The Official 2016 British Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**
Discussion
Flooble said:
As soon as you start talking about simplifying the controls you get into "what if".
Pit-to-car operation (ergo, engineers changing settings on the car directly without driver involvement) was banned a while ago, so you need to cater for all the possible edge cases.
With the cars starting out on a full fuel load and gradually getting lighter there is a massive change in the dynamics of the car. So you need brake controls. Ideally you would have suspension too but that was banned ages ago.
You need engine mode controls to allow the driver to manage fuel usage. Not just because of the regulation but also because more fuel = slower car; therefore you only put in the minimum amount of fuel you can get away with as it makes your car faster.
You have the DRS, push-to-pass, radio, pit limit buttons
You need to be able to control the diff settings as the tyres wear (and in case of other issues with the car where you may need to lock up the diff).
And so on ... if you take away the ability to alter settings you will see DNFs or backed off racing where currently the car will continue.
Making the settings "automatic" is making the driver even less critical to the vehicle, so you are actually pushing towards more anodyne racing. Especially with a standardised ECU which means every car will behave in exactly the same way.
But how far are you going to follow that theory ?Pit-to-car operation (ergo, engineers changing settings on the car directly without driver involvement) was banned a while ago, so you need to cater for all the possible edge cases.
With the cars starting out on a full fuel load and gradually getting lighter there is a massive change in the dynamics of the car. So you need brake controls. Ideally you would have suspension too but that was banned ages ago.
You need engine mode controls to allow the driver to manage fuel usage. Not just because of the regulation but also because more fuel = slower car; therefore you only put in the minimum amount of fuel you can get away with as it makes your car faster.
You have the DRS, push-to-pass, radio, pit limit buttons
You need to be able to control the diff settings as the tyres wear (and in case of other issues with the car where you may need to lock up the diff).
And so on ... if you take away the ability to alter settings you will see DNFs or backed off racing where currently the car will continue.
Making the settings "automatic" is making the driver even less critical to the vehicle, so you are actually pushing towards more anodyne racing. Especially with a standardised ECU which means every car will behave in exactly the same way.
The car is already doing a million things. It's deciding how much fuel to inject and for how long, its deciding when to fire the ignition system for example. The gearbox has syncromeshes so the drive doesn't need to rev match. Should the driver be doing all that too ?
If you dumb down the cars people will moan that F1 is hypocritical, and they'd have a point. Your average road car is doing a bunch of things as it goes along - why not an F1 car ?
I can see real time data analysis taking over operation of the diff, engine mode, ERS harvesting regime and so on. That leaves the driver free to concentrate on their bit - braking 5 feet later, turning in and clipping the apex, carrying the speed through a corner and so on.
Edit: Forgot to say some really nice pictures there NJK. I was surprised by the focal lengths, I thought Silverstone stands were quite far away. I've got a Mk1 7D, how do you find the Mk2 ?
Edited by Crafty_ on Monday 11th July 16:00
NJK44 said:
Very good. 
NJK44 said:
Even better
KaraK said:
Setting aside the illegality of the exchange under the current rules for a moment I actually don't think that reflects too badly on Nico - after all being able to shift through the gear and not have it "stick" would mean he could still use 8th whereas having to stay out of it completely would mean that 6th was essentially "top" which would dramatically reduce his top speed and that is the sort of thing I'd say it's perfectly reasonable for a driver to ask an engineer.
I'd take a different view. To me it feels like Nico is pleading to be spoon fed the answers. If an engineer says avoid 7th, engineers being what they are, it almost certainly means all other gears are acceptable. If they didn't want him going from 6th to 8th they'd surely have said to not go above 6th or words to that effect.The message was probably particularly carefully worded to deliberately convey the bare minimum and in questioning it Nico was inviting a less careful response when they were clearly sailing close to the wind already.
768 said:
I'd take a different view. To me it feels like Nico is pleading to be spoon fed the answers. If an engineer says avoid 7th, engineers being what they are, it almost certainly means all other gears are acceptable. If they didn't want him going from 6th to 8th they'd surely have said to not go above 6th or words to that effect.
The message was probably particularly carefully worded to deliberately convey the bare minimum and in questioning it Nico was inviting a less careful response when they were clearly sailing close to the wind already.
I see what you are getting at - and I think reading the transcript back while I'm sat at my desk in a relatively calm environment with all the time in the world it's easy to take "avoid 7th gear" exactly as you've done - i.e. that you can shift through it but not really "use" it. But I think driving an F1 car at high speed in tricky conditions (one wheel out of place could easily mean a 1-way trip to the barrier/gravel trap), with another quick car not far behind you when you've just had what could have been a race-ending problem is a very different kettle of fish. Asking for clarification in that sort of situation isn't ridiculous to my mind, especially given from the bits we did hear the engineer sounded rather flustered and appeared to be tripping over his own words, and as you say he was probably trying not to get the team in the sThe message was probably particularly carefully worded to deliberately convey the bare minimum and in questioning it Nico was inviting a less careful response when they were clearly sailing close to the wind already.
t by saying the wrong thing to the driver.
Crafty_ said:
But how far are you going to follow that theory ?
The car is already doing a million things. It's deciding how much fuel to inject and for how long, its deciding when to fire the ignition system for example. The gearbox has syncromeshes so the drive doesn't need to rev match. Should the driver be doing all that too ?
If you dumb down the cars people will moan that F1 is hypocritical, and they'd have a point. Your average road car is doing a bunch of things as it goes along - why not an F1 car ?
I can see real time data analysis taking over operation of the diff, engine mode, ERS harvesting regime and so on. That leaves the driver free to concentrate on their bit - braking 5 feet later, turning in and clipping the apex, carrying the speed through a corner and so on.
Edit: Forgot to say some really nice pictures there NJK. I was surprised by the focal lengths, I thought Silverstone stands were quite far away. I've got a Mk1 7D, how do you find the Mk2 ?
Point taken (and the pretty pictures), however, I think that the driver is always going to need a "manual override" of the settings to cope with problems. As you say in general the car is already managing a lot of the important stuff, but the driver still needs to be able to tell it "okay, now is a good time to save some fuel" with a greater degree of finesse than short-shift/lift & coast. Equally the diffs, if you make them fully automatic they become traction control and/or brake steering - both of which were banned to increase "driver involvement". That's the thing - you can't have super-simple cars for "driver involvement" and everything automatic. When ABS was banned that actually really helped the spectacle - drivers locking up is something we all enjoy (if you see what I mean). The car is already doing a million things. It's deciding how much fuel to inject and for how long, its deciding when to fire the ignition system for example. The gearbox has syncromeshes so the drive doesn't need to rev match. Should the driver be doing all that too ?
If you dumb down the cars people will moan that F1 is hypocritical, and they'd have a point. Your average road car is doing a bunch of things as it goes along - why not an F1 car ?
I can see real time data analysis taking over operation of the diff, engine mode, ERS harvesting regime and so on. That leaves the driver free to concentrate on their bit - braking 5 feet later, turning in and clipping the apex, carrying the speed through a corner and so on.
Edit: Forgot to say some really nice pictures there NJK. I was surprised by the focal lengths, I thought Silverstone stands were quite far away. I've got a Mk1 7D, how do you find the Mk2 ?
Edited by Crafty_ on Monday 11th July 16:00
Perhaps the challenge is that instead of abandoning the ability to fiddle with settings in-race, the engineers have instead given the driver controls to do it. Having a fixed diff would increase tyre wear and make it harder to corner, but would be one less dial to fiddle with. Having the brakes preset to a single setting would make the car a nightmare at the start and end of the race but would be another dial the driver wouldn't have to learn. Maybe that is the direction to take it - going for all-out automation is taking us back down the path that was abandoned in the early 90s when you had cars with active suspension, automatic gearboxes, anti-lock braking, traction control ... basically stuff you get today on road cars :-)
GCH said:
The full radio exchange in question, for those unaware that the whole conversation was not broadcast/reported:
Rosberg: Gearbox problem I have a gearbox….
Engineer: Yeah, driver default 0-1, chassis default 0-1, chassis default 0-1, you are stuck in 7th gear
Engineer: Avoid 7th gear Nico, avoid 7th Gear
Rosberg: Well what does that mean? I have to shift through it?
Engineer: Affirm Nico you need to shift through it, Affirm you just need to shift through it.
Engineer: So Nico, if it gets stuck again it will downshift out of 7th
Rosberg: What do I do if it gets stuck again?
Engineer: So Nico just try to avoid 7th If it happens downshift out of it, you are doing a really good job.
Rosberg: I tried to downshift out of it last time – it didn’t work
Engineer: Ok, copy, copy
That's useful to see. It is different when you see the second conversation where Nico goes from suggesting ("I have to shift through it?" to simply asking "What do I do?"). Given that he had been told "Avoid 7th" and then further "shift through it", the further conversation to me does seem to have gone past the point of fixing the problem. Mind you, if I was Nico barreling along at 200mph I'd have been very confused by "it will downshift out of 7th" and probably very reluctant to shift up out of 6th.Rosberg: Gearbox problem I have a gearbox….
Engineer: Yeah, driver default 0-1, chassis default 0-1, chassis default 0-1, you are stuck in 7th gear
Engineer: Avoid 7th gear Nico, avoid 7th Gear
Rosberg: Well what does that mean? I have to shift through it?
Engineer: Affirm Nico you need to shift through it, Affirm you just need to shift through it.
Engineer: So Nico, if it gets stuck again it will downshift out of 7th
Rosberg: What do I do if it gets stuck again?
Engineer: So Nico just try to avoid 7th If it happens downshift out of it, you are doing a really good job.
Rosberg: I tried to downshift out of it last time – it didn’t work
Engineer: Ok, copy, copy
Vocal Minority said:
NJK44 said:
Very good. NJK44 said:
Even betterNJK44 said:
Great shots 
Dr Z said:
I suspect they were concerned that a more severe sanction would be imposed.
Look, I know this might generate some obnoxious replies, even worse that those directed at a poster who says something not nasty about Hamilton, but here goes.
Christian was on the radio on Ch4 and later came to the presenters later. This will sound really weird but I'm warming to him.
Christian was on the radio on Ch4 and later came to the presenters later. This will sound really weird but I'm warming to him.
Derek Smith said:
Look, I know this might generate some obnoxious replies, even worse that those directed at a poster who says something not nasty about Hamilton, but here goes.
Christian was on the radio on Ch4 and later came to the presenters later. This will sound really weird but I'm warming to him.
He does seem a bit more relaxed these days. Christian was on the radio on Ch4 and later came to the presenters later. This will sound really weird but I'm warming to him.
Vaud said:
Derek Smith said:
Look, I know this might generate some obnoxious replies, even worse that those directed at a poster who says something not nasty about Hamilton, but here goes.
Christian was on the radio on Ch4 and later came to the presenters later. This will sound really weird but I'm warming to him.
He does seem a bit more relaxed these days. Christian was on the radio on Ch4 and later came to the presenters later. This will sound really weird but I'm warming to him.
HustleRussell said:
I can't forget how two faced that man can be with folk he's supposed to be in partnership with. I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt when he was incredibly smug in the winning years but the stink he made over Renault is inexcusable IMO.
Was it him or was he doing the bidding for Mateschitz and Marko, we'll never know.Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff