Track limits ideas

[TFSA]

We also have another hurdle regarding automated systems that we saw this weekend in Austin: Track limits getting changed.

Painting new track limits is easy. Changing a system is harder. AI assisted cameras might be able to do it, maybe even the suggested lasers, but this would definitely exclude car sensors.

[DChemTech]

We also have another hurdle regarding automated systems that we saw this weekend in Austin: Track limits getting changed.

Painting new track limits is easy. Changing a system is harder. AI assisted cameras might be able to do it, maybe even the suggested lasers, but this would definitely exclude car sensors.

There's a simple remedy. Don't change them. Have the white line and only the white line as the boundary.
Issues with sharp curbs or some other stuff? move the curbs. In the hopefully rare occasion why there is a safety requirement to deviate from the white lines - make it extremely clear and do by-eye checking, it's less reliable, but acceptable if it's the exception. Not if it's the norm.

[TFSA]

There's a simple remedy. Don't change them.

That's not a remedy. They were changed for a reason, the reason being that the drivers asked for it because they were bad/tight. In Qatar, they had to change them because of the tires not holding up.

What you're proposing is not a solution. It's refusing to fix a problem in order to not create another one, rather than finding a way to solve both. Changing kerbs, for example, are more expensive than painting the track.

[gazza42000]

Asking the drivers was stupid, of course they are going to want more leeway, all the drivers have to do is obey the track limit. I really don't care if that means they are slower.

[AR3-GP]

imo, while we know the drivers requested it, that was not the motivating factor for the change. The primary reason was likely that the workload on the officials would simply have been too high. In Qatar, race control was 7 laps behind the live race with the reviewing the offnenses (i.e on lap 37, they were still reviewing offenses from lap 30!). This creates the problem where drivers are not notified right away, and don't know they are on their last strikes.

For the point that the FIA would not be able to sufficiently and effectively police the limits without needing until Monday to review the tapes, it was better to just change the track such that there were less offenses. This worked out better for everyone involved.

[Andres125sx]

Like I said before, instead of a slippery part, make it textured. Not that much that it is abbrasive (or maybe a bit), but enough for drivers to notice. The effect will be that drivers will stay between the track limits much more.

That already exists, it´s called curb, but F1 cars suspensions are so tough to cope with the aerodynamic load wich multiplies the weight of the car by a factor of 2 or 3 that that texture is not working as intended anymore, and you cannot do it more textured or the rest of racing categories will suffer more mechanical failures

[DChemTech]

There's a simple remedy. Don't change them.

That's not a remedy. They were changed for a reason, the reason being that the drivers asked for it because they were bad/tight. In Qatar, they had to change them because of the tires not holding up.

What you're proposing is not a solution. It's refusing to fix a problem in order to not create another one, rather than finding a way to solve both. Changing kerbs, for example, are more expensive than painting the track.

I just don't think there is any problem. Track limits = white lines. No vague exceptions.
If the lines are not yet in a place where they work safely, and moving the curbs is too expensive, then sure, repaint the white lines and recalibrate the sensors (or if it's a one of, then have the exception of having manual control - but the basis remains, the limit is where the line is.)

[TFSA]

I just don't think there is any problem. Track limits = white lines. No vague exceptions.

The issue isn't what constitutes track limits, but where they should be placed, and how we should police them. Nobody is arguing where the limits are. Just whether they are placed appropriately, and how we can best make sure they're policed (or self-policed) without it being an insurmountable workload for the race stewards.

A lot of people in this thread is in favor of automated systems. I'm too, if it can be made to work reliably, but there's a lot of challenges i think people aren't considering (or are too easily dismissing) with automated systems, including cost, and - as i pointed out - the fact that we may sometimes want to change them for various reasons (like Qatar, in an effort to ensure that tires weren't blowing up).

