All four wheels off the circuit. Why don't they.....
Discussion
.......do what they do at Bedford Autodrome?
At Palmersport they have sensors in the white lines marking the edges of the various tracks they have there for the faster cars.
If your car goes over the white line, power is cut from the engine, meaning obviously that you slow down.
Surely it would be possible to do it at various corners on GP tracks, in particular La Source for instance at Spa.
Yes, you can leave the circuit to avoid an incident, buy you WILL lose some time. Surely better than letting people get away with a gamble or, just as bad, nailing them with a drive through..
I realise cost may be an issue, but once fitted, I amagine they are maintenance free and they must cost a lot less than Singapores 3million watt lighting system.
At Palmersport they have sensors in the white lines marking the edges of the various tracks they have there for the faster cars.
If your car goes over the white line, power is cut from the engine, meaning obviously that you slow down.
Surely it would be possible to do it at various corners on GP tracks, in particular La Source for instance at Spa.
Yes, you can leave the circuit to avoid an incident, buy you WILL lose some time. Surely better than letting people get away with a gamble or, just as bad, nailing them with a drive through..
I realise cost may be an issue, but once fitted, I amagine they are maintenance free and they must cost a lot less than Singapores 3million watt lighting system.
Nice idea, never heard of that before. How reliable are the systems? I can't see a happy situation happening if a cut out system kicks in, and then doesn't restart or glitches the car. The universal tech in F1 already, like refuelling systems, isn't the most reliable thing in the world. It could also be used for 'the powers of evil' if you forced somebody wide so their engine powered down on a straight or something.
I can hear the dulcet tones of Mark Webber complaining already from here!
I can hear the dulcet tones of Mark Webber complaining already from here!
PhillipM said:
How about, a barrier, some gravel, or some grass.
Radical I know, but it worked for the previous 50 years.
Not on street circuits it hasn't.Radical I know, but it worked for the previous 50 years.
The idea is to keep cars in the race rather than with barriers which generally have a long lasting detrimental effect on a cars performance.
I think the technology is pretty basic and need not cut power completely, just reduce it by, say 50%.
andygo said:
PhillipM said:
How about, a barrier, some gravel, or some grass.
Radical I know, but it worked for the previous 50 years.
Not on street circuits it hasn't.Radical I know, but it worked for the previous 50 years.
The idea is to keep cars in the race rather than with barriers which generally have a long lasting detrimental effect on a cars performance.
I think the technology is pretty basic and need not cut power completely, just reduce it by, say 50%.
Or get rid of all these s
tty street circuits, Monaco is the only one worth keeping...Edited by PhillipM on Sunday 27th September 17:42
I understand the points against, but it would have helped Webber when he was hung out to dry by alonso. Cost him 2 places and would probably have slowed Alonso down as he went off to a degree as well.
Surely its better to keep cars in contention. And there's no reason why you can't keep gravel traps and armco for the terminally unfortunate or brave....
Surely its better to keep cars in contention. And there's no reason why you can't keep gravel traps and armco for the terminally unfortunate or brave....
Project 644 said:
The palmers system is GPS based. There are no sensors in the white lines.
I'd be surprised if it could be that accurate (in terms of location and speed of update) using GPS - I know GPS can be very very accurate (since that was what it was designed for in the first place 
) but to keep up with fast moving race cars in real time 
llewop said:
Project 644 said:
The palmers system is GPS based. There are no sensors in the white lines.
I'd be surprised if it could be that accurate (in terms of location and speed of update) using GPS - I know GPS can be very very accurate (since that was what it was designed for in the first place ) but to keep up with fast moving race cars in real time llewop said:
Project 644 said:
The palmers system is GPS based. There are no sensors in the white lines.
I'd be surprised if it could be that accurate (in terms of location and speed of update) using GPS - I know GPS can be very very accurate (since that was what it was designed for in the first place ) but to keep up with fast moving race cars in real time i kinda like the kerbs, the high ones. you can only go over them so much before the car gets broken...so you either stay on the track, or you don't get to finish.
obviously only near the apex though. a driver who makes an error and misses the corner/runs wide should know that if he ends up ahead then he has to concede the place
obviously only near the apex though. a driver who makes an error and misses the corner/runs wide should know that if he ends up ahead then he has to concede the place
tank slapper said:
llewop said:
Project 644 said:
The palmers system is GPS based. There are no sensors in the white lines.
I'd be surprised if it could be that accurate (in terms of location and speed of update) using GPS - I know GPS can be very very accurate (since that was what it was designed for in the first place ) but to keep up with fast moving race cars in real time +/- 1m left or right of a curb is quite a bit for the F1 world! even apart from the fact that even in a slow corner they will travel forward a few metres every 10th of a second.
To run a locator system on a circuit for the purposes of policing infringements would have to be better than that! Look at the years it has taken to get tennis to adopt Hawkeye tech - and they only have a few lines and a ball, not several miles of circult perimeter and 20+ cars!
I was thinking someone was going to say that Palmer had a GPS basestation to provide better location and sub metre accuracy.... (which could be true and I'll
)I should have added that with differential receivers GPS accuracy is down to centimetres. F1 has enough cash that the cost is insignificant.
The other aspect is that although at 180mph a car travels 8 metres in 1/10th of a second, the direction of travel is largely predictable - a car isn't going to be reversing direction in between 2 samples for example, so with software it would be quite feasible to come up with a system that would work.
In my opinion, I'd rather see it left to the drivers.
The other aspect is that although at 180mph a car travels 8 metres in 1/10th of a second, the direction of travel is largely predictable - a car isn't going to be reversing direction in between 2 samples for example, so with software it would be quite feasible to come up with a system that would work.
In my opinion, I'd rather see it left to the drivers.
tank slapper said:
I should have added that with differential receivers GPS accuracy is down to centimetres. F1 has enough cash that the cost is insignificant.
The other aspect is that although at 180mph a car travels 8 metres in 1/10th of a second, the direction of travel is largely predictable - a car isn't going to be reversing direction in between 2 samples for example, so with software it would be quite feasible to come up with a system that would work.
In my opinion, I'd rather see it left to the drivers.
it was differential receivers I was thinking of - on my current project we've used that technology to get cm level accuracy of buildings surveyed (including aerial survey) - but doing that with things that are stationary is easier than cars at up to 8 m/s! The other aspect is that although at 180mph a car travels 8 metres in 1/10th of a second, the direction of travel is largely predictable - a car isn't going to be reversing direction in between 2 samples for example, so with software it would be quite feasible to come up with a system that would work.
In my opinion, I'd rather see it left to the drivers.
The problem is not 'leaving it to the drivers' but that it is the stewards that decide...inconsistently! It could be argued that Alonso left the track too (Webber's defence...) but since he lost a place to Glock, tricky to argue he got an advantage from it!
I would be more than happy with a system of fair and even handed stewards that judged each event (quickly to ensure action was taken within the timeframe of the race - so the guy crossing the line first was the winner...) in an objective and sensible way. However..... we are where we are
llewop said:
The problem is not 'leaving it to the drivers' but that it is the stewards that decide...inconsistently! It could be argued that Alonso left the track too (Webber's defence...) but since he lost a place to Glock, tricky to argue he got an advantage from it!
I meant that the control of the car should be only down to the drivers. I'd rather not see any mechanisms interfering with the car, be it to intervene in the contravention of rules or to aid the driver in controlling the car.Having stewards that are fit for purpose is a different matter, but that gets done to death on here already.
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff