Mercedes GP W02

[hardingfv32]

So this is all about what the driver can add to the cars development. Some driver might be better at this than other, like a good test driver?

Brian

[raymondu999]

That, and the simulator would let you experiment with setups. If Rosberg has more time in the simulator because Schumacher gets simulator sickness; then he has more time to work on setups before FP1

[hardingfv32]

This seem like a little chicken or egg question?

The same models used to generate some of the simulator codes are used to optimizes the chassis for a race on a post shaker,etc. Shouldn't the computer be the one setting up the car?

Is this all about seeing if the driver can deal with the computer dictated setup? Dumbing down the setup to reinforce the driver's all important confidence.

I wonder if a driver spends enough time in the simulator, can his confidence grow to accept a setup that initially did not inspire confidence? Instead of simulator it could be called a driver psychology manipulator.

Brian

[wesley123]

An computer doesnt got any feel for the track. Also an computer doesnt know what the drivers like or dont like, of course you can add that but it still isnt the driver doing the simulation.

The compuiter will probably create an what it thinks is a optimum, then drivers can test it from here, giving input to the engineers, who can probably change parts as well as make setup changes on the fly.

[hardingfv32]

What do you think drives the simulator? Some of the same models/codes/programs that are used to develop the setup. The computers are running the show and the driver is along to see if he can cope. I would assume the model/codes are designed with driver limitation included, but this might be about enlarging the driver respond elements to better meet the computer's requirements.

Why not teach the driver to "like" something that makes the car faster.

Maybe this is Schumacher's problem these days. The game is played differently and he is no longer the ideal person for the job.

Brian

[wesley123]

You cannot teach driving preference, simple as that. There are simple things you cannot 'learn' a person, and if so takes a lot of time. What you are saying doesnt even make sense. You are saying a computer is always right and we should all adapat to what the computer says. You are forgetting this; the computer is amde by humans, humans make mistakes and all is simulated. It is simulated, it isnt real life in a computing environment. No you are simulating real life, that is some things cannot be done because you do not know it would happen.

You see lots of times that drivers do not like new developpedf parts. Dont you think they wouldnt have brought it to the track if the simulator and CFD etc. etc. didnt show improved results(or in a worse case a slight loss of performance)? The driver is driving the car, he gets the preference, not the computer just because it says so, if Chuck Norris was the computer, it would be different(and I think Red Bull got engineers and computers and Vettel with Chuck Norris DNA)

[hardingfv32]

There is a good chance I could find a model or formula for the last breath you just exhaled. There are models for everything in the physical world these days. So yes, we can model the drivers physical actions. And yes, they will not be perfect, so we correlate their accuracy with track testing and make adjustments.

The most aggressive aircraft are now flown by computer with the pilot allowed to request only the broadest form of actions.

Of coarse we can teach drivers new preferences, especially if the motivation is success. The simulators could be that learning tool. Again, there is no reason not to expect that some drivers learn better than others while in the simulator.

Brian

[wesley123]

That is the case yes, to a certain limit, take a look at for example Webber, having a hard time with the tires, hasnt improved at all over the year. Sure you can learn drivers new things, but you cannot simply say, look Hamilton; you like an oversteery car but our computer say understeer is the way to go so you drive with understeer. You cannot change a preference just on the fly, the driver doenst just has its preference, it is grown into him.

And sure computers can fly a plane, but does these systems take a sudden sidewind in account for example? I doubt it. And such things are still a problem with computers, they give an idea but they arent truth. They simulate what we know, and that is where the problem is, we actually know so little.

[hardingfv32]

That is the case yes, to a certain limit, take a look at for example Webber, having a hard time with the tires, hasnt improved at all over the year. Sure you can learn drivers new things, but you cannot simply say, look Hamilton; you like an oversteery car but our computer say understeer is the way to go so you drive with understeer. You cannot change a preference just on the fly, the driver doenst just has its preference, it is grown into him.

And sure computers can fly a plane, but does these systems take a sudden sidewind in account for example? I doubt it. And such things are still a problem with computers, they give an idea but they arent truth. They simulate what we know, and that is where the problem is, we actually know so little.

1) I am not asking to change a preference over night. I am talking serous hours in the simulator learning a new and improve preference. What choice does the driver have if he needs to go faster?

2) Fact, the latest aggressive aircraft are not flyable by human control. About all the pilot can do is steer while on the ground. In your example of a sudden side wind there is nothing sudden about it to the computer. It is just a force that has been modeled and entered into the code. What is more accurate, an accelerometer or the pilots body? What about missing codes, well that is what flight simulators and flight testing is for. And yes, every once in awhile a plane crash.

Brian

[wesley123]

You simply cannot change a driving style by driving hours in the simulator. If that was the case, drivers would all have a similair driving style wouldnt they? And guess what they have not, the driver has an driving style which he is most comfortable with, of course you can set him up with lots of understeer because the computer says that is the fastest way, but if the driver is comfortable with that? I dont think so, and that also is a improtant factor in overall speed.

You make it look like that all is deadsimple, and I wish it where, since if everything was as simple as that we would have known lots of the universe by now as well as already live on mars, yet we do not, why? Because there are more things to take in mind other than 'this is the fastest way so the driver is going to spend 3 years in the simulator driving like that', it isnt that simple.

I shall take an example of myself, when I was little I could do little with my hands, I was far from handy in making objects and other work with my hands. Now over 10 years later, on school and outside school I had lots of practice in these things, and guess what, I still can't do it. Some things are 'born' into a person and cannot be changed, of course you can work around it, but will it be optimal? I mean you can let me build a whole house, but if it would survive the next day, I am quite sure it would not. Point is, some things just cannot be taught to a person, and you seem to be forgetting that.

And about your second point, you are correct about that, a bad example of mine. Let me put it differently, does the system flying the plane take an bird flying into the air intake into account? Nope it does not, yet as human you can learn to anticipate such things and what to do if that is the case and disaster strikes.

In the simulator drivers can learn the tracks, simulate new parts as well as work by complete setups and race strategies. There goes in a long time perfecting the racing line, strategies and different scenarios. I doubt a system takes for example in acocunt that the race will start with rain, then the track dries, then there will be drizzle and then the track will dry again, just to start heavy rain again 5 minutes bfore end of the race. In the simulator a driver can be taught to anticipate on that, and based on weather expectations together with simulator runs base it on that.

[hardingfv32]

You can not make objects, so we do not hire you to make objects.

For the next generation of F1 race driver, we do not hire them if they do not adapt well to what the simulator is demanding. Based on the latest developments with simulators, it might be too so to make this a hiring requirement, but it is coming very soon. So in the very near future, the driver must have great natural talent AND be adaptable to simulator training. It is not like the teams are filling a lot of positions and there are a lot of candidates.

Brian

[wesley123]

They adapt themselves as much as the team prefers to. What you are stating is in this position a complete braintransplant with new interests opinions etc. etc.

Things are simply born into you. As a matter of fact, why dont you change from writing with your regular hand to your other, you cannot do it. It will take lots of practice to even get it right but you're writing will never look as good as with your regular hand. The same is with anything else, you can ask a driver to change their compelte driving style but he will never drive as good as he did with the current. you simply cannot change a thing over a time like a year where the person has been used to for over 30 years, and I do not see another way to explain that to you.

[hardingfv32]

Of coarse you can. Take a switch hitter in US baseball, batting left or right handed. A special few can be taught this skill, but not all. Granted there does not seem to be any switch pitchers.

It is not like we are asking the drivers to perform amazing feats of dexterity.

Brian

[yener]

This time we have a new front wing.. Its the old one, but finetuned

[raymondu999]

Mind pointing out the fine tunings?