Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

You need data from the car. Imagine Pastor gives you a tap in the first corner. 6 laps later you are going into a 6th gear 280km/h sweeper and your rear wing fails. Someone can be hurt of killed, spectators , marshalls....when if the pit could see that they had strange downforce readings they will pick up that the rear wing may be damaged. Ditto ERS systems. Can see for verious safety reasons they need to be able to monitor the health of the cars

Easy. Publish a list of what is ok to transmit for safety reasons. Rest can be logged only. Can be a on/off go/no go signal so if for example the aero load goes below a certain value then the fault signal gets sent and the driver pits. Still better than Fernando is faster than you style nonsense.

There won't be a problem if the it is monitored by the stewards, even post race. Judge whatever the teams say and penalise calls that break the rules.

As above - Rear tyre/aero failing, a radio message telling the driver that there may be a problem with the rear tyre/aero - acceptable

Radio the driver telling them - setting 3 for diff, should see a 0.1sec gain in sector 2 - not acceptable

I think, as mentioned, some 'reactive' radio transmission need to occur for safety reasons. I don't think you can simply program the car to send a good/bad status signal. The cars probably have at least 2 sensors for just about everything, imagine what happens when a sensor fails? And believe me it does happen. The car would immediatly send a bad signal. Teams need to be able to watch parameters to avoid grey areas like this.

I know there will be 100 different coded messages to get around the rules for radio transmissions in these situations, but to me its something the teams have to have. Theres alot of reasons for and against, but this is how I see it anyway

There won't be a problem if the it is monitored by the stewards, even post race. Judge whatever the teams say and penalise calls that break the rules.

As above - Rear tyre/aero failing, a radio message telling the driver that there may be a problem with the rear tyre/aero - acceptable

Radio the driver telling them - setting 3 for diff, should see a 0.1sec gain in sector 2 - not acceptable

I think, as mentioned, some 'reactive' radio transmission need to occur for safety reasons. I don't think you can simply program the car to send a good/bad status signal. The cars probably have at least 2 sensors for just about everything, imagine what happens when a sensor fails? And believe me it does happen. The car would immediatly send a bad signal. Teams need to be able to watch parameters to avoid grey areas like this.

I know there will be 100 different coded messages to get around the rules for radio transmissions in these situations, but to me its something the teams have to have. Theres alot of reasons for and against, but this is how I see it anyway

Be sad to miss out on the lulz when the drivers cant remember what the codes mean.

"Kimi, the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain."

"WTF does that mean".

But more seriously subjectivity in rule interpretation is usually where you get the biggest shit fights. eg its ok for Ferrari to install their barge boards on the piss but its not ok for anyone to drive around a hundred metres in front of them in quali lest they upset their aero.

Also if they can trust a fuel flow meter to be within 1% accurate they can trust a temperature or pressure or strain gauge,surely? None of that prevents the info coming up on the steering wheel. Some of the teams are already having a whinge their displays are too small.

Be sad to miss out on the lulz when the drivers cant remember what the codes mean.

"Kimi, the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain."

"WTF does that mean".

But more seriously subjectivity in rule interpretation is usually where you get the biggest shit fights. eg its ok for Ferrari to install their barge boards on the piss but its not ok for anyone to drive around a hundred metres in front of them in quali lest they upset their aero.

Also if they can trust a fuel flow meter to be within 1% accurate they can trust a temperature or pressure or strain gauge,surely? None of that prevents the info coming up on the steering wheel. Some of the teams are already having a whinge their displays are too small.

His response would more likely be

"yeah yeah yeah I know where the rain falls in Spain you don't have to tell me all the time "

  • Like 1

Hmm Kimi must be spewing. He finally finds some speed and the car fails him.

Lots of anger about. Grosjean with the dummy spit, Britney the same. Good job by Dan, Massa and Homo too.

Should be a cracker of a race. Wonder how long the super softs will last.

Disappointing Q3 from. Ferrari.. They seemed to be right on the pace all weekend.. Pretty close to the mercs times but dissapointing to be so far down the grid... Hopefully they can both get off to a good start and make it an interesting race

Some of them kick in at Singapore, others like tyre and brakes take effect from Japan.

Pretty dumb if you ask me. Implement strict 100kg fuel limts. Ban teams and drivers from talking about fuel during race.

You can't tell your driver when to back off to save fuel, but you can tell him when to push and not save fuel. huh?

No talk about ERS states and adjustments might mean people will retire due to problems with the system. Same goes for brake temp/wear but it's pretty easy to configure dash warning for that one and any driver seeing a rear brake temp/wear issue would know how to handle that. Not neccesarily so easy with ERS.

The way I read it, you can tell a driver to save fuel, you just can't tell them how much. But there is also a simple fix to this. Fuel the car with enough fuel to race hard for the whole race, instead of for 90% of the race and hope for a safety car.

As for telling them how fast others are, they can still do it, just not as far as sectors go. They can give lap times.

Personally I think the changes are a good thing. Less micro managing, more just driving

Magnussen deserved a penalty - the other car was fully alongside - you can't just run them off the road in that situation. The only harsh part is that one certain other driver has been getting away with the exact same thing all season for some reason...

Stewards are a joke. AJ, I'm looking at you... Last race Magnussen gets pinged for running someone off the track ont he exit of a corner. Lst night a Lotus did the same thing to JEV and JEV got pinged for exceeded track limits. Get your shit together FIA. Any normal category has a single driving standards position for consistent decisions. Time the world's premier series did the same ffs.

Yeah some favourite RBR tracks coming up where they'll be as close to Mercedes as they're ever going to be. Singapore, Suzuka...

scrap that. They might be RBR favourite tracks, but they were no closer to the Mercs when they stopped fooling around. RBR can forget Suzuka too. They'll be fighting to be best of the rest.

Edited by hrd-hr30

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
    • I know I have to get a wheel alignment but until then I just need to bring the rear tyres in a bit they're wearing to the belt on the inside and brand new on the outside edge. I did shorten the arms a bit but got it wrong now after a few klms the Slip and VDC lights come on. I'd just like to get it to a point where I can drive for another week or two before getting an alignment. I've had to pay a lot of other stuff recently so doing it myself is my only option 
    • You just need a wheel alignment after, so just set them to the same as current and drive to the shop. As there are 2 upper links it may also be worth adding adjustable upper front links at the same time; these reduce bump steer when you move the camber (note that setting those correctly takes a lot longer as you have to recheck the camber at each length of the toe arm, through a range of movement, so you could just ignore that unless the handling becomes unpredictable)
    • I got adjustable after market rear camber arm to replace the stock one's because got sick of having to buy new rear tyres every few months. Can anyone please let me know what the best adjustment length would be. I don't have the old ones anymore to get measurements. I'm guessing the stock measurement minus a few mm would do it. Please any help on replacing them would be fantastic I've watched the YouTube clips but no-one talks about how long to set the camber arm to.
×
×
  • Create New...