|
| Site Partners: | SpotterGuides | Veloce Books |
| Related Sites: | Your Link Here |
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
8 Mar 2004, 19:23 (Ref:898414)
|
#1 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,577
 |
So it seems Renault have found a way around the rules...
From Autosport.com
http://www.autosport.com/newsitem.asp?id=26246&s=5 So while they don't have launch control per se they've got a system that can mimic it pretty well. The FIA said it would be impossible to ban TC because you can't 'uninvent' something and that it couldn't be policed as engine mapping technology can mimic it so closely. It appears we have the same problem with launch control and can sadly kiss another key driver skill goodbye. |
||
|
__________________
Brought to you by Glagnar's Human Rinds: "A-bunch-a-munch-crunch-a-human" 
|
|
8 Mar 2004, 19:26 (Ref:898422)
|
#2 | |
|
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
 |
Is this the same type of thing Ferrari supposedly ran in the early rounds of 2001 along with Sauber?
I remember H2F throwing his toys out of the pram because he couldn't overtake Heidfeld at Melbourne! 
Last edited by Knowlesy; 8 Mar 2004 at 19:27. |
|
|
|
|
|
8 Mar 2004, 19:33 (Ref:898431)
|
#3 | ||
 Race Official20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
"Uninvent" is great. The truth is that they don't have or can't develop better techonology to prevent/disable it.
|
||
|
|
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will
|
|
8 Mar 2004, 19:42 (Ref:898447)
|
#4 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 639
|
Its amazing what a good engine mapping programer can do!
As someone said in Melbourne its OK to ban these things but so hard to inforce because the engine mapping control can be programed to do what launch control did anyway.That statement came from teams main man to a group of guests on a pit tour in Melbourne.The team will remain nameless but it certianally raised my eyebrows as well as the rest of the group I was with. The Grumpy1  P.S. The team we were in wasn't Renault either. Last edited by grumpy1; 8 Mar 2004 at 19:43. |
|
|
|
|
|
8 Mar 2004, 21:33 (Ref:898605)
|
#5 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,496
|
Renault haven't found a way around the rules as much as a means of maximising performance within the rules... they can't control the throttle inputs but they can control mixture etc and they have. This may be why they were so effective under traction control and under these regulations they have maintained their advantage. Good on them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 Mar 2004, 21:48 (Ref:898637)
|
#6 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 531
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
8 Mar 2004, 22:13 (Ref:898680)
|
#7 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 639
|
As I said the team shall remain nameless(not the 2 mentioned so far) but the way this team was looking at it if you can have your engine & transmission do x at Y revs in z gear so what? If we can do it so can everyone else and its not illeagal but launch control is.
The Grumpy1
Last edited by grumpy1; 8 Mar 2004 at 22:15. |
|
|
|
|
|
9 Mar 2004, 20:39 (Ref:899925)
|
#8 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 319
|
Shame though isn't it when we all looked forward to race starts by the driver himself. never mind we will just have to let go of the past.
|
||
|
|
|
|
9 Mar 2004, 21:08 (Ref:899959)
|
#9 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,292
|
So Renault can still use launch control by simply re-naming it?
I hear Williams will be using a new system at Sepang called "Pink Jam Truffle Control" to help them with their starts. |
||
|
|
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 14:01 (Ref:900883)
|
#10 | ||
|
Race Official 20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
It doesn't surprise me at all. The name "Briatore" says it all...
|
||
|
|
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 14:25 (Ref:900898)
|
#11 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,598
|
Quote:
Unless you meant that the name Briatore is synonymous with doing things better than the rest - but I don't think you meant that. |
||
|
|
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 15:42 (Ref:900963)
|
#12 | ||
|
Rookie
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 58
|
during the SpeedTV broadcast of the Steve Machett said the Renaults have a new system to "mimic" launch control. Apparently it is a system that senses the exact "bite-point" of the clutch. This way the driver can just mash his foot to the floor, and not have to worry finding the "bite-point" with a cutch pedal or a clutch hand lever.
This was just conjucture from a race broadcaster, not a team offical, so please just take it for what its worth. -xBook |
||
|
|
__________________
"...you mean, like, up this ramp" -Jeff Spicoli "Fast Times at Ridgemont High"
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 16:35 (Ref:901010)
|
#13 | ||
|
Forum Host
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 6,529
|
well the FIA again write rules that can be looped... no surprise...
|
||
|
|
__________________
A byte walks into a bar and orders a pint. Bartender asks him "What's wrong?" Byte says "Parity error." Bartender nods and says "Yeah, I thought you looked a bit off."
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 17:19 (Ref:901049)
|
#14 | |||
|
Race Official 20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
Quote:
I know that all the teams can be doing similar things, but in the end, FIA takes the blame (as I mentioned before) for not being capable -or let it be this way - of supervising the teams. I don't buy that "it's impossible" excuse. Last edited by Bononi; 10 Mar 2004 at 17:23. |
|||
|
|
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 20:06 (Ref:901221)
|
#15 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 639
|
The problems are two fold.
