a thought about technology in F1...
Discussion
I was watching an interesting programme the other night on one of the National Geographical channels about the Red Arrows. It followed a group of RAF pilots who've piloted some of the finest and most technically advanced jet fighters in the world today. They were all going through a series of tests to make the grade to become a Red Arrow pilot.
I'm sure most of you have at some point seen the Red Arrows performing their stunning routines and I for one have always stood in amazement at their control and discipline as they pull off maneuvers that leave you wanting more...
Well these RAF pilots had several tests to undertaken, written, oral and of course several flights in the now iconic Red Arrow jet - the Hawk T1. What was interesting to listen to was the comments these guys were making about the Red Arrows. These are men who've flown some of the most advanced electronically controlled jets in the world, yet they felt that being a member of the Red Arrows and being able to show their skills in the Hawk T1 was the most important thing in their lives. To fly the Hawk T1 was the ultimate, the pinnacle achievement of any RAF pilot’s career in their eyes.
You have to remember here that the Hawk T1 is not some state-of-the-art jet fighter, it's an old horse to be polite, but it requires the pilot to have 100% control of the jet, no computers here to help you out of a problem like the stunning new Typhoon (what was once dubbed the Eurofighter). As one pilot said, the Hawk T1 is a pilot’s jet - kind of how we might say a certain car is a driver’s car...
So what I'm trying to say here, is that we have often had many discussions on this and other forums about the pinnacle of motor sport, ie F1, being more technically advanced than any other formula, yet many of us who feel that the driver should have full control of the car are often said to be harking back to the old days that are long gone.
The question therefore is, if cutting edge RAF fighter pilots feel that the Hawk T1 is the pinnacle of their profession, despite far more technically advanced equipment being so close at hand, why couldn't we bring back the skill of the driver as the most important aspect of F1 in today's arena with cars devoid of all the electronic gadgets that do nothing to improve the show. So what if these gadgets are now common place in other motor sport disciplines, the idea here is that F1 is about the interaction between car and driver, not car, then computer engineer and finally the driver!
It is well documented that one of the finest ‘drivers’ of our time, the late and legendary Senna did not like the increasing reliance on electronic aids in F1. I wonder how many racing drivers today would relish the chance to take full control of the car, just as those pilots would do anything to get behind the cockpit of a Hawk T1?
It's an interesting thought...
I'm sure most of you have at some point seen the Red Arrows performing their stunning routines and I for one have always stood in amazement at their control and discipline as they pull off maneuvers that leave you wanting more...
Well these RAF pilots had several tests to undertaken, written, oral and of course several flights in the now iconic Red Arrow jet - the Hawk T1. What was interesting to listen to was the comments these guys were making about the Red Arrows. These are men who've flown some of the most advanced electronically controlled jets in the world, yet they felt that being a member of the Red Arrows and being able to show their skills in the Hawk T1 was the most important thing in their lives. To fly the Hawk T1 was the ultimate, the pinnacle achievement of any RAF pilot’s career in their eyes.
You have to remember here that the Hawk T1 is not some state-of-the-art jet fighter, it's an old horse to be polite, but it requires the pilot to have 100% control of the jet, no computers here to help you out of a problem like the stunning new Typhoon (what was once dubbed the Eurofighter). As one pilot said, the Hawk T1 is a pilot’s jet - kind of how we might say a certain car is a driver’s car...
So what I'm trying to say here, is that we have often had many discussions on this and other forums about the pinnacle of motor sport, ie F1, being more technically advanced than any other formula, yet many of us who feel that the driver should have full control of the car are often said to be harking back to the old days that are long gone.
The question therefore is, if cutting edge RAF fighter pilots feel that the Hawk T1 is the pinnacle of their profession, despite far more technically advanced equipment being so close at hand, why couldn't we bring back the skill of the driver as the most important aspect of F1 in today's arena with cars devoid of all the electronic gadgets that do nothing to improve the show. So what if these gadgets are now common place in other motor sport disciplines, the idea here is that F1 is about the interaction between car and driver, not car, then computer engineer and finally the driver!
It is well documented that one of the finest ‘drivers’ of our time, the late and legendary Senna did not like the increasing reliance on electronic aids in F1. I wonder how many racing drivers today would relish the chance to take full control of the car, just as those pilots would do anything to get behind the cockpit of a Hawk T1?
It's an interesting thought...
I think I've seen that on BBC2. It sounds very much like the same show.
I got the impression that they wanted to fly the Red Arrows not because of the plane but because of the prestige associated with flying in that group, being in the public eye and the respect from their peers rather than the quality of the plane. Proving themselves in the Hawk is not so much proving themselves in the plane, but against the others who are in the Red Arrows and achieving the respect of the public.
This is much the same as F1 really - the most popular, most lucrative, most respected and perceived as the pinnacle via its commercial success with the public. And thus it doesn't matter what kind of plane they fly or car they drive as long as they can achieve this variant or perception of success.
Ir I recall, one of the applicants is/had already flown a Hawk in a different squadron so it didn't seem to be the Hawk he was lusting after.
I got the impression that they wanted to fly the Red Arrows not because of the plane but because of the prestige associated with flying in that group, being in the public eye and the respect from their peers rather than the quality of the plane. Proving themselves in the Hawk is not so much proving themselves in the plane, but against the others who are in the Red Arrows and achieving the respect of the public.
This is much the same as F1 really - the most popular, most lucrative, most respected and perceived as the pinnacle via its commercial success with the public. And thus it doesn't matter what kind of plane they fly or car they drive as long as they can achieve this variant or perception of success.
Ir I recall, one of the applicants is/had already flown a Hawk in a different squadron so it didn't seem to be the Hawk he was lusting after.
I don't mean to generalise, but desire has a lot to do with it.
From an outsiders perspective I'd much rather fly a Typhoon / F16 than a Hawk, much like I'd rather drive an F1 car over an F3 car, even if the F3 car is the more pure experience.
The advances in F1 not only make it the peak of motorsport, but also far more interesting to watch to someone like me (a geek) than a sport like Nascar.
I agree things like ABS and TC have no place in F1, but the overall analogy of at Typhoon VS Hawk is flawed IMHO.
From an outsiders perspective I'd much rather fly a Typhoon / F16 than a Hawk, much like I'd rather drive an F1 car over an F3 car, even if the F3 car is the more pure experience.
The advances in F1 not only make it the peak of motorsport, but also far more interesting to watch to someone like me (a geek) than a sport like Nascar.
I agree things like ABS and TC have no place in F1, but the overall analogy of at Typhoon VS Hawk is flawed IMHO.
Agree with jon- about the flawed analogy.
I'm quite sure that the Hawk is better from a purity of flying, knowing you are in control of your own immediate fate with nothing more than knowledge, experience and skill between you and a fiery doom.
However, ask the same pilots where they'd rather be when the bullets start flying and the plane is actually doing what it has been bought for....
Same with F1. If it was all about driver skill, you might as well put them all in Kia Sedonas and let them loose on the Top Gear track.
I'm quite sure that the Hawk is better from a purity of flying, knowing you are in control of your own immediate fate with nothing more than knowledge, experience and skill between you and a fiery doom.
However, ask the same pilots where they'd rather be when the bullets start flying and the plane is actually doing what it has been bought for....
Same with F1. If it was all about driver skill, you might as well put them all in Kia Sedonas and let them loose on the Top Gear track.
Whilst I agree with a lot of what you say we also have to account for the fact that F1 is meant to be the panicle of both the professions of racing driver and racing car designer.
Sadly, in the eyes of some, this results in an unhappy marriage of wants. It is easier to design a car that will gain you 10 seconds a lap (rule permitting) than to find a driver who is 10 seconds a lap faster. Therefore so long as you have a Drivers and Constructors World Championship in the same series you will never be able to ascertain if one driver it truly X seconds a lap faster than another, save when it comes to team mates, but even then the potential variables can men direct comparison is impossible.
On the other hand if you are asking would I be interested in seeing a race series where all the best drivers are honing around the greatest race tracks in the World in all but identical mid-70’s designs, I look forward to the first race of the Porsche 917/30 World Championship
Edited by rude-boy on Wednesday 12th September 13:40
I agree that electronic driver aids should be banned. 2008 regs are a good step toward this with TC effectively outlawed again. It doesn't mean the cars have to be outdated though. Nothing wrong with a state of the art chassis, engine, drivetrain etc. Just as long as the driver is manually controlling the car, rather than being a partial passenger. As one current F1 driver said to me a couple of years back when discussing TC "any muppet can drive a modern F1 car from apex to exit".
Colin McRae hated driving WRC cars, as capable as they are. He wanted the FIA to change the rules, to allow cars with mid-engined normally aspirated V6s, manual transmissions, passive diffs. Basically modern Metro 6R4s, that would be fantastic to watch, sound amazing, and be a challenge to drive.
I'm a huge fan of McRae's and a huge fan of rallying. I can't stand the modern WRC and think he was right on the money. As interesting as the modern cars are from a technological point-of-view they've sanitised the sport.
I do clubman rallies in my little 106 Rallye. I've got lots of mates who rally in all kinds of cars, although most commonly Mk2 Escorts. None of us watch the WRC on the TV, though strangely we all watch F1. And that's where my argument falls apart, because there's just no logic to that, is there?!
I'm a huge fan of McRae's and a huge fan of rallying. I can't stand the modern WRC and think he was right on the money. As interesting as the modern cars are from a technological point-of-view they've sanitised the sport.
I do clubman rallies in my little 106 Rallye. I've got lots of mates who rally in all kinds of cars, although most commonly Mk2 Escorts. None of us watch the WRC on the TV, though strangely we all watch F1. And that's where my argument falls apart, because there's just no logic to that, is there?!
I did some driving on the Minardi 2 seater F1 experience days - unfortunately not the F1 car - but I was taking passengers out for laps and donuts etc in a Caterham R500 - everyone enjoyed the R500 more than the Minardi !
but probably because i was more of a hooligan
but probably because i was more of a hooligan
jon- said:
I don't mean to generalise, but desire has a lot to do with it.
From an outsiders perspective I'd much rather fly a Typhoon / F16 than a Hawk, much like I'd rather drive an F1 car over an F3 car, even if the F3 car is the more pure experience.
The advances in F1 not only make it the peak of motorsport, but also far more interesting to watch to someone like me (a geek) than a sport like Nascar.
I agree things like ABS and TC have no place in F1, but the overall analogy of at Typhoon VS Hawk is flawed IMHO.
From an outsiders perspective I'd much rather fly a Typhoon / F16 than a Hawk, much like I'd rather drive an F1 car over an F3 car, even if the F3 car is the more pure experience.
The advances in F1 not only make it the peak of motorsport, but also far more interesting to watch to someone like me (a geek) than a sport like Nascar.
I agree things like ABS and TC have no place in F1, but the overall analogy of at Typhoon VS Hawk is flawed IMHO.
Gilles Villeneuve was right when he said he just wanted to drive big engined, low downforce F1 cars with Huge Slick, i.e. most of the grip from Mechanical means. No Electronic's. Something like we had back in about 1990. Cars were modern, relatively big engines (not these micky mouse screems (had proer torque)), PHat Slick, wide track and a few year before all te decived came in (TC with Beneton et al in 94 and Active ala Lotus and Williams).
That is what we need but with manaufacturers able to build new chassis and engine to these rules.
Anything that get between the driver and him actually controlling the car is UTTER UTTER JUNK.
TC , ABS, Active, etc and the like is the Bast*rds Spawn. Has no right to be in any level of Motorsport.
That is what we need but with manaufacturers able to build new chassis and engine to these rules.
Anything that get between the driver and him actually controlling the car is UTTER UTTER JUNK.
TC , ABS, Active, etc and the like is the Bast*rds Spawn. Has no right to be in any level of Motorsport.
RT106 said:
Colin McRae hated driving WRC cars, as capable as they are. He wanted the FIA to change the rules, to allow cars with mid-engined normally aspirated V6s, manual transmissions, passive diffs. Basically modern Metro 6R4s, that would be fantastic to watch, sound amazing, and be a challenge to drive.
Why did he continue to drive WRC cars if he hated them?Or by WRC are you excluding Grp A rally cars?
zac510 said:
RT106 said:
Colin McRae hated driving WRC cars, as capable as they are. He wanted the FIA to change the rules, to allow cars with mid-engined normally aspirated V6s, manual transmissions, passive diffs. Basically modern Metro 6R4s, that would be fantastic to watch, sound amazing, and be a challenge to drive.
Why did he continue to drive WRC cars if he hated them?Or by WRC are you excluding Grp A rally cars?
I hope Spa will bring out the Best in the Dull current cars - hoping for more than more than one good overtake! Mind recording it as I will be doing something where there will actually be overtaking!
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff