| Scooby South | 02-26-2007 02:55 PM |
Who's faster.....natural or sensor
�
�
Who's the quicker driver:
Someone who does it naturally...by feel...site....experience....
Or the guy thats hooked up to a computer, GPS and with a analytical team of engineers...
Cars set up the same....initially...
Natural guys gives adjustment by feel...
Computer guy gets his adjustments from the computer nerds...
Which one and why????
Someone who does it naturally...by feel...site....experience....
Or the guy thats hooked up to a computer, GPS and with a analytical team of engineers...
Cars set up the same....initially...
Natural guys gives adjustment by feel...
Computer guy gets his adjustments from the computer nerds...
Which one and why????
| Scooby South | 02-26-2007 03:11 PM |
My thought is this...The natural guy might like the way the car is reacting in certain section....but the sensors say he can apply another 21.3% throttle thru that section based off collected data....assumed G-forces, grip level etc.....which will be faster but not comfortable to the natural guy...
So I say the sensor guy goes faster...
Bill
So I say the sensor guy goes faster...
Bill
| msedly | 02-26-2007 03:18 PM |
Although there is no suspension involved, I used to race shifter karts. I always relied more on the way the kart felt and what it could and could not do. What I mean is that if there is a kart that has a problem pushing the front end in right hand turns, a computer might tell you that you're going to slow and to change throttle, etc. where a natural driver will correct his/her line to make the kart happy thru the turn which will yield a faster sector time. I firmly believe that a natural driver is a great driver. Perfect example: Ayrton Senna. With a good car, he was fast; With a crappy car, he was faster!
Just my $.02
Just my $.02
| Impreza01 | 02-26-2007 03:20 PM |
Here's the problem, sensor technology will definitely be faster reacting. The issue is scientists and engineers can address a finite number of conditions. The natural driver will be able to foresee things happening or may make adjustments that sensors cannot predict or account for. Also, there is the issue of the psychological effects on the driver. If the driver feels uncomfortable about the adjustments the sensors do or dictate, then it's possible there will be a mental block or hampering. No driver performs well under "survival mode".
I believe a good combination is the fastest. If F1 was really about all-out, on the edge technology, you'd see advance traction control, mind-blowing throttle-control, smart brake bias proportiong, AWD cars driven by drivers who feel comfortable using them. There is a reason much technology has been banned. Either the costs are too great or the advantages are way too significant.
I believe a good combination is the fastest. If F1 was really about all-out, on the edge technology, you'd see advance traction control, mind-blowing throttle-control, smart brake bias proportiong, AWD cars driven by drivers who feel comfortable using them. There is a reason much technology has been banned. Either the costs are too great or the advantages are way too significant.
| LastResort | 02-26-2007 03:40 PM |
Given infinite budget, sensors, all the way. Considering how far things have come in the DARPA Grand Challenge where the autonomous vehicles.
| Don-HRD | 02-26-2007 03:48 PM |
Data ack is the single most important investment you can make to improve your driving. Forget a bigger badder motor or more hp, or buying a set of dampers because "they are perfect", get data ack and you will SEE the improvement and know which dampers are the best for yourself and how you can use the power you already have.
The statement above :"The natural guy might like the way the car is reacting in certain section....but the sensors say he can apply another 21.3% throttle thru that section based off collected data....assumed G-forces, grip level etc.....which will be faster but not comfortable to the natural guy..."
Is not correct, and is a huge difference between the club driver who changes the way he drives to get a laptime as opposed to a pro driver who simply changes the car to make it do what he wants to do. Data allows the team and driver to see what is going on and many times that is different than what the driver thinks is going on. Changes can then be made so the driver feels good and the car works good.
The statement above :"The natural guy might like the way the car is reacting in certain section....but the sensors say he can apply another 21.3% throttle thru that section based off collected data....assumed G-forces, grip level etc.....which will be faster but not comfortable to the natural guy..."
Is not correct, and is a huge difference between the club driver who changes the way he drives to get a laptime as opposed to a pro driver who simply changes the car to make it do what he wants to do. Data allows the team and driver to see what is going on and many times that is different than what the driver thinks is going on. Changes can then be made so the driver feels good and the car works good.
| goto_racing | 02-26-2007 04:00 PM |
Sensor guy. Physics doesn't care how you feel. Can you imagine trying to fly a space shuttle into a perfect orbit by the seat of your pants? Not really.
An automated system will always be faster and more accurate in it's decision making than a human. It's human overseer needs only to react to catastrophe and unforseen situations, which I am sorry to say, are a limitation of the human designers, not the computer.
Sorry, software guy here defending my craft.
Chris Lock
An automated system will always be faster and more accurate in it's decision making than a human. It's human overseer needs only to react to catastrophe and unforseen situations, which I am sorry to say, are a limitation of the human designers, not the computer.
Sorry, software guy here defending my craft.
Chris Lock
| msedly | 02-26-2007 04:01 PM |
[quote=Don-HRD;17184927]Data ack is the single most important investment you can make to improve your driving. Forget a bigger badder motor or more hp, or buying a set of dampers because "they are perfect", get data ack and you will SEE the improvement and know which dampers are the best for yourself and how you can use the power you already have.
The statement above :"The natural guy might like the way the car is reacting in certain section....but the sensors say he can apply another 21.3% throttle thru that section based off collected data....assumed G-forces, grip level etc.....which will be faster but not comfortable to the natural guy..."
Is not correct, and is a huge difference between the club driver who changes the way he drives to get a laptime as opposed to a pro driver who simply changes the car to make it do what he wants to do. Data allows the team and driver to see what is going on and many times that is different than what the driver thinks is going on. Changes can then be made so the driver feels good and the car works good.[/quote]
Absolutely! I am a huge fan of Data Aquisition software for the same reasons, but when there is no time to make adjustments because you are in the middle of a race... The "natural" driver will find a way to make the car do what he wants rather than whine about it.:rolleyes:
The statement above :"The natural guy might like the way the car is reacting in certain section....but the sensors say he can apply another 21.3% throttle thru that section based off collected data....assumed G-forces, grip level etc.....which will be faster but not comfortable to the natural guy..."
Is not correct, and is a huge difference between the club driver who changes the way he drives to get a laptime as opposed to a pro driver who simply changes the car to make it do what he wants to do. Data allows the team and driver to see what is going on and many times that is different than what the driver thinks is going on. Changes can then be made so the driver feels good and the car works good.[/quote]
Absolutely! I am a huge fan of Data Aquisition software for the same reasons, but when there is no time to make adjustments because you are in the middle of a race... The "natural" driver will find a way to make the car do what he wants rather than whine about it.:rolleyes:
| JoBoo | 02-26-2007 04:13 PM |
Sensors dont lie, but EGOS ALWAYS get in the way of unobjective assessment. Plus how good IS your Aresse dyno?
Sorry guys, just telling it how it is. (if you answered that question then your butt will not be as good as data ;) )
Sorry guys, just telling it how it is. (if you answered that question then your butt will not be as good as data ;) )
| leecea | 02-26-2007 04:14 PM |
I would speculate that a 'mechanical' approach using sophisticated sensors and a driver capable of absolute consistency lap to lap will generate the fastest lap times under perfect conditions.
However, in wheel to wheel jostling, the one that ends up at the front is often the one who made a courageous pass, a split second decision to take advantage of another's mistake, or had the talent to evade an accident.
I guess I'm saying you have to have some of each.
However, in wheel to wheel jostling, the one that ends up at the front is often the one who made a courageous pass, a split second decision to take advantage of another's mistake, or had the talent to evade an accident.
I guess I'm saying you have to have some of each.
| MPME | 02-26-2007 04:40 PM |
[QUOTE=Scooby South;17184298]Who's the quicker driver:
Someone who does it naturally...by feel...site....experience....
Or the guy thats hooked up to a computer, GPS and with a analytical team of engineers...
Cars set up the same....initially...
Natural guys gives adjustment by feel...
Computer guy gets his adjustments from the computer nerds...
Which one and why????[/QUOTE]
A natural, in any sport, possesses skills most others dream of having, and use training/imporvement tools to get closer to that natural talent. Data has only been prevalent in racing for 20yrs. To assert that the best drivers have come in the last 20yrs because of the added performance and training tool of data would be silly.
Someone who does it naturally...by feel...site....experience....
Or the guy thats hooked up to a computer, GPS and with a analytical team of engineers...
Cars set up the same....initially...
Natural guys gives adjustment by feel...
Computer guy gets his adjustments from the computer nerds...
Which one and why????[/QUOTE]
A natural, in any sport, possesses skills most others dream of having, and use training/imporvement tools to get closer to that natural talent. Data has only been prevalent in racing for 20yrs. To assert that the best drivers have come in the last 20yrs because of the added performance and training tool of data would be silly.
| goto_racing | 02-26-2007 04:52 PM |
[QUOTE=MPME;17185562] To assert that the best drivers have come in the last 20yrs because of the added performance and training tool of data would be silly.[/QUOTE]
No one asserted this, and it really wasn't the question. The question was a hypothetical one asking which would be quicker(read: faster all other things equal), not whether drivers have gotten better or worse for having technology.
