Why would you want an RC to run a ToT PHRF race when PHRF is a ToD formula? One approximation multiplied by another approximation does not improve accuracy.If we think its difficult for an RC to run PHRF TOT (vs straight TOD), how do you expect a pickup RC to run ORC with all the multi variables in a given race?
"...ORC ratings are calculated for different courses and wind speeds, making results closer and more accurate (unlike PHRF)"
And OD is not the great saviuor: Harbor20 and J24 with keels needing to be relocated and straightened to be competive. The fastest M24s have always been those that have had 'accidents' and had internal structural work. J70s with tens of thousands of dollars of bottom work, for boats allowing only superficial sanding. And don't get me started on FT10s. Etc. Etc. Etc. Rotate boats and lets see how even OD is.......
Direct from the US PHRF Handbook:Why would you want an RC to run a ToT PHRF race when PHRF is a ToD formula? One approximation multiplied by another approximation does not improve accuracy.
Yeah, I know all that. It's been in PHRF handbooks for decades. It got momentum going in the 70s and people still are pushing it. ToT had one benefit. The RC didn't have to know how long the course was, which is an irrelevant concern in the era of GPS. It also tried to address light air sport boats clumsily. But ToT has several huge flaws.Direct from the US PHRF Handbook:
"NRR will also encourage the switch from Time on Distance (ToD) to Time on Time (ToT). This departure from the traditional PHRF format will increase accuracy and fairness. When racing under ToD, the ratings stay the same as wind speed increases or decreases. Hence, when the wind drops, the fast boats always enjoy a rating advantage and conversely small boats enjoy a rating advantage when the wind builds.
It has been shown through analysis that a medium air strength derived ToT rating will produce accurate club level racing scoring in light air. That fact is what drives us to promote ToT NRR as the base format.
Another benefit to ToT scoring is the reduction of work for a race committee. There is no need to measure course distances to determine the corrected times. This further increases the accuracy of the ratings since there is no error when setting a course distance plus it makes putting on races easier."
I'm calling BS. ToT or ToD...all you really need is an Excel spreadsheet...neither one is difficult to figure results.Agreed. Our club still won't give up MORC (or apparently their silver) to move to PHRF entirely. At this rate we'll invite you to our ORC worlds in 2120, but you'll be too busy since y'all are racing in between Pluto and Cerberus in light-sail powered spacecraft.
It's likely more accurate using the float measurements and hull lines than a scale on a lift to get the weight of a boat. Calibration of a weight scale requires use of a lot of standard weights that have been verified to have any confidence, and that sure as hell is not likely to ever happen.Yes ORC does use the weight of the boat as an input, but the vast majority of boats are not weighed with a scale. Float measurements are taken at the stem and stern with the boat in the water and then the weight is calculated. To do this ORC needs to have the computerized drawings of the hull which can be gotten for most boats. For the OOR-EZ you don't even need to do that.
I would be interested to know if anybody has physically weighed their boat in the last two years for ORC?
Ya but the cell should be calibrated for every measurement. Who's gonna do that? As an R&D engineer, I would not trust any black box measurement device without calibrating immediately before and after the measurement. I've seen too many fuck ups in my career on such "wonderous" company-promised devices to ever trust them.Oops bg, weighing should be done with certified cell, accurate and repeatable to 0.1%!
I would trust that the hull lines are more accurate than any load cell from my experience. Sample the water to get density, use a tape measure and you're done. I'd bet within a few pounds using that method. At 62 to 64 pounds per cubic feet of water, what's the most you'll be off by? 15 pounds probably. Fuck load more accurate than some load cell.?
10 boats to weigh, 10 cells needed?
But seriously, the tower and mobile crane guys rely day to day on this tech, of course there will be some fucups, but probably less than calculated disp. from in water measures?