Does anyone have some good insight into what this will actually change? Its getting a lot of press coverage but I haven't seen much actual explanation of what will be different. From what I understand the drivers will start the cars exactly the same way (with setting a clutch bite point and the two paddle release system) but there will be a significant reduction in the information the team is able to feed back to the driver to 'set' this?
The "manual starts" or "less completely automated start" thread.
#1
Posted 05 August 2015 - 01:16
Advertisement
#2
Posted 05 August 2015 - 01:33
Does anyone have some good insight into what this will actually change? Its getting a lot of press coverage but I haven't seen much actual explanation of what will be different. From what I understand the drivers will start the cars exactly the same way (with setting a clutch bite point and the two paddle release system) but there will be a significant reduction in the information the team is able to feed back to the driver to 'set' this?
I think the starts will be very similar in terms of procedure and switchology, the main difference being there will be less back and forth conference calling with the pits, so the driver will have to make more use of the data that is available on his display. It wouldn't surprise me if the displays have been reprogrammed to provide even more information, in an effort to help the driver merge all aspect of the start e.g tyre temps (Number of burn outs) and clutch bite point sequencing.
#3
Posted 05 August 2015 - 01:58
http://forums.autosp...-manual-starts/
From an Adam Cooper article
http://www.motorspor...revealed-by-fia
From now on, the clutch bite point may not be changed from the time the car leaves the garage for the first time after the pit lane is open ahead of the race, until after the start lockout period that commences following the beginning of the grand prix.
From Spa, bite point finder activation by the driver has to be inhibited by disabling any driver button or switch associated with that function.
The FIA adds that the “bite point update from the bite point finder should be disabled by setting BBitePointFinderUsed to zero.”
The TD adds that all pit-to-car communications during any reconnaissance or formation laps will be limited to safety and sporting information, so in other words there can be no discussion of start procedures.
Whiting makes it clear that the only information that will be tolerated is on safety grounds – such as a critical problem with the car, a puncture warning or damage, or an indication of a problem with a competitor’s car.
Furthermore, he will allow an instruction to enter the pit lane in order to fix or retire the car, marshalling information (for example yellow flag, red flag, race start aborted or other similar instructions), information regarding a wet track, oil or debris in certain corners, or the need to swap position with other drivers.
#4
Posted 05 August 2015 - 02:41
I think the starts will be very similar in terms of procedure and switchology, the main difference being there will be less back and forth conference calling with the pits, so the driver will have to make more use of the data that is available on his display. It wouldn't surprise me if the displays have been reprogrammed to provide even more information, in an effort to help the driver merge all aspect of the start e.g tyre temps (Number of burn outs) and clutch bite point sequencing.
The engineers are smart enough to get on top of the new rules, if it turns out all this fuss was about nothing and the starts remain the same, the Martin Brundle types need to stop meddling by dropping hints into Charlie Whitings ear whenever he see's something he disagrees with.
#5
Posted 05 August 2015 - 07:57
#6
Posted 05 August 2015 - 08:24
I hate these half assed decisions mid season, if they want fully manual starts then get rid of the electronics and go back to a proper clutch.
I simply dont understand why they couldnt have waited untill next year for this change. I hate changes halfway through a season. Remember Silverstone a few years ago when they banned cold blowing engine maps for extra downforce on the blown diffuser for one race only. Madness.
Yes removing the control over the clutch will mean someone might actually stall on the get away. They will still have to let the clutch out by hand.
To be honest the FIA should go further and remove the second clutch so that the driver has to find the bite point as the lights go out, rather than find the bite point on the first clutch and just dump the second clutch when the lights go out.
Edited by MattK9, 05 August 2015 - 08:25.
#7
Posted 05 August 2015 - 09:46
I hate these half assed decisions mid season, if they want fully manual starts then get rid of the electronics and go back to a proper clutch.
This. Oh, and let's not forget about the tyre change mid season in 2013. It started out with fantastic competition for the first place, then Seb won every single race on the harder tyres.
Edited by redraven9, 05 August 2015 - 09:47.
#8
Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:27
The introducing of manual starts are basically introduced to spice up the competition and to stop the merc dominance. In the end it will turn out to heal Mercedes start problems and than they will win every single race. That would be quite ironic...This. Oh, and let's not forget about the tyre change mid season in 2013. It started out with fantastic competition for the first place, then Seb won every single race on the harder tyres.
#9
Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:36
It won't be a manual start until there's three pedals and a handbrake.
#10
Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:41
#11
Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:48
I'm sure they can have a fully manual clutch with a hand lever?
That would be the best solution imo. Like most other formulae.
#12
Posted 05 August 2015 - 11:05
LOL, boolean BBitePointFinderUsed
Why do they keep banning stuff in one shape and then add the same thing in a new form?
No wonder it feels so meaningless to care even a little bit about the regulation changes. Nothing actually changes.
#13
Posted 05 August 2015 - 11:41
Sound like an awful java class to meLOL, boolean BBitePointFinderUsed
Why do they keep banning stuff in one shape and then add the same thing in a new form?
No wonder it feels so meaningless to care even a little bit about the regulation changes. Nothing actually changes.
Edited by Marklar, 05 August 2015 - 11:44.
#14
Posted 05 August 2015 - 11:51
The original Ferrari paddle-operated gearbox did it right for a racing car, it was a simple replacement of an H-gate lever with an electric switch, all other functions remained under control of the driver and I think the sport should go back to that.
#15
Posted 05 August 2015 - 18:50
I hate these half assed decisions mid season, if they want fully manual starts then get rid of the electronics and go back to a proper clutch.
As long as it does something to potentially improve the races, it's welcome. It's not like it's going to have an impact in the championship anyway. Customer satisfaction comes first.
#16
Posted 10 August 2015 - 10:34
As long as it does something to potentially improve the races, it's welcome. It's not like it's going to have an impact in the championship anyway. Customer satisfaction comes first.
If it means that Ferrari constantly get a better start than the Merc then yes, it will have an effect on the championship.
Vettel is only 42 points behind Hamilton. A couple more races like Hungary and there might even be a race on for the WDC.
#17
Posted 10 August 2015 - 12:36
Interesting article in AMuS today.
https://translate.go...t-text=&act=url
According to them the engineers fear that the start will be a complete chaos, because the cluches are made to work with certain softwares. So the clutches are inappropriate for manual starts. That have an simple reason. These clutches are very "sensitive": if the track is slightly changing than the bite point (in the article called pressure point) have to be changed, if you are not doing that (what will be the case from Spa onwards if you leave the pits) than you will first of all have the wrong bite point and you cant change it and if you are starting too often with the wrong bite point than you will have a bad start (and you will already know it before the start) and the clutch will get destroyed later in the race.
#18
Posted 10 August 2015 - 12:40
#19
Posted 10 August 2015 - 12:41
Interesting article in AMuS today.
https://translate.go...t-text=&act=url
According to them the engineers fear that the start will be a complete chaos, because the cluches are made to work with certain softwares. So the clutches are inappropriate for manual starts. That have an simple reason. These clutches are very "sensitive": if the track is slightly changing than the bite point (in the article called pressure point) have to be changed, if you are not doing that (what will be the case from Spa onwards if you leave the pits) than you will first of all have the wrong bite point and you cant change it and if you are starting too often with the wrong bite point than you will have a bad start (and you will already know it before the start) and the clutch will get destroyed later in the race.
Sounds good to me!
Advertisement
#20
Posted 10 August 2015 - 12:49
The introducing of manual starts are basically introduced to spice up the competition and to stop the merc dominance. In the end it will turn out to heal Mercedes start problems and than they will win every single race. That would be quite ironic...
Indeed. Given how often Mercedes have had start problems recently, perhaps the best thing to make the race win interesting would be to allow the old system to continue...
However, it should introduce more unpredictability into the races themselves, throughout the field, though I believe the main expressed goal was to put more drivers more in control and reduce the amount of driver aids. I don't have any issue with that goal. I don't like mid-season changes and think they should be avoided but I don't have a big issue with this one.
Spa race start is going to have a lot of hype. Hopefully it won't descend into chaos though.
#21
Posted 10 August 2015 - 13:25
This. Oh, and let's not forget about the tyre change mid season in 2013. It started out with fantastic competition for the first place, then Seb won every single race on the harder tyres.
I don't believe the tyre compounds were actually made any harder, They just changed the construction from the steel belt to the kevlar belt that was used before 2013 due to the failures that had been seen throughout the 1st half of the year.
The steel belt was causing the tyres to run hotter which was causing problems with the bonding process & making the tyres more prone to delaminate.
#22
Posted 10 August 2015 - 15:55
I don't believe the tyre compounds were actually made any harder, They just changed the construction from the steel belt to the kevlar belt that was used before 2013 due to the failures that had been seen throughout the 1st half of the year.
The steel belt was causing the tyres to run hotter which was causing problems with the bonding process & making the tyres more prone to delaminate.
It was a combination of both. Kevlar instead of steal but they also made more conservative choices (too conservative) regarding compounds. Because of especially Barcelona when people made 4 stops. But Barcelona was a one-off and the change in construction already made the tyres more durable and less prone to falling apart. All this led to all teams bar Red Bull having warm-up problems and to Red Bull dominating because their massive downforce made the tyres work. And to boring races between 1 and 2 stops instead of 2-3 stops. It was an overreaction from Pirelli.
#23
Posted 10 August 2015 - 16:11
And to boring races between 1 and 2 stops instead of 2-3 stops.
I still don't get why people think more stops = better races.
I'd rather have less stops so that more of the action is done on the track & so there is a greater incentive to try & overtake on track rather than relying on the undercut to pit-pass.
As to the latter part of 2013, Was plenty of good racing through the field. Yes Vettel won 9 of the final races but that doesn't automatically mean they were all boring as there was plenty of other cars out there racing.
#24
Posted 10 August 2015 - 16:14
Oh no! Please no unpredictability. Where's the fun in that?
Because if they introduce manual starts it should be done correctly with proper clutches, I don't want to watch a lottery.
#25
Posted 10 August 2015 - 16:42
Fair point. But nobody ever designed anything to fail (well, probably not often, anyway) so if things do, then they do.Because if they introduce manual starts it should be done correctly with proper clutches, I don't want to watch a lottery.
I don't know how the clutches work in detail, but if there's the option to hammer the start and hope it lasts or nurse it and (probably) have better reliability then that makes things more interesting.
If it's a binary work/fail then it's a bit crap.
#26
Posted 11 August 2015 - 00:52
Fair point. But nobody ever designed anything to fail (well, probably not often, anyway) so if things do, then they do.
I don't know how the clutches work in detail, but if there's the option to hammer the start and hope it lasts or nurse it and (probably) have better reliability then that makes things more interesting.
If it's a binary work/fail then it's a bit crap.
Currently it is "binary" in the sense that the drivers "feel" is basically irrelevant. When the lights go out everything is already set and the driver just have to hope it was set correctly. This is a bullshit rule and I would be very surprised if there is a team that has not found a way around it. There will be no tire smoke.
#27
Posted 11 August 2015 - 01:44
Because if they introduce manual starts it should be done correctly with proper clutches, I don't want to watch a lottery.
I'm sure they already use the hand clutch to leave the pit boxes, so they must have some feel for them.
I guess by "proper clutch" you mean a foot activated one?
#28
Posted 11 August 2015 - 08:03
Yeah, get that, but at least that's better than 'good start/broken car' kind of binary.Currently it is "binary" in the sense that the drivers "feel" is basically irrelevant. When the lights go out everything is already set and the driver just have to hope it was set correctly. This is a bullshit rule and I would be very surprised if there is a team that has not found a way around it. There will be no tire smoke.
Hopefully it'll be fun. Probably won't be any worse than it is now.
#29
Posted 11 August 2015 - 14:33
AMUS: teams not satified, starts will suffer, clutch will get fried...
https://translate.go...t-text=&act=url
#30
Posted 11 August 2015 - 19:48
Well cry me a river. The cars seem to be able to get going after a spin, or after a pit stop without a problem. Sure, it's risky if a driver tries to get away as hard as he can and the car can't take it, but that's a question which already contains an answer.
#31
Posted 12 August 2015 - 08:14
I think it's good to go back to basics BUT I will never understand the way the FIA operates. We just lost a driver to an avoidable crash and yet here they are dropping a rule change in mid season they could easily see a car or two stall on the grid.
