What F1 could be like.

Discussion in 'Motorsports' started by Pando, Dec 5, 2004.

  1. What could F1 be like if there were no rules at all to restrict the speed on the cars?
    Would we see cars with 6.0+ litre extremely forced aspirated engines outputting something 5000+ HP? What about an extended superlight body to cover the wheels on the car to reduce drag? For tires slicks are obviously better than those rilled tires they use nowadays.
    Some fun ideas:
    what about stuff such as dynamic, computer-controlled suspension - giving optimum ground effect at all times?
    Dynamic but driver-operated spoilers - so you could adjust the spoiler angle yourself, to go from no downforce at all on the straights, to extreme, maximum downforce when cornering. This would also allow the wings to be used as an effective air-brake by setting the angle to more than maximum effective angle of attack for downforce.
    How about the same principle on camber and toe? Wouldn't a driver-operated dynamic asymmetrical camber greatly improve grip while cornering? The car's four wheels would "lean" into a corner - somewhat in the same manner a bike does while cornering, and when the opposite corner comes you make the wheels not only turn, but also lean (camber +/-) the other way?
    Is any of this feasible in terms of what technology - not rules, allow?
    Personally i think F1 cars go fast enough, there sould be some safety in F1, there has been so many horrible crashes in racing history (although there are some other things they could change to make the sport more interesting like it was before, but that is the topic of a different thread). However i find it fun to think about how fast the "ultimate" race car could have been with modern technology, because F1 is not modern racing technology at its best is it? It is modern racing technology at its best under the rules and restrictions that F1 provides and demands.
  2. the biggest question is, do you still need driver....
  3. That was also something yes.. regarding how difficult it is to make even a normal street car drive 100% computer controlled i believe it is even more difficult to write a program that can Race a race car at speeds of that a driver does. But with enough computer systems to _help_ the driver i believe the driver is almost not needed anymore (we already find many of them in normal cars, some in racing, such as ABS, TCS, stability programs, auto shifting) - after you have "taught" the car where each brakpoint is, where each turn-in is, etc, being a programmer myself i would say that is far more easy to create than having the car-program itself learn the track on its own. With enough systems like that i think the driver would only be making minor adjustments and such.
  4. If the engineers had their way the cars would either need no driver or kill him from all the g forces exerted in the corners. Slowing down the cars and limiting the displacement was done for a reason.
  5. the fact that a race track is a alot simpler place would make a driverless car a lot easier to make...
  6. I already said i don't think F1 cars should go faster. All i'm saying is that i sometimes wonder how fast a race car could have been made - with no limitations from the rules of the sport. And i'm wondering if any of what i wrote would be feasible to do, and/or if anyone else has ideas like that.
  7. Is it? There are other cars in normal traffic yes, but do any of them try to overtake at 200+ MPH? :)
  8. The fact that you are dealing with single direction traffic, and the fact that there is only really one ideal line, and a lot more pre-existing marking for human to reference, already makes the problem a lot simpler...
  9. That's a terrible idea.
  10. GPWC !!! <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>
  11. the risk of the driver's safety will multiply greatly.
  12. Are you saying that it would be more easy to write computer software that will learn an F1 race track itself, then drive the car as good as the best F1 drivers in the world, than it would be to write software that drive a normal street car safely from A to B on normal roads and that is able to maneuver most situations an average driver is supposed to deal with?
  13. yes...because its less spontaneous....it has a clear set of rules and procedures, while on normal traffic there are more variables involve...
  14. I believe it was in Car and Driver I read that someone was developing a GPS-based system where the car pretty much drives itself. The GPS relays info like braking and acceleration points and the guys in the pits can program the car to go faster or slower through a certain section and what-not.

    As for your idea, I've wondered the same thing. But I think that an F1 car has enough gadgets and such for the driver to deal with, not to mention that he has to pay attention to the other cars and the course. But the technology that could be derived from those sort of developments could be extremely exciting. I don't remember where I read this either, but I read that a suspension company (I want to say Progress but I'm not sure) has in the works a computer controlled shock system that automatically changes the valving after sensing what's going on. For example, if the car is in the air (ie: rally), the computers will sense that and take in factors like how far off the ground it is and speed and the weight of the vehicle and such then soften the dampers just enough to allow the car to use the whole travel of the suspension without bottoming out (if it can) then tighten back up when the car gets going again. Very intriguing (sp?) and exciting if you think about it!
  15. They'd race on the moon.
  16. I disagree, less spontaneous? I would find it quite surprising if there happens less crashes and wild (non-regulated action) action per mile raced on a race track than per mile driven on a normal street.

    In some corners on certain race tracks you gain time by riding the curb, some places you even gain a little by having one wheel slightly off the track on the grass (don't ask me why, perhaps to negotiate the corner at a wider arch?) - things like these are, believe me, extremely difficult to let a computer program discover and _learn_ itself, if you simply tell it to do it, write exactly how it should drive the whole track, then it is relatively easy.

    You say the race track has a "clear set of rules and procedures", yes, and the street traffic doesn't?
  17. I like the question/idea of how to control stuff like dynamic wings and dynamic camber too. Perhaps one joystick for steering on one the right hand, another separate joystick for wings and camber on the left, camber on the X-axis and wings on the Y-axis (and normal pedals for brake/throttle)? :)
  18. i read a bit about this in popular science.. and basically if rules were lifted from F1, cars would grip a lot better and the biggest leaps you be made in aerodynamics.. no drivers could handle the Gs from acceleration much less the Gs applied in a turn which could exceed 20.
  19. 20Gs turning? are you sure?
  20. "driver-operated spoilers - so you could adjust the spoiler angle yourself, to go from no down force at all on the straights, to extreme, maximum down force when cornering. This would also allow the wings to be used as an effective air-brake by setting the angle to more than maximum effective angle of attack for down force."

    Didn't some of the Can Am cars use this at one point or a variation of this. I know they used some other technologies that were ahead of their time also.
  21. so says popular science.
  22. Chapparall 2F.
  23. What does "Actual Science" say? <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/pitlane/emoticons/tongue.gif"></A>
  24. lol.. care to tell popsci that youre smarter then them? they might believe and back off.
  25. Lol, I don't think I'll try my luck.

Share This Page