Maybe if I were an avid NASCAR fan I would understand the reason for all the security issues surrounding the processor. Why should the software controlling engine performance be considered differently than the many mechanical tweaks used to outperform competitors? Engine performance ultimately hinges on the mechanical design anyway, so software changes can only go so far to improve performance until the track is littered with pistons.
Way to lead the way NASCAR!
Quote: Carburetors were the usual fuel delivery method for most U.S. made gasoline-fueled engines up until the late 1980s, when fuel injection became the preferred method of automotive fuel delivery. In the U.S. market, the last carbureted cars were:
* 1990 (General public) : Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser, Buick Estate Wagon
* 1991 (Police) : Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor with the 5.8 L (351 cu in) engine.
* 1991 (SUV) : Jeep Grand Wagoneer with the AMC 360 engine.
* 1994 (Light truck) : Isuzu
What a great move on the part of NASCAR! I wonder what type of innovations we will see as a result of the switch to fuel injection? Nice partnership deal with Freescale as well, I am sure the marketing group is ecstatic. When will we get more details on the engine performance changes now with the new system? Looking forward to the new more realistic racing platforms.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.