If Ayrton Senna was a young driver today..

Housey said:
I do, which is why I don't base my comments on a single source and certainly not from snippets that you seem to be basing it on. To simply state the FIA found nothing in itself is wrong as it is to state it's utter rubbish, as that simply shows you have limited knowledge yourself.
Click to expand...

fia concluded it hadnt been used.....

maybe you believe sennas ears though and thats your single source :rolleyes:

nevermind all the video evidence that indicates there was no traction control
 
arknor, for the love of God get a grip....

I'm not sure anyone, outside of the truly rabid fanboys that seem to somehow retain their freedom in society, truly believes that the Benetton B194 was entirely legal and above board. Of course it wasn't. You don't just leave mysterious redundant launch control codes in ECUs by accident - they weren't redundant at all. And it's not as if the team was staffed by entirely trustworthy individuals....*cough*Flav*cough*.

Does this lessen Schumacher's achievement of winning the '94 title? I don't know. Maybe. He did have a rough time with officialdom that year anyway (penalty for overtaking on the formation lap, really? :rolleyes:). And I guess the way the year ended overshadows pretty much everything else. Did he answer pretty much all of his critics by winning so convincingly in '95? Certainly did in my opinion, though he was still a little rough around the edges even then.
 
JRS said:
arknor, for the love of God get a grip....

I'm not sure anyone, outside of the truly rabid fanboys that seem to somehow retain their freedom in society, truly believes that the Benetton B194 was entirely legal and above board. Of course it wasn't. You don't just leave mysterious redundant launch control codes in ECUs by accident - they weren't redundant at all. And it's not as if the team was staffed by entirely trustworthy individuals....*cough*Flav*cough*.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure if you look further than wiki or schumihaters.com then you will find McLaren and Ferrari also had these redundant commands on the car, but they are not focused on because they were not driven by Schumi or winning races :)
 
JRS said:
(penalty for overtaking on the formation lap, really? :rolleyes:)
Click to expand...

Its a rule everyone knows about, yet he deliberately broke it. Then deliberately ignored the penalty for breaking it, then deliberately ignored the penalty for ignoring the penalty. The ban was was action against the attitude he had, rather than the offence itself. Something the FIA should start doing again with certain drivers....
 
JRS said:
arknor, for the love of God get a grip....

I'm not sure anyone, outside of the truly rabid fanboys that seem to somehow retain their freedom in society, truly believes that the Benetton B194 was entirely legal and above board. Of course it wasn't. You don't just leave mysterious redundant launch control codes in ECUs by accident - they weren't redundant at all. And it's not as if the team was staffed by entirely trustworthy individuals....*cough*Flav*cough*.

Does this lessen Schumacher's achievement of winning the '94 title? I don't know. Maybe. He did have a rough time with officialdom that year anyway (penalty for overtaking on the formation lap, really? :rolleyes:). And I guess the way the year ended overshadows pretty much everything else. Did he answer pretty much all of his critics by winning so convincingly in '95? Certainly did in my opinion, though he was still a little rough around the edges even then.
Click to expand...
you do relaise who made the ecu in the benneton right? this maybe explains why they couldnt remove the code right? the facts are the rest of the equipment needed for the traction control code to work were never found on the car.

video evidence suggests there was never any traction control during races

traction control just kicked in yo...

it wasnt even traction control the fia said the code was for it was launch control but it was more sensational for the media to call it traction control...

theres still videos fo schumacher having poor starts that season with tons of wheelspin off the grid
 
Last edited:
This thread makes me want to watch Senna again!

If Senna was in F1 today, do you think he would allow the PR gag to be put on him like so many other drivers? Or would he be one of the few who openly voice their opinions?
 
This is the same Senna who very publicly got into a war with the president of the FIA and came out with his superlicense intact. I don't think he would be one to keep quiet if he was around now ;)
 
Skeeter said:
Its a rule everyone knows about, yet he deliberately broke it. Then deliberately ignored the penalty for breaking it, then deliberately ignored the penalty for ignoring the penalty. The ban was was action against the attitude he had, rather than the offence itself. Something the FIA should start doing again with certain drivers....
Click to expand...

He was told to ignore it by his team as they told him the black flag was a mistake and he served a penalty in race, he never ignored it because of his attitude in the slightest, but again facts are thin or non existent when you speak about Schumacher.
 
arknor said:
fia concluded it hadnt been used.....

maybe you believe sennas ears though and thats your single source :rolleyes:

nevermind all the video evidence that indicates there was no traction control
Click to expand...

First of all, please grow up and stop with your childish silly eyes, I'm not some child you're conversing with. You also have no idea where I am taking my sources from either, so stop trying to make disparaging comments as to where you feel they are coming from.

It is apparent to me you are simply taking your sources from your obviously limited knowledge. The FIA report disclosed it was present though they chose to take Bennettons word for it that is wasn't used, so hardly clear, but again this is simply one aspect you need to consider. I suggest you stop being so adamant about stuff you obviously have limited knowledge about. I have a couple of mates who worked for F1 teams, some back in 94. I was also working for a software company selling ERP software and I had F1 teams as customers and got to know many people working within them. Now you can believe what you wish, but please don't try and dismiss me as some 15 year old taking his knowledge from YouTube and Wikipedia, it makes you look petulant. I don't pretend to be the world source of wisdom on motorsport for I am most certainly not, but I promise you my knowledge and today connections with the sport lead me to have a broader knowledge than most people and perhaps provide a perspective you are lacking.

I don't don fanboyism, I criticise and praise where I think it due and if you think this is me trying to discredit Shumacher to elevate Senna you are wrong, but perhaps that's the way your mind works...
 
And my last word on the subject so as not to take this any further off topic, but for clarity

"PRESS RELEASE FROM THE FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DE L'AUTOMOBILE (FIA)

According to LDRA Ltd., the company appointed by the FIA to investigate Formula One electronic systems, the best evidence is that Benetton Formula Ltd. was not using "launch control" (an automatic start system) at the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix. Had the evidence proved they were, the World Motor Sport Council would have been invited to exclude them from the World Championship. Given the evidence available, such a course of action would obviously have been wrong.

To avoid speculation, the report of the FIA Formula One Technical Delegate submitted to the World Motor Sport Council on 26 July is attached

Hockenheim, 29 July 1994

Report by the FIA Formula One Technical Delegate on the investigations carried out on the electrical systems on Car Number 5 in the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix.


An investigation into the software used in the computer systems of the cars finishing in the first three places at the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix was undertaken by Liverpool Data Research Associates Ltd. (LDRA).

LDRA is a company which specializes in the analysis, validation and verification of highly complex computer software such as that used in modern civilian and military aircraft and a wide range of safety critical applications.

On race day (1st May 1994), each of the teams was requested to supply the source code* for the software on board the car and schematic circuit diagrams of the electrical system. (Appendix 1 )

One team complied in full with this request and a demonstration of the complete electrical system was set up with entirely satisfactory results.

Having received nothing from the other two teams, a fax was sent on 9th May (Appendix 2) asking for urgent action.

An alternative suggestion was received from Benetton Formula Ltd. In this letter dated 10th May (Appendix 3), they stated the source codes could not be made available for commercial reasons.

In a fax to Benetton Formula dated 15th May (Appendix 4), we accepted this proposal, on the condition that Article 2.6 of the Technical Regulations was satisfied.

On 27th May we received a detailed program for the demonstration at Cosworth Engineering. (Appendix 5)

The tests which were scheduled to take place on 28th June were canceled, by Benetton, after some discussion between Ford and themselves concerning non-disclosure agreements

By a fax dated 28th June, we again requested the tests take place as a matter of urgency. (Appendix 6)

The demonstration and tests took place on 6th July. We received a report from LDRA on 11th July (Appendix 7) which left a number of unanswered questions which we were advised could only be addressed by close examination of the source code.

In a letter to Benetton dated 13th July (Appendix 8) we made it clear the demonstration had been unsatisfactory and we required the source code for the software.

Following another exchange of letters on the 13th and 14th July (Appendices 9 and 10) a meeting was set up at the Benetton factory on 19th July, an agenda for which was received on 18th July (Appendix 11) which gave our advisors full access to all the source code, but only on Benetton's premises and subject to the instructions set out in Appendix 11.

Analysis of this software, which had been used at the San Marino Grand Prix, revealed that it included a facility called "launch control". This is a system which, when armed, allows the driver to initiate a start with a single action. The system will control the clutch, gear shift and engine speed fully automatically to a predetermined pattern.

Benetton stated that this system is used only during testing. Benetton further stated that "it (the system) can only be switched on by recompilation of the code". This means recompilation of the source code. Detailed analysis by the LDRA experts of this complex code revealed that this statement was untrue. "Launch control" could in fact be switched on using a lap-top personal computer (PC) connected to the gearbox control unit (GCU).

When confronted with this information, the Benetton representatives conceded that it was possible to switch on the "launch control" using a lap-top PC but indicated that the availability of this feature of the software came as a surprise to them.

In order to enable "launch control", a particular menu with ten options, has to be selected on the PC screen. "Launch control" is not visibly listed as an option. The menu was so arranged that, after ten items, nothing further appeared. If however, the operator scrolled down the menu beyond the tenth listed option, to option 13, launch control can be enabled, even though this is not visible on the screen. No satisfactory explanation was offered for this apparent attempt to conceal the feature.

Two conditions had to be satisfied before the computer would apply "launch control": First, the software had to be enabled either by recompiling the code, which would take some minutes, or by connecting the lap-top PC as outlined above, which could be done in a matter of seconds.

Secondly, the driver had to work through a particular sequence of up-down gear shift paddle positions, a specific gear position had to be selected and the clutch and throttle pedals had also to be in certain positions. Only if all these actions were carried out would the "launch control" become available.

Having thus initiated "launch control", the driver would be able to make a fully automatic start. Such a start is clearly a driver aid as it operates the clutch, changes gear and uses traction control by modulating engine power (by changing ignition or fuel settings), in response to wheel speed.

When asked why, if this system was only used in testing, such an elaborate procedure was necessary in order to switch it on, we were told it was to prevent it being switched on accidentally.

A full copy of the LDRA report of the 9 July meeting can be seen in Appendix 12.

In the circumstances, I am not satisfied in accordance with Article 2.6 of the Formula One Technical Regulations that car number 5 (M.Schumacher) complied with the Regulations at all times during the San Marino Grand Prix and I therefore submit this matter to the World Council for their consideration.

Charlie Whiting FIA Formula One Technical Delegate "
Click to expand...

Another perspective, no more.

"At the French Grand Prix in late June, Schumacher beat Hill off the line with a start so flawless that it hardened the suspicions lurking in many minds. This was the kind of getaway that had been seen many times in the previous two seasons, when the top teams had enjoyed the benefits of the now proscibed traction control systems and fully automatic gearboxes.

"Announcing its ban on most kinds of computed-contolled devices, the FIA had been loud in its insistence that the new regulations would be regularly and strictly policed. And in July, shortly after the British Grand Prix, the FIA's technical comission produced the findings from a software analysis company, LDRA of Liverpool, which it had hired to conduct its spot checks into the computed programs being used by three teams: Ferrari, McLaren and Benetton.

"To enable these checks to be made, the teams had first to agree to surrender their source codes: the means to acces their computed programs.Ferrari, spooked by the unpunished discovery of their use of a variation on traction control at Aida, readily complied; their cars were found to be clean. McLaren and Benetton, however, refused to produce the source codes, claiming that to do so would first compromise their commercial confidentiality and second infringe the intellectual copywright' of their software suppliers. When it was pointed out to them that the LDRA is often enlisted by the British government to look into military software whose confidentiality is covered by the Official Secrets Act and carries weightier consequences than a silver cup, a few bottles of champagne and the further inflation of a few already oversixed egos, they gave in.

"Both teams were fined $100,000 for attempting to obstruct the course of justice. Andm when the findings emerged, both appeared to have something to hide. In McLaren's case it was a gearbox program permitting automatic shifts. After much deliberating, and to the surprise of many, the FIA eventually decided that this was not illegal. But Benetton had something far more exciting up their sleeves.

"When LDRA's people finally got into the B194's computer software, they discovered a hidden program, and it was dynamite: something which allowed Schumacher to make perfect starts merely by flooring the throttle and holding it there, the computed taking over to determine the correct matching od gear-changes to engine speed, ensuring that the car reached the first corner in the least possible time, with no wheel spin or sideslip, all its energy concentrated into a forward motion. Before the winter, this combination of traction control and gearbox automation would have been legal. Now, although explicitly outlawed by the regulations, it was still there. If you knew how to find it. Because it was invisible.

"It took even LDRA's people a while. What you had to do was call up the software's menu of programs, scroll down beyond the bottom line, put the cursor on an apparently blank line, press a particular key (no clues to that, either) - and, hey presto, without anything showing on the screen, the special program was there.

"They called it 'launch control', and LDRA's computer detectives also discovered the means by which the driver could activate it on his way to the starting grid. It involves a sequence of commands using the throttle and clutch pedals and the gear-shift 'paddles' under the steering wheel. Benetton couldn't deny it's existence, but they did claim that it hadn't been used since it had been banned. So why was it still there, and why had its existence been so carefully disguised?

"It had remained in the software, they said, because to remove it would be too difficult. The danger was that in the purging of one program, others might become corrupted. Best to leave it be. But, so that the driver couldn't accidentally engage it and thereby unintentionally break the new rules, 'launch control' had been hidden carefully away behind a series of masking procedures.

"'That's enough to make me believe they were cheating,' an experienced software programmer with another Formula One team told me. 'Look, we purged out own software of all illegal systems during the winter. I did it myself. OK, our car isn't quite as sophisticated as the Benetton. But it only took me two days. That's all. Perfectly straightforward. And the fact that they disguised it was very suspicious.'

"Then he told me the most interesting thing I had heard all year.

"Here's what you do, he said, if you really want to get away with something. You write an illegal program - an offspring of traction conrtol, say, such as a prescription for rev limits in each gear for a particulat circuit - and you build into it a seld-liquidating facility. This is how it works. The car leaves the pits before the race without the program in its software. The driver stops the car on the grid, and gets out. His race engineer comes up and, as they do in the pre-race period before the grid is cleared, he plugs his little laptop computer into the car - and presses the key that downloads the illegal program. For the next hour and a half the driver makes unresticted use of it. Thanks to its efficience, he wins the race. He takes his lap of honour, he drives back down the pit lane, he steers through the cheering crowds into parc ferme where the scrutineers are waiting to establish the winning cars legality, and he switches off the engine. And the program disappears, leaving not a trace of its existence.

"'It's easy,' the software man said. 'In fact we use it all the time in testing, when we just want to try something out without having it hanging around to clutter up the system. And its just about impossible to police. The FIA came round the teams early in the season, asking advice on what to do. But they're totally out of their depth here, not surprisingly. It's like crime. There's always more at stake for the criminals than for the police, so the criminals are always a step ahead. It's a nightmare, really.'"



*Extract from 'The death of Ayrton Senna', Richard Williams. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Click to expand...

I use these purely because they were easy to source and quickly, but I have other peoples views that suggest it was present and whether it is called traction or launch control the process is the same. The reality is that someone people are adamant it was present, there are many who dismiss it and who you believe is based on the individual and your sources. ALL F1 teams cheat, ALL motorsport teams cheat, it's what the sport is built up on the talented ones hide it well.
 
sr4470 said:
Like Senna?
Click to expand...

Uh....when have I ever spoken ill of Senna? Hell, I seem to recall having to defend him on occasion - and if any driver shouldn't need defending, it's him!

As for the Ligier JS43 - it was an evolution of the JS41, itself a copy of the Benetton B195. I still don't see the issue with customer cars myself, so don't see a great deal wrong with that. Teams before and since have ran cars copying others in minute detail. Christ, how many teams actually did the legwork for running ground effect cars rather than just copying Lotus?

But this is getting waaaaaay off topic. As every F1 thread seems to do. Have a good 'un all.
 
Last edited:
its clearly not traction control.

there were starts where schumacher didnt get off the line well, there were starts where hill launched like a rocket yet everyone ignores the poor starts and focuses on france.
if were going by visible evidence surely the merc had launch control last year....


either way it was not benneton who coded the ecu it was mclaren from when they used ford engines and there were various other teams that year who had the same code found in the ecu for launch control
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom