[Awaiting feedback] Checker request - GC6WCCW - 100,000-foot Challenge

I request a challenge checker for GC6WCCW - 100,000-foot Challenge. In order to complete the challenge task, you must find 13 caches or fewer, accumulating a total of at least 100,000 feet of elevation. You may not include this cache in that total.

Here you go: http://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC6WCCW/23287

I have had to translate the total altitude in feet to an average altitude in metres. Please let me know if this is suitable.

Thank you very much. I looks good, and I think it works, but I can't tell because it is in metrics. The problem is that very few, if any, of the cachers who find this cache won't understand the checker's output, without doing a lot of math, except an occasional visiting European or math major.
I appreciate the hard work you have put in so far, but is it possible to put it back into feet instead of meters?

Not with that script. The other script I found also doesn't convert to feet (the elevation data is in metres, so would need to be converted if you want it in feet) but also doesn't fit the challenge as well.

Here is a checker based on another script http://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC6WCCW/23288
The checker looks for 100000 feet with a maximum of 13 caches.
The input is feet but unfortunately the output is still in metric. There is no output in feet

Please tell us which checker you prefer

Thank you so much for looking. I do prefer the second one (checker #23288) as it appropriately accumulates. The first one (checker #23287) doesn't work because it averages which is not the challenge task. The task on my challenge task is to accumulate elevation, not average (although the end result might be the same). However, is there no way to alter the script to correct the output to feet instead of meters? I noticed the unnecessary conversion from feet to meters in the "if" commands in lines 63 - 67, and again in lines 199 - 203. If those two conversions were taken out, I believe it would have the desired output. Is it possible?

We will have to ask Target who is the script writer, but I know he is rather busy in the next couple of days

I have removed my tag.

Thanks. I can wait. I would be very grateful.

Since I am new at this, should this topic be marked as "New Script Required" rather than "Awaiting Feedback"?

Target knows about the request and it is an alteration in an existing script.

A "new script required" means a complete new script