Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to Supply Electronics to Formula 1
Yooden_Vranx writes "speedtv.com reports that beginning in 2008, Microsoft will be the sole supplier of Engine Control Units to Formula 1. Apparently, moving to a single supplier is part of the FIA's (Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile) attempts to cut costs.
The article does not clarify whether this cost reduction is enabled by cutting back on tech support, what percentage of the engine's power will be required to run all the 'features' embedded in the device, or whether 'crash' will now refer primarily to software behavior rather than driving incidents."
I hope it doesn't crash!
Something tells me this is going to be bad...
Engine Control Unit: Pressure is rising abnormally in main engine block. Would you like Windows to attempt to fix the problem?
Driver: *OK*
Engine Control Unit:This feature requires the latest service pack from windowsupdate.com. Would you like to download and install?"
Driver: shit.
... to turn the engine off?
or, be prompted with dialogs along the lines of "Applying the brakes will cause temporary loss of your vehicle's speed. Are you sure, Y/N?"
As McLaren rounds turn number 5 at Jerez, a small balloon pops up in his HUD:
You may be a victim of software counterfeiting. This copy of Windows is not genuine and is not eligible to receive all updates and product support from Microsoft.
Click Get Genuine now to get more information and resolve this issue.
Given the context, wouldn't it be Press F1 to continue
F1? geddit? oh well.
At least something other than Takuma Sato will be the cause of a crash on an F1 circuit.
What do you mean it just stopped?
...moment later..
...and when WGA's routine credential check ran, it determined that the software was illegal per contract and shut everything down.
...and...
:)
I'm telling you... I was entering turn 3, off the throttle for just a 1/1000th of a second, and when I tried to bring the revs back up, the damn car just stopped.
Ok, Mr. Schumacher, please sit tight and give us a moment to check the logs....
We think we've located the issue, Sir. Since you crashed the A car during practice, you're in the backup car. We cloned the race configuration from the computer off the A car to the B car, but we neglected to refresh the hardware/software credentials.
Yes....and...
And...you want we should kick Massa out of his ride so you can finish the qualifying session?
Actually....no. I think I'll just sit here and block the track so nobody else can get in a run
Rotate the tires, sometimes that helps.
This is a good chance for Microsoft to show off their embedded systems (Maybe WinCE? The article doesn't say.)
...). Microsoft wants new engine control technology developed on and tied into WinCE. When the time comes to transfer that to the production world, WinCE will come along with it.
Of course WinCE (it's their only embedded OS, not counting the XBOX OS and WinXP embedded). The real point of this exercise is to get Microsoft software in *production* automobiles. Technology developed or refined in F1 and other racing leagues often makes its way down to consumer vehicles (antilock brakes, stability control systems, variable valve timing, hydraulic clutch,
Having worked with WinCE, this is a very scary proposition. I'd be terrified of putting it on any device that doesn't have a RESET button (hmm, why do all WinCE phones have reset buttons but Symbian ones don't?). One can only imagine how much they paid the F1 people to "standardize" on a software platform that is individually and independently developed by each team/manufacturer.
This DoJ? Are you kidding? When it comes to antitrust enforcement, the current DoJ doesn't use tanks. They use Yugos with Super Soakers mounted on top.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Maybe Im wrong, but I feel like there has been a huge influx of blatant Microsoft bashing lately in the article descriptions. Some of it is humorous, some of it may be true, but it just seems like Ive been reading some OSS-Microsoft-hating version of Fox news. I dont remember it always being this way. Seriously, what gives?
-Lanimilbus
The contract was awarded to Microsoft MES, not Microsoft Automotive. I believe MES is a joint venture with Siemens, the technology partner to Mclaren (The shiny silver cars, for those who don't follow racing. Philistines.). Since McLaren already supplies a good deal of motorsports electronic components, this isn't much of a surprise.
As a longtime F1 fan I am not surprised. The FIA (and Bernie and Max) have been out of touch with the needs of the sport for quite a while. The "cost-cutting" move to V8s from the nice V10s ended up costing a lot of money and angering the teams. They pushed out Michelin because Michelin wouldn't toe the line. They won't restructure the revenue stream to help the teams and then blame the teams for making the sport too expensive. They create the two race engine rule that reduces the spectacle for little cost saving. All while ignoring one of the biggest expenses: testing. It is so simple: take away in-season private testing, make Friday an open test day and have one engine for qualifying and race (don't get me started on how messed up qualifying is).
Serve Gonk.
MS has been active in the Automotive sector for quite some time now, and is one of the biggest players in the market. They have a full fledged Automotive Division, and some of their systems based on CE go into Fiat, Volvo and others I dont know.
So if you think they just jumped into it, well no. They've been there for a long time now. And seem to be doing quite well. This will buy them lots of publicity.
And anyway, safety on F1 cars are multiple times redundant and even if the software fails there is a mechanical framework protecting the driver. The software largely handles monitoring tasks, warnings and such.
Life is just a conviction.
Anyway, most would be using Open Source drivers etc and the actual application would be closed source (which is GPL-OK).
Even having open source engine management would not be that limiting. It's generally the configurations that are proprietary, rather than the actual control mechanisms.
WinCE (the likely MS choice) only works on a few CPUs and only in certain modes (eg. little endian only). Most F1 engine management are likely using things like MPC5200s running in big endian mode.
This all smells of hoax.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Gee, I guess that means it's not their only embedded OS, then, does it?
Even a Republican like me can figure that out...
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Windows CE is NOT a real-time operating system, no matter what Microsoft claim.
Gentlemen, Restart your Engines!
Microsoft is undoubtedly paying a lot of money to do this, probably in the tens of millions plus the engineering time. Formula one is the most expensive sponsorship platform there is.
The benefit to the sport is partly cost but mostly to ensure that the teams own software can be kept within limits. In particular Microsoft can use their trusted computing environment to ensure that the teams only run the homologated code they have submitted to FISA for signing. So after the race there can be no questions as to whether they used driver aids like traction control or remote engine management.
Contrary to assertions an F1 car does need an O/S. It is not like a street car. The engine itself is not the issue, it is the wireless link, the telemetry, the fuel management and so on that is critical.
I could see Microsoft using a stock Windows kernel as a start but I suspect that most of this is going to be about custom coding the system to develop a new breed of O/S.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
MS has been active in the Automotive sector for quite some time now, and is one of the biggest players in the market. They have a full fledged Automotive Division, and some of their systems based on CE go into Fiat, Volvo and others I dont know. So if you think they just jumped into it, well no.
Far as I can see, Microsoft's only products are "entertainment units" and software for managing the manufacturing end. This wasn't a jump; it was a leap into an empty swimming pool, naked, in the dark, off the high board. This is what I used to refer to as a "Greens Deal"- ie, two honchos on the golf course shake hands on a deal that doesn't make the slightest sense (sample: conglomerate I worked for was not allowed to purchase any LCD panels except HP LCD panels- and we didn't get a very good discount, either.) Someone at F1 shook hands with someone at MS on the golf course, a suitcase of money went to F1 (Bernie Ecclestone NEVER met a dollar he didn't like, despite having billions of them) and as a result, F1 engine technology just took a massive step backwards.
They're not even remotely qualified to make real-time software, much less real-time hardware. When you have an engine with 8-12 cylinders that revs to over 15,000 RPMs and pushes the absolute limit of performance, timing is beyond critical. Race cars are torture on electronics; vibration, temperature, and TONS of electrical interference. MS has never worked on something like this. Ever.
Prediction: MS will try to use all sorts of DSPs and such to do signal processing instead of discreet circuits. The cars will run very poorly- and it will be nearly impossible for the team race engineers to figure out why. That's if the electronics themselves even survive the environment.
Hilarity will ensue, like MS engineers telling teams, "well, why don't you just shield all the wiring and run more grounds?" "Because that would add 50 pounds of weight." "So?" Or..."what do you mean, there's no chassis ground?" "Which part of CARBON FIBER IS NOT CONDUCTIVE DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?!" I would pay good money to hear tape recordings from Northampton, Maranello, etc...I'd learn all sorts of new swear words.
Two companies that are infinitely more qualified come to mind immediately- Bosch and MOTEC (Magneti Marelli is a little too tied to Ferrari, I think.) 3/4 of the world's auto racing engineers cut their teeth and/or use MOTEC ECUs. Companies like Bosch and MOTEC have engineers that have the necessary signal processing down pat, and they've been doing this stuff for decades. I don't see fresh grads having the skills, nor do I see seasoned engineers as being willing to take a big risk with MS...and F1 isn't the kind of place where you can grab a bunch of programmers and EEs, hand them books about racing electronics, and expect results. Where is MS going to get the talent for this?
Please help metamoderate.
... gets replaced by the "Flaming red scream of death".
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
I've tuned engines on racing cars. Firstly a little formula SAE racer, later V8 supercars.
Those Engine Control Units need to be bulletproof. And by bulletproof, I mean being able to handle being short circuited, reverse polarity applied, handle vibration, lots of heat, have weird settings applied, and generally being totally mistreated.
There are so many things that can go wrong on an engine, that to troubleshoot a problem you need to have 100% faith in the ECU. I don't mean 99.999%, I really do mean 100%! If there's a tiny little nagging doubt in your mind that the ECU might be at fault, then it throws your faultfinding completely out the window. Most of the time when there's a problem you need to fix it RIGHT NOW, normally this is at the start of a practice session, and the engineers want to get some tuning data for the suspension, the driver wants to practice the track, and every second of downtime means lots of stress for everyone in the team, including the manager and sponsorship guys. If you haven't worked in motorsport you have no idea what stress is all about. It's hardcore.
Why didn't they go with an established manufacturer such as MoTeC or Magneti Marelli? Those guys really know what's what when it comes to making an ECU.
I don't care how much experience or money Microsoft has, making a realtime OS for an ECU is no trivial matter. It's extremely difficult! You can't just whack a desktop OS like Windows CE or linux onto a small computer, things really and truly don't work like that. It will only take a couple of bugs before the engineers in F1 will be tearing their hair out, going on strike, and trying to retrofit their old ECUs into the cars. I really don't think that this idea will fly.
I am artificially intelligent.
"In addition, the WMSC also announced that due to a significant increase in cornering speeds in F1 this season, the sport's Technical Working Group will be consulted regarding possible measures to slow the cars down."
I doubt you've ever even used WinCE (called Windows Mobile now btw). Seems like your comment is just MS-bashing FUD.
Windows Mobile is a "platform" based on WinCE. It's what they used to call Pocket PC. Basically it's a CE core, Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer, and the Pocket PC UI and control panel (there's a few more things that I forget). People who aren't doing PDAs (like, oh, those doing engine control systems), use WinCE.
Now, what do you suppose the difference is between running CE in a cash register (which, in my opinion, is a good idea), versus running it in an automobile (not such a good idea, again, in my opinion)? I know, for example (being a WinCE user), that WinCE 5.x uses a shared single virtual memory space, divided into slots for the application. And that the code segment is mostly unprotected from write access (in a supposedly modern OS, can you believe it?), and that it has no security model whatsoever, and that all apps run in kernel mode and can, if they feel like it, capture the processor and stop all preemption and interrupts. Because of this, I'm not worried running WinCE on a cash register, but I am a bit more fearful in the case where lives are involved.
Being an avid F1 fan up until the mid 90's, I'd have to disagree with that. If anyone remembers 'back in the day', drivers had the option of turning up or down their turbo boost to gain speed but at a great cost to fuel. This definitely was technology taken to the N'th degree, but it was still the drivers decision when/if to turn up or down that affected the outcome. It may not be a physical skill, but driving is as much, if not more, mental than physical.
Right now the drivers are much better than the cars, so the limiting factor is the cars. Rather than the drivers skill then deciding outcomes, its the cars lack of skill that decides who wins.
I'm all for making F1 more exciting for fans, and increasing the field sizes (remember pre-qualifying?!), but this isn't the way to do it. Compare the tapes of Senna vs Piquet, against Schumacher vs Alonso and you might as well be watching two different sports.
<F1 cockpit> "Where do you want to go today?"
<F1 driver> *gasp*
<Clippy> "I've noticed you are having some trouble. Would you like me to: drive the car for you; show you a map of the circuit; wipe your helmet's visor; stop by the pitstop for a fresh change of underwear; search the help files for '300kph collision'?"
*SLAM*
i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer