty...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, the rules say that this isn't the case:d) Each forum has one wild-card flight of up to 1500 miles and 6 hours that is not subject to parts b and c of this rule.(Where part b is the 'penalty' rule and part c is the 'absolute limit' rule).Therefore, taking the fairly wild assumption that you're going to use this for one of the transoceanic legs... you get the picture. No more limitation on routes there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will lift the restriction on the Pacific crossing only, enabling that without a penalty.Still leaves only a single Atlantic route.Of course one could choose a 1 hour penalty over the Pacific and use it over the Atlantic instead.I'll get cracking on some planning, even though I still think things are too restrictive...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,Good to hear this discussion. A couple of personal reactions (these are not official comments).1. The "triple-time" penalty (or whatever it might be called) is intended to allow some leeway from the 2-hour restriction but to discourage taking advantage of that leeway. In past years, we've had the 2-hour restriction but occasionally "broken" it with impunity. (People did mostly the right thing but the temptation to squeeze a few extra miles was always there). And, in particular, the "over water" loophole needed to be closed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone in previous years (at least not on our team) deliberately planned a route to go over the limit.As it is with this new rules you're going to have to plan for legs of no more than 1.5 hours at most in order to have some leeway in case of headwinds or goarounds.1 goaround or a few knots more headwind than anticipated when you're close to the 2 hour limit can mean you cause a setback of half an hour to an hour, especially if there's nowhere to divert (which can happen in many places, in effect anywhere except the USA and western Europe it's likely there's simply nowher in range that can take your aircraft).That's pretty hefty. And I DO consider the penalty to mean you're in violation of the rules and will plan accordingly, leading to very short legs and possibly long detours to make sure there's never a possibility of going over the limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentlemen-We're reviewing the rules. Jeroen has brought up some very legitimate points regarding routing. We're going to look at what our options are and try to revise things.This is really the community's race. When there's this level of outcry in the community, something needs to be done. It's not my role to sit up on high and govern. We're going to find something that everyone can agree on.I'll be back to you soon with a solution.Matt SmithOrganizerMSFS RTW Race

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey All,Interesting set of rules. I support the keep it under two hours rule and like the possibilities the triple penalty presents. The penalty could be your friend and there is nothing wrong with using it to advantage. It's no different than an NFL team taking a delay of game to get a better angle on a field goal or a basketball team deliberately fouling and hoping the person fouled misses the free throws so that they can get the ball back. It certainly makes planning very interesting. If I go an hour overtime here do I save over 3 hours by not going that way? Plus it gives the teams a bit of a break. Should be fun!Take Care! -Ed-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this