WhiteBlue wrote:the Williams aero sucks when they turn the wheels. this kills the downforce in fast corners. on point and squirt circuits they do not feel the problem because there are no really fast corners. Williams aero is subterranean for many years now. already with BMW it was the lousy aero that always let them down. remember that walrus nose? they do not deserve a driver of Nico's caliber.
You may be right about the bad effect of steering on the car's aero; I hadn't think about that...
However, don't take it as an offense, but I think you're in quite a nationalistic mood these days WB
(which is your right of course), and I feel some of your comments are just biased by that. You're so much Germany whohoo here, BMW woohoo there that in the end you're just putting the blame on others with no proof
(This is NOT a comment aimed at flamming you, but an expression of what I think of some statements in your recent posts
) In the Williams/BMW days, both parties expressed unsatisfaction toward the other, and in the end what prevailed is that a team in disagreement with his engine manufacturer comes to nothing good
(though there were some good results also during this era).
But, fair enough, Williams is lacking efficiency on the aero front these last three years especially IMO (
which means the post BMW period). I think hiring Loic Bigois as a designer for the FW28 was the fist wrong call, and the team is now among the numerous
"Bridgestone destroyed our pace" Teams, and it hurts especially since they're not very well funded compared to their opponents. Like the other teams in this position, they cannot close the gap to others as long as the rules stay stable, and have to wait for the 2009 set of changes to take their bets again.
Conceptual wrote:I honestly love the IDEA of the night races, but man, the Singapore track could seriously benefit from the Diamond Track Grinder that Indy uses to smooth the surface.
+1!
fenix4life wrote:
What a unfair race of Rosberg.
He should never have been second if he had pitted fair and square like the rest.
Why should the stewards wait that long to give him and Kubica a penalty. Massa which fault was done after Rosberg and Kubica received his penalty before those two.
Rosberg and Kubica should have received their penalty immediately after that the safety car has come in. He would never had had a large gap before him and would never have finished second.
err, wait a minute... So he should have been penalised for lacking fuel at a moment which no one could predict as being the
"wrong" one. I find it unfair. But still, you should be happy because he got the penalty, and a severe one on top of that: 10 sec stop & go
(+ obviously the time lost in the pit lane, so we're talking about a 35/40 sec loss!)
Other drivers having commited the same infrigement recieved the same penalty, which calls for no scandal.
Massa's penalty had nothing to do with a suposed advantage taken of the SC, but with a dangerous release of his car
(remember he escaped penalty for the same thing at Valancia, can't always have that luck!). I do not blame Massa, it's not his fault, but this penalty concerned a safety danger, which is priority to other aspects, hence why it was dealt with faster IMO.
timbo wrote:This is not as easy in my mind. There can be a solution like another set of warning lights a bit behind. I think that right now we are facing teething problems that any progressive system has. Question is a benifit for having such systems. However, I think FIA may come into play and forbid such system as unsafe.
IMO today's glich was fuel rig sensor misfire.
You get a point. One cannot condamn a design for his early failures
(though it has been tested a lot in both Races Free Practises and private tests.) I think like you that the FIA is going to put their nose in it anyway. They usualy don't go against Ferari, but forbiding this would only help Ferari to stop hurting themselves, so...