Race start monitoring system

[RZS10]

There is no reason that the teams could not figure out [...]

How would the teams be able to figure out [...]

The question should rather be "why" should they try to figure it out? The drivers would still have to preempt the start and that's a very thin line - Bottas and Hamilton (Monza 2014) got away with it, Alonso started within 0.08s in Russia last year.

Trying to do that every race wouldn't be worth the risk given that the penalty for a false start is a drive through penalty afaik

I don't really buy the "teams might exploit it" argument tbh

Does anyone have any knowledge about how accurate one can measure very small distances using radio frequencies?

Several years ago they made a (very) short distance radar with an accuracy of a micrometer.

It would be my pinion that a 'secret' arbitrary precision could lead to questions of fairness.

It's the same for everyone. The article mentioned that all competitors agreed to that solution.

Does this type of officiating then start to flow into other rule sets… kind of a slippery slope situation.

There's enough rules in F1 that are enforced with a lot of wiggle room (most of the non-technical ones), so we already have that situation.

Since the FIA has not had many secret rules before… I wonder if this is just not a coverup of a inadequate start monitoring system.

The system has never failed - i wouldn't call that inadequate.

[Cold Fussion]

The question should rather be "why" should they try to figure it out? The drivers would still have to preempt the start and that's a very thin line - Bottas and Hamilton (Monza 2014) got away with it, Alonso started within 0.08s in Russia last year.

Trying to do that every race wouldn't be worth the risk given that the penalty for a false start is a drive through penalty afaik

I don't really buy the "teams might exploit it" argument tbh

I fully agree and I've argued that point on here before. I've never understood rules like the 100 ms reaction time rules in track sprinting. To me the whole preemptive start thing is self regulating because you get heavy penalties for false starting (especially in track sprinting).

[wuzak]

Preempting the start must be quite risky when the light system delay is random.

The FOM graphic showed Bottas had a reaction time of 0.201s. Is that from the light going out, or the signal for the lights to go out?

[Big Mangalhit]

Yup I can't see a way of teams utilising this tolerance for something it's not like you can antecipate the lights well enough to move the car x cm before the start. I think it should be open to public knowledge.

As for the system never failed story I am not sure about that. I think Bottas did a false start lucky enough to be within the tolerance distance before 0.201s after the signal. I know this is self regulating and not a problem. The Fia clearly stated you are allowed to gamble and can take advantage of that and if you do that more often you get more penalties than you take advantage.

[RZS10]

again: the 0.201s did not have anything to do with the allowed tolerance and were just shown by the FOM (probably to calm down the average spectator)

this is from my quoted post on the first page


the tolerance is just about the movement (signal strength), and he was probably way closer to it than in this pic

+ the only relevant time was the 0.06s and that had NO influence on whether the start was legit, he could have moved earlier but less and still be within the tolerance.

Now that i think of it the teams could make the cars move forward at a very low pace once 5th red turns on just to end up within the tolerance of total movement with the drivers starting normally (not preempting) - this would be a tiny advantage to a completely standing start.

[Big Mangalhit]

Well but you assume he passed the tolerance limit at exactly the "green light". I think he started moving before the "green" light but passed the threshold of the tolerance at 0.201s after the light, that is way it was reported that way. So technically if mercedes has the data in which exact position he was at 0.201s after the "green" they can know the tolerance although i don't think they have the timestamp of the "green"

Imagine in your graph that you had drawn the orange line a bit higher so that it intersected the blue one 0.201s after the green line.

And by green I assume lights out.

[RZS10]

I think there's a slight misunderstanding, the blue graph is the change in signal strength measured by the system, the orange line labeled "Bottas movement" is just highlighting how far he moved before 'green' - the tolerance itself is basically a distance X they are allowed to move between the 5th red and 'green' (the vertical lines), it is not a threshold for "the car has actually started"

In my shitty sketch he does NOT pass the tolerance at all.

Let me try it this way: any movement within the yellow rectangle is allowed...

1) is a normal start, the car starts moving after green with a certain reaction time
2) is a preempted start, movement starts before green but graph does NOT leave yellow area before 'green'
3) false start since it does leave the yellow area before 'green'



those are idealized btw, there's probably some noise in the signal and change in signal strength from engaging gear

[henry]

Can I offer a slightly different take on how things might be organised. I'm making this up but I think it matches with what we know.

The start sequence begins when the first red light goes on.

If the car moves before the lights go off it's a jumped start.

At a practical level they know that the car sometimes moves when the driver engages gear. To allow for this they allow a small movement before judging it as a jumped start. A tolerance.

So if the car doesn't move when the gear is engaged it can potentially move up to the tolerance amount immediately prior to the lights going out and it will not be a jump start.

Nothing to do with reaction times or time allowances.

[RZS10]

Isn't this 1:1 what has already been described?

[henry]

Isn't this 1:1 what has already been described?

No. What has been described is after the lights go out. I'm saying it's between the beginning of the start sequence and the lights going out. I.i. Before the lights go out.

[RZS10]

We're all talking about what happens before 'green' (=lights going out) ... all my sketches are with 5th red (lighting up) and 'green', the relevant part being what happens between those ... ofc there was an explanation of how the system works in general and where the graph comes from

[henry]

We're all talking about what happens before 'green' (=lights going out) ... all my sketches are with 5th red (lighting up) and 'green', the relevant part being what happens between those ... ofc there was an explanation of how the system works in general and where the graph comes from

You're right. I'm an idiot. Sorry.

[Edax]

Preempting the start must be quite risky when the light system delay is random.

The FOM graphic showed Bottas had a reaction time of 0.201s. Is that from the light going out, or the signal for the lights to go out?

Just wondering. What is the reaction time? Normally I would say engaging the clutch. But on a downward sloping start straight like Austria, I guess you also have to release the brake pretty much at the same time.

Could the initial movement of the car be caused by releasing the brakes and if so is that counted in the reaction time?

[notsofast]

Go sit in your car during heavy wind. You can feel the car move even though the tires are not rotating. If you were doing this on the starting grid, the system would detect movement, even though you're standing still. The tolerance is related to the uncertainty in knowing whether the driver is actively moving the car forward.

[Cold Fussion]

Preempting the start must be quite risky when the light system delay is random.

The FOM graphic showed Bottas had a reaction time of 0.201s. Is that from the light going out, or the signal for the lights to go out?

Just wondering. What is the reaction time? Normally I would say engaging the clutch. But on a downward sloping start straight like Austria, I guess you also have to release the brake pretty much at the same time.

Could the initial movement of the car be caused by releasing the brakes and if so is that counted in the reaction time?

I think the reaction time has to be the time from green light to the transponder passing the 'box starting line'. From the onboard footage Bottas is very clearly moving within 1 frame which corresponds to 20 ms.