F2008 launches today (Ferrari F1)

[stephen300o]

flemke said:

stephen300o said:

flemke said:

stephen300o said:

Was it the answer to a specific question, and did it refer to Hamiltons driving style?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64541

Might have been Gazzetta dello Sport stirring, asking about Hamiltons driving style, not much context there.

Maybe, but then why would he gratuitously add:

"For sure he won't be able to carry on driving the way he has, and even though he raced and won in GP2 without traction control, he was on different tyres."

None of the F1-experienced drivers will be able to carry on driving the way that they have been, and now quite a few of the drivers on the grid will have recently raced in GP2. It was not necessary to single out Hamilton. One suspects that Ferrari are quite worried about Hamilton,as they should be.

It's not a big deal. It's just another tile in the rich mosaic of Ferrari distastefulness.

You must agree that Hamilton tends to throw the car about more than some, it doesn't effect his speed much but would effect wear'n tear (lessons learn't from Days of thunder)

[flemke]

stephen300o said:

flemke said:

stephen300o said:

flemke said:

stephen300o said:

Was it the answer to a specific question, and did it refer to Hamiltons driving style?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64541

Might have been Gazzetta dello Sport stirring, asking about Hamiltons driving style, not much context there.

Maybe, but then why would he gratuitously add:

"For sure he won't be able to carry on driving the way he has, and even though he raced and won in GP2 without traction control, he was on different tyres."

None of the F1-experienced drivers will be able to carry on driving the way that they have been, and now quite a few of the drivers on the grid will have recently raced in GP2. It was not necessary to single out Hamilton. One suspects that Ferrari are quite worried about Hamilton,as they should be.

It's not a big deal. It's just another tile in the rich mosaic of Ferrari distastefulness.

You must agree that Hamilton tends to throw the car about more than some, it doesn't effect his speed much but would effect wear'n tear (lessons learn't from Days of thunder)

He did do, as did a few of the others.
Again, I would submit that this guy appears to be highly adaptable (winning F1 races at 3 circuits which he had never even seen before, fastest laps in the wet and in the dry).
For him, as for Michael, to have maximised the advantage of traction control when it was available is no evidence at all that he cannot drive effectively without it.

In contrast, I would cite an anecdote from the Goodwood Revival of about three years ago.
In that race, a then-current F1 driver (Liuzzi, IIRC) was down to race an E-Type (IIRC). In practice he was having big problems shifting gear.
It turned out, according to the car's mechanic, that he could not heel-and-toe, because he had never before raced a car that didn't have paddle-shift.
Allegedly, they sent him out in the race with instructions to get the car up to 4th gear and then keep it there.

[jon-]

flemke said:

F1 driver (Liuzzi, IIRC) <snip> could not heel-and-toe

Blimey! Even as a part time racer / trackdayer I was heel toeing in my road car long before I ever had race experience purely because as a driving enthusiast wanting to be the best driver I could.

Makes you wonder how much the boys who have had a lot of money behind them really live racing.

I do enjoy your anecdotal motorsport stories flemke, thank you.

[flemke]

jon- said:

I do enjoy your anecdotal motorsport stories flemke, thank you.

I don't think I've ever mentioned on here my favourite anecdote: when the real flemke, wearing a t-shirt and cotton trousers, ran across a racetrack infield and by himself pulled a competitor out of a car that was, literally, engulfed in flames.
It happened right in front of me, and is one of the reasons why, when modern journalists refer to modern persons' bravery, I often shake my head.

[jon-]

flemke said:

jon- said:

I do enjoy your anecdotal motorsport stories flemke, thank you.

I don't think I've ever mentioned on here my favourite anecdote: when the real flemke, wearing a t-shirt and cotton trousers, ran across a racetrack infield and by himself pulled a competitor out of a car that was, literally, engulfed in flames.
It happened right in front of me, and is one of the reasons why, when modern journalists refer to modern persons' bravery, I often shake my head.

