Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
What will be that different in the braking department Lex? In terms of the bike ........ they aren't that expensive that the CRT's will be that far off say the best bike in the world ...... the Honda .....
Its the riders ........
People used to get lapped all the time, go back and watch King Kenny and Barry Sheene at Silverstone in '79. It's not the end of the world, and give them some time, the season hasn't even started yet. The the ART's are chopping SECONDS off every test. Will they be up front? No, but if RDP can stay on his bike he'll be swapping paint with the satilights.
How is that a condemnation of CRT bikes? The author doesn't provide a reason, either.
We all agree that the rider makes the difference in the braking zone, the author appears to agree. If the rider is the problem, then licensing is the issue, not the CRT-ness of the bike.
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
Without them, we would not have this infusion of sub par riders.
The best riders in the world are going to go where the money is, if the CRT seats paid better (or at all) we may see better riders on them. Again, hardly a technical problem with the brakes.
That was a rather dramatic change in Jumkie's allegiances
And apparently according to Jumkie we suddenly went from being the opposite of boppers to being ..... neo boppers
What I'm not sure of is:
was the sudden fall out with Stoner a product of Jumkie's new found excess drinking ...........
or was the drinking a product of that fall out??
Whatever the case Jumkie had one of histories most famous "about faces" after the "Hayden incident", and judging by his vexation with Pedrosa ........... you would have to say we were in for a lifetime of sooking from Jumkie .......
But Jumkie is exacting his revenge even as we speak, think yourself lucky ........ unlike me, you are not being manipulated via the internet into doing exactly what Jumkie wants me to do .........
Jumkie is a sociopath, and he can't see outside that. His whole existence is one of "please myself by seeking approval of the masses".
The question, over the matter of whether what is being debated is right or wrong, doesn't enter into it with Jum. .......... just so long as he gets the approval of the masses.
I still remember back to the old debate whereby Babel said "a gyro could be used to map the track", I opposed this view.
Jumkie actually joined Babel ( his once hated foe ) on this debate ....... simply because every bopper and his dog was opposing me ...... regardless of the actual issue at hand. And simply because I had upset him over some other matter.
Even today ...... are there, or have there ever been, any "gyros being used to map the track?" ........ NO!!
I would have to say, at least I managed to educate some over the matter. The extra silly thing is, they all now know I'm right, but because of their sociopath's need for approval, will publicly deny it.
Sadly, for Jumkie, the only "masses" that will approve of him lately, are the boppers.
Yamaha have already admitted to mapping the track with the use of a gyro, they have also kind of admitted that they can pick up the signals from the various transponders around the track, that would be more accurate than GPS. It's all online if you care to look. An F1 team was caught using an airbox pressure sensor to do the same thing.
Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
No they have not. I invite anybody to show me proof of a working mapping positioning system that uses a gyro for the actual task of position sensing.
Attitude is not position.
Attitude is not position.
This exceeds my present knowledge if not my past ability to understand but I think yamaka who seemed to be fairly credible in his claims to being an aeronautical engineer as well as a reasonable and sensible guy, and aware of the concept of attitude, was implying that if you knew how a bikes attitude changed over the course of a lap, and the geography of the track was a known thing from video footage, transponders or whatever it amounted to the same thing.
Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
Sounds real great Mick ........ now put it into practice .....
Make it and fail.
In any case why would you bother GPS is the most accurate position measurement known, it surpasses any gyro expected accuracy and costs so little ....... why bother, even if it did not have a fatal flaw.
Because at the time of the discussion if I recall they were not supposed to be using gps for the purpose.
Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
Michael
Is it GPS specifically ? or any means of track logging?
To use a gyro sensor in any manner resembling a tracking device it must be constantly referred back to a known correct standard, eg. line of sight or ............ a GPS ........... rendering a gyro .......... useless.
Gps's came along after folk botched there way along with gyro's, in a never satisfactory manner. Gps's did all the things gyros could not. WhyTF would you retrofit a sensor that did not do what is required, and has a well known flaw, when the cure has been found for all the ills of that old technology.??
I spent 20 years sticking all manners of sensors on things ............... I have given you the reasons a gyroscopic device has its uses and the reasons it is not applicable to other applications. Perhaps, since it may take 20 years to understand the pro.s and con.s of why a gyroscopic sensor is not applicable for mapping/positioning, you could give me your arguments for why such a device should be used? especially on a race bike on a race track. You do the research, you obviously have not to date.
Even your humble smartphone has a gyro, gps, accelerometer, etc. etc. etc. these days. Turn off the GPS and see how far you get with any of the positioning software just using the gyro sensor ........... tells the story really ...... they even use phone tower location in preference .......... as ......... as tower location is, its even used where gyro is not ...... why?
( PS. Smartphones are great ........ I actually use a smartphone on my KTM Enduro bike these days ....... replaces the speedo/GPS and can track and log all sorts of stuff ........... were I 20 years younger, or had the time, I would have likely had it talking to the bikes ignition too
)
What possible reason can you have that flies in the face of all that is known as the uses of a gyroscopic sensor? If you do feel you have reinvented a better wheel, I'd love to know about it. When you get it working and cheaper than GPS sensors, and of better accuracy, you'll make millions.
The silly thing is that I believe they have possibly superseded the need of logging track position. Such a system would have been quite outdated. Instead they could create a smarter system that did all the "thinking" and adjustment live for whatever corner they were at, irrespective of the track, absolutely no need of a logged database of where on the track the bike was. This a gyro has a use for ........ but it is by no means logging a track position as was proposed by Babel, and was the debate being had.
I'm beginning to see why "electronics" aids, are despised in GP ......... even though I personally like the idea, especially if MGP is a development series.
Is it GPS specifically ? or any means of track logging?
To use a gyro sensor in any manner resembling a tracking device it must be constantly referred back to a known correct standard, eg. line of sight or ............ a GPS ........... rendering a gyro .......... useless.
Gps's came along after folk botched there way along with gyro's, in a never satisfactory manner. Gps's did all the things gyros could not. WhyTF would you retrofit a sensor that did not do what is required, and has a well known flaw, when the cure has been found for all the ills of that old technology.??
I spent 20 years sticking all manners of sensors on things ............... I have given you the reasons a gyroscopic device has its uses and the reasons it is not applicable to other applications. Perhaps, since it may take 20 years to understand the pro.s and con.s of why a gyroscopic sensor is not applicable for mapping/positioning, you could give me your arguments for why such a device should be used? especially on a race bike on a race track. You do the research, you obviously have not to date.
Even your humble smartphone has a gyro, gps, accelerometer, etc. etc. etc. these days. Turn off the GPS and see how far you get with any of the positioning software just using the gyro sensor ........... tells the story really ...... they even use phone tower location in preference .......... as ......... as tower location is, its even used where gyro is not ...... why?
( PS. Smartphones are great ........ I actually use a smartphone on my KTM Enduro bike these days ....... replaces the speedo/GPS and can track and log all sorts of stuff ........... were I 20 years younger, or had the time, I would have likely had it talking to the bikes ignition too
What possible reason can you have that flies in the face of all that is known as the uses of a gyroscopic sensor? If you do feel you have reinvented a better wheel, I'd love to know about it. When you get it working and cheaper than GPS sensors, and of better accuracy, you'll make millions.
The silly thing is that I believe they have possibly superseded the need of logging track position. Such a system would have been quite outdated. Instead they could create a smarter system that did all the "thinking" and adjustment live for whatever corner they were at, irrespective of the track, absolutely no need of a logged database of where on the track the bike was. This a gyro has a use for ........ but it is by no means logging a track position as was proposed by Babel, and was the debate being had.
I'm beginning to see why "electronics" aids, are despised in GP ......... even though I personally like the idea, especially if MGP is a development series.
I explained the basic concept of how location specific mapping works with a gyro. You claim gyro mapping is impossible by embracing a definition of "location" and "map" that are incompatible with gyro data. A fuel map is still a map, though it has no compass orientation or geographic coordinates. The integer 2 is located halfway between 1 and 3, though 2's location relative to 1 and 3 cannot be universally measured in meters or feet. An electronic system, with just a gyro, can create a sequence of unique corner profiles for each track, and it knows the location of the bike in that sequence by monitoring the corner the bike has just exited. It is a very crude method of mapping a track and the location of the bike, but it still allows location specific settings. For all intents and purposes, if an electronics system can automatically change the setting for specific locations, it can map a track.
Your response is similar to what the AMA said when competitors suggested Amar Bazzaz had created traction control without wheel sensors (wheel sensors were banned in 2004). The AMA said that if it didn't use wheel sensors, it wasn't traction control. For 2006, they had to repeal the ban on wheel sensors, but by then Yosh Suzuki had already established a sizable advantage in talent, equipment, and funding. It was the beginning of the end of AMA SBK. Semantics don't really have any bearing on the functionality of electronic devices.
Joined Jul 2011
1K Posts | 872+
Dont Know
It doesnt make much sense to be mapping tracks. One off track excursion, or dicing with other riders could throw the whole system off. They come to a track and have only two hours to set the bike up to try and win the race. Mapping the the track, in terms of position on track seems like a waste of valuable time to me. The best information you could have is simply lean angle. Even with my primitive riding skills I understand how important it is at maximum lean to have an extremely smooth throttle pick up. But that same smooth map is not so good at high revs going down the straight. That requires an explosive power map. But what if you link a gyro sensor to the engine and change mapping based on lean angle. I think people see gyro sensors and get all excited and ignore the obvious.
Location-specific is an integral part of race bikes for international competition b/c it allows the settings to be altered for each corner and each straight. Engine braking, TC, throttle response, etc. can all be modified. This is particularly important in fuel-limited MotoGP b/c you can set the bike to use the fuel at the most advantageous parts of the circuit.
You have described the type of traction control available on high-end production bikes like the S1000RR. The Bimmer has a lean angle sensor and a gyro under the seat. IIRC the engine management system modulates power, depending on the circumstances, with 3 methods: soft-response, spark-cut, or using throttle-by-wire to alter the rider's input. It has multiple methods b/c cutting spark kills your cat so it's only for race exhaust on a trackday.
Track mapping with just a gyro would be a buggy piece of crap, but it gets better and better if you mix it with other sensors. It gets better still, as hawkdriver suggested, when teams starting pinging the timing transponders.
Joined Oct 2006
25K Posts | 4K+
Your Mom's House
Posting after a long time. Couldn't resist this
http://www.powerslid...84
See how things changed once Jumkie dared to criticize Stoner
Joined Jun 2007
10K Posts | 1K+
Norah Head
Its flawed Lex ........ thats why they don't do it, despite your design idea there.
But hey don't let me dissuade you, let me know when your system is done, and I'd be keen to check it out.
And I think you are now trying to debate to change the definition of what "mapping" is. Good luck with that.
But hey don't let me dissuade you, let me know when your system is done, and I'd be keen to check it out.
And I think you are now trying to debate to change the definition of what "mapping" is. Good luck with that.
Ameba?????????? Do you mean Amoeba O intellectual one
For the record Jums has more intellect in his ball sweat than Mental and his merry band of Neos combined.......
