Q about CART "pit windows" 2002-3

[ChrisB]

IIRC, CART used a rules thing called a "pit window" for some races in 2002-3. The way this worked, IIRC, is that no car could go longer than a set number of laps without pitting. That "set number of laps" was predetermined for each race. For instance, I think for the Milwaukee 225 it was 50 laps.

Did this mean that one car could make it's first pit on say, lap 5, and that car had to pit again before lap 55? And another car could make it's first pit on lap 49, and that car had to pit again before lap 99? In other words, you could have a whole variety of cars with their own "pit windows"? There was no designated lap(s) window that everyone must pit together, it was just a number of laps that no individual car could go over without pitting?

Was that it?

[tllips]

Yes, that was correct, except in actuality, the leaders all pitted together. You could not afford to go in one lap early and risk a yellow helping your competitors.

This idea was implemented to prevent drivers from slowing down to save fuel. It was supposed to lead to better racing and more overtaking on track. It did not really accomplish this and instead led to parades right through pit lane. :(

[Rosco]

And that was the start of the downfall, gimmick racing, the disease has spread into all forms of racing

[Insomniac]

In addition to the caution risk, the guy who pitted later almost always ended up coming out in the same or better position. Also what ended up happening was they still saved fuel to get to the end of the window and keep the stop as short as possible. They need to increase MPG and decrease the fuel tank to get people to burn fuel (tire changes take longer than re-fueling).

[cameraman]

They need to increase MPG and decrease the fuel tank to get people to burn fuel (tire changes take longer than re-fueling). Or switch to F1 style pressurized fuel rigs that can fill the car in 8 seconds.

[Boatdesigner]

Just close the pits during yellows. Only green flag stops. If you MUST pit during yellow, you go to the back of the line. Simple and far more exciting IMHO.

[jonovision_man]

I have a revolutionary idea:

The team fuels up the car when they decide it's the best time to do it!

It's so simple it just might work! :D ;)

I know what you're saying - that's not nearly contrived enough, we need some way to make racing exciting, forget the best team winning, we want to really hose the fast drivers so they don't just run away with it, right? :p Well don't worry, we still have a button and option tires. And if that's not good enough, we can introduce reverse grids or something. Or randomly water down some people's fuel, that'd really shake things up! ;)

jono

[Insomniac]

Or switch to F1 style pressurized fuel rigs that can fill the car in 8 seconds.

I was trying to keep costs down. ;) But I'm not sure if switchinbg the engines to run on ethanol or gasoline is as simple as I think.

[Ray Scar]

In addition to the caution risk, the guy who pitted later almost always ended up coming out in the same or better position. Also what ended up happening was they still saved fuel to get to the end of the window and keep the stop as short as possible. They need to increase MPG and decrease the fuel tank to get people to burn fuel (tire changes take longer than re-fueling).

As I understand it the fuel saving is driven more by the desire to go a little further than anyone else. That way you (presumably) get a faster lap or two in while the guy that pitted earlier is running heavy. Shortening the actual pit stop is certainly a goal but usually secondary to this.

Without resorting to some gimmick the only way to eliminate the fuel saving strategies is to do away the pit lane speed limit. That's when this all started.

Personally, I'm not against fuel strategies. But then again, I'm also not afraid of seeing races where a guy that is clearly faster than anyone else laps the field.

[Insomniac]

As I understand it the fuel saving is driven more by the desire to go a little further than anyone else. That way you (presumably) get a faster lap or two in while the guy that pitted earlier is running heavy. Shortening the actual pit stop is certainly a goal but usually secondary to this.

Without resorting to some gimmick the only way to eliminate the fuel saving strategies is to do away the pit lane speed limit. That's when this all started.

Personally, I'm not against fuel strategies. But then again, I'm also not afraid of seeing races where a guy that is clearly faster than anyone else laps the field.

I should've added that the fuel needs to outlast the tires like the last Denver race.

[ChrisB]

Thanks guys.. I was trying to remember and re-understand it. Also IIRC there could be a situation where someone pitted in such a way that their "window" would end with 5 laps to go near the end... and they could be leading the race, but still have to pit.

Most of the racing I grew up with was short track... the strategy there is simple... go like hell! :) There's no pit stop strategy. The once or twice that Nascar & Indy/Champ cars came to town was the only time when pit stops became part of the show because the races are so long.

"Pit Strategy" really comes down to 2 things...

1. Go slow to make as few pit stops as possible to reduce the time consumed by the pit-lane speed limit (which are NOT going away) and the stop itself.

2. Go slow to keep the odds as high as possible to be able to pit under a yellow flag.

How to avoid that? I posted in OC years ago... make EVERYONE come in at the same time. Yellow or Green doesn't matter. Everyone must pit for fuel on lap 50, 100, 150, etc.

