traction control and wet weather

[nae]

as an experimental project i would hearty agree

but i want to see men race cars, i play a computer most days and
dont want so see men tell a control system they wont something then it decides
for them, that isnt really driving and defo isnt racing

[nae]

Q: With the backdrop of your American heritage, can you understand the safety concerns surrounding the ban on traction control (TC)?

Sebastien Bourdais: In general it never made sense to me to have TC in Formula One. We are supposed to be the best drivers on this planet. We all come from Formulae without traction control and nobody complains. And then we come into Formula One and suddenly it was the easiest car to drive because there was nothing to do with the right foot. And in fact when I tested last year it was a bit frustrating for me as I felt I was not 100 percent in control of the car. All the discussions about not driving in the wet without TC…if we have such discussions we should not be here. For myself I have discovered that in wet conditions the car drives superbly - it is super balanced.

[Belatti]

I´m starting to like this Sebastien. I posted a couple of his quotes in the ChampCar - F1 comparison thread about some differences, but there he mentioned what you posted, too.

I love his "All the discussions about not driving in the wet without TC, if we have such discussions we should not be here" quote.

And "For myself I have discovered that in wet conditions the car drives superbly - it is super balanced" lets me see he is a good driver. I really hope he does well, he deserves after all for all the time he had to wait and all the things he have won.

[nae]

and what with today's times in Spain, he ain't just talking himself up

could str be a surprise this year, lets hope so

[icef1mkd]

Indeed, I know the guy comes from a racing family and
has a rep of a pure racer (taking on Le Mans, RoC and so on...)
and man he comfirms it with thoughts like these.

I'm starting to like him more and more, and since NOW he's
just 0.103 behind Vettel in qualifying simulation...I'm starting
to believe that in the moment when he adopts fully into the system
he'll be able to extract his full potential...and if he keeps that
attitude of a champ...I think we'll really enjoy having Sebastien in
Formula 1.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

I've liked Bourdais for a fair bit now, never followed the american series tbh, mainly because I can never find a regular show to watch (that I'm not either at uni or work during), and admittedly at first I thought "Great, so is this going to be another Villneurve or another Michael Andretti?" very quickly though I reassured myself, I meanm, regardless of how lowly one rates the CHAMPCAR series (and many do - not nessecarily with a basis for this opinion) how many championships has he won? and how many in succession?!

He's a bloody good driver, and I'm really liking the STR team atm, I mean Red Bull Racing is a sellout - all this talk about youth and what-not and all of a sudden they've ditched all their red bull young driver program guys and snapped up the oldest driving pair on the grid. Nothing wrong with that, it's just that it seems as though they're giving up on all the young hype they built the Red Bull empire on.

STR on the otherhand have two young and exciting drivers, and its great to see. Bourdias' comments about TC & the wet...I simply cannot agree more. All the other series do away with TC, and F1 had no TC for years - all of a sudden though "Oh no, we can't do away with it - think of the carnage." What carnage?! Name ONE time this year there could have been an accident even remotely as bad as Kubica's at Montreal which would have happened without TC?

You can't name one, and no Fuji does not count because at no point would spinning on a track THAT WET ever involve forces like that. You simply don't go fast enough. And who cares about aqua-planning on the straight? It's not like aquaplanning is going to suddenly form a brick wall for you to drive into - you'll simply gently slip into the gravel, or slide into the wall. At worst you'll hit a spinning car at a relative speed of, what? say 100mph? For an F1 car that's nothing nowadays (relatively speaking of course)

Being totally honest without TC i'd have suggested not to race, but purely because it would have been a bit iof a farce.

[Rob W]

Just on American racing series' - Bourdais is lucky he drove for Champ Cars IMO instead of IRL even though IRL is by far the more popular series.

I honestly think that nowdays guys who've spent time on ovals are at a significant disadvantage when trying to switch series. There are heaps of extremely successful current 'oval' drivers like Scott Dixon, Sam Hornish etc - but would an F1 really bother anymore? Why not get someone from GP2 who has been driving largely the same circuits for years instead - and at a fraction of the cost?

Is it becoming too difficult to make the leap from ovals? Are drivers from IRL going to start moving to Champ Car teams in order to get a couple of years circuit racing under their belt with an aim for F1 down the track?

R

[Rob W]

...Bourdias' comments about TC & the wet...I simply cannot agree more. All the other series do away with TC, and F1 had no TC for years - all of a sudden though "Oh no, we can't do away with it - think of the carnage." What carnage?!

Champ cars don't even race what it's raining do they? Or they wont start if it's raining?? That would remove half of the traction control problem.

R

[jaho101]

...Bourdias' comments about TC & the wet...I simply cannot agree more. All the other series do away with TC, and F1 had no TC for years - all of a sudden though "Oh no, we can't do away with it - think of the carnage." What carnage?!

Champ cars don't even race what it's raining do they? Or they wont start if it's raining?? That would remove half of the traction control problem.

R

They don't race on Ovals when its wet. However is you want to see an amazing wet-race in Champcar, watch Mexico 2006. Bourdais pulls off an amazing stunt on the last lap, Zinadri-esque.

[bizadfar]

I've liked Bourdais for a fair bit now, never followed the american series tbh, mainly because I can never find a regular show to watch (that I'm not either at uni or work during), and admittedly at first I thought "Great, so is this going to be another Villneurve or another Michael Andretti?" very quickly though I reassured myself, I meanm, regardless of how lowly one rates the CHAMPCAR series (and many do - not nessecarily with a basis for this opinion) how many championships has he won? and how many in succession?!

He's a bloody good driver, and I'm really liking the STR team atm, I mean Red Bull Racing is a sellout - all this talk about youth and what-not and all of a sudden they've ditched all their red bull young driver program guys and snapped up the oldest driving pair on the grid. Nothing wrong with that, it's just that it seems as though they're giving up on all the young hype they built the Red Bull empire on.

STR on the otherhand have two young and exciting drivers, and its great to see. Bourdias' comments about TC & the wet...I simply cannot agree more. All the other series do away with TC, and F1 had no TC for years - all of a sudden though "Oh no, we can't do away with it - think of the carnage." What carnage?! Name ONE time this year there could have been an accident even remotely as bad as Kubica's at Montreal which would have happened without TC?

You can't name one, and no Fuji does not count because at no point would spinning on a track THAT WET ever involve forces like that. You simply don't go fast enough. And who cares about aqua-planning on the straight? It's not like aquaplanning is going to suddenly form a brick wall for you to drive into - you'll simply gently slip into the gravel, or slide into the wall. At worst you'll hit a spinning car at a relative speed of, what? say 100mph? For an F1 car that's nothing nowadays (relatively speaking of course)

Being totally honest without TC i'd have suggested not to race, but purely because it would have been a bit iof a farce.

hmm i think you should the Indy 300 from a couple years ago.... exactly that just happened and there was majority of the field pileup on the s/f......... [-X

[nae]

the rules of the series dictates the design of the cars

in F1 there is a possibility of racing in the rain so the designers have to factor this in to the design, i dont know about other open wheel series but if there is a possibility and they dont then the fault lies in the design.

nobody in F1 circles will forget that wet spa race and for all that nobody wants to
see that again(starts under SC) it has to be part of the range of possibles to punish bad driving. it is entirely possible to drive an F1 car in the wet and just like in the dry driver error causes crashes and thus good drivers come to the fore.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

hmm i think you should the Indy 300 from a couple years ago.... exactly that just happened and there was majority of the field pileup on the s/f......... [-X

Exactly, that why I said it would be a facre. But one race at indy a couple years ago does not dictate what would happen in an F1 car. As nae says the rule dictate the design and thus the conditions the cars can run in. F1 cars are designed to be able to race in the wet, they always have been. And until relatively recently they did, without many problems, without TC. Which goes back to my first point - if it was alright in 2000, why not in 2008? So with all due respect (I'm not trying to start any arguments) I see no relevance that the Indy 300 possibly has.

[bizadfar]

hmm i think you should the Indy 300 from a couple years ago.... exactly that just happened and there was majority of the field pileup on the s/f......... [-X

Exactly, that why I said it would be a facre. But one race at indy a couple years ago does not dictate what would happen in an F1 car. As nae says the rule dictate the design and thus the conditions the cars can run in. F1 cars are designed to be able to race in the wet, they always have been. And until relatively recently they did, without many problems, without TC. Which goes back to my first point - if it was alright in 2000, why not in 2008? So with all due respect (I'm not trying to start any arguments) I see no relevance that the Indy 300 possibly has.

In some respect I agree, TC can't do much when your floating on a layer of standing water.

But watch the onboards, There will be more and more (in your opinion) bizarre accidents and dull races. And there was a lot of that pre 2001 with less than half the finishers.

[jaho101]

hmm i think you should the Indy 300 from a couple years ago.... exactly that just happened and there was majority of the field pileup on the s/f......... [-X

Did the race end 200 miles early?

[Spencifer_Murphy]

In some respect I agree, TC can't do much when your floating on a layer of standing water.

But watch the onboards, There will be more and more (in your opinion) bizarre accidents and dull races. And there was a lot of that pre 2001 with less than half the finishers.

True, but it will shake things up a little bit. I mean how many wet races do we get a year? One, two, maybe three. One or two races with bizzare accidents could be a pretty exciting thing. At least races like Spa '98 are a rareity lol.