Quote:
Originally Posted by Sodemo
Maybe we could allow traction control again too under the premise that it would cut costs by using less rear tyres...?
|
Traction control is incomparable with active suspension, as the later does not drive the car and takes nothing away from the driver.
However, assuming that active suspensions are indeed a driver aid, would that be a justification for banning such a relevant technology? Is it justified to ban any driver aid? These questions can only be answered affirmatively if one deems driver aids as something detrimental.
I can no longer agree with that. Firstly, it worth mentioning that the definition of a driver aid is somewhat arbitrary. A number of still legal technologies, such as drive- and brake-by-wire, are comparable with or have an overlap with driver aids like traction control. A number of other technologies or pieces of engineering that are still allowed or banned for other reasons than being a driver aid, such as downforce generating bodywork, all-wheel drive and continuously variable transmissions, reduce or move away the necessity of having driver aids.
Secondly, one should except that the driver's role is changing all the time. In the sixties the cars required a totally different way of driving than they did in the eighties or in present times.
Thirdly, what real differences does it make to allow driver aids? Although traction control and engine braking have been banned since 2008, the 2008 final championship standing are quite exchangeable with those from 2007.