The future of motorsports

Racing safety has made amazing progress over its history. I was recently horrified when I saw this:

It was such a hard hit. A fractured pelvis and hip is nothing to sneeze at, but I was amazed that that was the extent of his injuries; when it happened, I really thought they'd be pulling a dead body out of the wreckage.

Still, the open-cockpit nature of F1/Indy cars remains a problem; there have been numerous instances in which drivers were killed or injured in rollovers or impacts to their helmet by debris. This year, F1 is addressing the problem by requiring all teams to install a "halo," a titanium brace intended to better protect the driver's head:

IndyCar is taking similar steps, and by the end of this season or possibly next season, you may see the cars fitted with sturdy windscreens:

This video shows an impact test for the "halo", as well as for a (rejected) prototype F1 windscreen, and a one-piece fighter jet canopy.

These moves toward safety are happening at the same time that autonomous vehicle technology is becoming viable - not just for cars, but also motorcycles:

In a recent discussion of the F1 halo with my brother, he suggested that safety could be optimized by taking the driver/rider out of the vehicle altogether. It certainly would maximize safety, and we might see more (and more spectacular) crashes, since the robots could be programmed to take crazy risks in pursuit of victory for their team. On the other hand, the race would no longer be a contest of operator skill/daring; it would become nothing more than an engineering contest.

Since the whole of motorsports depends on attracting interested fans who will pay for tickets and/or put up with advertising, one starts to wonder: would people still watch the races if the cars and bikes were piloting themselves? Some people are fans of particular drivers, but others rally behind particular teams - and still others just want to watch cars and bikes whip around turns at ludicrous speed and maybe crash every now and then.

So what's the future of motorsports? If the cars and bikes were autonomous, would you still watch? Or is the courage and skill of human operators out there on the course an indispensable element of the sport for you?

There is a group of hard core fans who would be interested in the engineering side of racing (I'm one), but the majority of fans are interested in the personalities of the drivers, and the 'soap opera' aspect of driver rivalries and perceived conflict between teams. I don't follow car racing, but MotoGP's love or Valentino Rossi is a perfect example. Rossi has recently signed up for two more years of racing, to the great relief of the organizers who must spend a great deal of time worrying about what happens to their fan base when Rossi does retire. Case in point was the 2016 race in Mugello when Rossi blew an engine, and half the spectators left before the end of the race because they were there specifically to watch Rossi.

I'll make a generalization that all sports, with the exception of horse racing, are driven by the publicity that surrounds the participants. Take that away, and that sport will become a footnote on a web site or (as we old people would say) something you find on page 8 of the newspaper. If you automated mechanical sports, the stick and ball competitions would become an even larger part of a sports fan's obsession.

If the cars and bikes were autonomous, would you still watch?

To me, this would be the equivalent of watching trains go around the tracks as a kid. It would be cool for a couple of minutes, then would be about as bad as watching paint dry.

To me, without human riders or drivers it is just a glorified video game. Even though I have been attending motorcycle racing since 1976, I would find something else to watch.

Have you ever watched the drone races on TV? They're pretty cool. The kids are incredibly quick with them. The races are held in all kind of interesting places. One was in a sports stadium. They had to race through the tunnels, up stairs, out into the field and then back into the interior. Lots of crashes. These are basically like video games but humans controlling and crashes. I guess something in between real racing and just computers racing cars.

If the cars and bikes were autonomous, would you still watch? Nope.

Or is the courage and skill of human operators out there on the course an indispensable element of the sport for you? Yup.

Have you ever watched the drone races on TV? They're pretty cool. The kids are incredibly quick with them. The races are held in all kind of interesting places. One was in a sports stadium. They had to race through the tunnels, up stairs, out into the field and then back into the interior. Lots of crashes. These are basically like video games but humans controlling and crashes. I guess something in between real racing and just computers racing cars.

I had the same thought about remotely-operated vehicles. We're on the verge of creating fleets of remotely-operated trucks: fit them up with some cameras and servos, and the driver can sit in an office in the trucking company headquarters while the truck he's driving down the highway is a thousand miles away. The difference with racing is the race drivers/riders depend on a huge amount of sensory input to be able to operate their car/bike at the edge of the envelope; a rider can't be looking at instruments to cognitively figure out that the back end is starting to slip out, he has to viscerally feel the bike yawing/rolling out from under him in order to have that timely, practiced automatic response that enables successful recovery. How do you convey those kinds of kinesthetic sensations with remote sensors? You'd need something like what was portrayed in that old movie Brainstorm, and technology like that is still a long ways off.

Robotic riders (like Yamaha's Motobot) will eventually be able to ride better than human riders. On a bike fitted with GPS, 3-axis rate gyros independent wheel speed sensors, and a steering angle sensor, the robot will know exactly what's happening and will have the ability to react to inputs faster than a human rider can. But I don't think remote human operators will ever be able to match what an in-the-saddle human rider can do.

There is a group of hard core fans who would be interested in the engineering side of racing (I'm one), but the majority of fans are interested in the personalities of the drivers, and the 'soap opera' aspect of driver rivalries and perceived conflict between teams.

Back when Indycar was CART, I followed it (and F1) closely and for more than a decade, going to several races a year. One thing I've liked about indycar is that the press and fans treat drivers as individuals and not so much as teammates for comparison purposes. When one team member doesn't finish or qualify as well as their counterparts, these isn't the constant ridiculous outcry to sack the teammate, etc like in F1. I've always appreciated that aspect of domestic racing here. Indycar has had their many heroes, but seldom was it a negative atmosphere.

