[Kal (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by Nesti

Ask an F1 driver what he would prefer? My answer would be the same.

Putting a computer in charge is insanity and Airbus have proceeded along an incorrect pathway in order to rake-in inherent economies associated with electrical/electronic systems to take leading share in the aerospace market. The truth is-is that when electronics/computers work fine until they screw-up , and when they do, they fail 'big-time'.

The fact is I didn’t have any experience without traction control and I was rubbish. It’s interesting. The throttle used to be like a button, you’d lift or floor it with no half measures. Now you need to be as smooth as possible. The laptimes have been good immediately, that’s a sign that we’ve started on the right footing.
But from a safety point of view, these limitations in the use of electronics look like a step backwards to me: in the event of wet races we’ll have a lot more accidents.
Felipe Massa

Without traction control it is much more difficult to accelerate – you have to apply your foot on the throttle much more carefully.
It is more fun to drive but also more difficult. We are going to see more mistakes because it is easier to lose control when you are pushing, but there will be the same winners.
Personally I prefer cars with full electronics. In terms of technology and safety, I think it is a backwards step.
Pedro de la Rosa


F1 removed traction control, not full ESP, which is what I was referring to anyway. To use your argument against Peter, I'm not interested in computer assistance during normal control, only emergency situations. I am only interested in when the computer takes over when the driver has for all intents and purposes 'lost control' of the vehicle, such as in an emergency maneuver, or when road conditions cause a sudden loss of control.