That's just a running joke on Autosport forum isn't it? http://forums.autosport.com/index.php?showtopic=142430 http://forums.autosport.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=187286&view=findpost&p=6318103
Some guy showed a video of Senna doing it around Suzuka with a Honda NSX, he kept flicking the pedal to induce mild traction control or so I was lead to believe. [video=youtube;8By2AEsGAhU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8By2AEsGAhU[/video] Maybe cosicave can shed some light on this?
That's not for traction control, he's just feeling for grip. He's probably unfamiliar with the car, how responsive it is, how much it understeers/oversteers and how much applying the throttle upsets the handling of the car etc. You see rally drivers doing this a lot because they don't know how much grip the road yields. For best traction you want smooth, progressive application of the throttle, like you see with onboard starts. Webber wouldn't have been doing that out of the hairpin in Montreal. Notice Senna does this on corner entry and mid corner, not in the traction zones.
I seem to remember Senna's technique of feathering the throttle being quite widely well known back in they day, if that's what we're talking about.
Yeah apparently a lot of his speed came from being able to keep the turbo spooled through the corner. It's a bit before my time though.
Not necessarily, Bhaji. It would depend how the system was set up, very much including the rear differential which I alluded to before. Remember that best traction occurs with some tyre-slip (10%-15%). Thus the most efficient TC for racing (not the same as a road car, which kicks in sooner because of greater concern for tyre longevity) would deliberately allow wheel-spin to begin and then chop torque slightly but very suddenly, then allow and chop again, repeating the process as necessary until delivered torque does not exceed the tyre's ability to cope. See below, Bando. Remember how I defined traction control as a system (mechanical or electronic) designed to monitor and regulate traction by limiting power delivery. A driver does not constitute such a system, even if inputs are attempted to emulate such a system. Please see below because I have more to say on this, and as I hope will become clear, this is not what Senna was trying to do in any case. This was Captain's amusing – but nonetheless astute – response: Essentially true. Please read below, although I will save a fuller explanation for another post.** Are you referring to 'heel and toe' or the stabbing, 'cadence' throttle inputs**? I am going to assume that you're more interested in the throttle technique alone, since heel and toe is only relevant when braking, which deserves a separate discussion. AG's following post is pretty much on the money but there is something important I'd like to add, so please read my comment which follows his: You've mentioned several interesting things here, AG. The most important thing of all – and something which should entirely eliminate this throttle technique from our discussion – is that it is impossible* for a driver to move his foot fast enough to produce the effect seen in the photograph. This is also true of a driver who attempts to emulate ABS when braking (which should not be confused with 'cadence braking') because it requires driver inputs to be repeated like bullets from an Uzi machine gun (about 600 rpm!). Each of these inputs involves inches – rather than millimetres – of pedal travel to first apply and then release the throttle pedal (or brake pedal, when speaking of ABS), and I would challenge any driver to achieve more than five or six 'on-off' cycles in one second. *Such pedal input would require almost instant transition between the 'on' stage to the 'off' stage (and vice versa), and no time lag at all for it to communicate with the wheels, since the slightest lag anywhere softens the whole effect too much for it have benefit. There is a natural time-lag in any physical system which requires transmission, and all transmission involves some element of loss, especially when it begins with driver input and ends with two lumps of rubber. Furthermore, there is also a minimum time lag of about 0.22 seconds (even in a driver with very fast reaction times) for brain processing to react to foot feedback and then another 0.22 seconds for the foot to react to what a brain is telling it, which is essential if the driver is to consciously and accurately regulate what is happening. **I will explain the purpose of this technique in another post when I get time (if anyone's interested); but AG's response is essentially quite close. The reason I have not included such an explanation here is that it involves several other important aspects of car control which, to put things in perspective, will also need at least some reference.
Thanks! I also learn a lot here. Questions are the most fruitful way to knowledge, regardless of who asks.
Yeah... It certainly cleared that up for me. It all seems like a much to do about nothing from the little that I have read. Seems like some folks in the Italian media are looking for something to divert attention away from the not so overly stellar performance of the Scuderia thus far.
Agreed. Although a good traction control system certainly could achieve this effect, there are other reasonable explanations, as I and others have attempted to shed some light upon.
AG and Cosicave are on a roll this week clearing things up for us Is it alright that I can call you two Starsky and Hutch?
Nooooooooooooooooo……………………………… !! I don't watch TV much but they are probably my least favourite TV characters …EVER! More than deflated, I am exploded!
