Is F1 getting boring?

[Ogami musashi]

I do not need to know why the aero is screwed to know that it is screwed. The drivers know it as well and they want more mechanical grip and less aero grip. Until mechanical issues become the main field of competitive advantages I will rather listen to drivers than aerodynamicists.

Aerodynamicists probably know why the aero is screwed but they have a vested interest to have aero as the main field of competitive advantage. Ergo they will never criticize that status and rather send F1 for another 15 or 20 years on wild goose chases.

I was quite sarcastic with Autogyro actually. Miguel summed up exactly what i think about the problem of a driver giving its impressions. And that goes even beyond that; the simple fact is that a driver or any human in a car can't assess the problem correctly simply because wake is non linear and changes at rates that the driver can't sense.

That's why the sentence "drivers confirm that you need to be 3 sec.." is very funny; First of all i never seen such a statement and even if it existed that's pretty a feat to be able to sum up the lap time difference as a function of downforce advantage you need to overtake someone. Aero by the naked eye has struck again.

[machin]

Anthony Davidson (5 live F1 coverage) seems to have got wind of my virtual slipstream idea... Except in his version he would allow the following car to feather its rear wing, rather than give a power boost... Sounds quite good I think...

[autogyro]

I do not need to know why the aero is screwed to know that it is screwed. The drivers know it as well and they want more mechanical grip and less aero grip. Until mechanical issues become the main field of competitive advantages I will rather listen to drivers than aerodynamicists.

Aerodynamicists probably know why the aero is screwed but they have a vested interest to have aero as the main field of competitive advantage. Ergo they will never criticize that status and rather send F1 for another 15 or 20 years on wild goose chases.

I was quite sarcastic with Autogyro actually. Miguel summed up exactly what i think about the problem of a driver giving its impressions. And that goes even beyond that; the simple fact is that a driver or any human in a car can't assess the problem correctly simply because wake is non linear and changes at rates that the driver can't sense.

That's why the sentence "drivers confirm that you need to be 3 sec.." is very funny; First of all i never seen such a statement and even if it existed that's pretty a feat to be able to sum up the lap time difference as a function of downforce advantage you need to overtake someone. Aero by the naked eye has struck again.

Thank you Ogami, you have proven that with all your obvious technical knowledge you have absolutely no idea what motor racing is about. You have no need to say anything else. Thank you.

[kilcoo316]

Thank you Ogami, you have proven that with all your obvious technical knowledge you have absolutely no idea what motor racing is about. You have no need to say anything else. Thank you.

So, in your opinion, what are the proportional sources of the problems?

How much of the problem do you attribute to aerodynamics.


Lets assume someone did say that 3 seconds a lap advantage was required to overtake, break that down (in your opinion).

[WhiteBlue]

Lets assume someone did say that 3 seconds a lap advantage was required to overtake, break that down (in your opinion).

A short consideration will lead anybody to the conclusion that giving a time difference is just a simple but meaningless reference used by the racing folks. They check which cars can overtake and look what the lap times are and then you make such a statement which can be completely different if it is made on a different circuit, in clean or dirty air or with different cars. Giving a performance difference measured in lap times and free air is completely arbitrary. You can as well measure the lap time with a sun dial.

[Ogami musashi]

Thank you Ogami, you have proven that with all your obvious technical knowledge you have absolutely no idea what motor racing is about. You have no need to say anything else. Thank you.

I say whatever i want.

If you can't understand that any human can't tell you by the eyes what the aeros are you probably do not understand why we have load cells, track systems and...engineers to interpret the data.

[autogyro]

Thank you Ogami, you have proven that with all your obvious technical knowledge you have absolutely no idea what motor racing is about. You have no need to say anything else. Thank you.

I say whatever i want.

If you can't understand that any human can't tell you by the eyes what the aeros are you probably do not understand why we have load cells, track systems and...engineers to interpret the data.