1.The FIA writes a ruling that can be interpreted differently.Until the rule is writen so there is no ambiguity then teams will do as they please so to speak. 2.These chips that control such things are so small and all look the same so they can hide the thing anywhere so how would a scrutiner find it. As this person said it doesn't have to be one chip but can also be a combination of things in the engine mapping so its to hard to control for the scutiners. The Grumpy1
Last edited by grumpy1; 10 Mar 2004 at 20:07. |
|
|
|
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 20:52 (Ref:901267)
|
#16 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 995
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 20:58 (Ref:901280)
|
#17 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 13,211
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
__________________
That's so frickin uncool man!
|
|
10 Mar 2004, 23:27 (Ref:901443)
|
#18 | ||
|
Race Official Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,454
|
How about this for a radical idea. Join the accelerator to a fuel flow device - call it a 'throttle' - by means of a fixed wire, then the amount of fuel that goes in is controlled by how far you press the accelerator down. Nobody in the crowd will be able to spot it's not fly-by-wire so if you don't tell them they won't worry it's not cutting edge technology.
|
||
|
|
__________________
Bill Bryson: It is no longer permitted to be stupid and slow. You must choose one or the other.
|
|
11 Mar 2004, 01:04 (Ref:901489)
|
#19 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5,917
|
Quote:"1.The FIA writes a ruling that can be interpreted differently.Until the rule is writen so there is no ambiguity then teams will do as they please so to speak."
You know, sometimes i'm not quite sure if that's FIA's fault. FIA can't stop something they didn't know exist, and for a sports as complex as F1, it's terribly difficult to write an exact rule to every detail. The thing is that every team knows the intention of the ruling and the (so-called) "spirit" of it. They know what F1 tries to restrict.. and the "different interpretation" is not that teams unwillingly cross the boundry by reading and understanding the rulebook differently. Rather, teams CHOSE to deliberately understand the rules differently. Simply they find loopholes and twist rules to suit them. There's little we can do about it than for rival teams to counter-interprete it to have any breach banned. |
||
|
|
__________________
Alonso: "McLaren and Williams are also great racing teams, but Ferrari is the biggest one that you can go to."
|
|
11 Mar 2004, 02:19 (Ref:901510)
|
#20 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 639
|
I don't disagree GTR with what you say.Far from it in fact.
The rule makers know the teams will find away around these things.Thats part of the game.The only loosers are the smaller teams who can't afford to throw money at things like this.  My point is the rule makers are aware of this and if they were really going to enforce these rules they would employ enginers and IT experts to find these devices.They would also write the rule so there was one interpritation only otherwise the rule is not worth the paper its written on.  The Grumpy1
Last edited by grumpy1; 11 Mar 2004 at 02:21. |
|
|
|
|
|
11 Mar 2004, 02:32 (Ref:901513)
|
#21 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,083
|
Allowing TC while banning LC was allways an odd thing to do.
I guess the whole point of it all was to eliminate the potentially dangerous situations where the cars was triggered by the driver and everything left to the software. It should be abit safer now...so that's good |
||
|
|
|
|
11 Mar 2004, 18:10 (Ref:902208)
|
#22 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,292
|
Well as long as Microsoft didn't write the software it should be OK.
|
||
|
|
|
|
12 Mar 2004, 13:15 (Ref:903203)
|
#23 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5,917
|
Grumpy, the thing is F1 is like a cat and mouse game. The cat tries to catch the mouse, the mouse can run into any crack and come out again out of sight from another end away from the cat..
FIA can hire loads of engineers, no doubt. But the thing is that the "better" engineers would usually be targetted by the other teams, who probably offer better pay and everything else to work for them. So end up, we'd have a case of having good engineers in FIA vs brilliant engineers in teams. And again, the brilliant engineers would find a way out. Furthermore, it's difficult for FIA to pre-empt every move team makes, the teams simply spend more to squeeze and twist rules even more. FIA is threading a very thin line of being in control, or over-restrictive with F1 developement. The only good thing now is that we have "internal control", where teams would spend money/manpower to figure if another team cheats. FIA simply sits back and wait for somebody to come up with evidence. True, as the authority of F1, FIA had shown their inability to keep F1 participants in check. However, it is a harder task than we make it seem. |
||
|
|
__________________
Alonso: "McLaren and Williams are also great racing teams, but Ferrari is the biggest one that you can go to."
|
|
12 Mar 2004, 14:52 (Ref:903314)
|
#24 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 13,000
|
Well done to Renault for creating perhaps the best posisble legal starting system, and giving viewers (not to mention the other teams) a major surprise at the start. They've done nothing wrong, and clearly studied the rules in great detail.
|
||
|
|
|
|
12 Mar 2004, 15:02 (Ref:903331)
|
#25 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 736
|
Surely if 'launch control' has been banned ANY 'starting system' is illegal?
Controlling'mixture, to reduce power at the start is launch control. Electonically taking over the clutch operation is launch control. I have never known a group of people so incapable of agreeing, setting and policing rules!! No wonder F1 continues to implode. |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Found It!!! | Skam85 | Formula One | 4 | 3 Jun 2004 12:10 |
| I Found It-ntcc!!! | kmchow | Touring Car Racing | 10 | 24 Jul 2002 07:11 |
Linear Mode
