In all seriousness, I think that there might be a good argument, in 2025, for converting races, be they car or boat or whatnot, to be remotely-driven.
We’ve got the technology today.
It’d permit for higher speeds and suchlike, and eliminate some requirements.
The audience doesn’t get the drama of the driver maybe being killed in an accident, but by-and-large, blood sport has faded into history.
There are clearly some people who watch racing for the crashes — but it’s possible to have the crashes and have vehicles potentially destroyed without the drivers being killed too.
Well, I suppose it depends on what people are out for. Like I said, if it’s death that they’re interested in, then, yeah, it would. But if they’re okay with the crashes without the death, then I’d think that it’d be okay.
Not gonna lie, a pure engineering contest without the restrictions feel like a very cool idea. See what the true limits car engineers can achieve in a race if they didn’t even need to consider driver safety. There exists a lot of restrictions on racing leagues for driver safety, as it should. But without drivers, you can pretty much throw all of it away.
These types of events exist already. There’s stuff like the DARPA races, “battle bots,” VEX and LEGO robotic, RC car races, drone races, etc.
Regarding your point about removing limitations without a driver, currently anything that would harm a driver in a race is going to destroy the car too, so I can’t imagine what would really change in this regard.
There a lot of numbers higher than the 9Gs that are safe-ish and reasonable-ish for human drivers/pilots to experience regularly. A big bag of water with bones inside that likes to breathe doesn’t take well to high levels of acceleration, eg. really fast turns.
Outside of planes, I don’t know that any land or water based vehicle could pull 9Gs as you’re limited by the traction of the tires and whatever physics effect boats on the water.
F1 maxes out around 6/7Gs, but they’re not solely limited by tire friction, they’re effectively upside down planes that use their airfoils to get more traction. A lot of the difference is sideways Gs are harder. A pilot getting pushed down into their seat while banking through a turn can have more control than a driver getting pulled to the outside of the turn.
But without drivers, you can pretty much throw all of it away.
I’m not sure you could - since spectator safety is considered more important than driver safety. (both are important)
So unless it’s out in the middle of nowhere, with no spectators, no camerapeople, any pit crew would need to be in bunkers - just drones within a few kilometers of the track - it couldn’t happen either and such and event would probably be less exciting than watching someone else play the F1 PC/Console game…
These drivers understand the danger they’re getting into when entering these races.
Why do you want to take their bodily autonomy away from them by preventing them from doing something that they love? I’d much rather take a wall at 200MPH in a race car than go out from a heart attack while taking my morning shit or getting T-boned on my commute to the office.
In all seriousness, I think that there might be a good argument, in 2025, for converting races, be they car or boat or whatnot, to be remotely-driven.
We’ve got the technology today.
It’d permit for higher speeds and suchlike, and eliminate some requirements.
The audience doesn’t get the drama of the driver maybe being killed in an accident, but by-and-large, blood sport has faded into history.
There are clearly some people who watch racing for the crashes — but it’s possible to have the crashes and have vehicles potentially destroyed without the drivers being killed too.
That defeats the whole point.
Well, I suppose it depends on what people are out for. Like I said, if it’s death that they’re interested in, then, yeah, it would. But if they’re okay with the crashes without the death, then I’d think that it’d be okay.
Sport requires human drama.
No fans would watch robots race, unless they were rooting for a human to win.
Just gamblers.
Not gonna lie, a pure engineering contest without the restrictions feel like a very cool idea. See what the true limits car engineers can achieve in a race if they didn’t even need to consider driver safety. There exists a lot of restrictions on racing leagues for driver safety, as it should. But without drivers, you can pretty much throw all of it away.
These types of events exist already. There’s stuff like the DARPA races, “battle bots,” VEX and LEGO robotic, RC car races, drone races, etc.
Regarding your point about removing limitations without a driver, currently anything that would harm a driver in a race is going to destroy the car too, so I can’t imagine what would really change in this regard.
There a lot of numbers higher than the 9Gs that are safe-ish and reasonable-ish for human drivers/pilots to experience regularly. A big bag of water with bones inside that likes to breathe doesn’t take well to high levels of acceleration, eg. really fast turns.
Outside of planes, I don’t know that any land or water based vehicle could pull 9Gs as you’re limited by the traction of the tires and whatever physics effect boats on the water.
F1 maxes out around 6/7Gs, but they’re not solely limited by tire friction, they’re effectively upside down planes that use their airfoils to get more traction. A lot of the difference is sideways Gs are harder. A pilot getting pushed down into their seat while banking through a turn can have more control than a driver getting pulled to the outside of the turn.
I’m not sure you could - since spectator safety is considered more important than driver safety. (both are important)
So unless it’s out in the middle of nowhere, with no spectators, no camerapeople, any pit crew would need to be in bunkers - just drones within a few kilometers of the track - it couldn’t happen either and such and event would probably be less exciting than watching someone else play the F1 PC/Console game…
If robots were racing, people would be rooting for the remote pilot, or the team that built it, or the designers of the engine, etc…
Does no one remember Robot Wars or any spinoffs thereof?
Did they get NASCAR ratings?
And those battles were a quite a bit more action than oval track racing.
Maybe you would get figure 8 courses or mario kart tracks, but i do not believe that will keep viewers interested long term.
I dunno, maybe that’s true. People like watching humans be in danger, that’s true.
Monster Truck shows probably don’t need humans though. We like watching stuff get crushed by big things even if humans aren’t involved!
These drivers understand the danger they’re getting into when entering these races.
Why do you want to take their bodily autonomy away from them by preventing them from doing something that they love? I’d much rather take a wall at 200MPH in a race car than go out from a heart attack while taking my morning shit or getting T-boned on my commute to the office.
Hahahah no. Humans haven’t changed. We still love to gawk at death and pain. We just don’t want to admit it directly.
Rubber-neckers slowing down the highway for a crash on the other side aren’t doing it to make sure they are safe. They are hoping to spot some gore.
Unless you like TOOL.
“I want to watch things die from a good safe distance. Vicariously, I live while the whole world dies.”
If theres no risk of complete assholes burning up or crumpling into a pancake during a car race then the race sucks ass.