Flagtronic in car warning light system

[Steve Demeter]

It would seem that the very legitimate concerns that many of us share about where to put this monstrosity are not registering with the CRB.

DaveW and Beer point out the same issues I have: No place to put the darn thing/

[Hardingfv32]

It should be reiterated.... That early in this thread it was stated by a possible CRB member that this system was not proposed by the CRB. It is not clear what input the CRB has made at this point.

Yes, your concerns are legitimate, but that does not mean it will be practical or cost effective to resolve them.

What harm will you suffer if your concerns are not resolved to your satisfaction?

Brian

[Steve Demeter]

Brian,

Where do we take our concerns then?

Who came up with this idea?

[lmpdesigner]

Okay just how big is it? X,Y,Z??
The website does not say (shame on you-Flagtronics! Get with the program and add some drawings of unit.))

Runs off of a 12v power supply? So I have to add another switch and circuit breaker to my car now?
GPS antennae? That comes with the system? Are there ANY extra bits I need to buy to install it/make it work?

Is there anywhere in the SCCA proposed rules that says I have to mount the indicator where I can see it, while sitting in car? A bit joking here but if "I" can't see the unit is that a violation of these "new" rules?

[DaveW]

I contacted FT a few weeks ago and they sent me a PDF of the FT dimensions. They say on the PDF that this is a "pre-production model." I saved it as a JPG, below:

[DaveW]

It should be reiterated.... That early in this thread it was stated by a possible CRB member that this system was not proposed by the CRB. It is not clear what input the CRB has made at this point.

Yes, your concerns are legitimate, but that does not mean it will be practical or cost effective to resolve them.

What harm will you suffer if your concerns are not resolved to your satisfaction?

Brian

Steve and I both worry that we may be excluded from some events if the FT is not mounted on our cars in a location visible by the driver, and neither of us think mounting on the exterior of the bodywork is practical for us.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Steve and I both worry that we may be excluded from some events if the FT is not mounted on our cars in a location visible by the driver, and neither of us think mounting on the exterior of the bodywork is practical for us.

I filled out their contact message last and received a reply from Aleric Sanders one of their R&D Engineers.

I asked:

On the 'inside the scca' broadcast there was an indication that there might be other packaging / display options to come.
I have an FC with little to no room for another display and an older data system.
What solution/format is in the works for my situation?

Reponse:

There are two solutions that are on the horizon within Flagtronics' product lineup. One product is a displayless unit that simply mounts at a location that the driver does not need to see and would tie into the dash system via CAN Bus. The other product that is further out would be one that hooks into the helmet and would be an in-helmet system.
In the meantime, VSCDA has a web page dedicated to some tricky Flagtronics FT200 installs here and might help near-term.

I furthered the conversation with this reply:

I really appreciate the response.

I have been part of a long discussion on ApexSpeed.com regarding installing this system in open wheel formula and sport racer cars. I did see the install photos for Bob Wrights FC, but most of us do not have the room for such placement.

I’ve attached 4 photos. One is basically my view while in the car. One shows my hand on the wheel and another shows clearance behind the wheel and dash. As you can see there is very little visible room for placement of the current device.

That led me to writing you. I am encouraged to hear about the helmet but what would actually be better for me would be some sort of light strip that could be attached to the side or top of my current display or to one or both of my side mirrors. It would seem whatever you are planning for the helmet could be adapted for use on or near a dash or mirror. That would also eliminate additional helmet wiring and a distraction inside my helmet.
Attached a picture showing possible placement of lights on the type of mirror we use.

I do realize the CAN interface option is available, but my current system won’t support it. Only the newer systems would. And I’m not ready to spend $3000 to upgrade my data system just yet!

Anyway, appreciate the response and glad to see the product development moving forward.

If I can be of any help please reach out.

I do not particularly want a helmet product. More connections and hassle and there's even less room with my fat head.
BUT, the helmet product IS an indicator that there will be some sort of smallish light output in the future - and maybe that can be adapted to attaching to my dash or mirrors.

Only time will tell. When they come up with a solution for me I'll buy then, but I've not heard about any tracks using it on the west coast as of yet so I have time.

[Hardingfv32]

Steve and I both worry that we may be excluded from some events if the FT is not mounted on our cars in a location visible by the driver, and neither of us think mounting on the exterior of the bodywork is practical for us.

Assume that a centered location is not possible, then your are going to have to accept that the a flag or signal board is going to be your first notification of an incident. The driver is going to have to move his eye focus from the track to view the display.
There will never be a rule questioning the quality of the display view. Yes, you have lost some of the utility of this system but that is because of car's dimensions. No reason the rest of the competitors have to pay for more expensive solution that solves your problems. The $260 current unit is good for 90% of all SCCA competitors.

So that said, it is time for you guys with 'issues' to get creative. My car designs have even tighter cockpits than yours but I still see many possibilities.

1) A bracket mounted in the same location as the mirror arm this attaches to the upper cockpit rail. You would view it just like you view the mirror. Not aesthetically pleasing, but so be it. Seal the connectors with silicon for weather proofing.

2) I put a lot of control units and switches in the area about 8-9" aft of the steering wheel in my cars. Again, possible mounting to the upper frame member. Could stick out from the tube or be below it.

Once you give up on the ideal center location there are all kinds of possibilities.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

Do not hang your hat on a CAN connection to your logger or dash. Yes, you can provide a signal to the logger/dash, but the logger/dash has to have programing to display the information provided. This is going to require firmware updates for the logger/dash. Only the newest units are going to still have firmware support.

Way in the future the Flagtronic system could become omnipresent and well supported by logger/dash firmware.... but not today.

Brian

[Raceworks]

I filled out their contact message last and received a reply from Aleric Sanders one of their R&D Engineers.
I do not particularly want a helmet product. More connections and hassle and there's even less room with my fat head.
BUT, the helmet product IS an indicator that there will be some sort of smallish light output in the future - and maybe that can be adapted to attaching to my dash or mirrors.

Only time will tell. When they come up with a solution for me I'll buy then, but I've not heard about any tracks using it on the west coast as of yet so I have time.

Nice to see they're aware of the issue and taking steps to deal with it.

[Raceworks]

Do not hang your hat on a CAN connection to your logger or dash. Yes, you can provide a signal to the logger/dash, but the logger/dash has to have programing to display the information provided. This is going to require firmware updates for the logger/dash. Only the newest units are going to still have firmware support.

Way in the future the Flagtronic system could become omnipresent and well supported by logger/dash firmware.... but not today.

Brian

This was already addressed ealier. Flagtronics works with any of the CAN-capable products Aim currently produces. Several models can also have two CAN inputs, which means those cars that stream ECU data to the system can also integrate Flagtronics. Flagtronics is one of the pull-down menu options on Race Studio 3. Flagtronics has instructions on what codes correspond to what flags correspond to which codes.

You're only correct in that they don't have that support for "legacy" products at Aim.

[Hardingfv32]

Runs off of a 12v power supply? So I have to add another switch and circuit breaker to my car now?
GPS antennae? That comes with the system? Are there ANY extra bits I need to buy to install it/make it work?

Is powered by a remote lithium battery (<4V?) that is changed by 12v IF hard wired. Comes with its own gps antenna. Nothing else is required for the $260 unit.

No rules regarding the system at this time.

Brian

[lmpdesigner]

I contacted FT a few weeks ago and they sent me a PDF of the FT dimensions. They say on the PDF that this is a "pre-production model." I saved it as a JPG, below:

Dave, Thanks for info.

Unit is "okay" in size-still I can see it being hard to mount in a formula car. I have a Norma CN car, whichis a "2 seater" and I have very little space to mount it!

[Raceworks]

There will never be a rule questioning the quality of the display view.

I wouldn't count on that. I've seen mandatory rules for data-logger mounts, transponder locations, even "spec" locations for go-pro cameras.

So that said, it is time for you guys with 'issues' to get creative.

Thanks, because it's not like we have decades of experience prepping or driving race cars...

My car designs have even tighter cockpits than yours but I still see many possibilities.

Oh yes, let's have a look at your "possibilities," oh Great One.

1) A bracket mounted in the same location as the mirror arm this attaches to the upper cockpit rail. You would view it just like you view the mirror. Not aesthetically pleasing, but so be it. Seal the connectors with silicon for weather proofing.

So, that location on my car, which is typical for the types of cars under discussion, looks like this:



And from the top:


I guess this would work if I liked driving one-handed. Or maybe I'll go for the full white-trash look and cut the bodywork and mount the unit with the wire harness flapping in the airstream at 130+ mph. Riiiiight.

2) I put a lot of control units and switches in the area about 8-9" aft of the steering wheel in my cars. Again, possible mounting to the upper frame member. Could stick out from the tube or be below it..

OK, so 6 to 8 " back, on the top frame rail....


Hey, this might work...



...until I turn the steering wheel.

Once you give up on the ideal center location there are all kinds of possibilities..

Assuming the driver is incorporeal, yes.

[DaveW]

...Once you give up on the ideal center location there are all kinds of possibilities.

Brian

Brian,

I already investigated the possibility of alternate locations in my Citation cockpit. Any place I could mount the stand-alone unit would be either not visible w/o contortions on my part, or interfere with ingress/egress of my cockpit. So unless they come up with a thinner unit that would fit in the one ideal location ahead of the cutout top of the steering wheel, I am either going to have to wait until they make one that will fit, or mount it somewhere that is not very visible, and so would not fulfill it's potential benefit. And I refuse to do a cobbled installation, which is what mounting it outside the bodywork would be.

You can argue all you want, but I am VERY experienced in making things fit in tight spaces, so again, you are not looking at MY choices, just theorizing what might work.

[Speed Sport Engineering]

As someone who has also maximized their available cockpit space, I sympathize with everyone. 6'3" in a VanDiemen leaves very little room for anything around the steering wheel.

I believe the best approach at this point is to start lobbying the sanctioning bodies to phase in the implantation requirements over several years to allow more advancements in the units to accommodate the tight confinements. Otherwise, we'll all be buying a unit now, then be replacing it with another one when something more size applicable is available basically doubling the effective cost.

My understanding is the wiring harness on these units isn't exactly motorsports quality either, and is rather large, stiff, and bulky compounding the size issue for us.

I don't take the addition of items in the cockpit lightly. This really needs to be phased in and allow time for improvements.

I plan on looking closer at a unit while at the runoffs, hopefully they will have a unit I can borrow for a day to see what location options might work.

I still can't help but to feel there are some other influences at work here that is causing the rapid required use....we've gone without it 60+ years of road racing, and all of a sudden it's required with less then a years notice? hmmm....

[Hardingfv32]

Thanks, because it's not like we have decades of experience prepping or driving race cars...
Oh yes, let's have a look at your "possibilities," oh Great One.

Your guys act like this has to be some kind of aero and aesthetic solution. IT DOES NOT as far as the BRD/CRB is concerned. The utility of the system is too obvious for anything to stop its implementation.

I question your enthusiasm to find a creative solution. Maybe your prep skills are better than your creative skills.

Clearly the area between the head-surround and the mirror, above the body, is a good area to mount the display. A simple aluminum bracket 90deg bracket will do the job.

if you want something inside the cockpit, then your are going to have to accept some arm interference when making extreme steering input. The steering input demonstrated in the last photo is seldom seen on track and/or in very slow corners.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

I believe the best approach at this point is to start lobbying the sanctioning bodies to phase in the implantation requirements over several years to allow more advancements in the units to accommodate the tight confinements. Otherwise, we'll all be buying a unit now, then be replacing it with another one when something more size applicable is available basically doubling the effective cost.

This unit @$260 works for 90%, maybe 95%, of all SCCA competitors. It is a clear benefit to the competitors, race control and tracks. A few formula car competitors are not going to slow the implementation. Accommodations can be made for how the system is used with formula car classes/groups, but you will still need the unit mounted on your car.

What is the size of the market for a smaller modularized unit? Is it worth the investment in time and money to really come up with something better? If the logger/dash companies develop firmware for their new units, what happens to the market then?

Brian

[TimH]

The steering input demonstrated in the last photo is seldom seen on track and/or in very slow corners.

I guess Brian hasn't had to catch a slide in a while...

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Your guys act like this has to be some kind of aero and aesthetic solution. IT DOES NOT as far as the BRD/CRB is concerned. The utility of the system is too obvious for anything to stop its implementation.

I question your enthusiasm to find a creative solution. Maybe your prep skills are better than your creative skills.

Clearly the area between the head-surround and the mirror, above the body, is a good area to mount the display. A simple aluminum bracket 90deg bracket will do the job.

if you want something inside the cockpit, then your are going to have to accept some arm interference when making extreme steering input. The steering input demonstrated in the last photo is seldom seen on track and/or in very slow corners.

Brian

Brian,

Your statements in a word: Ridiculous

Sorry, but we are making efforts to resolve the issues and you keep suggesting we need to 'give up' and bolt it to the body work in front of us.
We are not objecting to the product.

Thanks for all the advice - I'll pass.

Paul

[Hardingfv32]

Sorry, but we are making efforts to resolve the issues and you keep suggesting we need to 'give up' and bolt it to the body work in front of us.

Between the head-surround and mirror, on top of the frame member, is not in your front view. What is wrong with this location?

Does anyone have something more substantial than aero or aesthetic reasons to preclude this location? I can not solve this location problem without knowing more about how you guys think.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

Here are the parts of the FT200

The display with lens is about .300" thick. It is connected to the main board with 10 conductor connectors. You could use a 10 conductor cable to connect the display to the main board.

The connectors can be sourced but you would probably want to hand wire a cable exiting to the side of the display module.

Doable if you have the skill set.

Brian

[Steve Demeter]

Brian,

You never answered my question Who started this mess. You stated earlier that it was NOT the CRB.

I think that your responses to people who have to live with poor decisions made by others are plan and simple those of one who does not give a **** about what their uninformed decision making process does to others.

There have been many individuals with more experience than one can add up that have stated that it is simply impossible to fit this unit into a reasonable spot in their particular car.

I have suggested that a unit that only requires a light on the dash, not the monstrosity be developed prior to implementation, but you simply ignored that idea.


It seems that your attitude is that you are smarter than the collective knowledge on ApexSpeed!!!!1

This seems to be degenerating to the bad old days when people with poser simply did what they damned well pleased and piss on the people paying the bills.

[DaveW]

Here are the parts of the FT200

The display with lens is about .300" thick. It is connected to the main board with 10 conductor connectors. You could use a 10 conductor cable to connect the display to the main board.

The connectors can be sourced but you would probably want to hand wire a cable exiting to the side of the display module.

Doable if you have the skill set.

Brian

That is the best suggestion you have offered so far ! Thank you for disassembling one so we could see what's in it.

Sounds like a great business opportunity for someone familiar with electronic devices. I'd be willing to pay to have the FT modified so it would work in my car. I suggested to FT that I would buy a thinner stand-alone device, and your sort of modifications plus a thinner case (3D printing?) could help create it.

[Hardingfv32]

Brian,

You never answered my question Who started this mess. You stated earlier that it was NOT the CRB.

I think that your responses to people who have to live with poor decisions made by others are plan and simple those of one who does not give a **** about what their uninformed decision making process does to others.

There have been many individuals with more experience than one can add up that have stated that it is simply impossible to fit this unit into a reasonable spot in their particular car.

I have suggested that a unit that only requires a light on the dash, not the monstrosity be developed prior to implementation, but you simply ignored that idea.


It seems that your attitude is that you are smarter than the collective knowledge on ApexSpeed!!!!1

This seems to be degenerating to the bad old days when people with poser simply did what they damned well pleased and piss on the people paying the bills.

1) I have no idea, but I would assume the BRD.

2) Clearly it is not impossible from my last post. What is clear is that no one has volunteered what is wrong with this exterior location.

3) A light on the dash negates the use of a virtual pace car. So, how important a feature is that for our track time management? Do we give up on that because a few formula car competitor do not like exterior mounting locations?

4) I am not smarter, just acknowledging the tremendous advantages to everyone running a race/event. With 90% of competitors able to use the system as is, maybe it is the other 10% that are going to need to make a compromise.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

I'd be willing to pay to have the FT modified so it would work in my car.

Yes, there is always a better solution IF you are willing to pay. I am sure this could easily double the cost of the std FT200. The volume is just too low and sales to much of an unknown.

My idea does require a second housing for the mainboard. At this point I am planning on cutting the housing in half. The display would probably end up <.400".

Brian

[DaveW]

Yes, there is always a better solution IF you are willing to pay. I am sure this could easily double the cost of the std FT200. The volume is just too low and sales to much of an unknown.

My idea does require a second housing for the mainboard. At this point I am planning on cutting the housing in half. The display would probably end up <.400".

Brian

Less than 1/2" thick would fit in the prime location behind the cutout in the steering wheel. And if I could mount its antenna remotely it'd likely work. As I said - I want to use it IF I can fit it in. And 1 tire costs almost as much as the FT...so that's not an issue.

[J Leonard]

Between the head-surround and mirror, on top of the frame member, is not in your front view. What is wrong with this location?

Does anyone have something more substantial than aero or aesthetic reasons to preclude this location? I can not solve this location problem without knowing more about how you guys think.

Brian

What would you do with the wiring harness? Just asking.

[toolo4sno]

So will I be penalized if the system thinks I am in a yellow flag zone, but in fact the GPS position is incorrect and I am in a green zone? To improve that signal I am going to have to put the antenna out in air flow. I have been avoiding that with my lap timer app, but I won't be able to now if a penalty is possible.

I don't have a steering wheel with speed sensor. Will these systems (at full implementation) require me to get an AIM wheel or something more updated to be able to perform a pit speed limiter or the virtual SC?

Meanwhile the runoff at the Kink is so narrow that crashing cars consistently bounce back onto the track, but this dash light thing will make it all better. I'd rather see money spent on track safety improvements rather than hastily required blinking light trinkets.

[TimH]

Meanwhile the runoff at the Kink is so narrow that crashing cars consistently bounce back onto the track, but this dash light thing will make it all better. I'd rather see money spent on track safety improvements rather than hastily required blinking light trinkets.

.

The Kink is the Kink and nothing can make it safer short of rerouting the railroad.

Meanwhile, separating the display from the rest of the unit makes a lot possible. Please, Flagtronics, make this happen.

[Hardingfv32]

What would you do with the wiring harness? Just asking.

Had not examined the harness before. The main cable can be stripped down to just two .060" wires that supply 12V. The GPS cable is .170", 4 conductor.

This should not be hard to route. Yes, not very aesthetically pleasing.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

So will I be penalized if the system thinks I am in a yellow flag zone, but in fact the GPS position is incorrect and I am in a green zone? To improve that signal I am going to have to put the antenna out in air flow. I have been avoiding that with my lap timer app, but I won't be able to now if a penalty is possible.

I don't have a steering wheel with speed sensor. Will these systems (at full implementation) require me to get an AIM wheel or something more updated to be able to perform a pit speed limiter or the virtual SC?

This system uses GPS data to function. There will be no mistakes because of the GPS signal. It either knows your location or you fall out of the system until the data reapears.

I am trying to learn more about the antenna strength. All of the sedans will have the unit on their dashes. Half the signal through glass and half through steel bodywork. I would guess under fiberglass body work not be an issue. We know GPS antennas are fine under fiberglass.

Using GPS, the system always knows how fast you are going anywhere on the track. For the virtual SC situation the system will indicate to you, using the display, if you need to slow down to maintain the prescribed set speed.

Brian

[Rick Kirchner]

So if i understand the pictures, the GPS unit is separate, and the helical antenna is for communications to/from the unit?

First thing i'd do is separate the display, make it linear, maybe two rows of leds on a flex substrate and molded over so that it could be mounted on top of a DAQ display. Back before i got an AIM system i had a shift light linear display like that. it looks like they mounted a couple of other components on the display board. That might complicate things depending on what they are. Plenty of flexible color changing led strips out there though

Those connectors are an abortion. Just a cheap, easy, mindless selection, lots of other options. Even weatherpaks would be smaller! i'd terminate the wires on he board and move the connectors outside of the case, which also removes the mate/demate forces from the board.

3d printed case, 3d printed mold for the display. The easy button for the OEM though, is to provide another connector for an external display. That preserves the generic design for the majority of users, and would allow formula car guys to mount a smaller remote display.

[toolo4sno]

This system uses GPS data to function. There will be no mistakes because of the GPS signal. It either knows your location or you fall out of the system until the data reapears.

I am trying to learn more about the antenna strength. All of the sedans will have the unit on their dashes. Half the signal through glass and half through steel bodywork. I would guess under fiberglass body work not be an issue. We know GPS antennas are fine under fiberglass.

Using GPS, the system always knows how fast you are going anywhere on the track. For the virtual SC situation the system will indicate to you, using the display, if you need to slow down to maintain the prescribed set speed.

Brian

This is my lap timer's GPS map trace from one of the last times I went out. Can you tell me what track it is? It was mildly cloudy that day and the reception sucked.



The reason I bring this up is don't be in too much of a hurry to rely on electronics to save us. They will introduce new wrinkles while possibly solving old ones and definitely costing me time and money to make it all work. I also don't want to be penalized because the system thought I was somewhere I wasn't. I design and build electronics for cars almost every day. The moment I start to get comfortable and actually rely on electronics is the moment they fail.

[924RACR]

Thank you, Brian, for providing the tear-down photos of the unit. THAT was helpful.

While I'd love some thin LED strips that could mount to the edge of the cockpit, it sounds like that will remove some of the key information the display can show?

Even keeping the existing display, if a pigtail can be run from that board externally to the rest of the unit mounted elsewhere, then I could find room on my steering wheel, maybe below the main dash, on the hub, to run that. Yeah, it sucks a little to have yet another cable wrapped around my steering column, in addition to the dash and the radio button... but that is tolerable. Radio button COULD be moved, if needed.

This unit is clearly designed for the one-box implementation, which makes sense given the target market.

We just aren't that target market.

[Steve Davis]

Brian.. maybe you know the answer to this .. what is the frequency and mode of the incoming commands to the unit. That would also lead to what sort of antenna(s) is/are required at the track to successfully provide 100% solid comms all the way around. Places like the bottom of t4/5 at Road Atlanta and out between T6 and 7. Quite similar problems at MOST tracks with any decent amount of elevation.

I have a hard time believing that comms can be maintained in those areas .. unless there is a distributed antenna farm that needs to be installed at every track to make it work. The only other option I can think of would be satellite phone comms.. and pretty sure they could not engineer THAT into a package that small and it would also be subject to dropouts when passing under trees...or BRIDGES!. Seems as a minimum we would be likely to see time delays of > 1 sec .. and some times SEVERAL seconds before the unit would respond ..and the unit would still have to ACQ the command to be sure it was received - AND the command packets would have to be a constant stream.

I also agree with Rick about terminating the wires on the display board (no 'connector') leaving pigtails to the remote electronics. The 2 buttons on the display COULD be remoted, but without making changes on the main board, that would be a lot more complex than just leaving them on the display board.. or maybe a short jumper separate from the display data. The GPS antenna .. well.. that would be attached to the remote box anyway, so a connector would be OK there. I had never seen the SIZE of those connectors on the rear of the unit. Wonder where they even found those big things.
Steve

[Hardingfv32]

Yeah, it sucks a little to have yet another cable wrapped around my steering column, in addition to the dash and the radio button... but that is tolerable. Radio button COULD be moved, if needed..

I am placing the display on the steering wheel. With the other units needing connections I ended up with a 14 conductor coil cable. Very ungainly to say the least. If I become too frustrated I might have to spring for a built-in connector steer wheel hub.

Brian

[Hardingfv32]

With a closer inspection of the boards it can be see that they wear made by Lucidtron in China. You bring them your design idea and they create and manufacture the hardware for you. So if we want different packaging they will be the ones to do it based on what Flagtronic requests.

These design/fab companies are really helpful in getting low volume ideas/products out to the public.

Brian

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Do we know what tracks are using this system?

Or which regions?

[Hardingfv32]

Go to their web site and view who they are actively selling kits to. This will give you an idea where it is being used.

Brian