Programmer needed for simple project - autoread times

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 10:10 am

Chuck Frank wrote:

...but wouldn't it be a LOT easier and more efficient to use a live announcer?... ...Certainly we can't be that hard up for personel...

I don't have a strong opinion for/against this project and I am not saying that this project is the solution to the problem I bring up, but when you are a course worker in the afternoon, you need to be relieved because your run group is already on course, you haven't eaten, need to go to the bathroom, working a stations all by yourself, etc. and the worker coordinators are having a hard time rounding up people for their assignments, then "Yes" sometimes I think we are hard up.

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 10:33 am

Richard Casto wrote:

Chuck Frank wrote:

...but wouldn't it be a LOT easier and more efficient to use a live announcer?... ...Certainly we can't be that hard up for personel...

I don't have a strong opinion for/against this project and I am not saying that this project is the solution to the problem I bring up, but when you are a course worker in the afternoon, you need to be relieved because your run group is already on course, you haven't eaten, need to go to the bathroom, working a stations all by yourself, etc. and the worker coordinators are having a hard time rounding up people for their assignments, then "Yes" sometimes I think we are hard up.

<soapbox>
RIchard has a point, but it has nothing to do with freeing up one worker who is doing the broadcasting. It has a lot to do with our sites. When we send workers out 1/2 mile away and they can only watch a 20 yard area of a 1 mile course, yes, you have issues with worker coverage. It is the logistics. And adding one worker to the mix helps nothing.

Your only real option is to based the entry limit on the number of workers you need for coverage.

I think the energy that is being directed towards these efforts would be better served at securing better sites that are closer to the core membership.

Oh yea one more thing...if an announcer adds nothing more than what a computer adds, then what is the purpose of the announcer? The best announcers add some insight and levity to the event.

okay, climbing down now

</soapbox>

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Don't forget...

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Chuck Frank · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 11:27 am

Richard Casto wrote:

Chuck Frank wrote:

...but wouldn't it be a LOT easier and more efficient to use a live announcer?... ...Certainly we can't be that hard up for personel...

I don't have a strong opinion for/against this project and I am not saying that this project is the solution to the problem I bring up, but when you are a course worker in the afternoon, you need to be relieved because your run group is already on course, you haven't eaten, need to go to the bathroom, working a stations all by yourself, etc. and the worker coordinators are having a hard time rounding up people for their assignments, then "Yes" sometimes I think we are hard up.

A BIG reason for having live announcing, unless you can rig the computer to call for worker changes and call out people by name who don't show.
I've never had a problem reading out times for every car, and with a laptop wified to the main the announcer could go back and get missed times without bothering the timing and scoring people.
SCCA thinks announcers are important enough that they sometimes pay to bring in non competitors just to announce. Anyone who has done a national event can appreciate how much the announcer adds in keeping everyone informed and the event moving efficiently their job is far bigger than reading times. If all that is needed is a mechanical reading of the times, then I'd vote for another display board, it's much easier to form a visual picture of the time than listening for it on the radio. I don't know how many times at the T&T that I accidently turned the radio off when trying to turn it up while getting the car slowed down over the Laurenburg bumps.
I'm not necessarily against this project, just FOR live announcing.

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 11:47 am

MikeWhitney wrote:

Don't forget...

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

I agree 100%.

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 2:36 pm

jimpastorius wrote:

RIchard has a point, but it has nothing to do with freeing up one worker who is doing the broadcasting.

I don't think Jim (or Mike?) was saying I was thinking that the automated announcer would fix the worker problem, but just to make sure, I was NOT suggestion it would or should.

I am also not trying to rain on anyone's parade (I am trying to NOT be part of the problem). I was just dumbfounded about the idea that we have a vast pool of workers at our disposal that will fill whatever need we might have during an event. Theoretically we do have a vast pool of workers, but IMHO in practice we don’t. Anyhow, I have inadvertently hijacked the thread to make my point.

So getting back on topic and sorry if this has already been addressed, but maybe it could be setup that if we have an announcer, someone can flip a switch and the automated announcer is out of the loop. If we don't happen to have anyone to announce, the automated announcer could do its thing. If someone needed to make an announcement, they can flip the switch, to override the automated announcer and then say what needs to say (worker change notification, etc.). I am assuming that this is being fed into the FM transmitter as well. And I hear it has improved range (yes!) so that you can actually pick it up in the pits.

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 2:50 pm

Richard Casto wrote:

I don't think Jim (or Mike?) was saying I was thinking that the automated announcer would fix the worker problem, but just to make sure, I was NOT suggestion it would or should.

I am also not trying to rain on anyone's parade (I am trying to NOT be part of the problem). I was just dumbfounded about the idea that we have a vast pool of workers at our disposal that will fill whatever need we might have during an event. Theoretically we do have a vast pool of workers, but IMHO in practice we don’t. Anyhow, I have inadvertently hijacked the thread to make my point.

I think Mike was jabbing me

Well, if workers are a problem, either you need bigger entry limits or more condensed courses. Let's do the math...a typical Laurinburg course as 9-10 worker stations. Let's say you have the average 120 drivers (that is high now). Roughly 20 drivers have postions that do not require them to work (and rightly so). We are down to 100. That leaves 25 workers per heat. T&S will need 5 of those, then you have start and maybe an announcer or finish person. So we have less than 20 workers to cover 9-10 stations.

[edit]
I forgot the grid...2 more people per heat subtracted from cone shagging.
[/edit]

If you happen to be at the far end of Laurinburg or Sanford, that is usually 1/2 mile away. It will take the average person 10-12 minutes to walk out to your station after checking in.

A sight like VMP or RBC Center allows you to use 4-5 worker stations. Therefore, you have 3-4 people per station. You can have both announcers and time posting people

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 3:31 pm

Oh yea, all of the experienced people hate shaggin cones. Because we have stood out there in the middle of nowhere in the 100 degree heat. So we all seek the cushy jobs. Yes, working the gate at 7 in the morning is a fine example. That is sweeter than tech or t&s.

So who do we have left to work the course.....drum roll please. All of the newbies! So when we are left with stations that have one worker and that worker could be a novice.

The last NASA event at VMP, I worked the course with Rod McGeorge, Courtney Cormier, Mike "Junior" Johnson. You talk about a blast. So working the course is not all bad

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

jimpastorius wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

Don't forget...

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

I agree 100%.

You guys did read the last word, right?

Please note that I have not contributed at all to the off-topic direction this thread has taken. No statements have been made about the need for announcers, the lack or surplus of workers, or what I or others should be spending our time on.

I'm just having fun. That's all. If you guys want to make a bigger deal of this, go ahead though. It's fun to watch. Like watching monkeys at the zoo fighting over a banana.

jimpastorius · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 3:49 pm

I did read the last sentence

I could think of nothing any more clever than 100% :lol:

David Teague · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 3:54 pm

I will gladly announce in addition to any other worker assingments I have or do, I do it all the time some why not at the autocross.. now back to our regular discussion.

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 4:20 pm

MikeWhitney wrote:

jimpastorius wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

Don't forget...

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

I agree 100%.

You guys did read the last word, right?

Ok, I didn't get it the first time. Probably because of my crappy grades in Chemistry. :lol:

George Bright · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2005 6:57 pm

Richard Casto wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

jimpastorius wrote:

MikeWhitney wrote:

Don't forget...

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

I agree 100%.

You guys did read the last word, right?

Ok, I didn't get it the first time. Probably because of my crappy grades in Chemistry. :lol:

I too had bad grades in Chemistry but I think that had something to do with doing bonghits with the Forestry guys instead of studying as I should. But I did get the joke.

Hows that for off topic. :lol4:

My programing skills are too rusty to be much help in this project.

AndersGreen · **Posted:** Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:00 am

Graham Jagger wrote:

4. Whopper from War Games (might as well sound like a computer)

"Would you like.... to take... a fun run?"

Anders

Vincent Keene · **Posted:** Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:57 am

MikeWhitney wrote:

Please note that I have not contributed at all to the off-topic direction this thread has taken. No statements have been made about the need for announcers, the lack or surplus of workers, or what I or others should be spending our time on.

I see this little project by Mike as "bling". We all know how much I like bling :wink:

so I'm all for it.

Do we "need" this? No. Would it be nice? Hell yeah! Go for it Mike.

BTW, after you finish the bus project, and this one, how about getting started on bar coding cars. This "old" idea is now possible using AX Ware so why not look into it?

THSCC Forums

Programmer needed for simple project - autoread times

Who is online