4 ms·
I think they should just remove the drivers and let the engineers compete freely. That would be much more interesting to watch than the current yawn-fest of "wh
by moe 12y ago
I think they should just remove the drivers and let the engineers compete freely. That would be much more interesting to watch than the current yawn-fest of "which human will make the least mistakes on mostly identical cars"...
- TheLoneWolfling 12y agoIt's rather difficult to do that and keep some semblance of safety. Ultimately I think the simplest way to keep things sane would be to do something along the lines of "you have <x> amount of MJ worth of <fuel of your choice or electrical power> for the race" (which would then spawn all sorts of related rules about what exactly counts as fuel, but meh. Such is life.).
- moe 12y agoIt's rather difficult to do that and keep some semblance of safety. Huh? But that's partly the point, what do you need safety for when there's no drivers? Build a strong cage around the track so the spectators don't get hurt when a car lifts off at 400mph. And set hefty fines for when a robocar damages another robocar, so the participants are incentivized to win by racing rather than by elimination (which might actually be an interesting sub-genre of its own, though). And then let's just see how far the engineers can bend physics when they don't have to throttle everything down to accommodate for human safety and reflexes...
- TheLoneWolfling 12y agoOh, thought you were talking about driver-d cars. With driverless cars, I agree.
- Already__Taken 12y agoThose are basically WEC rules then.
- TheLoneWolfling 12y agoWEC is endurance based - this would be a much shorter race. Also, WEC imposes lots of other limits (numbers of tires allowed, etc, etc.) Imagine something more along the lines of Group C.