rec.autos.simulators

>>BROOKLYN, Mich. -- Jeff Gordon may not be the only
>>guy on his team who's a whiz at those NASCAR computer
>>racing games. Ray Evernham and his crew might also be
>>pretty adept at that stuff, according to some rivals in the
>>stock-car garage . . . only Evernham and Co. are playing
>>these computer games for real, and winning races.

>>General Motors has been quietly funding a major
>>computer-simulation engineering program for some two
>>years with Gordon's team, according to NASCAR sources,
>>and this season the benefits are paying off spectacularly.

>>''I know that's what they're doing,'' one key NASCAR
>>figure said, asking not to be named. ''GM has developed a
>>program with PI Research (a well-known computer
>>company doing several NASCAR programs for various
>>teams) where all you have to do is plug in the shocks, the
>>springs, the tires, and bang -- it tells you how fast you're
>>going to run.

>>''What I don't understand is why Earnhardt's bunch doesn't
>>have access to that . . . and why Ford Motor Company
>>hasn't tried to develop its own version.''

>>Formula One teams have been using such computer
>>simulation programs for several years, Indy-car teams, too.
>>NASCAR teams, however, have been somewhat slow to
>>pick up the ball, in part because they run twice as many
>>races as the F1 and Indy-car tours and because testing --
>>crucial to such computer programs -- is more limited. Plus,
>>the use of race-team engineers is relatively new to the
>>stock-car tour.

>>Todd Parrott, crew chief for Dale Jarrett, says that
>>expertise in such computer simulations is a big reason for
>>Gordon's success because it helps eliminate mistakes.

>>Are Gordon and Evernham using such super-computer
>>simulation programs?

>>''They are doing it,'' Parrott says flatly. ''They know what
>>a
>>change (in the chassis, shocks, springs or tire pressure)
>>will
>>do before they make the change.

>>''And all that is is money and people and resources.
>>They've got more engineers than anybody in racing.
>>They've got aerodynamicist from General Motors working
>>right there in the shop. It's hard to beat stuff like that .
>>.. .
>>when they don't make a mistake.

>>''They're good everywhere they go. It's not like they're
>>just
>>good on the speedways or just good on the short tracks or
>>just Daytona and Talladega. They're good every race track
>>they go to.''

>>All that just makes Parrott burn.

>>''If Jeff doesn't win the championship, then they've got a
>>big problem, the way they're winning races,'' Parrott says.
>>''I'm not crying, whining, moaning or groaning. The kid's
>>good, and he's got a great race team. He's got the best
>>equipment. And they've got more people working on their
>>stuff than anybody in NASCAR. They've got more money.
>>So, like Ricky Rudd said, there's no reason why Hendrick
>>Motorsports shouldn't win every race. But they can be
>>beat. And we proved that at Dover.''

>>Is Gordon's team winning because of a stronger, deeper
>>engineerin what some NASCAR team engineers are
>>thinking.

>>The two Winston Cup operations that should logically have
>>the strongest engineering operations are Jack Roush's and
>>Roger Penske's. Penske's Indy-car operation has long used
>>specialty computer simulation programs.

>>But Rick Hendrick's engineering operation appears to be
>>the strongest. ''They probably have a larger engineering
>>staff than any Winston Cup team,'' Robin Pemberton,
>>Rusty Wallace's crew chief, says. ''We don't have any
>>engineers in-house. We use Ford, and we've got some
>>people in England. We use the wind tunnel in Southampton
>>for our 40 percent models all the time.

>>''We're not as wild on that stuff as people might think. We
>>might even be behind in some small areas.''

>>There are three major car-testing machines that could be
>>useful to NASCAR teams, Pemberton said. ''Ford has one,
>>GM has one, called K&C machines. And I think Goodyear
>>has one, for tire testing. But it's hard to get time on any
>>of
>>them because they use them for production cars, and it's
>>very expensive to use. But we have worked on them in the
>>past.''

>>Access to the Goodyear machine might be particularly
>>valuable to teams, but Goodyear officials are quite
>>tight-lipped about that machine and who is allowed access.

>>Only two or three years ago, crew chiefs and drivers were
>>very reluctant to deal with engineers, preferring the
>>traditional seat-of-the-pants approach to chassis set-ups.
>>But the success of Gordon, Evernham and the Hendrick
>>operation has shown even the most skeptical NASCAR
>>men the value of good mechanical engineers. Now virtually
>>every team has an engineer . . . and many teams are
>>starting to expand the engineering staff.

>>''I think there is a need for more engineers on these
>>teams,''
>>Pemberton says. ''But you have to find good
>>common-sense race engineers, like Terry Satchell. Good,
>>practical people.''

>>Satchell, who now works with Andy Petree and Ken
>>Schrader, was a Penske team Indy-car engineer in 1994
>>and 1995, working with Al Unser Jr.

>>The new generation of drivers, particularly a smart, savvy
>>racer like Gordon, might be more amenable to working with
>>engineers and computer specialists, too. ''These new guys
>>don't have the old settled ways like the old guys,''
>>Pemberton said. ''They just think this is the way it's
>>supposed to be. Like Robby Gordon; he's dying for an
>>engineer, somebody he thinks he can talk to, somebody
>>who can put numbers in his head.''

>>Satchell agrees. He says it's also a matter of culture:
>>''Indy-car drivers are very used to getting out of the car
>>and
>>wanting to see the PI data. They get out of the car and they
>>want to see their 'traces.' That's a big deal with all those
>>guys because they've got the data.

>>''It's very easy to show them 'Here is what you just did,
>>and here's what the simulation says you can do, if you do
>>this or that.' 'Oh, yeah, let's try it.' ''

>>Satchell pulled up a multi-colored schematic on his laptop,
>>an old Indy-car simulation program from a Mid-Ohio test a
>>few years back, and fingered through the data, in effect
>>'driving' the car around the track, to demonstrate what was
>>possible in this area. The C-base compiled simulation
>>program is one he helped design for Penske.

>>So why hasn't Satchell developed a similar program for his
>>Winston Cup team? ''I would if I could, if I had the money.
>>But we have bited,'' Satchell said.

>>''You can only do so much if you're on the road this
>>month. But if I had the money, I'd hire a programmer and
>>mechanical engineer and tell them this is what I want done.
>>I don't know if I'd need five or ten, but if we had a
>>software guy and another mechanical engineer, I think we
>>could get a lot done. The better the tool, the fewer the
>>people you need.''

>>One of the sport's first team engineers, Bobby Hutchens, of
>>the Earnhardt team, has been working in the computer
>>simulation area.

>>''I think over the next year or two you'll see quite a bit
>>of
>>advancement in those simulation programs,'' Hutchens said.
>>''There are people who are presently working with teams to
>>develop those programs to where you can put a setup in the
>>computer and generate some calculations.''

>>How sophisticated is the top-of-the-line NASCAR stuff
>>right now?

>>''I think it's really just in its infancy stage yet,''
>>Hutchens
>>said. ''I don't think anyone is using it as a measuring tool
>>right now. They're just trying to touch it, feel it, and see
>>how the changes actually correlate to what the program
>>might predict. I don't think anyone is gaining a tremendous
>>performance advantage by it at this point. But I think down
>>the road you'll see that.

>>''And I think this is where the multiple-team operation will
>>come into play because they'll be able to cover more tracks
>>in a shorter amount of time. So it will come down to
>>resources and people -- how many of your people will you
>>be able to devote to look at this data and take it to the
>>next
>>step.''