Is F1 getting boring?

[autogyro]

There is a high vertical (DF) acting on the whole car and the suspension of the car is totaly compromised for its use.
Of course a high DF car handles differently to a non DF car.
I cannot understand how anyone can ignore this.

That doesn't change the fact be it a DF car or not when you corner if the lateral force tyres can produce is exceeded the car will slip the same way.
There's no "rail" cornering with a DF car; There's no "less limit cornering" neither, the physics are exactly the same.

What changes is that because you corner faster you can't overshoot tyre's limit as much as with a slower car because if you do you'll end up in the wall.

Oh dear
If you are cornering faster in a high DF car and the tyres only break away at this high speed, then the tyres are working totaly differently than the tyres on a non DF car where the tyres break away at a far lower speed.
Of course physics does not change, god I wish we could alter that!
Everything on a high DF car works differently precisely because it is a high DF car.

[horse]

"We have to wait and see different races and check the situation, without being emotional. Something that confuses the fans is changing the rules all the time."

Alonso predicts four-team fight

I don't think Nando understands F1 fans very much then. Rule changes are great and if you've produced a duff set of rules then change them. Rule changes are one of the key factors to stopping F1 being boring as it maintains innovation and a healthy level of uncertainty throughout the field.

EDIT: From a laymans perspective this is how I see the DF/suspension issue. The downforce does indeed increase the cornering force of the tyre for a similar amount of slip compared to no DF. However, as that downforce is all transmitted through the suspension, the suspension feels the equivalent of more mass (ie a heavier car). This "extra weight" does not cause give the difficulties of changing momentum like a heavier machine would, but the suspension must work like the weight of the car is constantly changing and also becoming much greater than the curb weight. Whether the fact that with less downforce the suspension does not have to deal so much with this problem and thus can maybe be optimised more for cornering, is something I can not speculate about.

[Ogami musashi]

Oh dear
If you are cornering faster in a high DF car and the tyres only break away at this high speed, then the tyres are working totaly differently than the tyres on a non DF car where the tyres break away at a far lower speed.

Nobody said that. A high DF car will have its grip lose when the lateral forces available are not sufficient for the speed and/or when suspension can't maintain the tires on the ground and before you jump on it the fact that a huge load is on the suspension doesn't mean at all the car will stay onto the ground because of N3 law combined with N2 law.
Simply said..F1 cars literally bounce off the ground for nothing.

Everything on a high DF car works differently precisely because it is a high DF car.

No logic in that opinion.


To make it clear..your point was that High DF cars corner differently, on rails, with the idea that the driver doesn't hit the limit, that's plain wrong.

[machin]

So what we've learnt from the past "few" pages is that:-

Lots of downforce and relatively little mechanical grip makes overtaking difficult, -yes, maybe the wake field can be improved, but either way, lots of downforce kills overtaking.

There's two options then:-

1, Take the downforce away, with the result being that the cars corner a lot slower.

2, Give a following car some other advantage over the car he is following. For example a short term increase in power.

Simple.

[horse]

So what we've learnt from the past "few" pages is that:-

Lots of downforce and relatively little mechanical grip makes overtaking difficult, -yes, maybe the wake field can be improved, but either way, lots of downforce kills overtaking.

There's two options then:-

1, Take the downforce away, with the result being that the cars corner a lot slower.

2, Give a following car some other advantage over the car he is following. For example a short term increase in power.

Simple.

In addition to this, I have also wondered whether a tyre compound that was not so sensitive to "rubbering in" would help with racing. If you could somehow make a tyre that could perform on a green track and not generate too many marbles then maybe more of the track could be used for manoeuvres? <- This has been mentioned loads already, sorry!!!

[vyselegend]

2006 was a peak year in terms of overtaking (for the 21st century). Strangely, there was still the tyre war going on, closer than ever, so the compounds used were probably the softer possible. I would have thought soft compounds to be more dirt/marble sensitive because they "stick" more (and also because that's what I understand from drivers/engineers interviews), but there was more overtaking then, so they were more successfull going off line. Why?

I know there are lots of factors, so maybe it isn't really tyre related. But if it is, it may be specific to those Brigestone control tyres.

[WhiteBlue]

Tyre competition isn't reduced to the hardness of the compound. The detail of the construction can play a much bigger role there. If the construction differs significantly in terms of favoring race pace over one lap performance you can get huge speed differentials in race pace. Some tyres loose performance and recover it after a certain amount of heat has been put through them. So the different behavior over the use period is probably much more responsible for overtaking in tyre wars. Super soft tyres shedding marbles off the racing line are no advantage to overtaking as you have said.

I would not advocate a tyre war as a means to improve overtaking. Tyre wars need high testing budgets to work. At least that was the experience of the past. One would have to find a way to eliminate tyre testing to go back to competing tyre suppliers. But then the suppliers would probably argue that they would run into safety issues.

[Pandamasque]

I would not advocate a tyre war as a means to improve overtaking. Tyre wars need high testing budgets to work. At least that was the experience of the past. One would have to find a way to eliminate tyre testing to go back to competing tyre suppliers. But then the suppliers would probably argue that they would run into safety issues.

Post-GP testing on Mondays should help.

[kilcoo316]

So what we've learnt from the past "few" pages is that:-

Lots of downforce and relatively little mechanical grip makes overtaking difficult, -yes, maybe the wake field can be improved, but either way, lots of downforce kills overtaking.

We did?


I thought a few of us (actually the folks that I think are also aerodynamicists) are saying no, that is not the case.

[kilcoo316]

I definitely think the first (and also the easiest) thing to do is allow the teams to totally change the setup (but NOT parts) between qualifying and the race.


Reinstate the sunday warmup is the cry!!!

[WhiteBlue]

I would not advocate a tyre war as a means to improve overtaking. Tyre wars need high testing budgets to work. At least that was the experience of the past. One would have to find a way to eliminate tyre testing to go back to competing tyre suppliers. But then the suppliers would probably argue that they would run into safety issues.

Post-GP testing on Mondays should help.

I think that the commercial situation will largely dictate how F1 will go forward in terms of tyres. To me it sounds as if the attempts by FOM and FiA have failed to lure Bridgestone back for a second stint as the single tyre supplier. Michelin may or may not change their mind about competition and in the end there may not be a choice but to go back to competitive tyre supply. If that happens they may have to severely restrict tyre testing and have to apply some homologation.

Regarding downforce restrictions it would make little sense to ask Adrian Newey or Nick Tombazis about this question. They would always argue that something else is at fault. When you ask where to prune the F1 tree none of the aerodynamicists would cut the branch off they are sitting on.

[andrew]

I really think that the best thing to do is ban double diffusers and anything like that (ok that's happening in 2011) and reduce overall downforce. Making the tyres harder would hopefully also reduce grip. Whilst I don't want F1 to be like a bus lane race in rush hour, I would rather the cars cornered slower so that there can be some racing. If the cars have less grip and are less stable, this will test driver skill rather than the quality of the car. Some decent tracks also would help. We only have Spa and Monza (and the Nurburgring every second year) that are true tracks. The rest are sterile, featureless rubbish with no character (Tilke??).

But to answer the thread question; yes F1 is getting boring. In fact there is no getting about it. The series is all about making money and not about the sport. F1 is rotten to the core through veering away dramatically from what could be considered its "core values" and now panders to people who want to be seen at high profile events and know nothing or very little about the sport. I can guarantee if F1 was about the fans, it would not be in teh mess it is now.

So yes, F1 is getting boring.

(End of rant. )

[machin]

I thought a few of us (actually the folks that I think are also aerodynamicists) are saying no, that is not the case.

The problem is that unless you run specified aero parts, or have very very prescriptive rules a car optimised to run in clear air will always work less efficiently when following another car as the inflow conditions are different, (angle of attack of any surface will effectively be changed due to the change in flow direction, to name but one problem)...

I think they've just got to bite the bullet and create another performance differentiator that doesn't reply on aero to allow more over-taking. Personally I think the engine/transmission/KERS system needs to provide this diffenertiator....

[kilcoo316]

The problem is that unless you run specified aero parts, or have very very prescriptive rules a car optimised to run in clear air will always work less efficiently when following another car as the inflow conditions are different, (angle of attack of any surface will effectively be changed due to the change in flow direction, to name but one problem)...

Don't be so certain.


There are ways and means. The methods would involve abandoning the flat floor, which is something the FIA are going to be loath to do.

I think they've just got to bite the bullet and create another performance differentiator that doesn't reply on aero to allow more over-taking. Personally I think the engine/transmission/KERS system needs to provide this diffenertiator....

KERS isn't a differentiator once every team has it.


The suggestion earlier in the thread of an extra 1,000 rpm (or whatever) released through the standard ECU when within a second of the car in front is a real differentiator, and something to definitely be considered IMO.

[horse]

The suggestion earlier in the thread of an extra 1,000 rpm (or whatever) released through the standard ECU when within a second of the car in front is a real differentiator, and something to definitely be considered IMO.

Do you think anyone would bother/could possibly defend their line any more? I can foresee strategies of waiting to pass at the last opportunity before the race ends. Sort of like bikes.