Keep them flying Orvil, they will get racers to drive them.

[andrew]

Can we stay away from insults please children and still to facts?

You know, keep things civil.

[autogyro]

Can we stay away from insults please children and still to facts?

You know, keep things civil.

Point taken andrew.
I did not consider my comments as insults however.
I can do insults much better than that.

[marcush.]

I fail to see why it is necessary to follow your opponent closely to make a pass.

In fact if you ever tried to get by a agricultural means of transport on a road with traffic coming owards you.. you may be aware of the problem ,unless your mount is a Porsche twin turbo :It does make sense to read the traffic in front of you ,fall back and approach the obstruction with a decent delta in speed and make a smooth pass without fingerpointing reiceived from the traffic coming towards you.

with comparable power ,same tyres ,same fuelloads ,same brakes basically same everything ,you have to create overtaking opportunities .It took MS 36 or so laps to fox Jaime A.into a mistake big enough for overtaking.. I bet you could travel behind
say Alonso or MS half a year before something like this happened...

the mac wing is definetly helpful as was KERS .. but if all got this system it will not help anymore...or you need to find the other guy at sleep.. not many sleepy guys in F1 anymore..
but some tend to get hypnotised by the view of the rearlights of a F1 car telling them follow me as close as possible..

[WhiteBlue]

It took MS 36 or so laps to fox Jaime A.into a mistake big enough for overtaking.

It took him 36 laps for passing two times. The first time 12 and the second 24 laps (or perhaps the other way around). He fell back due to his botched tyre stop after he had already passed him.

[andrew]

Add to that there was only really one line where there was traction on slick tyres. That's why the Virgin passed him. He was on the wet bit and had no traction.

Sepang should be better though, especially if it rains. [-o<

[malcolm]

Chiming in quite late... and I missed some of the pages, so please excuse me if some of what I say is a repeat...

Going to recap a few things I read in a few of the pages in this thread:

-The FIA doesn't want tunnels (understandable).
-Shorter diffusers with sharper angles create more turbulence (obviously a lot more is at play, but I think this statement is generally adequate).
-Longer diffusers, as seen on sports cars, create less turbulence (again, generally speaking).


A few of my own comments:
-LMP's do not run on "hard tires" and definitely do create marbles, yet they are able to go off-line to pass.
-LMP's also have significant downforce, significant mechanical grip, yet they are able to run closely.
-LMP's used to run flat-bottomed cars, but had rules that stipulate maximum diffuser curvature radii (something around 5 mm, I believe).

Plan for the future:
-Allow the diffuser to extend further forward.
-Limit the diffuser to be planar, with no curvatures, apart from a sharp angle transitioning from flat-bottom to the diffuser (like LMP, circa '00ish).
-Limit the exiting cross-sectional area of the diffuser.
-Perhaps mandate certain control surfaces that would straighten the airflow off the back of the car and calm down the wake that each car generates.
-Limit the wings to a single element on the front, and a single element on the rear (thus limiting the AOA they can run, reducing efficiency, shifting the emphasis of downforce generation away from the wings and more toward the underbody, and even creating more advertising space!).
-Mandate that rear endplates must not be slotted or allow cut-outs, in an effort to reduce vortices.

This would allow the FIA to keep tunnels banned, would shift the centre of pressure forward and reduce the ratio of wing-generated downforce to underbody-generated downforce. The latter two would help reduce "aero push" by eliminating the need for the front wing to be the major source of downforce for the front of the car. Also, the wake would would be much less turbulent and would hopefully allow for closer racing, without turning F1 into really powerful Formula Fords.

Thoughts? Comments?

[masha08]

I thought you were comparing it from last year because I was just about to say that this year seems more exciting. Last year was too predictable. It wasn't until almost half of the season when Red Bull started challenging Brawn. This year though is more of an open race as the Ferraris, McLarens, Mercedes and Red Bulls all performing at the same level.