Motorsport Off Topic Thread

I dont think they would be allowed to do that. if the rule said that a system whose primary function was to prevent wheelspin then it would be allowed. however, i thought about this a bit last night and realised that as soon as the kers motor started reducing the power to the rear wheels for whatever reason then it would be preventing wheelspin. it would be no different to automatically modulating the throttle, its just using another system.

Skeeter, until a suitable explanation comes from official sources then any plausible explanation is worthy of discussion. We know full well that it is unlikely that red bull is using traction control, but currently there is no better explanation on the table and there are several people who know more than us internet detectives that are saying it sounds very much like the old traction control systems.

Also, just because the FIA has access to the ECU doesnt mean that the code for this traction control system is there when they examine it. I cant remember what car or when, but i seem to remember either an illegal traction control system or an illegal starting system that deleted itself when the car switched off, or something along those lines. Hell, I could probably program up a system that, within the shutdown routine, reprogrammed itself to something else and deleted the old code
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
stuff
Click to expand...

If that was aimed at me, I don't care less about the cheating. I'm interested in the technical side. Pushing the boundaries is the whole point of F1.


PS Skeeter, you're in Surrey, you don't work for McLaren do you. (I'm still new here lol)

Reaper 392 said:
I dont think they would be allowed to do that. if the rule said that a system whose primary function was to prevent wheelspin then it would be allowed. however, i thought about this a bit last night and realised that as soon as the kers motor started reducing the power to the rear wheels for whatever reason then it would be preventing wheelspin. it would be no different to automatically modulating the throttle, its just using another system
Click to expand...

But that's the thing. The engine alternator does the same thing. It's using engine toque and in a sense, reducing power to the wheels. Though I doubt they have alternators if they already have the KERS motor.
 
Last edited:
AshD93 said:
If that was aimed at me, I don't care less about the cheating. I'm interested in the technical side. Pushing the boundaries is the whole point of F1.
Click to expand...

It wasn't aimed at you.

I'm with you. Teams finding innovative ways of doing things is, and always has been, part of F1. And often yields very clever and interesting things.

But the "OMG RBR ARE CHEATING THEY SHOULD HAVE ALL THEIR POINTS REMOVED!" brigade that pop up every time someone posts a random piece of footage or a dodgy photo coupled with a made up spiel about how it means they are running an illegal car is just getting tedious.

Obviously you expect the teams to kick up a bit of a fuss, especially if getting something banned would be quicker than trying to figure it out for themselves ;). But the claims that the FIA are being bribed and that RBR are simply being allowed to openly cheat without challenge from their competitors is just internet drivel.
 
AshD93 said:
But that's the thing. The engine alternator does the same thing. It's using engine toque and in a sense, reducing power to the wheels. Though I doubt they have alternators if they already have the KERS motor.
Click to expand...

I suspect that if any information about wheel slip (or any information that could be used to deduce wheelspin) was fed into the alternator then it would be illegal
 
Reaper 392 said:
Skeeter, until a suitable explanation comes from official sources then any plausible explanation is worthy of discussion. We know full well that it is unlikely that red bull is using traction control, but currently there is no better explanation on the table and there are several people who know more than us internet detectives that are saying it sounds very much like the old traction control systems.
Click to expand...

Quite, but in these situations its the response of those with a vested interest that is key. We have heard nothing from either the people who make the rules (i.e. the FIA), or those who would gain the most from RBR to be found to have broken them (i.e. all the competitor teams). Until one of them speaks up its just 'people' making accusations.

Also, just because the FIA has access to the ECU doesn't mean that the code for this traction control system is there when they examine it. I cant remember what car or when, but i seem to remember either an illegal traction control system or an illegal starting system that deleted itself when the car switched off, or something along those lines. Hell, I could probably program up a system that, within the shutdown routine, reprogrammed itself to something else and deleted the old code
Click to expand...

Not sure how you would get that through parc ferme. Would be interesting to have code capable of changing itself. But the FIA have access to the whole ECU so would presumably be able to see the code that changes the code anyway?
 
Skeeter said:
Not sure how you would get that through parc ferme. Would be interesting to have code capable of changing itself. But the FIA have access to the whole ECU so would presumably be able to see the code that changes the code anyway?
Click to expand...

Obviously i don't have any experience, but they must have some way of editing the code on the ECU so that they can put their own engine maps and whatever on there, so it could be possible to add the self deleting traction control through there. Also, it wouldnt surprise me if there was some way of reloading all the code onto the ECU in case of problems so that could be another way
 
Yes, but the ECU cannot be changed from the start of Qualifying until after the end of the race.

Having a 'default' code set that is restored might work. Or something dynamic as you mentioned.

You would assume the FIA have thought of this though. And the ECU is made by McLaren so anything dodgy will come from them first :p.
 
Reaper 392 said:
I suspect that if any information about wheel slip (or any information that could be used to deduce wheelspin) was fed into the alternator then it would be illegal
Click to expand...

Another idea I just came up with is if the on board GPS was quick enough, the system would know the ideal speed of the car at the location the car was in and then relay that back to the motor so it produces the correct amount of torque for charging (basically whatever I mentioned before).

There would be no information going into the system that relates to wheel speed or slippage.

However it still would limit requested torque which would intervene the rules. And being a open loop control system, it would be horrible at controlling the torque quickly or accurately unless they were using accelerometers mixed with GPS for input speed to close the loop. But you would need seriously quick response and processing times.

Its always Red Bull with KERS management or issues so it's got to be related for sure.


Edit: Or it's just RBRs amazing defuser allowing him to floor it earlier and creating even more downforce with the blown defuser.
 
Last edited:
AshD93 said:
When he's powering out of the corner is a interesting one. The article suggests output torque of the electric motor is modulated which means he needs to be using KERS every time he comes out of a corner.
Click to expand...

Very possible, which would mean he isnt using it on every corner and thus wouldnt get a silly advantage and thus only makes huge gains in one sector.

At the end of the day people, you have to admit, the engine note going through that corner in that video compared to everyone else is completely different. This will always lead people to make big statements about them being that they are doing so well.

If it turns out that they have done something snazzy with the system, then fair play to them. That is what F1 is about!
 
Last edited:
Thought this bit from that Autosport article was interesting:

Vettel himself also brushed off talk of his outfit doing anything illegal, and said that any clever engine mapping his team used was something he and his team should be praised for.

"We are pretty proud of the system we have because other people will never figure out how we've done it," he said. "Constantly we try to improve the car. That's part of the homework that we have to do."
Click to expand...
 
Yeah. There's no question that they are doing something funky.

But somehow concluding that means they are running an illegal car and bribing the FIA to get away with it is a large and illogical leap.

Its a shame that F1 has got to the stage where innovation and genius is met with such negativity, rather than celebrated and promoted. That said, I'm pretty sure it would be getting a different opinion if it was anyone other than RBR doing it.
 
Yep. Its more pronounced at Singapore because of the slow speed corners.

For the last few years, spanning before EBDs and beyond the ban all the cars have had a rough sounding over run and low rev note. The Renault engines have always been the loudest, and RBR always more extreme than the rest. But its always been there.
 
Guerrilla said:
A little more on the upcoming weight limit changes and driver weights.
Click to expand...

The trouble is, it doesn't matter what weight they set, teams will still want small light drivers.

An increase just means they can add more ballast where they want to.
I don't see a way of solving this. As a car and driver is so light, even a few kilos heavier want change anything. I think its just one of those things. Just like jockeys who get an advantage when small and light. Unless you increase the weight to say about 2000kilos then 5kilos of body weight isn't such a big percentage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom