Hi,
With news of Ground Effect being proposed by the strategy group I was inspired to investigate an write an article on my blog:
Would be interested to hear your feedback and thoughts.
Thanks
Dman
Dirty air what makes overtaking too difficult so racing is pretty boring maybe on 80% of the races. What are the 10 things wich are right and you risk throwing away?Tim.Wright wrote:For every one thing which people complain about in F1, there's 10 things which are right and you risk throwing all that away if you start from zero.
That is hardly due to ground effect but rather the standardised format.sgth0mas wrote:Just watch indycar if thats what you want. They use Ground efffects and have closer racing.
The ground effect proposal for F1 is the same as in GP2, so it doesn't go as far as to a complete redesign. And it works well in GP2. The only thing that is much more difficult is that you have to ponder in the freedom of dev vs safety.Tim.Wright wrote:I think most people underestimate the magnitude of "simply switching the car's to ground effect". Its a complete redesign of the concept of the vehicle from zero and it will throw up dozens of problems. Not because the concept is bad but the normal problems that you get in any engineering project when you start from a clean sheet. For every one thing which people complain about in F1, there's 10 things which are right and you risk throwing all that away if you start from zero.
All the problems may very well be solvable, but it will take 5-10 years to put everything in order and no-one have the patience for that. Look how quickly people get bent out of shape when there is a boring race and how quickly they are happy again after a single good one.
Its a massive massive risk. To reduce the risk someone, e.g. the strategy group or the FIA, need to invest millions in a lot of offline R&D with running prototypes if you want a clean switch of the regulations from wings to ground effect.
Oh i agree. Im just saying if you want ground effects and closer racing that series already exists. The ground effects do allow them to follow much closer however with less detriment.Sniffit wrote:That is hardly due to ground effect but rather the standardised format.sgth0mas wrote:Just watch indycar if thats what you want. They use Ground efffects and have closer racing.
Ogami musashi wrote: The ground effect proposal for F1 is the same as in GP2, so it doesn't go as far as to a complete redesign. And it works well in GP2. The only thing that is much more difficult is that you have to ponder in the freedom of dev vs safety.
This exact same dirty air existed in the 70s, 80s, and 90s as well(don't forget the 00s!), they overtook perfectly fine and created the races that people always cling back to in arguments of how awful racing today is.Andres125sx wrote: Dirty air what makes overtaking too difficult so racing is pretty boring maybe on 80% of the races.
The whole formula as a whole counts as a pretty big one?What are the 10 things wich are right and you risk throwing away?
In the 80s they ran with huge barn door wings, I'm certain that those would create much more dirty air than cars do now.so big it´s worth assuming those risks because current aero rules are responsible for boring races.
No. Tim is right on this. You are just promoting a massive change just because a few people don't like something. You've got absolutely no guarantee of success for an significant change in appearance as a whole. Plus, the same complaining people will find something new to complain of, because that's what they do.Domination periods[/qute]
The vast majority of F1s history is through one team dominating all. If that's a problem, then how come so many people watch it these days? If that truly was a problem then F1 would never have taken off.
All opinion. It's pretty much something that can't be won. Because if one thing is "fixed" they'll find another thing to complain about, and that was Tim's point when he said "For every one thing which people complain about in F1, there's 10 things which are right".and boring races
It's simple; No one says a thing when everything is okay, people only complain about what is wrong.
Yet, people were with masses in Grandstands when a team dominated and lapped the whole field on a regular basis.IMO, are the main responsible for the drop F1 is suffering both in TV audience and in track attendance, what also causes some venues to desist from hosting a gp like Germany, France, etc. and all that is directly related to current aero rules that causes lack of competitiveness
F1 has never been as close as it is now, and it never has been as competitive either(apart from a few odd years). Your complaint about domination is not much of a complaint. It's nothing more than a complaint about the natural order of things, you want it to change? Good luck reinventing society as a whole.
You see it everywhere, one team, one group of people excells above the rest, and when perspective changes, so does another. It goes on and on and on, and it is impossible to stop that, or to prevent that. Unless you of course want to ban the dominant team just because.
What I mean is current aero rules are the biggest problem current F1 suffer (apart from Bernie), so the massive risk is continue with same direction, not promoting a massive change. I don´t see any future for F1 in the medium to long term if things continue this route