The flaw in the initial question though, is that he never addressed if both drivers were of equal skill. Equal skill with more tools always has my vote.
Chris Lock
No one asserted this, and it really wasn't the question. The question was a hypothetical one asking which would be quicker(read: faster all other things equal), not whether drivers have gotten better or worse for having technology.
The flaw in the initial question though, is that he never addressed if both drivers were of equal skill. Equal skill with more tools always has my vote.
Chris Lock
| lukerussell | 02-26-2007 05:04 PM |
i'm not sure i understand the question. it can be construed two different ways:
1. Is it better to adjust your car according to what you feel would work or according to what data your pyrometers, sector times, sensors, data aq, stop watches, tire temps, computer modules, etc. would give you. The answer is obviously the latter.
2. Is an average driver w/ an F1 team of engineers making tweaks to his car going to beat a naturally gifted driver w/ average setup skills? I think the first one potentially will be faster until you throw in factors such as dirt on the track, traffic, rain, oil, etc. So maybe faster at AutoX but maybe not at Road Racing.
my opinion.
Luke
1. Is it better to adjust your car according to what you feel would work or according to what data your pyrometers, sector times, sensors, data aq, stop watches, tire temps, computer modules, etc. would give you. The answer is obviously the latter.
2. Is an average driver w/ an F1 team of engineers making tweaks to his car going to beat a naturally gifted driver w/ average setup skills? I think the first one potentially will be faster until you throw in factors such as dirt on the track, traffic, rain, oil, etc. So maybe faster at AutoX but maybe not at Road Racing.
my opinion.
Luke
| MPME | 02-26-2007 05:06 PM |
[QUOTE=goto_racing;17185717]No one asserted this, and it really wasn't the question. The question was a hypothetical one asking which would be quicker(read: faster all other things equal), not whether drivers have gotten better or worse for having technology.
The flaw in the initial question though, is that he never addressed if both drivers were of equal skill. Equal skill with more tools always has my vote.
Chris Lock[/QUOTE]
Thanks, my reading comprehension allowed me to deduce it wasn't the original question, but was becoming an assertation in replies to the original question, hence my own reply.
As for a better formed question, one wold clarify if the question is related to amateur or professional drivers. Amatuer drivers make greater use and thus greater improvements thanks to data. Pro drivers, and I mean genuine professionals, not someone with amatuer skills or semi-pro skills participating in a professional series, use data to modify their driving performance very little. Their engineers, on the other hand, use it a great deal.
The flaw in the initial question though, is that he never addressed if both drivers were of equal skill. Equal skill with more tools always has my vote.
Chris Lock[/QUOTE]
Thanks, my reading comprehension allowed me to deduce it wasn't the original question, but was becoming an assertation in replies to the original question, hence my own reply.
As for a better formed question, one wold clarify if the question is related to amateur or professional drivers. Amatuer drivers make greater use and thus greater improvements thanks to data. Pro drivers, and I mean genuine professionals, not someone with amatuer skills or semi-pro skills participating in a professional series, use data to modify their driving performance very little. Their engineers, on the other hand, use it a great deal.
| rbahr | 02-26-2007 05:18 PM |
This is a tough question BECAUSE different people learn in very different manners. The ego is key here - a person who can look at data will find it easier to get past the ego thing out there. I am sure that there are a few folks who can overcome that little voice... The other thing is that very few people have the reaction time, physical awareness and the memory to assimilate all of the data that is being generated... All in all I would say that a properly instrumented vehicle CAN produce a better driver...
Ray
Ray
| MPME | 02-26-2007 05:25 PM |
[QUOTE=rbahr;17186069]This is a tough question BECAUSE different people learn in very different manners. The ego is key here - a person who can look at data will find it easier to get past the ego thing out there. I am sure that there are a few folks who can overcome that little voice... The other thing is that very few people have the reaction time, physical awareness and the memory to assimilate all of the data that is being generated... All in all I would say that a properly instrumented vehicle CAN produce a better driver...
Ray[/QUOTE]
Brief aside: spent the '06 SJGP with a friend that engineered Allmendinger at Forsythe--was doing a feature on A.J., and hung out with he and my engineer pal the entire weekend, in debriefs, had a radio and headset during the sessions, etc.
I recall A.J. looking at a single data printout during the event, and barring what he downloaded to his engineer, relied on his own talent, not the data systems, to extract the most from himself. His engineer used the data to make small improvements to the car, or to verify the impact of certain changes, but as for driving, Allmendinger he didn't/doesn't need data to make himself better. Most top drivers are like that, and those are my own findings having worked in top series as well.
The less skilled the pro driver, the more they want/need data.