We've had seriously ugly cars because they were being so massively over cautious about a car striking a driver (let's face it if a car is going to hit a drivers head it makes little or no difference how high the nose is AND we ended up with spears on the front of the cars in the end anyway) but they are quite happy to fast track a major change to the starting procedure (the most dangerous part of the race) to 'spice up the profits show'.
#32
Posted 12 August 2015 - 08:32
Interesting the drivers will know they're gonna have a bad start... They can still measure the optimal bite point, only they can't change it.
Normally only Mark Webber had this knowlegde.
Edited by JeePee, 12 August 2015 - 08:33.
#33
Posted 12 August 2015 - 12:28
I think it's good to go back to basics BUT I will never understand the way the FIA operates. We just lost a driver to an avoidable crash and yet here they are dropping a rule change in mid season they could easily see a car or two stall on the grid.
So you're saying they should introduce rolling starts then?
#34
Posted 12 August 2015 - 12:58
I think it's good to go back to basics BUT I will never understand the way the FIA operates. We just lost a driver to an avoidable crash and yet here they are dropping a rule change in mid season they could easily see a car or two stall on the grid.
I'm struggling to see the connection.
We've had seriously ugly cars because they were being so massively over cautious about a car striking a driver (let's face it if a car is going to hit a drivers head it makes little or no difference how high the nose is AND we ended up with spears on the front of the cars in the end anyway) but they are quite happy to fast track a major change to the starting procedure (the most dangerous part of the race) to 'spice up the
profitsshow'.
The low noses were about reducing the chance to climb over another car. I'll grant you that the initial form of the regulations resulted in some ugly creations, but it did it's job and this year the long protrusions (which were not "spears") are gone. Again I don't see the connection to the starting procedure.
#35
Posted 12 August 2015 - 13:24
How is this going back to basics? It's the exact same procedure as at the last race, except that instead of using the telemetry from the install and formation lap starts on race day they use the telemetry to set the bite point based on what they practised on Saturday, or what the team is estimating based on the track conditions on race day (likely a bit of both).
So they're just using a less refined software parameter. I'm sure it'll lead to some odd starts initially, but it won't be much a function of the driver, just randomness and poor research. I hate that they are selling this as "manual" starts. How stupid do they think the audience is? Maybe we should have had those random sprinklers after all, same difference.
#36
Posted 12 August 2015 - 13:27
Yeah so basically it's a test of who masters the setup of their software and not a test of driver skill and reaction. If you're going to make a change do it right!How is this going back to basics? It's the exact same procedure as at the last race, except that instead of using the telemetry from the install and formation lap starts on race day they use the telemetry to set the bite point based on what they practised on Saturday, or what the team is estimating based on the track conditions on race day (likely a bit of both).
So they're just using a less refined software parameter. I'm sure it'll lead to some odd starts initially, but it won't be much a function of the driver, just randomness and poor research. I hate that they are selling this as "manual" starts. How stupid do they think the audience is? Maybe we should have had those random sprinklers after all, same difference.
Edited by Wally123, 12 August 2015 - 13:28.
#37
Posted 12 August 2015 - 21:13
I could be wrong
#38
Posted 12 August 2015 - 21:18
The way I understand it (which is probably totally wrong), they are going to have to use one of the 2 clutch paddles to control the bite in a similar way to the foot pedal in a traditional car.
This is because they can no longer set an accurate bite point, and if they try to do the same 2-paddle routine, either the first paddle will not engage at all, leading to a slow getaway, or it will fully engage and the car will stall.
So, the 1st paddle will have to be set to not engage (maybe move the car slightly), and the 2nd paddle will be used like a foot pedal.
Or the 1st paddle will be set to fully engage, and that will be used like a foot pedal, with the 2nd paddle becoming redundant.
The only question will be whether the 'feel' on a steering wheel paddle can be the same as on a foot pedal - the teams may have had to redesign the paddles.
Of course teams will cheat on this if they can, and the FIA will try to catch them - as usual.
#39
Posted 12 August 2015 - 21:53
Could be wrong
Edited by oetzi, 12 August 2015 - 21:54.
Advertisement
#40
Posted 13 August 2015 - 16:02
I think it's good to go back to basics BUT I will never understand the way the FIA operates. We just lost a driver to an avoidable crash and yet here they are dropping a rule change in mid season they could easily see a car or two stall on the grid.
We've had seriously ugly cars because they were being so massively over cautious about a car striking a driver (let's face it if a car is going to hit a drivers head it makes little or no difference how high the nose is AND we ended up with spears on the front of the cars in the end anyway) but they are quite happy to fast track a major change to the starting procedure (the most dangerous part of the race) to 'spice up the
profitsshow'.
I dont think anyone is going to actually stall. They still have anti stall software on board that will open the clutch if the revs are to low.
The start is only dangerous is drivers act like Grosjean at Spa 2012 or Vettel at Japan 2011 and Vettel and Hungary 2015.
#41
Posted 13 August 2015 - 16:40
The way I understand it (which is probably totally wrong), they are going to have to use one of the 2 clutch paddles to control the bite in a similar way to the foot pedal in a traditional car.
This is because they can no longer set an accurate bite point, and if they try to do the same 2-paddle routine, either the first paddle will not engage at all, leading to a slow getaway, or it will fully engage and the car will stall.
So, the 1st paddle will have to be set to not engage (maybe move the car slightly), and the 2nd paddle will be used like a foot pedal.
Or the 1st paddle will be set to fully engage, and that will be used like a foot pedal, with the 2nd paddle becoming redundant.
The only question will be whether the 'feel' on a steering wheel paddle can be the same as on a foot pedal - the teams may have had to redesign the paddles.
Of course teams will cheat on this if they can, and the FIA will try to catch them - as usual.
Do you have a source for this? Everything I've read (including some comments from drivers) implies that the bite point will still be set via the usual software and this is what the driver will still rely on as a base, as they do now, it's just the bite point won't be set on Sunday afternoon, it'll be plugged in earlier.
I much prefer the option you are suggesting.
#42
Posted 13 August 2015 - 17:55
I dont think anyone is going to actually stall. They still have anti stall software on board that will open the clutch if the revs are to low.
The start is only dangerous is drivers act like Grosjean at Spa 2012 or Vettel at Japan 2011 and Vettel and Hungary 2015.
We've seen in the past that when anti-stall kicks in, a car can fall back and be involved in collisions.
Looks like you have it in for Vettel. I would have said he's behaving better at starts these days, but that might change if he gets back on pole.
Do you have a source for this? Everything I've read (including some comments from drivers) implies that the bite point will still be set via the usual software and this is what the driver will still rely on as a base, as they do now, it's just the bite point won't be set on Sunday afternoon, it'll be plugged in earlier.
I much prefer the option you are suggesting.
No source, just thinking about what the FIA seem to be trying to achieve. At the moment I believe that drivers release the first clutch paddle without trying to control it, because they are confident that it won't engage enough to kill the engine. In the future, they won't have that confidence unless the software is very clever indeed, because the bite-point measurements won't take place at the right time.
What could clever software do? I suppose it could guess the grip which would be available on the tyres they were starting on, but if it guesses wrong we would have a stall (or anti-stall) situation, or lots of clutch slip burning out the clutch.
So I think the only safe option for regular good starts is for the team to tell the driver "it's up to you to control the clutch, too bad you don't have a foot pedal".
#43
Posted 14 August 2015 - 05:01
So you're saying they should introduce rolling starts then?
No not at all. I am just saying that it seems like an unnecessarily dangerous move to change the start procedure of the cars half way through the season. The cars are optimised for one procedure and not the one we are going to have in Spa. Maybe it will be fine or maybe someone will stall and that could be a big smash.
#44
Posted 14 August 2015 - 05:03
How is this going back to basics? It's the exact same procedure as at the last race, except that instead of using the telemetry from the install and formation lap starts on race day they use the telemetry to set the bite point based on what they practised on Saturday, or what the team is estimating based on the track conditions on race day (likely a bit of both).
So they're just using a less refined software parameter. I'm sure it'll lead to some odd starts initially, but it won't be much a function of the driver, just randomness and poor research. I hate that they are selling this as "manual" starts. How stupid do they think the audience is? Maybe we should have had those random sprinklers after all, same difference.
Well you are more informed about it than I am. Manual starts to me is going back to basics.
#45
Posted 14 August 2015 - 05:12
I'm struggling to see the connection.
The low noses were about reducing the chance to climb over another car. I'll grant you that the initial form of the regulations resulted in some ugly creations, but it did it's job and this year the long protrusions (which were not "spears") are gone. Again I don't see the connection to the starting procedure.
The point I was trying to make was that the FIA seem to make such odd decisions on safety (and other stuff). To me the whole low nose thing was a waste of time money and genuinely detracted from the sport with cars that just don't look right at all. If you look at Alonso's two close calls with being hit by a car, Grosean at Spa and Kimi at Hungary, it wasn't the nose which got close to his head it was the floor under the side pod.
But then they make the starts different just like that...someone could easily stall now.
#46
Posted 14 August 2015 - 07:11
I dont think anyone is going to actually stall. They still have anti stall software on board that will open the clutch if the revs are to low.
The start is only dangerous is drivers act like Grosjean at Spa 2012 or Vettel at Japan 2011 and Vettel and Hungary 2015.
I'm afraid to ask but what did Vettel do wrong at the start of Hungary 2015(besides outracing Merc drivers )? That was some brilliant aggressive start and all commentators praised him for it.
Edited by rasul, 14 August 2015 - 07:13.
#47
Posted 14 August 2015 - 11:14
No source, just thinking about what the FIA seem to be trying to achieve. At the moment I believe that drivers release the first clutch paddle without trying to control it, because they are confident that it won't engage enough to kill the engine. In the future, they won't have that confidence unless the software is very clever indeed, because the bite-point measurements won't take place at the right time.
What could clever software do? I suppose it could guess the grip which would be available on the tyres they were starting on, but if it guesses wrong we would have a stall (or anti-stall) situation, or lots of clutch slip burning out the clutch.
So I think the only safe option for regular good starts is for the team to tell the driver "it's up to you to control the clutch, too bad you don't have a foot pedal".
As is often the case with the FIA what they want to achieve and what they actually achieve appears to be a little at odds here. From everything I read it will still be the software dictating the bite point, it'll just be a less optimal point because of the changing grip levels on race day. It's already the case that a driver often has to work around the bite point being a little off, so I guess this is what we will see more of. It doesn't seem like much of a substantive change to me, just window dressing that will provide a few more Mark Webber style starts throughout the grid.
I would really like to see the start mechanism go back to being a fully manual process, where only the driver's input rather the start system settings dictate the quality of the launch. But I think this would require significant change.
#48
Posted 14 August 2015 - 11:38
How is this going back to basics? It's the exact same procedure as at the last race, except that instead of using the telemetry from the install and formation lap starts on race day they use the telemetry to set the bite point based on what they practised on Saturday, or what the team is estimating based on the track conditions on race day (likely a bit of both).
So they're just using a less refined software parameter. I'm sure it'll lead to some odd starts initially, but it won't be much a function of the driver, just randomness and poor research. I hate that they are selling this as "manual" starts. How stupid do they think the audience is? Maybe we should have had those random sprinklers after all, same difference.
Yeah, you're right. To me it's next to no change, though to hear one or two drivers you'd think it is. But as for manual starts, won't ever happen will it? The starts are manual now as opposed to launch control?
#49
Posted 15 August 2015 - 09:16
Karun Chandhok tried to give a 'simplified' version of the changes on the F1 show last night. Instead of the engineers seeing the data from the 3 bite-point finds the drivers do, the practice start from the pit-lane and then the practice start on the parade lap, which they use to select which pre-set start map the drivers can use, the drivers will have to chose that map themselves, based on what happens on the practice start on the parade lap. They can chat with the engineer on the grid before hand about what to do should this or that happen with the practice start but nothing can be said over the radio.
I have to admit that was not at all the way I read the new rules, as I figured they had to select the start map on the Saturday and wouldn't be able to change it on Sunday but it sounds like the drivers will have to work out which map will suit the unchangeable clutch bite-point from their practice start? I guess we will find out more next week.
#50
Posted 15 August 2015 - 10:17
AMUS: teams not satified, starts will suffer, clutch will get fried...
Then put in tougher clutches...ffs