The "French BBQ"? That's going back a few years now, and across the pond if memory serves and my quick googling correct.

You're point is valid though, I always wince when I see clips of the F1 in yesteryear. Now, looking at a 2008 car the amount of side protection around the drivers head makes the cars look ridiculous. I understand the importance of safety but the 2007 cars proved themselves time and time again to be safe in even the most horrific of crashes (Canada anyone?)

Wasn't Schumachers crash back in Silverstone in early 2000 the last time a driver was injured?

[stephen300o]

I think also Alan Mcnish can't heel and toe, I guess if you never use it, it doesn't matter.

[anonymous-user]

There is no point learning to heal and toe when you only have two pedals in the car. Even with a conventional 3 pedal setup, with modern race dogboxes you dont need to either, you can shift so fast due to their puny size and dog designs that heal and toeing is a disadvantage to lap time.

[anonymous-user]

Oh and speaking of Liuzi, the first time he drove at the Goodwood FOS the security guards wouldnt let him into the winners enclosure/stage area for the awards at the end of Sunday. His manager was a waste of space, he couldnt get in either and with Liuzi in his bad boy hairdo/clothes and face full of metal he had no chance. I went over having recognised him and dragged him into the enclosure, next minute he is on the stage with the rest of the F1 drivers there that year. Gave me a chuckle anyway.

[rubystone]

MrKipling43 said:

rubystone said:

I did wonder whether the comments were related to how TC might help to preserve the rear tyres a little more. To my eyes, Lewis' driving style might hurt the tyres a little more than, say, Button's...

He was in GP2 a year ago and, if memory serves, he did ok in that. They don't have traction control.

Lewis is one of the best drivers on the planet - I'm sure he, like everyone else on the grid, will manage just fine.

Fair point - but I was just trying to be equitable....

[Jungles]

Liuzzi went straight from karting to Formula Renault to F3 to F3000 to F1. He didn't race Formula Fords or any of the very low-level formulas (FF or FV) that still use conventional gear-shifts, or any other form of racing with conventional gear-shifts. So his inability to heel-toe is not all that surprising.

IMHO, all F1 drivers should be presumed not to be able to heel-toe or even double de-clutch, until proven otherwise.

[deevlash]

Liuzzi deserves another chanc in F1, his f3000 title winning season promised so much Id hate to think of it going to waste in a testing role

[lojohn]

D_Mike said:

interesting that they still have some sort of dials for the differential (????) labelled, entry, mid, and exit, even though TC Is banned.

TC is all about engine management. Diff settings merely enable the driver to allocate the available torque btween the driven wheels - so there is no correlation.

LJ

[D_Mike]

but the diffs were linked into the TC... if one wheel was spinning too much and the other wasn't the diff would transfer the power...

also the last few years the diffs have been very advanced, the engine automatically applies throttle when braking for example to help stop the rears locking. and the settings were changed constantly by he TC/engine managment.

I don't know if the standard ECU has cut back on what can be done with the diff, does anyone know?

[stemll]

MB getting a little tired of Ron's handling of 2007?

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hYBtKYIzdnFOT_NboRLENIG_FyvQ 
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/motorsport/story/0,,2237060,00.html 
http://uk.reuters.com/article/UK_MOTORSPORT/idUKL0727229120080107 

Ok, I know they're all the same story really.

[Jungles]

D_Mike said:

but the diffs were linked into the TC... if one wheel was spinning too much and the other wasn't the diff would transfer the power...

That's what a differential normally does - TC or no TC.

Even in your own car, LSD or clutch-pack diffs will do exactly what you said: transfer power from the wheel that is spinning too much to the wheel that isn't.

TC is just a mechanism to cut back throttle when the driving wheels are spinning at a set % faster than the road.

Edited by Jungles on Wednesday 9th January 00:41

[anonymous-user]

There is nothing in the regs to limit the active diff. When balancing out a car you tend to concentrate on the three stages of the corner, having the diff adjustable at those 3 stages independantly is very useful, even without the intervention of TC. They will still be using all the benefits of active diffs independantly of what the ECU limitations will be to maximise traction and stability.

I dont see why you still cant use the ECU to introduce load into the system under braking, it's not a TC system as such, it's just doing what the driver can do when left foot braking anyway. The FIA has mandated what input and output chanels the ECU can use, they will be doing everything posible within the capabailities of those sensor and actuator inputs/outputs, how much interfacing is allowed between the gearbox, clutch and engine will be in the spec of the system, there will be some required.

[D_Mike]

Jungles said:

D_Mike said:

but the diffs were linked into the TC... if one wheel was spinning too much and the other wasn't the diff would transfer the power...

That's what a differential normally does - TC or no TC.

Even in your own car, LSD or clutch-pack diffs will do exactly what you said: transfer power from the wheel that is spinning too much to the wheel that isn't.

TC is just a mechanism to cut back throttle when the driving wheels are spinning at a set % faster than the road.

Edited by Jungles on Wednesday 9th January 00:41

I think my post was worded badly. The TC was capable of predicting when a wheel was about to spin and use the electronic diff to transfer the power before it span!

[Jungles]

D_Mike said:

Jungles said:

D_Mike said:

but the diffs were linked into the TC... if one wheel was spinning too much and the other wasn't the diff would transfer the power...

That's what a differential normally does - TC or no TC.

Even in your own car, LSD or clutch-pack diffs will do exactly what you said: transfer power from the wheel that is spinning too much to the wheel that isn't.

TC is just a mechanism to cut back throttle when the driving wheels are spinning at a set % faster than the road.

Edited by Jungles on Wednesday 9th January 00:41

I think my post was worded badly. The TC was capable of predicting when a wheel was about to spin and use the electronic diff to transfer the power before it span!

Oh right, I see what you mean.

How would a TC system do that, though? Some kind of fuzzy logic software? Predicting when a wheel would spin is pretty hard.

In any case, it's immaterial in this year's season. No TC means no such trickery. Although I'm sure the engineers in some F1 teams will try to explore every loophole they find in the SECU and the SECU-engine interface.

[D_Mike]

Jungles said:

How would a TC system do that, though? Some kind of fuzzy logic software? Predicting when a wheel would spin is pretty hard.

In any case, it's immaterial in this year's season. No TC means no such trickery. Although I'm sure the engineers in some F1 teams will try to explore every loophole they find in the SECU and the SECU-engine interface.

here you go Jungles, thought this was interesting...

said:

For years the ING Renault F1 Team’s engineers worked on programming a system that generated the optimal rate of traction for the rear wheels whatever the conditions: straight, corners, grippe or slippery surfaces, high or low track and tyre temperatures, high or low down force etc. To do this they created a system that measured the speed of the front wheels’ (which not being driven cannot spin) rotation very accurately. Using this information they were able to deduce the optimal speed of the rear wheels. The next stage was to model mathematically with the help of the equations, the car’s handling, and the type of compound used as well as the track surface. When this information was fed into the ECU it was capable of calculating the amount of traction for each rear wheel at any given moment. The engineers’ trickiest job in this process was to model the tyres’ behaviour perfectly. The result: when the car was accelerating the on-board electronics let the engine develop its full power until the sensors picked up the first signs of spinning (101% of the speed at the rear in relation to the front wheels). By playing with the engine’s throttle, ignition and injection in pre-defined sequences, the traction control system allowed the wheels to attain 5% slippage and then maintained that figure. In case there was a difference between the slippage on the right or left-hand wheels, it was corrected by acting on the differential. It meant that the driver could press the accelerator as soon as he reached the apex without asking himself any questions. The power that arrived was always perfectly adapted to provide the rear wheels with maximum grip under reacceleration

from http://www.f1network.net/main/s208/st123092.htm

[Jungles]

What a technologically advanced world we live in.

Thanks for the link.