To me, an automated system should:

1. Work reliably and precisely with cars of all shapes and sizes.
2. Be capable of dealing with adjustments to the track.
3. Not require significant hardware changes if something changes (car sizes, track limits) to keep costs down.
4. Work with multiple (but maybe not all) racing series, and not just F1.
5. Work in different conditions, including in adverse weather, daytime/nighttime, in direct sunlight etc.
6. Be shielded from accidents - it shouldn't be possible for a car to hit the system and break it (unless the car has an insane accident, like Alex Peroni flying in F3 at Monza 2019). Similarly, if the system is placed on the cars, it shouldn't be in easy to break areas of the car (like the mirrors).

If a system can't satisfy the above, or at least most of it, then we need to find another solution for problematic tracks in my opinion.

Edit: Other desireable features might be that the system can detect which car breached track limits, so the driver can get instant feedback in the cockpit. This is nice, but not a requirement.

[Big Tea]

I still think it would be far easier to police and understand if touching the line is 'out' as in most other sports. If needed a second 'guide line' could be added where the driver can see it and know how close he is to the actual line, but as a guide only. they can scrape the paint off a wall with the tyre so should have no problem keeping close but not on the guide line,

[DDopey]

Like I said before, instead of a slippery part, make it textured. Not that much that it is abbrasive (or maybe a bit), but enough for drivers to notice. The effect will be that drivers will stay between the track limits much more.

That already exists, it´s called curb, but F1 cars suspensions are so tough to cope with the aerodynamic load wich multiplies the weight of the car by a factor of 2 or 3 that that texture is not working as intended anymore, and you cannot do it more textured or the rest of racing categories will suffer more mechanical failures

As I understood it, the places where these drivers went over track limits there was no feedback at all, certainly no curb. Only paint and as the drivers positions are now they just can hardly see them and on these places also not feel them.

I still think a different type of texture instead of a curb would help a lot.

[TFSA]

I still think it would be far easier to police and understand if touching the line is 'out' as in most other sports. If needed a second 'guide line' could be added where the driver can see it and know how close he is to the actual line, but as a guide only. they can scrape the paint off a wall with the tyre so should have no problem keeping close but not on the guide line,

That would make the racing itself horrible. Drivers would need to slow down way too much to make those corners. Races would go to a snails pace.

[gazza42000]

I still think it would be far easier to police and understand if touching the line is 'out' as in most other sports. If needed a second 'guide line' could be added where the driver can see it and know how close he is to the actual line, but as a guide only. they can scrape the paint off a wall with the tyre so should have no problem keeping close but not on the guide line,

That would make the racing itself horrible. Drivers would need to slow down way too much to make those corners. Races would go to a snails pace.

All they need to do is take a line approx 1.5 metres wider than the ones they currently take (where the car is pretty much off the track by any reasonable measurement), yes they will be slower but not 'a snails pace'.

[Zynerji]

I like an instant full MGUK Regen for 3 seconds to just rob the power on corner exit. It would defeat any benefit of running wide.

[Big Tea]

I still think it would be far easier to police and understand if touching the line is 'out' as in most other sports. If needed a second 'guide line' could be added where the driver can see it and know how close he is to the actual line, but as a guide only. they can scrape the paint off a wall with the tyre so should have no problem keeping close but not on the guide line,

That would make the racing itself horrible. Drivers would need to slow down way too much to make those corners. Races would go to a snails pace.

Its exactly what they should be doing anyway, except the other side of the line. The line is not the 'rumble strip', that can be inside the line if thats what you mean.

[Andres125sx]

I like an instant full MGUK Regen for 3 seconds to just rob the power on corner exit. It would defeat any benefit of running wide.

Robbing power at the max acceleration point will be dangerous, if not for the car behind, for next car behind. A car not accelerating where it is supposed to accelerate is very dangerous, look at any crash at starts when some car fail to start moving, it is not the car behind who crashes with it, but some coming from behind wich get suprised when the car ahead suddenly move to a side to dodge the slow car