Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 153 posts

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#81

Post by wolfspider »

systemvoltage wrote: post #14

I mean this in the most respectful way: Can someone please explain the allure of watching F1 race on TV? I honestly sat down with a few friends and we watched Kimi Raikonnen but it was not a lot of action in terms of overtaking and drama - it was mostly inching forward and making time. I fully understand and appreciate the amount of skills that go into driving an F1 car, but what is in for the spectator?

For me between 2000-2005 F1 was fun to watch though after 2005 there were too many regulations and all the cars were too similar. If you want to see some overtaking and drama those were some great races.

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#82

Post by happyjack »

F1 is an extremely difficult position these days. How can a team(s) increase lap speed YoY, have competitive racing, make money, stay safe, and still have incentives for OEMs to participate? The answer is they can't. At least in the current formula. I think Bernie did a great job running the sport as a dictator, but he set up a house of cards that was doomed. I don't think Chase Carey and Liberty really had a chance. Also, the talent pool has become increasingly level. With the advances in simulator technology and aero dominating the sport, I think the driver / pilot has much less factor. I don't think there is really any room to argue. Kimi is still out in Q1, and the Mercs are 1 2. There will always be different eras and arguments as to who is good, blah blah. But the fact is driver salaries are going down, and the margin between the drivers is shrinking. This isn't 2003 where Schumacher and Ferrari would run 3000 miles of testing every other week.

Let's be honest; it's about the car. There is a reason Adrian Newey has won titles with 3 teams. There is a reason MClaren is going back to Mercedes. There is a reason why Toro Rosso only wins in the wet. There is a reason driver salaries are down. There is a reason we have 18 year old drivers.

I think the only way to go back to exciting racing is bringing back more variables. Less Tilke / new age tracks (more track diversity), refueling / more tire manufacturers and the like, go back to the old school points system, and get rid of these crazy stewards that are killing races like the one Vetell had in Canada. Have a technical regulations package that has a diminishing return past a certain amount of $ spent. Make it more about mechanical grip and less about aero.

I remember listening to a beyond the grid podcast with Juan Pablo Montoya. The host kept trying to pull the whole "what was it like to race with Michael" ooze fest. Juan simply stated he was in the best car, and when he was at Mercedes he didn't do that well. All the drivers on the grid are good. All of them. The difference between the champions is some skill and a lot of luck, and managers making the right moves.

Don't get me wrong; it takes skill. But (especially today) to say that drivers are not second place to the cars is somewhat ignorant. The only pair of teammates on the grid right now who have any legitimate gap are Albon and Verstappen. Other than that, it's par for the course.

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#83

Post by wintorez »

ip26 wrote: post #76
wintorez wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wished there was a version of F1 with less mechanical and technical regulation to see what human ingenuity could achieve.

F1 made 1,500 horsepower thirty five years ago. If such an unrestricted series existed today, we'd probably be looking at 3,000+ horsepower, 300-400mph speeds, and either a) autopilot features (for faster-than-human reactions) or b) absolutely ridiculous levels of fatalities.

If it was up to me, I would create a race where the only limits were:

1) Combustion or electric engines only, no jets or rocket boosters 2) Should fit within a box of certain height-width-depth 3) No human drivers, only remote or AI 4) No type of weapons, or ramming, etc. Only pure speed.

I think that would have been an interesting race to watch.

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#84

Post by bgorman »

justiceforsaas wrote: post #38
aerospace_guy wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think engineers haven't been involved in building aircraft and automobiles until now? They've been the "main drivers of success" since the beginning of those industries. If you mean software engineers, I think your point is only partially valid. There is room for improvement in other areas as well, such as controls, aerodynamics, energy, materials to name a few.

I meant, they're going to become MORE the drivers of success. Not saying they haven't been drivers at all, I meant their role is going to become more and more important.

What is your opinion of the 737 Max scandal? It doesn't seem like engineer's input is valued very much at the industry leading company (by market cap).

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#85

Post by focom »

segmondy wrote: post #69
focom wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the first line: > Our statistical model finds that neither Lewis Hamilton nor Michael Schumacher is Formula 1’s greatest driver So its lame to play the racist card here.

Give me a break, let me guess, you are not black. Since Lewis got on top I have seen this argument come up, this rubbish didn't come up in the past. This same behavior happens all the time when a black person performs very well, folks find ways to take it away.

I am Caribbean but unlike you, I don't fall for the victim hood narrative. Racism is not the reason for every issues in our community.

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#86

Post by eVoLInTHRo »

systemvoltage wrote: post #14

I mean this in the most respectful way: Can someone please explain the allure of watching F1 race on TV? I honestly sat down with a few friends and we watched Kimi Raikonnen but it was not a lot of action in terms of overtaking and drama - it was mostly inching forward and making time. I fully understand and appreciate the amount of skills that go into driving an F1 car, but what is in for the spectator?

Here's my guess:

- It's televised Sunday mornings (at least here in America), and it's way more interesting than anything else on at that time.

- It's a soap opera/drama, but socially acceptable for men to watch. You've got all the classic story tropes there (intra-/inter-team rivalries, underdog/favorite, hotshot newcomer/grizzled veteran, rich vs poor, etc.)

- People are inherently intrigued by man + machine collaborations, kids too. I didn't appreciate this until I hung around my friends' kids, and saw their amazement at any moving vehicle. Then I remembered, yes, I was once one of those kids.

With that said, I think F1 as a motorsport is pretty boring.

- If you're in it for the racing, I'd rather watch Indycar, which has the same or better racing with open-wheeled cars at 1/10th the price.

- If you're in it to see car technology translate to your road car, probably should watch a GT series instead.

- If you're in it for the technological innovation, none of those things get shared to viewers. As a data person, I would love to see how the sausage gets made, like how they translate learnings from the simulator to the real track, or the the trial & error in tweaking their aero or engine configs, CFD, etc. But for obvious sporting reasons, they can't. Like you can notice that Mclaren's nose is different, you just don't know why. Knowing why is the more interesting part IMO.

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#87

Post by vl »

mhh__ wrote: post #29
choeger wrote: post #2

Interesting analysis, but the main point remains: You can not compare drivers across different eras. Is Lewis the GOAT? Yes. Is Michael the GOAT? Yes.

The whole idea of a GOAT is just stupid. Lewis is very good, if he didn't move to Mercedes he'd be another 1 time WDC. The best drivers make it to the top, but that's it. Alonso only won 2 and he was just as good as Lewis and Schumacher (arguably better considering what he could do in cars of almost any quality, lewis had a bad car once his entire career)

I feel stupid arguing this, but if you watched F1 during Schumacher era it was obvious that Schumacher is really the best driver. While still at Benetton, he demonstrated his abilities, then with the top car he showed enormous consistency. Other drivers haven’t achieved it in the similar cars.

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#88

Post by redis_mlc »

From what I read back in the day, Michael Schumacher was 1 second faster than anybody else. Another team would have to spend $1 billion on a new engine to win against him with their drivers.

Too bad he wasn't as good a skier:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Schumacher

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#89

Post by wbl »

wintorez wrote: post #83
ip26 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

F1 made 1,500 horsepower thirty five years ago. If such an unrestricted series existed today, we'd probably be looking at 3,000+ horsepower, 300-400mph speeds, and either a) autopilot features (for faster-than-human reactions) or b) absolutely ridiculous levels of fatalities.

If it was up to me, I would create a race where the only limits were: 1) Combustion or electric engines only, no jets or rocket boosters 2) Should fit within a box of certain height-width-depth 3) No human drivers, only remote or AI 4) No type of weapons, or ramming, etc. Only pure speed. I think that would have been an interesting race to watch.

Too dangerous. You got to spend the weight on roll cages to protect the driver and need rules to ensure that that happens.

Re: Engineers, not racers, are the true drivers of success in motor sport

#90

Post by vl »

barrkel wrote: post #67
wintorez wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wished there was a version of F1 with less mechanical and technical regulation to see what human ingenuity could achieve.

The regulations exist both to put a cap on what the teams need to spend on R&D (if it's too much then smaller manufacturers and teams pull out and there's only two or three cars on the grid), and to make it safer for the drivers.

The irony of course is that current very severe R&D limits on testing to reduce spending are significantly reducing competitiveness: if some team already has inferior car, they can’t improve it because they can’t test improvements!
Post reply on HN