I'm not a fan and don't think that the TT is the place for testing prototypes - too much involved in holding a race the economics don't stack up.

However if a race we are having then it at least should be credible - which it isn't.  My feeling is that the Mugen bikes have basically taken the challenge out of it by bringing something so out-of-this-world expensive and advanced that many of the teams who had a crack in the past have just decided not to bother.  If they want to have a full grid they should make it one of those events where any bike that enters can be bought for a set number of pounds after the event.  Lets say 20k for arguments sake.

I've always been a bit ambivalent to the actual race when its on - much like watch the Subarus go past.  It's OK for a break in the wait for the racing to start.  What I don't agree with is the award of a TT win for it - there is no comparison with an actual TT win.

My guess is that the COC is under some pressure to make sure it happens so various promises and commercial agreements are met. So I reckon it'll be on even if the Senior has to go to 4 laps to fit it in.  All the same - good luck to anyone who starts.

Sam

It's also coming up for 200 years since the electric motor was invented and the best we have is a ridiculously labour / financially expensive process of battery manufacture and very limited vehicle range. It's hardly inspiring.

(09-06-2017, 07:09 AM)Sam Pato Wrote: I'm not a fan and don't think that the TT is the place for testing prototypes

Things move on, and in this day and age I don't necessarily disagree, but, just playing devil's advocate, isn't that exactly where it all began?

It was but my point is more that there is a bit of a difference in the costs to stage the race these days.

Already a two hour delay. The Senior TT is the blue riband event and should be given priority. Put the sidecars out first, then the Senior and if there's time the Zero thing. Oh and no silly hospitality laps etc.

Heard on the radio hospitality laps are a go now due to delay. (hope the cars go over all the damp patches to aid in drying).

Is that why there's a delay.

I was always nervous about the mandatory teatime road opening because if things slide back, much after 3.30pm then you have to start either cutting laps off the senior or waiting till after the tea break, the open road period gives the opportunity for all sorts of randomness - RTCs, spillages and non race 'emergencies'. Remember watching the senior in 2012 ish at Brandywell - sat in the field from 10 am and were straining to see the bikes at 8'30 pm. I think if a single lap gets cut from the senior to allow zero interest or subaru laps the paying customers (yes it costs me about £1200 to be there) know what the organisers think of them - can't control the weather but messing up the whole event for vanity reasons is unforgiveable - head torches at the ready chaps

Looks like the timekeepers weren't that interested either... I wanted to see how Adam Child went on the production bike, but they cleared the timing before he finished.

For those who don't like the Zeros because the favourite bikes are so far out ahead of other competitors and the racing isn't as close as other classes, the third place sidecar just finished two and a half minutes down on second place.

With regard to the Subaru laps, I understand that the money raised actually goes to help fund the prize money, so it serves a very useful purpose.

I must admit to being impressed that eight electric milk floats finished the "race", sadly I still can't raise any excitement about it.

I sincerely hope that no-one is still labouring under the impression that the electric bikes are in any way "green". The fossil fuel used to charge the batteries (never mind create the things) far exceeds the amount used by a similar petrol powered machine over a similar distance.

The argument is that "this is the future", well, what about hydrogen power cells? The technology has been around for a long time and powered the NASA moon flights. It is clean, it does not (unlike the battery power) produce great amounts of heat as a waste product. A hydrogen cell could be changed as quickly as a re-fuel allowing more laps, would be lighter than the batteries and eminently recyclable (is that a word?).

I wonder if the Zero rules only allow electric battery power, or is it open to alternatives? Come on Universities, you can't compete with the amount of money Honda San and Mugen San are throwing at the project so think outside the box!

(10-06-2017, 09:12 AM)manxmike1 Wrote: I sincerely hope that no-one is still labouring under the impression that the electric bikes are in any way "green". The fossil fuel used to charge the batteries (never mind create the things) far exceeds the amount used by a similar petrol powered machine over a similar distance.

Do you have a source for this? Even a coal-fired power station has better thermal efficiency than a small petrol engine. Gas ones much more so. And close to half of UK grid electricity is produced from non-fossil-carbon sources.

(10-06-2017, 09:12 AM)manxmike1 Wrote: The argument is that "this is the future", well, what about hydrogen power cells? The technology has been around for a long time and powered the NASA moon flights. It is clean, it does not (unlike the battery power) produce great amounts of heat as a waste product. A hydrogen cell could be changed as quickly as a re-fuel allowing more laps, would be lighter than the batteries and eminently recyclable (is that a word?).

I wonder if the Zero rules only allow electric battery power, or is it open to alternatives? Come on Universities, you can't compete with the amount of money Honda San and Mugen San are throwing at the project so think outside the box!

I think when the TTXGP first came in, the rules were quite broad and did allow fuel cells - and no-one attempted one. But now the TT Zero rules specify "stored electricity".

I have to say if hydrogen fuel cell technology was as easy and effective as you suggest, then the electric car and bike market probably wouldn't be entirely composed of battery-powered vehicles. Storage of hydrogen is a major problem. The NASA space applications have used liquid hydrogen at -250°C. To liquefy the hydrogen in the first place requires a large amount of energy.

And as for producing heat as a waste product, if you do a certain amount of work you'll produce a certain amount of waste heat, there's no getting away from that.

(10-06-2017, 09:12 AM)manxmike1 Wrote: I sincerely hope that no-one is still labouring under the impression that the electric bikes are in any way "green". The fossil fuel used to charge the batteries (never mind create the things) far exceeds the amount used by a similar petrol powered machine over a similar distance.

Let's see if we can do a back-of-a-fag-packet calculation to work it out.

Say you want your electric bike to do 10 joules of work.
The electric drivetrain is abut 80% efficient so you need to charge it up with 12 joules of electricity.
Grid electricity nowadays is, very roughly, 50% nuclear/renewables, 30% gas, 20% coal.
So we only get 6 joules from fossil fuels - let's approximate it as 4 from gas and 2 from coal.
The gas power station is 60% efficient, so we need to burn 7 joules of gas.
The coal station is 30% efficient so we burn 7 joules of coal.
UK transmission grid losses are 8% so we need to burn another couple of joules of gas and coal to cover that, making 16 joules of fossil fuel burned.

A petrol engine in a bike is 20% efficient at best, so to do the same 10 joules of work, it burns at least 50 joules of fossil fuel. More than 3x as much as the electric bike used.

G Tech will be running one next year.