Traction control / Driver aids

[garyshell]

I am sitting here watching the F1 qualifying without traction control. Wow it sure as hell is nice to see some cars dancin' around the corners a bit. Made me think, I don't know what the status of such aids are in ICS. Hoop are you there??? Can you fill us in on what driver aids are or are not allowed in ICS?

Thanks,

Gary

[weeflyonthewall]

They progressed to paddle shifters this season. The boat anchor seems to still effect performance on non-ovals.

[Hoop-98]

As far as I know Traction Control went away in 2006 according to Honda. The lap times are similar to 03 Lolas. Just down 100 hp at low speed.

rh

[Jag_Warrior]

Is the assisted steering system still a go for this year?

[Hoop-98]

It is/was an open area, same as ALMS I believe.

rh

[Marbles]

Nevermind! ;)

[geek49203]

I am sitting here watching the F1 qualifying without traction control. Wow it sure as hell is nice to see some cars dancin' around the corners a bit. Made me think, I don't know what the status of such aids are in ICS. Hoop are you there??? Can you fill us in on what driver aids are or are not allowed in ICS?

Thanks,

Gary

Gary -

Here is a great example of a race series (yes, even F1) limiting its technology to make a better show.

Auto racing isn't about technology... it's about entertainment. While some may make the case that F1 decision actually makes racing more driver-centric, let me place my bet to say that the same drivers will be fast this year as last.

Everyone here who keeps harping that "NASCAR sucks 'cause they use old technology" and "Indy needs to use XYZ technology 'cause it's new" and "the DP01 was supposed to save CCWS" etc. needs to note my assertion, and (for crying out loud) stop harping on auto racing being a contest of technology. Every race series "freezes" its technology at some point in time, then only allows in a few new innovations, usually only to limit the costs or to make the show better.

BTW, yes, I enjoy watching F1's "low tech" show (with spec tires, spec ECU spec fuels, no traction control, no variable surfaces, and no espionage) as well.

[garyshell]

Gary -

Here is a great example of a race series (yes, even F1) limiting its technology to make a better show.

Auto racing isn't about technology... it's about entertainment. While some may make the case that F1 decision actually makes racing more driver-centric, let me place my bet to say that the same drivers will be fast this year as last.

Everyone here who keeps harping that "NASCAR sucks 'cause they use old technology" and "Indy needs to use XYZ technology 'cause it's new" and "the DP01 was supposed to save CCWS" etc. needs to note my assertion, and (for crying out loud) stop harping on auto racing being a contest of technology. Every race series "freezes" its technology at some point in time, then only allows in a few new innovations, usually only to limit the costs or to make the show better.

BTW, yes, I enjoy watching F1's "low tech" show (with spec tires, spec ECU spec fuels, no traction control, no variable surfaces, and no espionage) as well.

You will get zero arguement from me on ANY of that. I agree 1000%.

Gary

[fan-veteran]

Auto racing isn't about technology.....anymore. It is sad, but it is true. Technology was a very great, an exciting part of the game during last century. It was practically impossible 50 years ago to make a safe car doing 220mph in Indy, not to mention that the surface of the track was not appropriate for such speeds. Simply the technology was not adequate. Definitely there is no demand today for technology (new high-tech tires, engines, chassis) giving let's say 300mph average (it was possible i'm sure even a decade ago). And while i still can imagine such kind of race, yes, it will be very dangerous (300mph avg , there were examples with 240mph), i definitely can not imagine going with 350mph :dozey: . And the technologies for such speeds will be definitely 'very-high-tech'. Such speeds are nonsense, because there are humas which drive, not robots/computers. And hey - simply accelerate your records 1.5 times and you will get such crazy speeds :D .

But there is 'high-tech' in safety. The SAFER barriers were installed in 2002. The ongoing research process in reducing impact accelerations using new materials and shaping is 'high-tech'.

Who needs to use racing cars costing vast amount of money because of technological rivalry (not very real, because there would be rules limiting develompent here and there), if there is a possibility to lower their cost many times and give them the same speed.

If enourmous millitary budgets are redirected for such peacefull purposes - development of racing cars, the situation however changes ... :cool:

[nanders]

Auto racing isn't about technology... it's about entertainment.

Of NASCAR, F1 and ALMS who all have a fair entertainment value, they also have manufacture money, big name drivers and pretty fair sponsorship. Manufactures and drivers want to compete in these series. Is it a coincident that the manufactures are competing at a technological level in these series?

I quote myself here from another thread:

"Indy was one of the major places where technology was developed, but recently they have lost their way. They have lost their way while F1, NASCAR and ALMS still all have manufactures competing at a technical level. hmmmm."

"Isn't it funny that that's the series' where all the money is at? When I hear arguments that say "AOWR doesn't need the competition at the technology level," I'm thinking that's what they have now and it ain't working but the series' that are competing at the technical level have it all going for them. What's that thing Homer Simpson says? doh!"

http://www.gordonkirby.com/categories/columns/theway/2008/the_way_it_is_no116.html

"Increase the money by opening up the rules that encourages manufactures to compete at a technological level .. and then here comes the money. Then here comes the drivers. Once the manufactures and drivers are back then here comes the sponsors. That's the Reaganomics of AOWR. IMO."

[Wilf]

Of NASCAR, F1 and ALMS who all have a fair entertainment value, they also have manufacture money, big name drivers and pretty fair sponsorship. Manufactures and drivers want to compete in these series. Is it a coincident that the manufactures are competing at a technological level in these series?



NASCAR has severely limited the amount of technology available to teams. They still require carburetors, do not permit any computing or memory devices in the cars during a sanctioned event including practice, and require all of the cars to have the same, as in identical, shape. Ask Ford what they think of carburetors.

F1 has scaled back technology this year, but they still remain years ahead of most American series. It reamins to be seen if the reduced number of technical assists will aid the smaller teams close in on the big guys. It was fun to watch them locking up under breaking and breaking loose under acceleration. It seems that young Mr. Hamilton can do very well with or without all those artificial assists.

[nigelred5]

The only thing I don't care for with F1's limits on technology so far in the common ECU, but I accept there is little other way at least initially to police things like launch and TC. I'm sure teams will find a way to come up with something with similar function.

hmm, driver missing pit lights attributed to more functions on the wheel, drivers spinning off due to no TC, driver loosing position due to hitting pit speed limiter.(One might suggest to McLAren to move that dang button YESTERDAY!!!).. So far.... Mission accomplished !