I'm still a F1 fan and Indycar is looking like it may develop potential again.

As to driverless or autonomous cars racing - maybe young kids will watch that. Groups of kids nowadays actually sit and watch video game tournaments, often with multiple screens. Seems crazy to me, but what do I know?

In a recent discussion of the F1 halo with my brother, he suggested that safety could be optimized by taking the driver/rider out of the vehicle altogether. It certainly would maximize safety, and we might see more (and more spectacular) crashes, since the robots could be programmed to take crazy risks in pursuit of victory for their team. On the other hand, the race would no longer be a contest of operator skill/daring; it would become nothing more than an engineering contest

Not a new idea. I remember back in the 1970s, or possibly late 60s, when things like impact-absorbing bumpers, side guard door beams and airbags were first being mandated, reading a piece in, I think, Road & Track, that was a fictional "race report" on a race of the future with no drivers in the cars, done for safety reasons.

Rod Serling had a futuristic episode of The Twilight Zone with boxing robots, developed supposedly to curb man's inhumanity towards man, while retaining the "sport."

Motorsports is about the closest equivalent we have to Roman gladiators and chariot racing. Society being slightly more civilized these days and really not wanting to see death as the ultimate penalty, I think part of the attraction is fans know it's dangerous and are seeing the top competitors involved in a level of risk-taking the average Joe wants no part of. Take that away and many of those fans will likely stay home. At least that applies to my generation, and I'm surprised at some of the interests (and lack thereof) of young people now days, so who knows.

Also I think overall the heyday of motorsports (with a few exceptions) is behind us and have been on a gradual decline the past couple decades even though the powers behind it have been working overtime trying to keep the status quo (as in making empty seats at televised races appear as though spectators are sitting in them).

Personally I like to see manufacturers compete against each other too, not only makes it relevant but competition produces intense/compressed levels of engineering in performance and safety that would otherwise take much longer. Can you imagine what motorcycles would be like if the big four Japanese hadn't been going head to head in road racing or motocross the past six decades or w/o Ducati's involvement in Superbike or w/o Honda and BMW learning what they did while in Formula 1. It would just be scooters, Harley clones, and maybe some TW200's..

Today I forced myself to watch the Formula E race from Uruguay and after 10-15 minutes couldn't take it. The cars were identical except for colors, made an annoying screeching sound and as hard as the commentators tried to make it interesting, it wasn't. Golf is far more intriquing : ) By contrast the day before I watched much of the 12 Hours of Sebring from live in-car(s) with no commentary as I don't have the cable channel it was on. Turned out to be a blessing in disguise because for the most part it was riveting, switching back and forth from the BMW, Porsche, Corvette, and Ford GT plus being able to concurrently see live timing and scoring. Every car was different, the sounds, shifting, braking, how and where they made power, and how they dealt with traffic and different sections of track. There were some mechanical maladies that may have affected the outcome and the drivers were excellent as you'd expect from factory teams even though several made mistakes, and some of them costly. But that's the nature of endurance racing.

“I think part of the attraction is fans know it's dangerous and are seeing the top competitors involved in a level of risk-taking the average Joe wants no part of. Take that away and many of those fans will likely stay home”

+1

Rod Serling had a futuristic episode of The Twilight Zone with boxing robots, developed supposedly to curb man's inhumanity towards man, while retaining the "sport."

Robot boxers were the central element of the movie Real Steel. That Wikipedia page includes a link to the Twilight Zone episode you mentioned.

Groups of kids nowadays actually sit and watch video game tournaments, often with multiple screens. Seems crazy to me, but what do I know?

I suppose this might be analogous to remotely-piloted vehicles, rather than autonomous vehicles: the element of real physical risk isn't there, but at least there's still human skill in the loop.

I'd offer there are several factors impacting motor sports popularity:

- Cost. Ticket prices are insane, let alone, parking and food costs.

- Variety. Lots more to do and see today than in prior heyday years of Indy 500

- Lack of affinity. Unlike AJ, Lloyd, Roger, et al. today's drivers are a bunch of automatons making fewer on-track decisions, defaulting to computer programs.

- Time. When MotoGP was in Indy, we had leisurely breakfast, traveled to the track, watched the finals and were home before mid afternoon. The 500 or Brickyard is an all-day event. Who's got that much time to waste for a 2-hour event watching brands and drivers with whom I have no affinity?

Big one IMO? Lack of brand, driver or geographic affinity. I grew up at the drag strip. You were a Hemi, Ford or Chevy guy. Our heroes were Tommy Ivo, Don Garlits, nationally and other, local "heroes". I suspect American interest in MotoGP (and other international m/c racing) has dropped significantly with Nicky's and Colin's exits.

No need to completely remove the driver, make him a remote driver! Let him sit in a simulator where using VR tech he can still drive and fully operate the vehicle remotely, because he's in control he still relies on his skills, takes risks, and is out of the race if he crashes.

I think this would be awesome, and good for business as teams could sell VR kits to fans. Imagine being able to "drive" a formula one race car around Indy for a few laps? Now, the enthusiast operates a virtual car and not a real car like the actual Indy race car driver would.