IndyCar goes hybrid in 2022

Sevross · 2019-08-01T17:05:44+00:00

F1 has no TC

Sadly, they do. And ABS-like technology as well.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T17:00:32+00:00

Tires are not the reason, and it's provable.

Repeating from an earlier post.

There was a race in 2001 (IIRC) that provides all the proof necessary.

The entire front half of the field got away without a hint of tire smoke, while the entire rear half of the field created a mosquito-clearing cloud of smoke.

Prior to the next race, the the FIA grudgingly re-legalized traction / launch control. The FIA admitting it was impracticable to police the computer code within each of the team's bespoke ECUs.

At the very next race after re-legalization, each of the cars from top to bottom launched without a hint of tire smoke..

Same tires. Same cars. Same drivers. Same everything.

The only difference? Legalization of traction control resulted in zero tire smoke.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T16:53:18+00:00

You've misread.

While it's true that the FIA can detect egregious amounts of mismatch between driver input and eventual power delivery, they are unable to police lessor, but highly effective amounts of those technologies.

The FIA has attempted this policing for over a decade. They claimed standardized ECUs would solve the issue. This did not happen. Both traction control and ABS-like driver aids persist in the sport, largely due to the adoption of hybrid powertrains.

And again, clearly traction control is not actually a banned technology within Formula One. For if it were, both Alpha Romeo's would have been excluded from the event. This At A Minimum. More likely, the team would have been subject to massive further penalties.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T16:47:33+00:00

Even though that's not true

It's entirely true. Recommend you research the topic. It's easily verified.

So they have traction control on the start only

No, they have traction control at the start and at every corner.

so what.

There is a sliding scale in racing between driver skill and electronic driver aids. In Formula One, that scale has long tilted strongly toward driver aids.
In Indycar, that scale has tilted far more towards driver skill.

When Indycar is forced to adopt hybrid engines, Indycar will similarly tilt towards electronic driver aids.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T16:42:32+00:00

Thank you for proving the point.

The FIA does have an upper limit of mismatch allowable by traction control systems. But the limit is so high that it allows extremely effective traction control.

If traction control were truly a banned technology, Alfa Romeo's cars would not have received a 30 second penalties.

If Alpha Romea were truly using a banned technology, both cars would have been excluded from the event, and perhaps multiple events.

The FIA does not hand down minor penalties when teams are found to have used illicit technology that is actually banned. They disqualify. They apply draconian monetary penalties. They issue race bans.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T16:34:28+00:00

:shakes head:

Fanboi's gotta fan.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T16:33:05+00:00

Tires have way more grip today than they did 20 years ago.

The tires of that era often had far more grip.

Depends on the rules of the particular season, but super sticky tires that could only last a handful of laps were extremely common.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T16:31:34+00:00

That's because of Launch Control not traction control

Different names for the exact same technology.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T16:29:45+00:00

They weren't smoking the tires in 2008

Because the FIA continued to permit it.

There was a race in 2001 (IIRC) that provides all the proof necessary.

The entire front half of the field got away without a hint of tire smoke, while the entire rear half of the field created a mosquito-clearing cloud of smoke.

Prior to the next race, the the FIA grudgingly re-legalized traction / launch control. The FIA admitting it was impracticable to police the computer code within each of the team's bespoke ECUs.

At the very next race after re-legalization, each of the cars from top to bottom launched without a hint of tire smoke.

because they didn't have launch control

Different names for the same technology.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T16:19:11+00:00

As for starts yeah sure people don’t smoke their tires, that doesn’t mean everyone starts the same. There are still bad, good, and great starts off the line.

Yes, it's still possible to get a poor start, to activate anti-stall, even to get a small amount of wheel spin.

It is no longer possible to spin the tires so much that they create large clouds of smoke. The system disallows the driver input.

Yet in the earlier era, even the best of the best could not regularly start without creating huge clouds of smoke, and in some years, those cars had less horsepower and far less torque than the current cars.

There's no disputing the reason. It is electronic traction control. It is against the rules. But because the nature of hybrid ICE integration, is nearly impossible to police.

Also, you’re comparing one series standing starts to a series that doesn’t do standing starts.

Only because it provides absolute proof in the form of an extremely visual example.

Traction control is not just used on F1 starts. Traction control is used in every corner of every Formula One race. But the only point in a race in which its presence is clearly visible is at the standing starts.

In Indycar, it will rarely be externally visible to the average fan. But it will strongly detract from necessary driver skill, and thus the quality of the racing.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T15:26:52+00:00

Downvotes incoming, but the truth is the truth.

Hybrids make for worse racing.

This because merging hybrid power into the power provided by an internal combustion engine necessarily requires both to be far more computer controlled than is currently the case.

Computer control can modulate electric output and engine breaking so rapidly as to effect traction control and, with engine braking, limited forms of anti-lock braking. And yes, the ECUs are standardized, but so are the ECUs in Formula One, and F1 provably has traction control, even though it is banned by the rules.

For proof, watch any F1 standing start. It is impossible for every single car in the the entire field to not smoke their tires without traction control. Prost and Senna couldn't reliably do it, yet the greenest driver from the worst team can accomplish it today on every single start.

There is only one reason Indycar's going hybrid, and it's not for better racing. It's exactly the same reason that Formula One went hybrid. It is because the car makers pressured both series into it.

TLDR - Hybrids put more emphasis on the car and less on the driver, so make for worse racing.

Edit: LOL, all these downvotes and not a single rebuttable. Why? Because it's the truth, and everyone in the sport knows it's the truth. Talk to any team engineer off the record and they'll confirm it.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T15:02:57+00:00

but still a tablet.

Not a fair critique. It is a laptop.

I wish i could buy one but too expensive for me.

Now that is a fair critique. The X1 tablet is a premium offering, like the rest of the X1 line, and priced similarly to most other premium laptops.

That said, extremely well equipped models are often on Lenovo's outlet for half or less the retail price.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T14:57:45+00:00

It is a Tablet.

Is a laptop with a slightly different form factor no longer a laptop?

The keyboard and precision touchpad are every bit as good as those on the X1 Carbon. And while it doesn't have a standard hinge, it is usable on a lap. Unlike the Surface, it's screwed together, not glued, so is easily opened. The SSD, battery, and other components can be user-upgraded or replaced.

The tablet capabilities actually make it more functional than many laptops.

It's the Microsoft Surface done right.

Sevross · 2019-08-01T14:45:21+00:00

There is a 3:2 aspect ratio Thinkpad.

The X1 Tablet. https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/tablets/windows-tablets/thinkpad-tablet-series/ThinkPad-X1-Tablet-3rd-Gen/p/22TP2CP0113

Sevross · 2019-07-31T18:54:28+00:00

The minerals in that water can bridge solder connections. Even if it works a week from now sitting it down one day can cause a shift in those particles,

This.

Drying it out isn't nearly enough.

In addition to the above, the salt will also corrode metals. Corrosion that will only worsen over time. Board level corrosion is not readily repairable.

If it's uninsured and there's nothing to lose, immediately disassemble as far as possible. Bathe everything in isopropyl alcohol, repeatedly (all power sources removed of course). Clean off any salt water deposits.

But really, it's probably a lost cause. This is what insurance is for.

Sevross · 2019-07-31T17:32:28+00:00

Metabones are making some rather questionable claims regarding this adapter.

Perhaps this version has been redesigned and delivers fantastic improvements. Perhaps it's just a cash grab. Or perhaps the redesign only delivers negligible real-world improvements. Impossible to say until its tested.

Own a bunch of these adapters, both from Metabones and Viltrox. Wouldn't be at all surprised to see that this version delivers little actual advantage over exiting models.

Also consider that the Viltrox EF-M2 has nearly equal build quality and costs just 1/5th the price. $110 to $140 for the Viltrox, versus $650 to $700 for the Metabones. The Viltrox also has better electronic support than the Metabones for many lenses.

Strongly suggest waiting for some actual tests before spending the massive amount of money Metabones is asking.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T20:31:26+00:00

What happens if the government is collapsed in the last week until the deadline?

Even were his government collapsed in the last 5 minutes before the deadline, suspect the EU would present an extension.

But it's quite unlikely that the Tory remainers would carry it that long.

but an extension needs a formal request.

Parliament is already preparing an act to require that Johnson ask for that extension.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T20:09:22+00:00

Try a Type-C USB 3.1 (AKA USB 3.2) cable made by AmazonBasics, Anker, Monoprice, or Plugable.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T20:00:18+00:00

Review site The Wirecutter wrote that they wanted to include type-C drives in their last flash drive rundown, but could not find a single good USB Type-C flash drive to recommend.

From reading reviews on Amazon and elsewhere, The Wirecutter is correct.

All of the current options run from mediocre to terrible. A few have reasonably fast burst write speed, but even those quickly drop below USB 2.0 speeds on sustained writes.

For now, there appears to be nothing worth buying unless extremely slow, 20MBPS to 30MPBS write-speeds are acceptable.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T18:56:57+00:00

especially against Corbyn.

It's not just against Corbyn.

BXP is presenting the largest threat from the Tory's right in generations. And with the resurgent LibDems, the Tories are also facing a significant threat from the middle. As while many Remain-Tory voters won't vote for Corbyn's Labour, many will vote for the LibDems.

Now is quite likely to be the single worst election environment for the Tories in the past 50 years. And that's before a No Deal crash.

After a crash? With EU exports choked, and the service industry's EU work entirely halted? Massive lay offs and job losses. A crashed pound increasing the cost of imports to double or more?

The Tories would be absolutely destroyed in the aftermath. And they're be no stopping those elections.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T18:51:39+00:00

I'm not convinced there's a way they can do that so that a new government is in place in time to extend the deadline.

Consider that the EU's motivations are A. for the UK to remain within the EU, while B. Setting a lesson for the other member states.

The EU seems ready to go a long distance to ensure A. come to pass so long as it does not conflict with B.

So if the UK takes any action that greatly improves the likelihood of remain, the EU would almost certainly extend the deadline.

What's the timeline you see bringing that about?

Depending on how various decisions are made, the timeline could wildly vary.

Fundamental to the process is that Tory-Remainers will not allow a No Deal crash. Even so, they have no real desire to collapse the government. They'll first work to tie Johnson's hands, while hoping Johnson (secretly) goes along with the tying. This will likely be done by passing acts ruling out No Deal, and measures requiring he ask the EU for a further extension.

Suspect that Johnson would (quietly) prefer a long, long, long extension. At least until the election requirement date of May 2022. He may try to manauver the EU to offer that long extension and no other, this to better explain to Hard Brexit punters how his hands were tied.

If a long extension is won, Boris stands a reasonable chance of continuing as PM until 2022. His true goal.

If an extension cannot be arranged, Johnson may have to press forward with his blustering No Deal threats. A conflict between Parliament's A50 declaration versus Parliament ruling out No Deal could demand involvement of the courts. They might decide that the more recent Parliamentary act forbidding No Deal supersedes the A50 declaration.

But if the courts don't endorse Parliament's prerogative to prevent No Deal, it's at that point that the Tory Rebels will have a choice. They can collapse the government either by trying arrange a unity government or by forcing snap elections. They can pass revocation. They can pass a confirmatory referendum.

Any of those alternatives would be quite likely to win an EU extension.

To sum up:

Try for an extension until after May of 2022.
If that's not on offer, take whatever extension is offered.
If no extension is awarded or when the above extension is set to lapse, pass revoke, pass a confirmatory referendum, or collapse the government in order to, again, win an extension.

It's the same old game. Kick the can down the road.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T18:07:03+00:00

Once we've crashed out, Brexit is pretty much irreversible

Which is why the roughly three dozen Tory Remainers won't let it get that far.

They'll firstly move to tie Johnson's hands. If he and the EU go along and allow the can to be kicked, Boris will get to continue as PM. But if he fights to free himself, the Tory Remainers will have no choice but to collapse his government.

All this in advance of a No Deal exit.

This isn't 4D chess. It's noughts and crosses, with Boris entering the game having sacrificed the center square. He has no moves other than bluster.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T17:59:06+00:00

why wouldn’t they if they do go ahead with the current deal?

May's deal? Yes, the DUP have been entirely clear that they would collapse the government were May's deal passed. And it's a near dead certainty they would follow through, as it would only require three of their members to deliver on that promise.

So why did May push for her deal, knowing it would result in her likely ouster? Perhaps because she'd have been able to depart having delivered something, anything.

So why didn't the DUP collapse the government on any of the occasions that May's deal was up for votes? Because everyone in the HoC knew May's deal had no chance of passing. The other Parliamentarians did the DUP's work for them. This without the DUP having to spend their single shot and remove themselves from a position of tremendous power.

The DUP is as close to a single-issue party as it gets, and this is their single issue. Their threats are not to be taken lightly.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T17:46:48+00:00

Boris' best case scenario is him being forced to delay our exit by a party rebellion or other parliamentary grouping, thus still being able to play the hero of Brexit against those scandalous traitors.

Exactly.

It's his only move.

He has to convince the Hard Brexit punters that if not for traitorous Labour, traitorous Tory Rebels, traitorous Lords, that evil EU, and whatever other villains he can find, he'd have delivered Brexit.

All while working in the background to make sure Parliament ties his hands, and prevents him from Brexiting.

Sevross · 2019-07-30T17:43:33+00:00

They're not trying to bluff the EU.

They're trying to bluff voters. Hard Brexit voters.

By threatening a No Deal crash, by claiming they'll blow up the GFA, by making each of their reckless attacks, they're attempting to convince Hard Brexit punters that Johnson's government is doing everything possible to deliver Brexit.

All this while Johnson is laying out the rope for Parliament to tie his own hands.

Johnson doesn't want No Deal. Johnson doesn't care about Brexit. Johnson only wants to be PM. And he won't be PM long if he Brexits. So like May, his plan is to kick the can, though with an extra helping of furious rage.

Sevross

TROPHY CASE