Ray[/QUOTE]
Brief aside: spent the '06 SJGP with a friend that engineered Allmendinger at Forsythe--was doing a feature on A.J., and hung out with he and my engineer pal the entire weekend, in debriefs, had a radio and headset during the sessions, etc.
I recall A.J. looking at a single data printout during the event, and barring what he downloaded to his engineer, relied on his own talent, not the data systems, to extract the most from himself. His engineer used the data to make small improvements to the car, or to verify the impact of certain changes, but as for driving, Allmendinger he didn't/doesn't need data to make himself better. Most top drivers are like that, and those are my own findings having worked in top series as well.
The less skilled the pro driver, the more they want/need data.
| rbahr | 02-26-2007 05:40 PM |
Another good example of one of those who could just figure it out is Mark Donohue
| goto_racing | 02-26-2007 06:23 PM |
[QUOTE=MPME;17186167]
The less skilled the pro driver, the more they want/need data.[/QUOTE]
I guess I need this explained more. A pro driver just assumes he went fast and everything went well? Does he not even look at his times?
I find it hard to swallow that objective review is irrelavent to an athlete's self improvement. I COULD agree that a more skilled athlete (that has reached a high point in his career) may draw more on his experience than data, but I disagree that his skills could have been aquired in the same manner. In any sport, transforming raw talent into real skills is a process of repetition and analysis. It would take an awful lot of evidence (from all sports) for me to believe the above statement as something more than opinion, even though you present it as fact.
Sorry to break balls marshall :)
Chris Lock
The less skilled the pro driver, the more they want/need data.[/QUOTE]
I guess I need this explained more. A pro driver just assumes he went fast and everything went well? Does he not even look at his times?
I find it hard to swallow that objective review is irrelavent to an athlete's self improvement. I COULD agree that a more skilled athlete (that has reached a high point in his career) may draw more on his experience than data, but I disagree that his skills could have been aquired in the same manner. In any sport, transforming raw talent into real skills is a process of repetition and analysis. It would take an awful lot of evidence (from all sports) for me to believe the above statement as something more than opinion, even though you present it as fact.
Sorry to break balls marshall :)
Chris Lock
| MPME | 02-26-2007 07:03 PM |
[QUOTE=goto_racing;17186830]I guess I need this explained more. A pro driver just assumes he went fast and everything went well? Does he not even look at his times?
I find it hard to swallow that objective review is irrelavent to an athlete's self improvement. I COULD agree that a more skilled athlete (that has reached a high point in his career) may draw more on his experience than data, but I disagree that his skills could have been aquired in the same manner. In any sport, transforming raw talent into real skills is a process of repetition and analysis. It would take an awful lot of evidence (from all sports) for me to believe the above statement as something more than opinion, even though you present it as fact.
Sorry to break balls marshall :)
Chris Lock[/QUOTE]
Well, if we want to break balls, I guess I'd have to ask how many pro drivers or teams you've worked with, or pro engineering jobs you've held to then offer a balanced opinion. From my understanding, you'd be able to present the amateur/mild-pro perspective, but that's about it, no?... :)
Looking at one's laptimes is different than what was asked regarding the use of data acquisition.
I find it hard to swallow that objective review is irrelavent to an athlete's self improvement. I COULD agree that a more skilled athlete (that has reached a high point in his career) may draw more on his experience than data, but I disagree that his skills could have been aquired in the same manner. In any sport, transforming raw talent into real skills is a process of repetition and analysis. It would take an awful lot of evidence (from all sports) for me to believe the above statement as something more than opinion, even though you present it as fact.
Sorry to break balls marshall :)
Chris Lock[/QUOTE]
Well, if we want to break balls, I guess I'd have to ask how many pro drivers or teams you've worked with, or pro engineering jobs you've held to then offer a balanced opinion. From my understanding, you'd be able to present the amateur/mild-pro perspective, but that's about it, no?... :)
Looking at one's laptimes is different than what was asked regarding the use of data acquisition.
| goto_racing | 02-26-2007 07:25 PM |
[QUOTE=MPME;17187261]Well, if we want to break balls, I guess I'd have to ask how many pro drivers or teams you've worked with, or pro engineering jobs you've held to then offer a balanced opinion. From my understanding, you'd be able to present the amateur/mild-pro perspective, but that's about it, no?... :)
[/QUOTE]
I guess I should go cry in my "mild-pro" milk now, but instead:
[url]http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html[/url]
I gave your claim fair criticism. At least give mine that.
Chris Lock
[/QUOTE]
I guess I should go cry in my "mild-pro" milk now, but instead:
[url]http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html[/url]
I gave your claim fair criticism. At least give mine that.
Chris Lock
| rbahr | 02-26-2007 07:55 PM |
Perhaps another relevant question would be: "Can any professional race driver benefit from extensive instrumentation and data analysis?" I tend to not like to say never so I allow for that rare person who can survive without the data, but I suspect the majority (if not all) can benefit...
Ray
Ray
| Scooby South | 02-26-2007 07:56 PM |
I know there is unquestionable data that helps any given driver....
I guess my original question is...
With the same driver....if he takes 40 laps of any given track...and comes in to make adjustments on how the car feels to him...
Then that driver is hooked up to telemetry with all componants ...He does 40 laps again...and says nothing...but the team adjusts the car on what the telemetry saids....
"Will the driver be faster by the inputs he gave to make the car faster...or without his knowledge of what they changed...just changed based off the telemetry...which session would the driver be faster in......make sense???
Interesting things coming from you guys...thanks for the perspective..:)
Bill
I guess my original question is...
With the same driver....if he takes 40 laps of any given track...and comes in to make adjustments on how the car feels to him...
Then that driver is hooked up to telemetry with all componants ...He does 40 laps again...and says nothing...but the team adjusts the car on what the telemetry saids....
"Will the driver be faster by the inputs he gave to make the car faster...or without his knowledge of what they changed...just changed based off the telemetry...which session would the driver be faster in......make sense???
Interesting things coming from you guys...thanks for the perspective..:)
Bill
| Don-HRD | 02-26-2007 08:11 PM |
I agree a naturally gifted driver has a leg up, but like anything else, to each his own. I will not mention any names but I worked with a driver a few years ago who could tell you pretty much which changes in which dampers would benefit the car. A natural gift? No, simple experience in similar cars and looking over data and working with his engineer. A great driver? Yes one of the best- in fact I would say the premier Sports/Touring Car driver of today.
Another driver I did not work with directly had no experience with data ack and did OK on his own. However once he had data and an engineer who could understand and make use of it, he improved. Not just the car, but his driving improved as well, a function of understanding the hows and whys the car worked, how to adjust the car to his needs, and how to relate what he felt to the engineer in debrief. He became such a believer in data in fact, that he had it installed in his Late Model stock car to improve that program through making better use of testing.
My experience has been that data helps during the race meeting, but generically an engineer will not have time to make full use or interpretation of all the data until after the race meeting is over and you are back in the garage, where the needed adjustments are made for testing prior to the next race meeting.
It has also been my experience that true pro racers change the car to fit thier driving, working with thier engineers to optimize both car and driver. Club level racers will change thier driving first, often learning or inventing very very bad habits that often haunt them thier entire career.
Another driver I did not work with directly had no experience with data ack and did OK on his own. However once he had data and an engineer who could understand and make use of it, he improved. Not just the car, but his driving improved as well, a function of understanding the hows and whys the car worked, how to adjust the car to his needs, and how to relate what he felt to the engineer in debrief. He became such a believer in data in fact, that he had it installed in his Late Model stock car to improve that program through making better use of testing.
My experience has been that data helps during the race meeting, but generically an engineer will not have time to make full use or interpretation of all the data until after the race meeting is over and you are back in the garage, where the needed adjustments are made for testing prior to the next race meeting.
It has also been my experience that true pro racers change the car to fit thier driving, working with thier engineers to optimize both car and driver. Club level racers will change thier driving first, often learning or inventing very very bad habits that often haunt them thier entire career.
| MPME | 02-26-2007 08:41 PM |
[QUOTE=goto_racing;17187546]I guess I should go cry in my "mild-pro" milk now, but instead:
[url]http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html[/url]
I gave your claim fair criticism. At least give mine that.
Chris Lock[/QUOTE]
Chris, what I'm tryi to illustrate here, and I've obviously done a poor job of it, is that to give a valid reply to the question, one needs the proper breadth of experience to do so. Maybe I read the question differently than you and have interpreted it differently.
I take no issue with your assements for the level of what you know, but I just find it odd that where I have different experiences that have led me to a different answer, you want to bust my balls.
If this was a question posed about amatuer/mild-pro stuff, I'd limit my reply to what I've only seen in those circles. I've been fortunate to see more than that, and replied as such. If you want to break my balls on my replies based on what your particular experience happens to be, it's all good.
[url]http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html[/url]
I gave your claim fair criticism. At least give mine that.
Chris Lock[/QUOTE]
Chris, what I'm tryi to illustrate here, and I've obviously done a poor job of it, is that to give a valid reply to the question, one needs the proper breadth of experience to do so. Maybe I read the question differently than you and have interpreted it differently.
I take no issue with your assements for the level of what you know, but I just find it odd that where I have different experiences that have led me to a different answer, you want to bust my balls.
If this was a question posed about amatuer/mild-pro stuff, I'd limit my reply to what I've only seen in those circles. I've been fortunate to see more than that, and replied as such. If you want to break my balls on my replies based on what your particular experience happens to be, it's all good.
| racerjon1 | 02-26-2007 09:34 PM |
[QUOTE=Scooby South;17187887]I guess my original question is...
With the same driver....if he takes 40 laps of any given track...and comes in to make adjustments on how the car feels to him...
Then that driver is hooked up to telemetry with all componants ...He does 40 laps again...and says nothing...but the team adjusts the car on what the telemetry saids....
"Will the driver be faster by the inputs he gave to make the car faster...or without his knowledge of what they changed...just changed based off the telemetry...which session would the driver be faster in......make sense???
[/QUOTE]
I almost don't think it's a "fair" question, and hence the varried answers. If the driver has a lot of experience, but not with data aquisition, I submit he will be faster based off his butt-dyno rather than the team doing just the data adjustments.
The data is awesome, and given the choice I would want it, and I would want to coach with it, and use it to set up a car for a driver - but I think driver feel would still be important, and then you use the data to give the driver a combination of what the car wants and what he needs.
Going 100% either way isn't going to be the fast(est) way. A combination of both driver feel and data is needed to get the most. It's why "chemistry" is such a buzzword when you hear people talking about drivers and teams. You have a crew chief/engineer that understands how the driver drives, and how to combine that with what cars like.
Multi-time SCCA Solo National Champion Robert Carpenter told me once, "We set our cars up for our own idiosyncrasies," and I saw in one of the "big" books (Smith or somone) that "Driver Comfort is the most important factor to going fast." Both quotes show that both human, and "sensor" input to maximize potential.
Jon K
With the same driver....if he takes 40 laps of any given track...and comes in to make adjustments on how the car feels to him...
Then that driver is hooked up to telemetry with all componants ...He does 40 laps again...and says nothing...but the team adjusts the car on what the telemetry saids....
"Will the driver be faster by the inputs he gave to make the car faster...or without his knowledge of what they changed...just changed based off the telemetry...which session would the driver be faster in......make sense???
[/QUOTE]
I almost don't think it's a "fair" question, and hence the varried answers. If the driver has a lot of experience, but not with data aquisition, I submit he will be faster based off his butt-dyno rather than the team doing just the data adjustments.
The data is awesome, and given the choice I would want it, and I would want to coach with it, and use it to set up a car for a driver - but I think driver feel would still be important, and then you use the data to give the driver a combination of what the car wants and what he needs.
Going 100% either way isn't going to be the fast(est) way. A combination of both driver feel and data is needed to get the most. It's why "chemistry" is such a buzzword when you hear people talking about drivers and teams. You have a crew chief/engineer that understands how the driver drives, and how to combine that with what cars like.
Multi-time SCCA Solo National Champion Robert Carpenter told me once, "We set our cars up for our own idiosyncrasies," and I saw in one of the "big" books (Smith or somone) that "Driver Comfort is the most important factor to going fast." Both quotes show that both human, and "sensor" input to maximize potential.
Jon K
| davis10 | 02-26-2007 11:29 PM |
In order to be the sensor guy you have to prove you have a natural feel, then you get sponsors etc. and with their money you find ways to go faster by using sensors analyzers etc.
| cooleyjb | 02-26-2007 11:37 PM |
Natural kicks Sensors butt according to this
[url]http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=natural&word2=sensor[/url]
Impossible question to answer, davis10 has it right. You'll never get to sensor based performance improvement if you don't have any natural talent.
[url]http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=natural&word2=sensor[/url]
Impossible question to answer, davis10 has it right. You'll never get to sensor based performance improvement if you don't have any natural talent.
| Mykl | 02-27-2007 09:09 AM |
I don't think you need any natural talent to be a great driver. I think natural abilities really help you learn more quickly than another person might, but I believe that most people have the capability to be great drivers given enough study and practice. The problem is... a large majority of people who aren't already professionals don't get the opportunities necessary to hone their skills.
The problem with the sensor driver is that you need some knowledge and talent to use all that information. If you just don't know where to place the car on the course, it really doesn't matter what those sensors are telling you. Also consider that there is such a thing as entirely too much information, we can only deal with so much at once. Everything on a track/autocross tends to happen pretty fast to begin with, then throw in making decisions based on sensor feedback and what your competitors are doing and the overload may even slow you down while you process it all.
The problem with the sensor driver is that you need some knowledge and talent to use all that information. If you just don't know where to place the car on the course, it really doesn't matter what those sensors are telling you. Also consider that there is such a thing as entirely too much information, we can only deal with so much at once. Everything on a track/autocross tends to happen pretty fast to begin with, then throw in making decisions based on sensor feedback and what your competitors are doing and the overload may even slow you down while you process it all.
| JoBoo | 02-27-2007 10:07 AM |
wow, the scope of this discussion has gotten a little bigger than I thought early on.
I would suppose in the most idealistic sense, the better driver works (and knows how to communicate) with his team to use the data as a tool, as with any other tool used on the car, including his input from the cocpit. As some of the replies have touched on , the driver can either use that data to adjust what he/she is doing to be faster, or understand how to work with the engineers to make the car faster at certain points. This is also knowing what compromises any changes will bring, and how that affects overall speed/time.
So to be fair to the original question, who's faster? A driver who knows how to use the sensor. :D
I would suppose in the most idealistic sense, the better driver works (and knows how to communicate) with his team to use the data as a tool, as with any other tool used on the car, including his input from the cocpit. As some of the replies have touched on , the driver can either use that data to adjust what he/she is doing to be faster, or understand how to work with the engineers to make the car faster at certain points. This is also knowing what compromises any changes will bring, and how that affects overall speed/time.
So to be fair to the original question, who's faster? A driver who knows how to use the sensor. :D
| Predwolf | 02-27-2007 02:24 PM |
Making adjustments based on natural feeling Vs based on technology?
Technology all the way. We're not talking about who's a better driver, just what would make better adjustments.
Now, if you want to talk about making a better driver, then that's a whole 'nother discussion.
Technology all the way. We're not talking about who's a better driver, just what would make better adjustments.
Now, if you want to talk about making a better driver, then that's a whole 'nother discussion.
| Funky | 02-27-2007 02:36 PM |
You are presenting a false dichotomy.
The driver who incorporates all available objective data as well as his own subjective feedback will be the fastest.
The driver who incorporates all available objective data as well as his own subjective feedback will be the fastest.
| Joel Gat, 1.8L | 02-27-2007 03:34 PM |
Hello,
World records are being broken every year, in every sport, in large part due to computers, video, sensors, and data acquisition. Even sprint and endurance running records are being shattered every year and running has been around for as long as humans have existed (many records used to stand for decades, now none are safe).
I'm not sure exactly what the question is asking - there are no top professional drivers in any motorsport who are not using sensor data to improve at least their cars, if not also themselves. There is no doubt in my mind that Schumacher, Alonso, Raikkonen, Button, Massa (this year he was a new man!), etc., are all using sensors to improve themselves. They probably practice while wearing telemetry heartrate, bloodpressure, EKG, etc., sensors so that their physical and mental trainers have data from which to improve their condition for driving. They are certainly going over data from each of their performances and evaluation what their vehicles did as well as how they controlled or reacted to their vehicles. They are also certainly using data acquisition to improve their cars as well (well, their teams / engineers are).
But is the question asking whether someone with natural talent is better than someone with no natural talent but a lot of sensors? Sensors / data will never help a talentless hack get anywhere above club racing (though lots of money will get that person almost as high as they want to go, but I don't consider them to be racing at that level). If we're talking about your average car guy, natural or learned skill will trump sensors. You practically don't need sensor data until you've reached some real level of skill (ie, yaw rates and suspension travel will tell you almost nothing if you are missing all your apexes by 10 feet).
Meanwhile, if you look at the top 5 drivers from F1, WRC, NASCAR, ALMS, etc., all of them have a ton of natural talent. If you took two of those drivers, had one train for a year without data acquisition (ie, come in, tell his engineer what he feels, suggest changes, have the engineer implement changes based solely on driver feedback and his own experience, have the driver live his life as normal, etc), and had the other train with data acq (ie, come in, tell his engineer what he feels, suggest changes, have the engineer review the data and make the final call on the changes, have a personal trainer scientifically monitor fitness, suggest changes to workouts based on muscular endurance, aerobic capacity, etc), my guess is that at the end of the year, the latter driver will have improved significantly MORE (both personally and car-setup-wise). If you then dropped that second driver into the first driver's car, I believe he would be able to take better advantage of that car, both physically and technically. He learned something from the data - if nothing else, to be able to better correlate the things he does naturally with the actions of the car and he would be in better shape.
JMO, of course, while trying to figure out what the question was asking, too :P
Joel
World records are being broken every year, in every sport, in large part due to computers, video, sensors, and data acquisition. Even sprint and endurance running records are being shattered every year and running has been around for as long as humans have existed (many records used to stand for decades, now none are safe).
I'm not sure exactly what the question is asking - there are no top professional drivers in any motorsport who are not using sensor data to improve at least their cars, if not also themselves. There is no doubt in my mind that Schumacher, Alonso, Raikkonen, Button, Massa (this year he was a new man!), etc., are all using sensors to improve themselves. They probably practice while wearing telemetry heartrate, bloodpressure, EKG, etc., sensors so that their physical and mental trainers have data from which to improve their condition for driving. They are certainly going over data from each of their performances and evaluation what their vehicles did as well as how they controlled or reacted to their vehicles. They are also certainly using data acquisition to improve their cars as well (well, their teams / engineers are).
But is the question asking whether someone with natural talent is better than someone with no natural talent but a lot of sensors? Sensors / data will never help a talentless hack get anywhere above club racing (though lots of money will get that person almost as high as they want to go, but I don't consider them to be racing at that level). If we're talking about your average car guy, natural or learned skill will trump sensors. You practically don't need sensor data until you've reached some real level of skill (ie, yaw rates and suspension travel will tell you almost nothing if you are missing all your apexes by 10 feet).
Meanwhile, if you look at the top 5 drivers from F1, WRC, NASCAR, ALMS, etc., all of them have a ton of natural talent. If you took two of those drivers, had one train for a year without data acquisition (ie, come in, tell his engineer what he feels, suggest changes, have the engineer implement changes based solely on driver feedback and his own experience, have the driver live his life as normal, etc), and had the other train with data acq (ie, come in, tell his engineer what he feels, suggest changes, have the engineer review the data and make the final call on the changes, have a personal trainer scientifically monitor fitness, suggest changes to workouts based on muscular endurance, aerobic capacity, etc), my guess is that at the end of the year, the latter driver will have improved significantly MORE (both personally and car-setup-wise). If you then dropped that second driver into the first driver's car, I believe he would be able to take better advantage of that car, both physically and technically. He learned something from the data - if nothing else, to be able to better correlate the things he does naturally with the actions of the car and he would be in better shape.
JMO, of course, while trying to figure out what the question was asking, too :P
Joel
| Swine | 02-27-2007 03:51 PM |
Computer guy will always eventually come out on top.
| makofoto | 02-28-2007 04:09 AM |
Johnny Herbert said that Senna was SO fast because ultimately Senna had Absolute Trust that he could take the fastest corners fast ... while "everyone" else had that tiny bit of self doubt. So ... ultimately the man with the most natural talent, although of course he worked very hard at it, was faster. I suspect Schumacher took everything to the next level, by incorporating extremely high natural talent, developed very early and fortified by using all modern means.
To that earlier claim that Donohue could naturally "figure it out," I disagree. Donohue was one of the early ones to believe in careful scientific testing. I'm sure he would have embraced data aquisition whole heartedly, and put that data to good use. Donohue was fast because he studied handling, understood handling, tested it and then put it to good use.
To that earlier claim that Donohue could naturally "figure it out," I disagree. Donohue was one of the early ones to believe in careful scientific testing. I'm sure he would have embraced data aquisition whole heartedly, and put that data to good use. Donohue was fast because he studied handling, understood handling, tested it and then put it to good use.
| rbahr | 02-28-2007 12:24 PM |
In reply to makofoto:
I agree that Donohue would have used technology to help and in fact his being an engineer help tremendously. That said he didn't have the level of instrumentation available today and was able to accomplish amazing things and had an intimate awareness of his car (data that would now be provided by instrumentation)
In an absolute sense, I still think raw talent is good, but raw talent augmented by real data that feeds back into the decision process is better. The human element of being able to accept and correctly incorporate that data is the problem...
Ray
I agree that Donohue would have used technology to help and in fact his being an engineer help tremendously. That said he didn't have the level of instrumentation available today and was able to accomplish amazing things and had an intimate awareness of his car (data that would now be provided by instrumentation)
In an absolute sense, I still think raw talent is good, but raw talent augmented by real data that feeds back into the decision process is better. The human element of being able to accept and correctly incorporate that data is the problem...
Ray
| makofoto | 02-28-2007 01:28 PM |
Right, now Schumacher and Donohue have/would have even more information, but having natural talent augmented with absolute data plus huge dedication and work ethics but these men at the top.
I agree with the issue of being able to accept and use data. There are plenty of cases of drivers insisting that they were not lifting when in fact that data showed otherwise. Again, Senna had such absolute faith that he could keep his foot down where others instinctively lifted a bit ... even at F1 levels.
I agree with the issue of being able to accept and use data. There are plenty of cases of drivers insisting that they were not lifting when in fact that data showed otherwise. Again, Senna had such absolute faith that he could keep his foot down where others instinctively lifted a bit ... even at F1 levels.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét