Blockchain 3.0 pioneer concludes initial coin offering within 20 minutes with 53,206 participants from 170 countries
SEATTLE–(BUSINESS WIRE)–February 4, 2018–
With momentum building from a successful Private Sale that netted more than one million Ethereum (ETH) from over 5,000 individuals, ArcBlock, the pioneer in Blockchain 3.0 technology, announces that it has reached its total hard cap of 12,500 ETH and six million CyberMiles Tokens (CMT) in just 19 minutes.
Registration for the Public Sale portion of ArcBlock’s I.C.O., scheduled to commence Feb. 3, attracted more than 25,000 Know Your Customer applications and over 45,000 signups on the first day alone, ultimately reaching a record-setting 100,837 K.Y.C. applications and 147,204 signups in only six days. The demand was so strong that ArcBlock had to end its registration period seven days prior to the originally scheduled end date of Jan. 28.
The bullish sales were driven by 53,206 people participating, ranking ArcBlock’s public sale first compared to other successful I.C.O.s. To ensure general participation, ArcBlock decided to reduce individual cap to three ETHs and 7,500 CMT. The gas limit, meanwhile, was adjusted to 60 gwei, 200,000 for both ETH and CMT to ensure further a smooth-sailing public sale.
“This outcome owes its success to ArcBlock’s community and supporters from around the world,” Robert Mao, C.E.O. of ArcBlock, said. “The process of our token sale event is a reflection of a shared vision toward decentralization, something the ArcBlock team now looks forward to carrying out as we build our amazing platform.”
Assisted by an experienced team of advisors (including notably Salman Dhanani, Ding Lei, Justin Tomboulian, and Dr. Shoucheng Zhang) as well as investors and partners such as Bibox, CyberMiles, and EtherDelta, ArcBlock has outlined a 2018 roadmap and token distribution schedule as part of its overall development plan.
Q1:
Select the first group of founding clients that will be powered by ArcBlock
Distribute all tokens sold (token distribution: hardcap of 12,500 ETH and six million CMT distributed to ETH-wallet provided upon registration) within four weeks after the end of the Public Sale
List ABT on the exchanges (tentatively February), followed by an official announcement
Q2:
Launch the first decentralized consumer application (“dapp”) built on ArcBlock with development partners
Implement Hyperledger Adaptor with Open Chain Access Protocol, then launch the tokens in exchanges
Q3:
Publicly release first candidate for Open Chain Access Protocol (RC1)
Implement Open Chain Access Protocol and its reference on Ethereum and Hyperledger
Q4:
Officially release Open Chain Access Protocol and adaptors for Ethereum and Hyperledger
Ready the full ArcBlock platform for clients and partners, then open the platform to the general public
“The ArcBlock team is excited to demonstrate the power of decentralization by launching dapps with our partners, while rewarding ArcBlock’s community and supporters by increasing the value of our token economy,” Robert Mao said. “All of us are very much looking forward to showing our progress in action and cultivating a vibrant future together.”
ArcBlock is a comprehensive solution that combines blockchain technology with cloud computing, versus a standalone software package or set of A.P.I.s. The brain child of Robert Mao, a technology innovator, entrepreneur and researcher formerly with Microsoft Research, ArcBlock is the world’s first blockchain ecosystem for building and deploying decentralized applications. Together with Flavien Charlon, the creator of Colored Coins, Open Assets Protocol, and Openchain, Mao and the ArcBlock team aims to seamlessly connect between the existing system and services, and blockchain networks, throughout dynamic industries. Learn more at arcblock.io and follow ArcBlock on Twitter and Facebook.
]]>
https://briefnews.eu/arcblock-the-worlds-first-blockchain-ecosystem-for-decentralized-applications-rewrites-history-with-record-setting-public-sale/feed/0Lewis Hamilton rewrites history books with world title win at Mexican Grand Prix
https://briefnews.eu/lewis-hamilton-rewrites-history-books-with-world-title-win-at-mexican-grand-prix/
https://briefnews.eu/lewis-hamilton-rewrites-history-books-with-world-title-win-at-mexican-grand-prix/#respondSun, 29 Oct 2017 23:18:20 +0000http://briefnews.eu/lewis-hamilton-rewrites-history-books-with-world-title-win-at-mexican-grand-prix/
The Mercedes driver’s hopes of a victory were ended following a crazy first lap collision with Sebastian Vettel after his title rival’s Halloween horror show.
As Mexican’s celebrated their Day of the Dead, it was the last rites that were read over the German’s challenge as he smacked into Hamilton’s tyre with the race just a few corners old.
Hamilton furiously questioned Vettel’s motives as he suffered the ignominy of being crowned champ having been lapped as Red Bull’s Max Verstappen cruised to victory.
But if it was a deliberate act straight out of countryman Michael Schumacher’s old copybook, the tactic did not work.
In reality, the collision just summed up Vettel’s and Ferrari’s collapse in what Sir Alex Ferguson described as squeaky bum time just when they needed steady nerves and a bullet-proof car.
The incident left Vettel needing to charge through the field to at least finish second – and hoping Hamilton finished 10th or lower – to prolong the title battle.
But the four-time champ could only come home fourth while Hamilton battled back in the later stages after struggling with the performance to finish ninth after a late, thrilling scrap with his old McLaren team-mate Fernando Alonso.
That gave him an unassailable points lead with just the races in Brazil and Abu Dhabi left.
So 44 years after walking away from the grid having won his third and final drivers’ crown, Sir Jackie Stewart finally saw a successor beat his record.
Hamilton could arguably claim to have been Britain’s best even before he took the grid, having racked up 62 wins in his career compared to the Scotsman’s
The Herts-born racer had only needed to finish fifth to secure his fourth drivers’ crown even if Vettel won the race given his commanding 66 points lead.
But the 32-year-old was determined to claim the trophy in style with victory at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriquez.
The long 890m blast to the first corner when the red flights went out offered him his best chance to grab the lead from third on the grid.
But it was Verstappen who made the best start getting alongside Vettel, starting on pole for the 50th time in his career, at the first corner.
The duo made contact allowing Hamilton, starting third, to nip ahead of his only title rival coming out of the second corner.
Vettel hit the right rear tyre of Hamilton’s Mercedes sending shards of his shattered front nose flying into the hot Mexican air.
But it had also punctured Hamilton’s tyre forcing him to limp around the track to pit at the end of the first lap in last place.
It was a longish stop as Hamilton’s car was checked and he only emerged back into the pit lane just ahead of the safety car.
Vettel had also been forced to pit for a new nose coming back in 18th spot and knowing he needed to finish at least second to take the championship battle to the next race in Brazil.
Hamilton questioned on the radio whether Vettel had deliberately tried to hit him, but stewards ruled the early corners incidents were part of the rough and tumble of racing.
But Hamilton seemingly has suffered further damage to his car and was struggling for the pace at the back of the field, unable to overtake any cars.
As Hamilton was told not to get too close to the car ahead, he was lapped for the first time since Barcelona in 2013 as Verstappen swept past.
Hamilton used a Virtual Safety Car period when rookie Brendon Hartley parked up his Toro Rosso to dart into the pits for the quicker super soft tyres.
But he was still back in 16th spot as Vettel – surviving a scrap with Felipe Massa’s Williams – had moved into eighth place.
Vettel did progress through through the field as Hamilton repeatedly asked his race engineers their respective track positions.
But it was never going to be enough with Vettel admitting ‘Mama mia, it it too much’ as time and laps quickly ran out.
Verstappen triumphed from Valtieri Bottas in the other Mercedes with Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen third.
But as Olympic track champ Michael Johnson said beforehand, Hamilton had proved he is ‘the man’. If not in the manner he craved.
For the past decade, Democrats hoping to pass a big climate law have played Charlie Brown to the Republicans’ Lucy. Despite the GOP making it clear it has no intention of holding the ball for a global warming kick, the left routinely convinces itself that their counterparts will kneel into position once it gets a running start.
In 2010,Senate Democrats appealed to Republicans to pass federal climate legislation, only to see almost every conservative bail on them. Since then we’ve seen the old pattern repeat in statehouses and ballot boxes around the country: Democrats ask the GOP to hold the ball then go flying head-over-heels.
But then in July, a cadre of eight California Republicans crossed the aisle to vote with Democrats and pass that state’s cap-and-trade law.
The partisan space-time continuum shuddered — and this was before back-to-back superstorms, Harvey and Irma, buffeted the United States. Had the well-worn GOP force field stymieing progress on climate change begun to crack at the far-western edge?
While an enraged rightplanned the ouster of its leader, Chad Mayes, California Governor Jerry Brown praised him and the others who’d broken ranks. As did former Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who wrote: “I hope Republicans around the country can learn from the example.”
In statehouse testimony, speeches that would typically build to Republicans stridently aligning against carbon pricing went off script. “First thing I want to make clear, I personally think cap and trade sucks,” California Assemblyman Devon Mathis said at the beginning of a short speech. As he spoke, he came close to tears while urging his compatriots to vote “yes” for the program he’d just disparaged. So what the heck was happening there?
Dan Kahan, a professor at Yale who studies the way tribal identity affects how people think, has long argued that Republicans will become more willing to engage on climate change as constituents begin asking them to bring home money to adapt to a warming world. “The sooner the issue becomes one about dollars and cents for the districts,” he says, “the more quickly the logjam we have now will break loose.”
For years, journalists and activistshave said that wholesale Republican opposition to climate action can’t last forever. Now, with millions of Americans soaked in floodwaters from never-before-seen storms, that ideological logjam shows signs of breaking up.
Moving forward, there are three primary paths for Republicans to choose from as they debate climate legislation — three paths that three California GOP legislators traveled as they mulled cap and trade. The paths each legislator picks, combined with the reaction of their constituents, will determine how quickly the nation will react to a climate change-effected future that appears to already be here.
So far, most Republicans have bet that the political costs they will pay for engaging on climate policy are worse than the costs their constituents will pay as a result of climate change. This could shift, as Kahan suggests, if the damages from coastal erosion, drought, and flooding begin to spiral over the next decade or so. And any more Harveys, the bill from which isestimated at just under $ 200 billion to the U.S. economy, should hasten that move.
But for now, GOP politicians are still calling climate action prohibitively expensive. That’s the reason California Assemblymember Melissa Melendez gave for opposing cap and trade, asserting that her constituents didn’t feel climate change was imminent. “While they care about the environment and they want to protect Mother Earth, they do not feel,” she explained, “that Southern California will burst into flames if we don’t pass this bill.”
Texas Congressman Lamar Smith, head of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, went a step further. He went on whatBuzzfeed calleda “secret tour of the melting Arctic.” When he got back,he wrotethat rising greenhouse gas levels were “indisputable.” Then he added, “The benefits of a changing climate are often ignored and under-researched.”
But the classic Republican gambit is to simply ignore the issue. And some politicians go to absurd lengths to avoid addressing the environmental elephant in the room. That seems to be Florida Governor Rick Scott’s preferred move. He has censored the phrases“climate change” and “global warming” in state agencies, forcing public servants intocomical verbal gymnastics during legislative hearings. Even after Hurricane Irma ravaged his state, including compromising infrastructure andflooding parts of 22 counties with sewage, Scott saw no reason to change course.
“Clearly our environment changes all the time, and whether that’s cycles we’re going through or whether that’s man-made, I wouldn’t be able to tell you which one it is,” Scott said last week,according to a Politico report.
The reinforcement of head-in-the-sand views for Republicans who want to hold the line comes from the top. The Trump administration is starting toemploy Scott-style tacticsin directives issued byits Cabinet departments.
Bargaining seems like an obvious choice for Republicans. By making a deal on the California bill, Republicans came away with spoils: They got$ 260 million a year in tax cutsfor business and agriculture. They got another tax — alandowner fee to fundwildfire prevention — eliminated completely. And they got a market-based,industry-friendly version of cap and tradethat the Chamber of Commerce and agricultural interests supported.
What did Republicans give in return? Not much. The Democratic majority in the State Assembly had already passed a law that committed the state to squeezing carbon out of its economy. As Devon Mathis said, this bill was an “opportunity to make something many of us think is horrible a little bit better.” By helping it to pass with the two-thirds majority that Governor Brown wanted, Republicans helped protect the legislation from legal challenges — including from groups that would want it to be more harsh on fossil fuel companies.
But there’s a reason Republicans, despite being the party of Trump, don’t like deal-making: It’s dangerous. The California GOP immediately booted Chad Mayes from his perch as the party’s Assembly leader for working with Brown. Mayes’ fate recalls what happened toSouth Carolina Congressman Bob Ingliswhen he voted for climate legislation in 2012: He lost his seat to a primary challenger.
For his constituents, Inglis talking about climate change was like dressing in the opposing team’s jersey. “I think his constituents saw that as a sign that he really didn’t share their values,” Kahan says.
That same feeling of betrayal coursed through an agricultural exhibition center where Mathis held a town hall meeting. “You are supposed to stand up for those who voted for you,” said one speaker,the Valley Voice reported. Another told Mathis he’d “stamped a ‘D’” at the end of his name.
Mathis defended himself by pointing out that pure tribal loyalty isn’t politically effective: “If you want to rebuild the Republican Party, then you need to be more than the party of ‘no,’” he told his constituents. By being at the table, he reminded them, the GOP was able to move cap and trade to the right.
Still, almost every idea dreamed up for climate change mitigation requires some centralized regulation and introduces new spending — issues conservatives tend to see in black-and-white absolutes. “For Republicans to say, ‘We voted for this because it could be worse,’ is like saying, ‘It’s better to drown in 10 feet of water than 20 feet of water,’” former California Republican Assemblyman Dan Logue tells me.
Rocky Chávez is a bull-necked marine colonel who, though he’s a Republican, feels no need to toe the party line on climate change. The GOP can’t go on protecting people from the truth for the sake of cohesion, he told me.
“It’s like Elvis — Elvis is not alive anymore, people, I got news for you,” he says, equating his party’s collective climate denial to the outlandish headlines seen on National Enquirer covers. “We did go to the moon, those aren’t fake pictures taken out in the Arizona desert. There is no Sasquatch; he’s not running around in the forests of California.”
Chávez has previously come under fire for his liberal positions on gay marriage and immigration. But all the sound and fury has cost him little, politically. After all, he represents a coastal district near San Diego that narrowly favored Clinton in 2016.
“People are going to say, ‘Oh, he’s that idiot who doesn’t hate gays, doesn’t hate immigrants, and actually wants to protect the environment,’” Chávez says. “You know what? I’m OK.”
There are other California Republicans, he adds, who want to take a more proactive position on climate change. But they are scared to stick their necks out on issues like cap and trade. “I can tell you that it was much more than the seven who voted for it who believed in it,” Chávez tells me.
Tom Del Beccaro, former chair of the California Republicans, says it doesn’t make sense for most GOP politicians to follow Chávez’s example. “A party does not gain any voters by adopting the position of the opposition,” he explains. “There’s no reason for a Democrat voter to vote for a Democrat-light.”
Because Republicans haven’t defined their own path on climate change, they can’t use the issue to hold onto districts like Chávez’s when incumbents bow out. Case in point, U.S. Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen from South Florida, who hasadvocated for a climate-mitigation strategy. She isn’t running for reelection in 2018, and a Democrat is poised to take over her seat.
Similarly, when California first passed its climate change law in 2006, just one Republican voted for it: Shirley Horton, a politician from a relatively liberal district that flipped to blue as soon as she termed out of office.
So you can see Beccaro’s point. Republicans have to provide voters a clear choice, he says: “They have to pick some issue where things are breaking down, where the majority party isn’t providing a solution, and offer a plausible alternative.”
Climate change could actually be such an issue, Beccaro says. Republicans could, for instance, convince voters that they could combat it more affordably. It’s a sentiment echoed by Bob Inglis, who believes conservatives have the best tools needed to address climate change. Republican constituents, he explains, just need to hear their leaders discuss climate policy in a language they understand and respond to.
“What we deeply believe as conservatives is that free enterprise is far more creative than government mandates — and if you simply level the playing field by eliminating all the subsidies for all the fuels, then the free enterprise system can deliver the solutions,” he says. “That includes the biggest subsidy of them all, which is being able to belch and burn into the trash dump of the sky without accountability for the health and climate damages you are causing.”
According to Inglis, Republicans would be foolish if they wait to act until sentiments on climate change shift. “Leadership is defined as helping to see what is coming,” he says. “Sure you risk your seat by leading, but isn’t that what it’s all about?”
Tweet Embed: https://twitter.com/mims/statuses/908051294560161792 #Climate Caucus’ @RepCurbelo on #Irma: “Climate change without question contributes to strength and factors that lead to these events.” pic.twitter.com/gyCQEJoMiO
And in California, though Mayes was ousted from his leadership position, his replacementpraised him for the cap-and-trade negotiations. San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, probably the most popular Republican in the state,recently saidit was time for his party “to stop ignoring climate change.”
These are perhaps the first signs of evolution. As Politico writer David Siders put it recently, “If the Republican Party is undergoing a shift on climate, it is at its earliest, most incremental stage.” The California GOP may be furthest into that transformation thanks to plummeting Republican registration in the increasingly diverse state.
“Today just 26 percent of California voters are registered Republicans,”reports Laurel Rosenhall at CALmatters. And “7 percent of state Republicans are considering abandoning the party because of its stance on climate change.”
California conservative voters could decide how far the GOP will tack nationally, in part by either rewarding the bargainers and change agents for bringing home the bacon or throwing them out of office for breaking ranks.
Eight Republicans isn’t a big number. But it’s a fifth of the GOP caucus in the California state legislature. In the past, climate bills might pick up one or two maverick conservatives — one or two drops of water seeping through an imperceptible crack in the dam. This time it was the Republican leader of the Assembly, plus seven others. The drops have become a trickle.
]]>https://briefnews.eu/california-rewrites-the-gops-climate-playbook/feed/0US military rewrites Hollywood blockbusters to save reputation, research reveals
https://briefnews.eu/us-military-rewrites-hollywood-blockbusters-to-save-reputation-research-reveals/
https://briefnews.eu/us-military-rewrites-hollywood-blockbusters-to-save-reputation-research-reveals/#respondWed, 05 Jul 2017 18:01:25 +0000http://briefnews.eu/us-military-rewrites-hollywood-blockbusters-to-save-reputation-research-reveals/
While the US government’s influence in Hollywood is no secret, new documents reveal the staggering extent of CIA and Pentagon influence across hundreds of movies and TV shows.
Researchers Tom Secker and Matthew Alford secured 4,000 new pages of Pentagon and CIA documents using Freedom of Information requests, which show how US intelligence has been behind the scenes on more than 800 movies and 1000 TV shows.
The breadth of the collaboration is explained in Secker and Alford’s book, National Security Cinema: The Shocking New Evidence of Government Control in Hollywood, which raises questions about the levels of propaganda to which Hollywood exposes its audiences.
US intelligence and defense influence ranges from script rewrites to loaning equipment, censoring, and even stopping production of movies.
While it may not be surprising to learn the CIA was involved in its portrayal in Argo or Zero Dark Thirty, the Pentagon’s influence in Hulk, Transformers, Avatar and even Meet the Parents will surprise many.
As for television, Cupcake Wars, Oprah and America’s Got Talent may not seem like apt targets for propaganda, but all have allegedly been influenced by either the Department of Defense or the CIA, according to Secker and Alford.
The authors released the Department of Defense’s Hollywood database of collaborations, along with the book to show how far the assistance goes. While many of the film entries are benign, the database provides an insight into the influence waged, as well as the DOD’s amusing summaries of plots.
The document shows a pattern of the military essentially making access to equipment and film locations depending on how it’s portrayed in the script.
Any producer or writer who asks for access to the military for research has to have their scripts vetted. If they fail to make changes as requested, they won’t get the cooperation they need. Producers sign Production Assistance Agreements which commit them to using Pentagon-approved versions of the script, Secker and Arnold explain.
Any reference to military suicides appear to be a no-go for the Pentagon, the authors point out, perhaps not surprising given the high rates of veteran suicides. Coming Home was refused assistance from the Marines as it contained “reference to leathernecks in Vietnam cutting ears off dead Viet Cong, portraying an officer suffering a breakdown from his war experiences and committing suicide,” the DOD notes.
The military doesn’t like mentioning losses. Even the Vietnam War, a well-established defeat by the US, is a touchy subject.
The 2003 Hulk movie saw “radical” changes made by the Marine Corps, including the code name of an operation to capture the Hulk being changed from ‘Ranch Hand’ because that was the real name for US destruction of Vietnamese land with pesticides and poison.
References to “guinea pigs dying from radiation” was also omitted because it referred to real covert experiments on humans, the authors explain in a Medium post.
The Navy refused to cooperate with Top Gun 2 in the ’90s after the Navy and Marine Corp scandal known as Tailhook (which saw aviation officers accused of sexually assaulting people at a Vegas symposium), led to an internal report that blamed Top Gun for contributing to a regressive military culture, the book explains.
Assistance was approved for the original Top Gun, however, as “it clearly portrayed the navy in a very positive light,” the DOD said, adding that it “completed rehabilitation of the military’s image, which had been savaged by the Vietnam War.”
Meet the Parentssaw CIA censorship in the scene where Ben Stiller’s character discovers his father-in-law’s secret room. An initial script originally saw Stiller discover torture manuals.
True Lies was described as “highly fictional but positive depiction of Marines,” and military assistance was granted, while Independance Day saw “no cooperation due to implausible portrayal of military and story centered on aliens attacking from space and annemic [sic] us. military response.”
Forest Gump requested support for training scenes, but, the DOD notes, the early script had a “nihilistic view of military of Vietnam experience,” so they said “no thanks.”
For Air Force One, the DOD notes, “air force provided full cooperation for film in which russian terrorists kidnap air force one and hold the president hdstage [sic].”
Jurassic Park 3 had its script rewritten to get rid the “bad military force” featured.
“Script rewritten at our suggestion to eliminate all military references, since no positive military portrayal seemed feasible,” the DOD writes.
Die Hard 2’s request for assistance was rejected as it “met none of the departments criteria for approval, such as historical authenticity, accuracy of feasibility, benefits to understanding of the military, recruiting value, etc,” the DOD said.
An Officer and a Gentleman was declined because filmmakers wouldn’t change scenes showing a “damaging portrayal of navy single parent lifestyle, negative portrayal of women living around an air station, and a fight between officer candidate and drill instructor.”
]]>https://briefnews.eu/us-military-rewrites-hollywood-blockbusters-to-save-reputation-research-reveals/feed/0Mercedes-AMG’s F1-based Project One rewrites the hypercar rulebook
https://briefnews.eu/mercedes-amgs-f1-based-project-one-rewrites-the-hypercar-rulebook/
https://briefnews.eu/mercedes-amgs-f1-based-project-one-rewrites-the-hypercar-rulebook/#respondMon, 29 May 2017 23:33:23 +0000http://briefnews.eu/mercedes-amgs-f1-based-project-one-rewrites-the-hypercar-rulebook/
“We are the first to make pure bred F1 technology roadworthy.” AMG has finally shown the mechanical layout of its thousand-horsepower, Formula 1-inspired Project One hypercar at a sneak reveal at the Nürburgring 24 Hour race. AMG Chairman Tobias Moers insists the car will become the new hypercar benchmark, with an F1-based 1.6-liter, electrified, turbocharged V6 and four electric motors.
The all-wheel drive hypercar won’t just deliver levels of performance unparalleled outside the world’s racetracks, but will be able to run as a pure battery-electric car for up to 15 miles and, unique for a hypercar, its zero-emission mode will be front-wheel drive. That should make it capable of circumventing limitations on internal-combustion, high-powered cars in some city centers around the world.
“It shifts up the boundaries of what is technically feasible,” AMG Chairman Tobias Moers said, with production limited to just 275 models. “We are the first to make pure bred F1 technology roadworthy.”
“Our objective is not speed, but to be the benchmark. If we have a strategy and we move into a new era of performance at AMG, maybe it’s good to have something that opens the door in a very authentic way to that new era and this is it. “Plug-in hybrid is going to be the future for AMG. We get more performance and more efficiency and what’s wrong with that?” he asked.
Technically, though, Ferrari used a Formula One engine as the basis of its F50 supercar back in 1995, though Moers insists the Project One would be a class forward from the least loved of the hypercar Ferraris. “We are talking about a high-performance hybrid, with one combustion engine and four electric motors. The combustion engine comes from Brixworth, from the same people who delivered three consecutive Formula One World Championships for drivers and manufacturers.
“The redline is at 11,000 and it has a high-tech turbo, which is driven by a 107-horsepower electric motor. Its batteries are the same technology and arrangement as in F1, but we will build four times the storage, with about 25km of pure electric range.
“We have reached thermal efficiency of 43 percent. Nobody else has managed anything like that, street legal.”
By comparison, AMG’s 4.0-litre biturbo V8 has a thermal efficiency of around 25 percent.
At $ 2.54 million, the two-seat, hard-top coupe follows Formula One practice by basing the entire car around a carbon-fibre chassis tub, then mounting the engine directly to the tub and mounting the gearbox and differential unit directly to the engine.
Both the engine and eight-speed gearbox will be fully stressed parts of the chassis layout, while AMG has chosen to use a computer controlled clutch on a traditional manual gearbox, rather than the dual-clutch transmission layout most supercar makers, including Bugatti, favor.
The first deliveries of the car are due late next year, with Moers hoping to finish its production run by the end of 2020, and AMG already has one “mule” prototype running to help with initial verification of the powertrain and chassis concept.
But the key part of the technology is the Project One’s powertrain itself, which AMG insists it pulled directly from its Formula 1 program. Though heavily revised from the W08 EQ Power+ F1 car used by Lewis Hamilton and Valteri Bottas this weekend in Monaco, AMG Chairman Tobias Moers insists the modifications are only basic.
“The idle speed is 1,100 rpm and in F1 it’s 3,800 or 4,000. It revs to 11,000 rpm, but in F1 it’s 13,500 rpm.
“We have to move combustion ratio, for example, that’s what changes. In F1 they run Lambda that’s way more than one. But we can’t because of emissions. We have the same cylinder head, same crank housing but a different crankshaft.”
For all that, though, Moers insists customers won’t need the usual array of Formula One race engineers and laptop computers to start the engine.
“Prospective buyers have been asking if they will require a support crew or dedicated lubricants to run it. My answer is always ‘no.’ It will be a street car. You keep it plugged in in the garage. You fill it with 98 (Ron fuel).”
The trickier parts of the powertrain will be the way it combines its electrified and internal-combustion power. A ground-breaking engine in Formula One, the AMG V6 splits its single, large turbocharger, with the exhaust turbine moved to the back of the engine with the exhaust system and the compressor wheel sitting at the front of the engine where the cooler air is. A shaft runs through the engine’s vee angle to join them together.
Firstly, there is the power and torque from the tiny 1.6-liter V6 (which AMG wouldn’t talk about, but which must be somewhere around 470 hp). Then it also has a 134-hp electric motor (the MGU-K for “kinetic” in AMG-speak) directly attached to the engine’s crankshaft and another 107-hp (the MGU-H for “heat”) electric motor that spins up the turbocharger to eliminate turbo lag.
“The 80kW from the MGU-H is not so important to rev it (the turbocharger compressor) up but it’s important for regeneration,” Moers insisted. “It could be a lot smaller to rev and still spin it up.”
Any excess energy the MGU-H harvests can be sent directly to the MGU-K to punch more electric torque directly through the crankshaft.
Then there a 161-horsepower electric motor for each front wheel, which use essentially the same construction and design as the MGU-K, but in different housings.
While Moers would not be drawn on the car’s target weight, he did confirm that the entire powertrain would weight about 926 pounds, with the battery pack accounting for 220 lbs of that. The battery, built by its F1 supplier ABC, runs the same chemistry, cells and connectors as Hamilton’s racer, but is four times larger to add in the Project One’s zero-emission capability.
What makes the Project One particularly complicated is that all of its electric motors act as both motors and generators to recharge the fast-discharge battery, which has a converter to turn 800 volts into 12 volts sitting on top of its housing.
The extreme forces acting inside the highly stressed 1.6-liter V6 mean AMG will only rate it for 31,000 miles before it needs to be “remanufactured”.
“We have an understanding of about 50,000 km. This is OK for us. I think that’s good enough,” Mr. Moers insisted.
“That’s the life of the engine. Then we do some rework, like in a race car.”
After 31,000 miles, the engines would either be rebuilt by AMG or, depending on the work needed, replaced, and AMG didn’t rule out customers choosing to buy the car with a spare engine ready to go. As an aside, it has yet to put a price tag on either a new engine or a rebuild.
This year’s Formula One rules dictate that each driver can only use four hybrid power units for the entire 20-race season, though that drops to three of the V6 internal-combustion engines next year. While that’s just over 3,728 miles of Grand Prix racing, the engines and electrified power units could easily double that with four hours of practice and a one-hour qualifying shootout each race weekend.
The supercar industry’s widespread reaction to Moers’ claims of using a Formula One motor has been disbelief.
Ferrari basically said it doesn’t believe Mercedes-AMG. Ferrari, the only other race-winning Formula One engine supplier this year, clearly doubts whether AMG’s hypercar was a) using an F1-sourced engine and b) whether that was a good idea in the first place.
In an interview back at the Geneva Motor Show, Ferrari’s road-car chief engineer, Michael Leiters, said there was no way Ferrari would follow suit.
“Putting an F1 engine into a road car? We already did it with the F50 and I’m not convinced it works. An F1 engine runs at 16,000 rpm. How can you use a car that revs to 16,000 rpm on the street? You can’t, and if it doesn’t rev to 16,000 rpm, you have to ask the question, what remains of the Formula 1 engine?
“Instead of actual F1 engine, I’m convinced it’s better to take some concepts and innovations from a Formula 1 car. To make a supercar, I prefer to do it from scratch,” he insisted.
The all-wheel-drive Project One hypercar has fine torque vectoring at both ends, and eliminates the packaging difficulties of anti-roll bars via five-link suspension systems at both ends.
AMG has separated the vertical bump and roll tasks in the suspension with two springs in series sharing a single damper, while the longest rear pushrod in the car world is mounted directly to the upright and in large part defines the car’s aerodynamic package.
It will use a variable ride height and a variable aerodynamic package, to get the best from its custom-developed Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 285/35 19 front and 335/30 20 tires, which ride on center-lock wheels.
The transmission, too, will be similar to the Formula One car’s eight-speed unit, strengthened for longevity, and using the electric motors to “fill in” any acceleration holes during gear changes.
Moers insists the car will have different driving modes, ranging from the zero-emission front-drive BEV mode to a mode so aggressive it will be similar to a Grand Prix qualifying setup.
]]>https://briefnews.eu/mercedes-amgs-f1-based-project-one-rewrites-the-hypercar-rulebook/feed/0AMG's F1-based Project One rewrites the hypercar rulebook
https://briefnews.eu/amgs-f1-based-project-one-rewrites-the-hypercar-rulebook/
https://briefnews.eu/amgs-f1-based-project-one-rewrites-the-hypercar-rulebook/#respondSat, 27 May 2017 17:45:50 +0000http://briefnews.eu/amgs-f1-based-project-one-rewrites-the-hypercar-rulebook/
AMG has finally shown the mechanical layout of its thousand-horsepower, Formula 1-inspired Project One hypercar at a sneak reveal at the Nürburgring 24 Hour race. AMG Chairman Tobias Moers insists the car will become the new hypercar benchmark, with an F1-based 1.6-liter, electrified, turbocharged V6 and four electric motors.
The all-wheel drive hypercar won’t just deliver levels of performance unparalleled outside the world’s racetracks, but will be able to run as a pure battery-electric car for up to 15 miles and, unique for a hypercar, its zero-emission mode will be front-wheel drive. That should make it capable of circumventing limitations on internal-combustion, high-powered cars in some city centers around the world.
“It shifts up the boundaries of what is technically feasible,” AMG Chairman Tobias Moers said, with production limited to just 275 models. “We are the first to make pure bred F1 technology roadworthy.”
“Our objective is not speed, but to be the benchmark. If we have a strategy and we move into a new era of performance at AMG, maybe it’s good to have something that opens the door in a very authentic way to that new era and this is it.
“Plug-in hybrid is going to be the future for AMG. We get more performance and more efficiency and what’s wrong with that?” he asked.
Technically, though, Ferrari used a Formula One engine as the basis of its F50 supercar back in 1995, though Moers insists the Project One would be a class forward from the least loved of the hypercar Ferraris.
“We are talking about a high-performance hybrid, with one combustion engine and four electric motors. The combustion engine comes from Brixworth, from the same people who delivered three consecutive Formula One World Championships for drivers and manufacturers.
“The redline is at 11,000 and it has a high-tech turbo, which is driven by a 107-horsepower electric motor. Its batteries are the same technology and arrangement as in F1, but we will build four times the storage, with about 25km of pure electric range.
“We have reached thermal efficiency of 43 percent. Nobody else has managed anything like that, street legal.”
By comparison, AMG’s 4.0-litre biturbo V8 has a thermal efficiency of around 25 percent.
At $ 2.54 million, the two-seat, hard-top coupe follows Formula One practice by basing the entire car around a carbon-fibre chassis tub, then mounting the engine directly to the tub and mounting the gearbox and differential unit directly to the engine.
Both the engine and eight-speed gearbox will be fully stressed parts of the chassis layout, while AMG has chosen to use a computer controlled clutch on a traditional manual gearbox, rather than the dual-clutch transmission layout most supercar makers, including Bugatti, favor.
The first deliveries of the car are due late next year, with Moers hoping to finish its production run by the end of 2020, and AMG already has one “mule” prototype running to help with initial verification of the powertrain and chassis concept.
But the key part of the technology is the Project One’s powertrain itself, which AMG insists it pulled directly from its Formula 1 program. Though heavily revised from the W08 EQ Power+ F1 car used by Lewis Hamilton and Valteri Bottas this weekend in Monaco, AMG Chairman Tobias Moers insists the modifications are only basic.
“The idle speed is 1,100 rpm and in F1 it’s 3,800 or 4,000. It revs to 11,000 rpm, but in F1 it’s 13,500 rpm.
“We have to move combustion ratio, for example, that’s what changes. In F1 they run Lambda that’s way more than one. But we can’t because of emissions. We have the same cylinder head, same crank housing but a different crankshaft.”
For all that, though, Moers insists customers won’t need the usual array of Formula One race engineers and laptop computers to start the engine.
“Prospective buyers have been asking if they will require a support crew or dedicated lubricants to run it. My answer is always ‘no.’ It will be a street car. You keep it plugged in in the garage. You fill it with 98 (Ron fuel).”
The trickier parts of the powertrain will be the way it combines its electrified and internal-combustion power. A ground-breaking engine in Formula One, the AMG V6 splits its single, large turbocharger, with the exhaust turbine moved to the back of the engine with the exhaust system and the compressor wheel sitting at the front of the engine where the cooler air is. A shaft runs through the engine’s vee angle to join them together.
Firstly, there is the power and torque from the tiny 1.6-liter V6 (which AMG wouldn’t talk about, but which must be somewhere around 470 hp). Then it also has a 134-hp electric motor (the MGU-K for “kinetic” in AMG-speak) directly attached to the engine’s crankshaft and another 107-hp (the MGU-H for “heat”) electric motor that spins up the turbocharger to eliminate turbo lag.
“The 80kW from the MGU-H is not so important to rev it (the turbocharger compressor) up but it’s important for regeneration,” Moers insisted. “It could be a lot smaller to rev and still spin it up.”
Any excess energy the MGU-H harvests can be sent directly to the MGU-K to punch more electric torque directly through the crankshaft.
Then there a 161-horsepower electric motor for each front wheel, which use essentially the same construction and design as the MGU-K, but in different housings.
While Moers would not be drawn on the car’s target weight, he did confirm that the entire powertrain would weight about 926 pounds, with the battery pack accounting for 220 lbs of that. The battery, built by its F1 supplier ABC, runs the same chemistry, cells and connectors as Hamilton’s racer, but is four times larger to add in the Project One’s zero-emission capability.
What makes the Project One particularly complicated is that all of its electric motors act as both motors and generators to recharge the fast-discharge battery, which has a converter to turn 800 volts into 12 volts sitting on top of its housing.
The extreme forces acting inside the highly stressed 1.6-liter V6 mean AMG will only rate it for 31,000 miles before it needs to be “remanufactured”.
“We have an understanding of about 50,000 km. This is OK for us. I think that’s good enough,” Mr. Moers insisted.
“That’s the life of the engine. Then we do some rework, like in a race car.”
After 31,000 miles, the engines would either be rebuilt by AMG or, depending on the work needed, replaced, and AMG didn’t rule out customers choosing to buy the car with a spare engine ready to go. As an aside, it has yet to put a price tag on either a new engine or a rebuild.
This year’s Formula One rules dictate that each driver can only use four hybrid power units for the entire 20-race season, though that drops to three of the V6 internal-combustion engines next year. While that’s just over 3,728 miles of Grand Prix racing, the engines and electrified power units could easily double that with four hours of practice and a one-hour qualifying shootout each race weekend.
The supercar industry’s widespread reaction to Moers’ claims of using a Formula One motor has been disbelief.
Ferrari basically said it doesn’t believe Mercedes-AMG. Ferrari, the only other race-winning Formula One engine supplier this year, clearly doubts whether AMG’s hypercar was a) using an F1-sourced engine and b) whether that was a good idea in the first place.
In an interview back at the Geneva Motor Show, Ferrari’s road-car chief engineer, Michael Leiters, said there was no way Ferrari would follow suit.
“Putting an F1 engine into a road car? We already did it with the F50 and I’m not convinced it works. An F1 engine runs at 16,000 rpm. How can you use a car that revs to 16,000 rpm on the street? You can’t, and if it doesn’t rev to 16,000 rpm, you have to ask the question, what remains of the Formula 1 engine?
“Instead of actual F1 engine, I’m convinced it’s better to take some concepts and innovations from a Formula 1 car. To make a supercar, I prefer to do it from scratch,” he insisted.
The all-wheel-drive Project One hypercar has fine torque vectoring at both ends, and eliminates the packaging difficulties of anti-roll bars via five-link suspension systems at both ends.
AMG has separated the vertical bump and roll tasks in the suspension with two springs in series sharing a single damper, while the longest rear pushrod in the car world is mounted directly to the upright and in large part defines the car’s aerodynamic package.
It will use a variable ride height and a variable aerodynamic package, to get the best from its custom-developed Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 285/35 19 front and 335/30 20 tires, which ride on center-lock wheels.
The transmission, too, will be similar to the Formula One car’s eight-speed unit, strengthened for longevity, and using the electric motors to “fill in” any acceleration holes during gear changes.
Moers insists the car will have different driving modes, ranging from the zero-emission front-drive BEV mode to a mode so aggressive it will be similar to a Grand Prix qualifying setup.