Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
I suggest we discount DRS over takes from that equation.
the overtakes of vettel on hamilton, and raikkonen on bottas, would have been made even without DRS.
add to that the magnificient corner-to-corner wheel-to-wheel battle between raikkonen and verstappen,
there was zero DRS involvement there.
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"
Something we saw earlier in the 80s with the turbo-cars.. the only issue currently in F1 that is bad for overtaking in theory is the fuel flow and quantity restriction. However.. this is keeping the Renault powered cars in the game. We all saw what happened at the 2nd restart in Silverstone, massive power differences. No wonder Toto is looking to add more kgs of fuel.
track design may help as we have seen..slower corners that arent too dependent on downforce followed up by a long straight.
This is not a good idea. We've got a bunch of tracks with slow corners leading onto very long straights with little impact. Canada hairpin, Russia final turn, entire red bull ring, barcelona final turn..
not quite just one turn.. say three corners short before straight...then prior to that another two or three mid speed corners and then prior to that a high speed sections and then a slow corner that ends that long straight
the idea is to get the car behind closer and closer if they are the quicker car..because with downforce being a major issue then corners that are not too high on downforce is the only solutuon that doesnt require any entertainment gimmick such as d.r.s
When they can lap Silverstone and some of the most iconic corners in F1 as if they are straights to me that shows that we have way too much downforce to depend on. 80% flat out?? There's something major wrong there.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss
When they can lap Silverstone and some of the most iconic corners in F1 as if they are straights to me that shows that we have way too much downforce to depend on. 80% flat out?? There's something major wrong there.
When they can lap Silverstone and some of the most iconic corners in F1 as if they are straights to me that shows that we have way too much downforce to depend on. 80% flat out?? There's something major wrong there.
Did you see that drivers were looking at overtaking in to Copse? Overtaking attempts at 180mph is hardly a bad thing, is it? This isn't an oval track where such things are routine, but a bumpy track with corners and straights with varying requirements.
Tough crowd, I reckon...
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
The cars are faster than they were in previous years. There's something major wrong there.
Damn engineers. Gonna have to ban them too eventually.
Some seem to forget F1 is more of an engineering and logistics competition than it is a driver's competition. Driver pay ~1%-10% the size of a team's operating budget. If one wants athlete centered competition one could watch boxing, football, or running. Cost of the engineered hardware relatively small (gloves, balls), and, hell, they're spec items even, so it's all right up a NASCARmunists' alley.
I wonder if the concept of spec horses ever comes up in horse racing. It is only fair to the jockeys, and would surely entail more saddle-to-saddle action. Horse breeding is expensive, complicate, boring to viewers, so ideally one breeder should just be hired to breed and re-breed the same gene-line for a few years. What could go wrong? Mane thing is, each jockey gets a fair shot wither or not they have a big, stable budget. Yea or neigh?
It is simple really, engineer cars that can pass each other. Fan boost was my proposal. Cars whose down force can be turned up when following another car.
Formula Ford type cars might best represent what some are looking for. Negligible downforce, full grip available in corners regardless of vehicle proximity.
Just like F1's olden days, except way less awesome:
When they can lap Silverstone and some of the most iconic corners in F1 as if they are straights to me that shows that we have way too much downforce to depend on. 80% flat out?? There's something major wrong there.
yeah, you're right, take a look just how wrong f1 is today, 8G in corners, so boring:
i think they should ban going full throttle through the corners, place some brake lights, sidemarkers, and make sure they brake sufficiently going into a corner. also make sure they use their directional lights so it's more fair for those behind to decide where they are going to overtake.
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"
When they can lap Silverstone and some of the most iconic corners in F1 as if they are straights to me that shows that we have way too much downforce to depend on. 80% flat out?? There's something major wrong there.
I don't completely disagree with your sentiment,
but what used to be iconic corners and tracks in F1 decades ago no longer existed by the 90s/00s. Spa is said to be a great iconic track but what about the original iconic Spa? The 14 km layout would be driven 95% flat out if ran today. Same with the 1960s Monza without the chicanes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Italian_Grand_Prix How about old Silverstone? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_British_Grand_Prix
Overtaking isn't the be-all and end-all of F1. Here's Senna and Mansell in '91 at Monza. Mansell followed Senna for lap after lap, had a number of attempts to pass, used Patrese as a runner to wear Senna's tyres and concentration and it still took him a while to overtake. Was it dull? Don't think so, no. Today, with DRS, Mansell would have been past in the first few laps and that would have been that.
See how close they can follow and still the overtake is difficult.
I see that it proves what some of us have been saying... It's not the actual pass and certainly not a DRS aided one that counts nearly so much as the racing. As Just_a_fan said, with DRS we would never have seen that racing and for sure not with a modern front wing.
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss
I see that it proves what some of us have been saying... It's not the actual pass and certainly not a DRS aided one that counts nearly so much as the racing. As Just_a_fan said, with DRS we would never have seen that racing and for sure not with a modern front wing.
I wonder how much the front wing complexity is responsible for making drivers unable to follow. Wings were much simpler in 2009 but cars were just as hard to follow. Even in 2008 they were simpler, but still it was hard to stay on the wake of another car.
No matter how simple you make the wings, there are two things about the current cars that will alwas make it impossible to follow:
1 - The amount of downforce: Doesn't matter if you need a million winglets or two very simple wings, with the shear amount of downforce that cars produce today it will always be difficult to follow.
2 - The drag of the cars: If you look at my OP, I posted this video:
If you pay attention you'll notice that it's not the upwash that make cars hard to follow, it's actually the air that's pulled by the car ahead. So instead of having static air, let's say at 250km/h relative to your car, the air is still moving at 30km/h, so relative to your car it's only at 220km/h, which makes a huge difference. You can work at reducing the upwash, but there will always be drag.
In conclusion: it doesn't matter how simple you make the wings, if the amount of downforce doesn't decrease, following closely will always be pretty much impossible.