Can anyone spot any flaws in that?

(fitting everyone on pit lane at the same time is not a problem, I saw it happen many times at Nazareth)

[Insomniac]

Thanks guys.. I was trying to remember and re-understand it. Also IIRC there could be a situation where someone pitted in such a way that their "window" would end with 5 laps to go near the end... and they could be leading the race, but still have to pit.

Most of the racing I grew up with was short track... the strategy there is simple... go like hell! :) There's no pit stop strategy. The once or twice that Nascar & Indy/Champ cars came to town was the only time when pit stops became part of the show because the races are so long.

"Pit Strategy" really comes down to 2 things...

1. Go slow to make as few pit stops as possible to reduce the time consumed by the pit-lane speed limit (which are NOT going away) and the stop itself.

2. Go slow to keep the odds as high as possible to be able to pit under a yellow flag.

How to avoid that? I posted in OC years ago... make EVERYONE come in at the same time. Yellow or Green doesn't matter. Everyone must pit for fuel on lap 50, 100, 150, etc.

Can anyone spot any flaws in that?

(fitting everyone on pit lane at the same time is not a problem, I saw it happen many times at Nazareth)

That is essentially what the lap limit did. Everyone wanted to pit at the end of the windows. Their thinking was give them plenty of fuel and they'll go as fast as they can. But the teams thought every drop of fuel we don't use is a drop we don't have to put in.

I always wondered why someone in the middle to back didn't start with a quarter of half filled fuel cell. Go fast as hell on newer tires while everyone is close together still.

The problem isn't really the fuel strategy though. It's really that the guy in front can go fast enough to keep the next guy behind while conserving fuel. It hurts the guy behind to try and go all out. They don't get by and end up pitting earlier.

[Andrew Longman]

IIRC the pit window directly led to gifting Tag's win at RA and Stupid Marios win at washed out Oz.

Not exactly what they had in mind when they were looking to end fuel saving wins.

[cameraman]

I was trying to keep costs down. ;) But I'm not sure if switchinbg the engines to run on ethanol or gasoline is as simple as I think. Methanol could be delivered safely using a properly designed pressurized fuel rig. It might not be inexpensive to build but it is not impossible. The problem is solved if:

1. fueling takes much less time than tires
2. the tires are designed to make a double stint insane
3. the pits are closed during yellows

[Rosco]

Just close the pits during yellows. Only green flag stops. If you MUST pit during yellow, you go to the back of the line. Simple and far more exciting IMHO.

Do you really think anyone in either series can or would use common sense, hell no that would be too easy

[miatanut]

The problem isn't really the fuel strategy though. It's really that the guy in front can go fast enough to keep the next guy behind while conserving fuel. It hurts the guy behind to try and go all out. They don't get by and end up pitting earlier.

BINGO!

The solution? Dump the rear wings! The following car can then use the traditional strategy (which still works quite nicely in club racing), of finishing the corner before the longest straight up on the tail of the car ahead without losing front downforce, and with more momentum, and then pull the classic passing move at the end of the straight. Also means the cars can break loose easier, so the cars would be at part throttle more of the time, so the better drivers can push it and get by the less capable drivers. Or, somebody can accidently push it too far, and make a great passing opportunity for the car behind.

In other words, good old fashioned racing!

That would make sense, so it will never happen.

[ChrisB]

The following car can then use the traditional strategy (which still works quite nicely in club racing), of finishing the corner before the longest straight up on the tail of the car ahead without losing front downforce, and with more momentum, and then pull the classic passing move at the end of the straight.

What happens if the car that just made that great pass then pits under green, and the VERY NEXT LAP the yellow comes out and the car that was passed pits? Who's in the lead, the better driver or the luckier driver? :rolleyes:


IIRC the pit window directly led to gifting Tag's win at RA and Stupid Marios win at washed out Oz.

I don't remember the exact details of these races, but did the results involve some variation of someone pitting under green, while the winner pitted under yellow at sometime?

[Andrew Longman]

IIRC the pit window directly led to gifting Tag's win at RA and Stupid Marios win at washed out Oz.

I don't remember the exact details of these races, but did the results involve some variation of someone pitting under green, while the winner pitted under yellow at sometime?

Tags win:


Tagliani started in the 13th spot at Elkhart Lake, an unfamiliar position but one which allowed him to chance an early green flag pit stop with four other drivers, including Justin Wilson. The strategy was rewarded when a yellow flag on the 14th lap bunched up the field and the other 13 drivers needed to pit three more times on green instead of two.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20040809/ai_n12552486

Mario's win:


CART officials made a controversial decision as to when to end the race. The race became official when the drivers completed 36 laps - one more than half of the originally scheduled laps, but officials extended the race four additional laps, robbing either Michael Andretti or Jimmy Vasser of a win.

http://www.sportsbooks.com/news/sports_betting/2913.html

IIRC by going to 40 laps MA and JV had to pit under the window rule where as MD had already pitted. The officials didn't end it after 36 because they wanted everyone treaded equally by the pit rule. Totally messed up. Worst race of all time but the rain was to blame more than anyone person

[ChrisB]

Thanks Andrew. So Tags win essentially did come because of yellow-flag refuel stops, and Mario's was based on a rain shortened race which is essentially the same thing as yellow flags... the outcome is based on chance rather than skill.

Now if a series were to implement a rule which says that *everyone* must pit for fuel every, say, 50 miles, and *only* at those times... all those scenarios are eliminated.

(OK, who will be first to throw out the "overcrowded pit lane" counterargument? :) )

[jonovision_man]

I'll be the first to throw out the "contrived racing" counterargument... :p

Let them race, let the teams set their strategies. This kind of meddling drives me nuts... we have lots of passing in ChampCar, on track a lot of the time, so I don't see the problem that's trying to be solved...

jono

[miatanut]

The following car can then use the traditional strategy (which still works quite nicely in club racing), of finishing the corner before the longest straight up on the tail of the car ahead without losing front downforce, and with more momentum, and then pull the classic passing move at the end of the straight.

What happens if the car that just made that great pass then pits under green, and the VERY NEXT LAP the yellow comes out and the car that was passed pits? Who's in the lead, the better driver or the luckier driver? :rolleyes:

With cars that can actually pass on the track, the unlucky driver will be by again in just a few laps. In club racing you can see the pass/repass/re-repass stuff that happens when the following car isn't at a disadvantage. It would be nice to have that again in professional racing.

[miatanut]

I'll be the first to throw out the "contrived racing" counterargument... :p

Let them race, let the teams set their strategies. This kind of meddling drives me nuts... we have lots of passing in ChampCar, on track a lot of the time, so I don't see the problem that's trying to be solved...

jono

We have lots of passing when it rains, so everybody raves about the rain races and we get lots of complaints about the parades in the dry races. What's the difference? In the rain races, the power to grip level is where it should be for a top level professional series, so the better drivers can really make a difference.

What if we had that at the dry races?

That would be the quickest way to eliminate fields filled with ride-buyers, which is why it won't happen.

[jonovision_man]

There's more to rain than just that... rain creates changing grip levels, hidden/unexpected pool of water, etc. There's a lot of uncertainty in the rain that won't be there on any dry race, regardless of how you change the formula.

In fact most people in the sport advocate MORE mechanical grip, not less... it's the aero that is usually singled out as the problem. F1 is considering re-introducing slicks for exactly that reason.

Meh. I don't see the issue, the racing is fine. How about getting better drivers out there so the talent out there is more consistent, GP2 seems to have more evenly matched competitors at the front end anyway.

jono

[miatanut]

In fact most people in the sport advocate MORE mechanical grip, not less... it's the aero that is usually singled out as the problem. F1 is considering re-introducing slicks for exactly that reason.jono

I'm just talking about aero grip reduction, and more importantly, less turbulence for the following car.

[ChrisB]

OK... :) we've somehow gone from yellow fuel stops to mechanical grip.

I guess as a counter-counterargument :) to the "contrived racing" thing, one could say that racing on a 1-2 mile oval or road course, and being able to stop for fuel at anytime at equal 1-2 mile intervals is contrived and would never happen in a "real world" road race.

Heck, even sports car races on closed circuits insist on having the driver work on the car if it breaks down outside the pits, even if the crew members are standing close by. The rational is that in a "real" road race, there wouldn't be any mechanics suddenly appear to fix the car.. the driver would have to do it.

As a crazy example.... What if.... :) the PA Turnpike was shut down for a 300 mile road race from Philly to Pittsburgh. La Carrera Pennsylvania. :) Would racers be able to stop for fuel anytime they wanted at equal 1-2 mile intervals? No, they could only stop at the pre-determined places. That's what I'm trying to emulate here... mandatory fuel stops at pretermined mileposts, just like in a real road race.

[jonovision_man]

Full marks for creativity. :)

Ever hear of the Gumball 3000? There's even less structure there, they don't close down a turnpike or anything like that... it's just get from A to B. When they want fuel, they stop wherever they want.

Ha. :)

jono

[Insomniac]

miatanut: Have you been paying attention to what CC is doing? They designed the DP01 to rely less on wings and more on the undertray to reduce turbulence for following cars.

They are still spec cars. Everyone has the same car, same tires and same engines. No one has an advantage on some tracks while stinking at other tracks. Bridgestone brings conservative tires to every race because they don't want the drivers to complain about tires publicly or have their tires appear to be anything but perfect.

I think the days where you couldn't set up a car to run nearly perfect around a track are gone. Racing has fundamentally changed because of technology.

[ChrisB]

When they want fuel, they stop wherever they want.

No they don't :) If they only have 5 miles worth of fuel left... and the next fuel station is 10 miles away... they may WANT to stop for fuel in the next 5 miles, but they can't (whereas on a typical oval/RC they could)

The point of "mandatory fuel stops" as described here is one small way to try to make the racing resemble real life situations.

[miatanut]

miatanut: Have you been paying attention to what CC is doing? They designed the DP01 to rely less on wings and more on the undertray to reduce turbulence for following cars.

They are still spec cars. Everyone has the same car, same tires and same engines. No one has an advantage on some tracks while stinking at other tracks. Bridgestone brings conservative tires to every race because they don't want the drivers to complain about tires publicly or have their tires appear to be anything but perfect.

I think the days where you couldn't set up a car to run nearly perfect around a track are gone. Racing has fundamentally changed because of technology.
I've been in the 'dump the wings' camp for years. I have good company. Paul Van Valkenburgh, who was working for Chevy helping Jim Hall pioneer aero downforce, also admits it has ruined the racing and that it would be nice to put the genie back in the bottle.

The DP01 made an incremental improvement in this problem. Now, only about 40% of the downforce comes from the rear wing, and the improvement it has made in the cars being able to follow closely has been quite noticable.

Get rid of it alltogether, and we could have real racing again, and most passes wouldn't be made in the pit.

[cameraman]

Get rid of it alltogether, and we could have real racing again, and most passes wouldn't be made in the pit. And your lap times would be equal to the ALMS.

[jonovision_man]

Cars without wings look funny...

http://www.the-hug.org/orgimages/20030501-04.jpg

And part of what's cool about OW is just how fast they fire through a corner. It seems so impossible, then you see it... it always amazes me, even all these years later.

jono

[Andrew Longman]

Miata, my understanding is that close following is made difficult because of turbulence of the front wing more than the back, causing understeer.

By generating more downforce from the undertray and tunnels it increases overall downforce and in the center of the mass, leading to more stability.

Losing downforce off the rear wing would likely mostly cause the car to rotate more (oversteer) through the corner.

[miatanut]

Miata, my understanding is that close following is made difficult because of turbulence of the front wing more than the back, causing understeer.

By generating more downforce from the undertray and tunnels it increases overall downforce and in the center of the mass, leading to more stability.

Losing downforce off the rear wing would likely mostly cause the car to rotate more (oversteer) through the corner.

Yes, the loss of downforce is off the front wing. Where does the loss of downforce come from? The turbulence generated by the rear wing of the car ahead. Tunnel-generated downforce causes relatively little turbulence, so it minimizes the disadvantage of the following car. Take away the rear wing, adjust the size of the front wing as needed to keep the car balanced, and you would see a lot more passing. Not as much as a typical zero downforce club race, but a lot more than we see now.

And a much lower percentage of the passes would be made in the pits.

Plus the cars would be a bit more tail-happy, making the racing more dramatic. Something that could actually attract a few people back to the sport!

[ChrisB]

Cars without wings look funny...

No they don't... :)

http://home.comcast.net/~biordi/hawk_cb.jpg


BTW... if anyone wants a good "get rid of the aero" thread, go here on TF..

Who wants to put the aero genie back in the bottle? (http://www.trackforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100479)

(ironically started by me)

[miatanut]

And your lap times would be equal to the ALMS.

As someone who discovered this sport about the time LeMans cars were faster around Nurburgring than F1 cars, and those days still look like the golden days of racing to me, and as someone who much more recently watched a CART car (don't remember who) set the lap record at Portland in June, and watched one of Gurney's Eagle GTP's break it again that same August, my response is "And the problem with that is?..."

[miatanut]

Cars without wings look funny...

No they don't... :)

http://home.comcast.net/~biordi/hawk_cb.jpg


BTW... if anyone wants a good "get rid of the aero" thread, go here on TF..

Who wants to put the aero genie back in the bottle? (http://www.trackforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100479)

(ironically started by me)

I'm glad to see some of that thinking over there.

Motorsports Forums had a great one a while back on this subject. It really starts going with post #24, so I've linked to the second page.
http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120640&page=2

If enough fans start making enough noise about this, the leaders might have to listen, and we could get some real racing back!

[Sean Malone]

No wings, front engines, dirt trackers from 'murica...it's the wave of the future.










:gomer: