I have a question of efficiency

[pack529holycross]

As we completed construction on our track yesterday, it dawned on me that 49ft is a really long way to be shuttling cars back and forth within the event. I then concluded that "shuttle time", and its effect as a variable in the scheduling of an event, is something I wanted to at lest make an ATTEMPT at minimizing if possible. Here are my thoughts, and you - o great GURU of the software - please tell me where my theory has merit of flaws:

We are using points scoring, a 6 lane track, fastrack timer, and have the following dens ( using "groups" functions to separate Dens ):

1 Tiger Den (GROUP 1)
2 Wolf Dens (GROUP 2 GROUP 3)
1 Bear Den (GROUP 4)
1 WI Den (GROUP 5)
1 WII Den GROUP 6)

OPEN CLASS - siblings, parents, outlaw

I expect that with even 90% participation, we will still have over 75-80 cars running, and the purpose of this exercise is to explore every possible way of minimizing "dead air" ( non-racing time ) in the racing program.

Here is the theory:

TWO assigned staging people (say S1 and S2) used in the following way - S1 Has the race schedule for GROUPS 1, 3, and 5. S2 has the race schedule for GROUPS 2, 4, and 6.
S1 stages up the cars from GROUP 1/heat 1 while S2 pre-stages cars for GROUP 2/heat 1.
S1 loads the cars for GROUP 1/heat 1, and begins the run. He walks away from the finish line and begins to pre-stage GROUP 1, heat 2 ( obviously some of the cars for heat 2 are still on the track in heat 1 ).
After GROUP 1/heat 1 times/places are recieved by the PC, PC desk switches to GROUP 2/heat 1 in the software as S2 resets starting gate and loads cars for GROUP 2/heat 1.
During S2 activity, cars are being shuttled back to S1 for pre-staging or return to impound area.
S2 begins the run for GROUP 2/heat 1. He walks away from the finish line and begins to pre-stage GROUP 2/heat 2.

S1 and S2 continue to alternate loading and running heats until both GROUPS have completed their racing schedules, respectively.

Potential benefits:
No lag time between "finish" and "start" with regards to shuttling cars, as the cars being shuttled for any given heat are NOT a part of pre-staging/staging for the next heat.


Question for the Software GURU - can such a "toggle" between groups be possible?

Nicholas

[doct1010]

No Guru here, however sounds like a good plan. You may want to give S1 and S2 a break at some point, thats alot of running plan for back-ups. We used a similar plan and it works well. Be sure staging area and impound are out of harms way, a dropped car due to traffic can be devastating for a cub. Less hands involved the better. If you plan to allow cubs to stage their own car, ONE at a time in staging area. If you are using GPRM I believe it allows you to toggle. Guru can confirm.

[Stan Pope]

The question and the following discussion violates my "First Rule of Racing" that is, "Only the car owner handles his car during racing." That changes the whole dynamic of the process. None-the-less ...

This is a good problem for process optimization. Within the primary goal of providing a fun, fair, and accurate competition, you also want to pack in as much actual racing as possible. Stated another way, you want to maximize the heats per hour.

It looks like you have already decomposed the process into its individual steps and identified those steps that are strictly serial and those which can be overlapped with others. (Formal documentation of each will help future years leaders understand the "whys" and give them a better basis for implementing ... or rejecting ... requested changes.)

With small groups on wide tracks, PPN schedules tend to have several (sometimes many) heats whch involve a car from the prior heat. PPN can sort heats to minimize that, but it can't always be eliminated. Foir instance, a group of size 7 racing on a 4-lane track will always have cars in successive heats for every heat!

I'll assume that you have already looked at the likely schedules in their most optimal form and determined that the number of cases of cars involved in successive heats is great enough to impact the racing time severly.

Now, on to your specific plan ...

The track, from start of a heat until results are recorded and cars are removed, is the primary controlling factor in the process.

I think that I would have a single starter. That provides a "contact point" to interface with the score keeper and the judges. It also allows the stagers to go on to their next step as soon as they have delivered the cars to the starter. Training issue: The starter must be trained (and usually reminded a few times) not to watch the current heat ... but to get on with staging for the next heat as soon as the current heat is released from the starting gate!

I think that I would have a separate team responsible to transfer cars from the finish line to the pit. Start with a team of two and increase or decrease size to allow the team to keep up. If you are not able to interleave the separate races, one of these members is an "expediter" and is responsible for promptly moving just the car(s) needed for the next heat. His retrieves and moves first. He always returns cars to the stager and never to the pit.

I would locate the pit between the finish line and starting line, probably closer to the starting line in such manner that the "finsh line to pit" team and the "pit to starting line" team do not interfere with each other. This can be done by having them work from opposite sides of the pit table.

[pack529holycross]

I did fil to clarify that I intend to have two "fields" of cars, being separated by which "starter" will run those groups within the Field. There will be a single Finish-to-Pits runner per "field", bringing the cars back to the impound area after their respective runs. Visually, it will appear to the audience as two complete race teams, working off separate "fields" of cars, with a single track, timer, and software working to crunch the data.

I will also have the individual Starters paired up with a Scorer to manually document the runs, points, places, etc as a backup.

That seems to break down as - 2 teams, consisting of 1 Starter, 1 pre-stage, 1 shuttle "runner", and 1 scorer. I like the redundancy of having two-deep leadership even in an event such as the derby

Nicholas

[gpraceman]

Question for the Software GURU - can such a "toggle" between groups be possible?

With GPRM, you can switch between groups at any time while in the racing screen. When a switch is made, it will jump to the first un-run heat for the group. The only thing is that the On Deck listing will not be correct the heat before you make the group change.

[blcrow33]

We have 90 scouts in our pack and race each den separately during the day and then have the Grand Championship race at night. We have 2 dens for each rank except Webelos II. We race two times in each lane. That is 10 races including the Championship race. We hold it in our small gym so it is very tight when the entire pack is there. Because of this and to save time, we stage the cars for the scouts. Plus they always want to be right there at the finish line when their car comes down our 42 foot track. In the past they complained they could not see there car cross the finish line when they staged their own cars. We have 3 adults getting the next cars ready for the heat and bringing them to the starting line. We have our Pack leader put all the ars on the track so every car is placed on the track the same way. We have two runners to bring the cars back to the staging area after each heat. At last years race we ran over 170 heats and our average turn around time was 48 seconds per heat. We allowed 30 minutes for each den race. Since things are so tight in the gym and because of the number of scouts we have, it would take us a long time if we had each scout stage their own car. Some of our dens are 12 scouts so that would be 12 kids around the start of the track. I feel for smaller packs it is a good idea for scouts to stage their own cars but for larger dens, keeping the number of people to a minimum behind the track makes things run faster and eliminates any chances for cars to get damaged. I tell all the volunteers that our number one priority is how we handle the cars. I have seen kids drop cars but I have not seen any adults drop cars yet. Knock on wood. If everyone knows their job, things will run smooth and quickly making for a better time for the scouts.

[Stan Pope]

... Because of this and to save time, we stage the cars for the scouts. Plus they always want to be right there at the finish line when their car comes down our 42 foot track. In the past they complained they could not see there car cross the finish line when they staged their own cars...

You speak as though "staging their own cars" and "watching from the finish line" are mutually exclusive. They are not. But it does take time for a group of youngsters to move from the starting line to the finish line for each heat.

The balance is which is more important to your group ... reducing the total time to run the races or increasing the experience for the youngsters. For me, it is a "no brainer", but other groups feel that the boys (or their parents) would rather get it all over with quickly.

[blcrow33]

Our main goal at the Pinewood Derby is to make sure the Scouts have the best experiance possible. Our experience because of our pack size and amount of space to move around in at the race has been the scouts our most happiest when they can see their cars cross the finish line and then be able to shout and jump up and down if their cars win. One thing I have learned from going to other packs to help them with their derbies is to do what is best for each pack to make the scouts happy. The way we do it definitely is best for our pack. You can not be committed to one way all the time and we reevaluate each year how we want to do the Pinewood Derby. It is all about the Scouts. When we have 6 hours of races all day, if we factor in having eachg scout stage their own cars, it would at least double the amount of time it takes to run our derby. It is hard enough keeping everyones attention and getting them there with all the basketball and other activities going on in the boys lives. But don't get me started on that. That subject would open up another can of worms.

[Stan Pope]

... best for our pack.

No dispute! And I'll admit to being rather biased on the issue.

Out of curiosity, which way do your youngsters prefer? Including their input is a good part of that regular review. The ones that I talk to would rather race their own, even if they get fewer heats. Of course, their opinion deals with fun, and as leaders we are concerned for what they learn in the process.

[blcrow33]

We did a survey for the PWD last year to make any changes that would make our Derby more exciting. One of the questions was would the scouts like to put the cars on the tracks or would they like to watch the race. The majority wanted to watch the race. I think the main reason is all the scouts are crowded around the finish line with all their buddies and cheering eachother on. They talk to there friends after each heat and say "See that" or "Did you see how fast that car was". Maybe the next group of scouts coming in will want to do something different. We are always trying to improve our event.

[Stan Pope]

We did a survey for the PWD last year to make any changes that would make our Derby more exciting. One of the questions was would the scouts like to put the cars on the tracks or would they like to watch the race.

Hmmm ... I don't understand ... Can they not do both? That is ... stage their cars then return to the finish line for watching? What am I missing?

[blcrow33]

They can do both. It would be tight with the number of people we have in the gym during the race but we would just have to make sure there is enough room for the scouts to go back and forth. I think the main issue is we are already spending 6 hours of races. If we had to wait for the scout to walk to the finish line each time after they set their car on the track, you will at least double the amount of time it takes to run our races. it is hard enough to get parents and kids to sit there as it is. Like I said we had to rearrange all the den races just to fit in the Pinewood Derby between all the scouts being in Basketball as it is. There is no more time we can get to run these races. You did make me think. Our race is this Saturday but next year I think we will revisit the option of having the scouts stage the cars themselves.

[Stan Pope]

... next year I think we will revisit the option of having the scouts stage the cars themselves.

Never be satisfied. Not all change is for the better, but if you never
change, you won't get better!

Time: 6 hours includes 1 1/2 hour for inspection, so that's 4-1/2 hours for racing and awards ... say 1/2 hour for awards so 4 hours for racing at 45 seconds per heat is 320 heats, more or less times 4 lanes (or did you say 5) is 1280 runs divided by 90 scouts is about 16 heats per scout! That is a low estimate, because without the boys staging, the heats/hour or seconds per heat should be even better than that. Even if not, you are well into the "satisfactory number of heats per boy" range. For those with really slow cars, it is probably too many, or, at least, that is what someone on Scouts-L told me a few years ago.

Families stay all day: If you are in a cultural demographic where the typical family size is 5 to 10 children, then this would be an all day affair for most of 'em. For my demographic, 3 or more participating racers is unusual, and one or two is more likely. Your larger pack, is more like a small district, and you might consider stagger scheduling the dens. Can also consider staggering the inspection for them if you can con someone to inspect instead of watch! Hmmm... Do you have a Unit Commissioner??? (The other thing I don't know is if your pack covers a 50 mile long area or a 5 mile long area ... that would make a difference for a family that had a Tiger and a Webelos ... no time to go home between!)

Anyway, keep improving. I like your approach of regular review ... too many don't do that!