Changes To Qualifying

[Just_a_fan]

Exactly, we would get to see more of the best doing what they do well with a reverse wdc grid sprint race. The best will shine brighter and the habitual crashers will be drummed out of F1 quicker. Then we will truly have the 20 best open wheel road racers on the planet in F1.

I applaud your confidence. I fear it will be misplaced, sadly.

[izzy]

Where did you get 50% I've never seen anything above the upper 20's referenced, and that was when the trailing car was within a car length or two.

IMO, even 8% won't be enough if they ditch drs. It will be just like it was back in the 80's & 90's where you needed a significant fuel or tire life delta to get an overtake done on anything but a long strait.

for example watch how long it takes Prost in a superior car to get past Senna. Now consider how simple these cars are aerodynamically compared to today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL20sWuccUk

it's on formula1.com: “That fundamentally the CFD was correct,” says Tombazis. “There have been no major surprises. So there is a 5-10% wake disruption, compared to the current levels of 50%, although it depends on the exact configuration you are testing and so on.”

There is some passing now, with 50% disruption, that's because of the tow, tyres and basic car/driver delta. So add all that downforce back and what's gonna happen? They have to be careful not to make passing too easy, as once all the faster cars have passed all the slower cars that's race over. As then the cars are in SPEED ORDER

when the aero was simpler there was less wake, hence less tow

[NL_Fer]

Actually in Singapore Leclerc was driving so slow, after the stops, the ended up behind the midfielder on medium tyres. Vettel showed some serious overtaking to stay in front of Leclerc and make a Ferrari swap impossible.

Finally the midfield tyre choice worked.

[dans79]

it's on formula1.com: “That fundamentally the CFD was correct,” says Tombazis. “There have been no major surprises. So there is a 5-10% wake disruption, compared to the current levels of 50%, although it depends on the exact configuration you are testing and so on.”

I don't trust that number, its not quantified in any way. The only way I can see a 2019 car loosing 50% of it's down-force would be if it was literally 1m behind the car in front. If cars where loosing 50% at normal following distance's of a few care lengths, we'd never see any passing.

[ENGINE TUNER]

the 2017 rule changes where supposed to make the show better and offer closer racing. We all know that didn't happen. The same was supposed to happen with 2019 rule changes, and most of the drivers say it's worse.

The 2017 changes were to make the cars faster, and that is all, not to make the racing closer, everyone knew they would do the opposite beforehand. The 2019 changes were to alleviate the mistakes made with the 2017 changes. You are mistaken.

You make other false statements, but there is no use argueing.

[izzy]

I don't trust that number, its not quantified in any way. The only way I can see a 2019 car loosing 50% of it's down-force would be if it was literally 1m behind the car in front. If cars where loosing 50% at normal following distance's of a few care lengths, we'd never see any passing.

what do you mean "not quantified"? it's a number, it IS a quantity! You can challenge it but you're up against this guy:
Nicholas Tombazis is a racing car designer who has worked in Formula One since 1992, for the Benetton, McLaren and Ferrari teams. Tombazis graduated with a degree in engineering in 1989 at the Trinity College in Cambridge, followed by a PhD in aeronautical engineering at the Imperial College London in 1992

so you need something pretty solid by way of evidence doncha think? And their CFD facility is pretty impressive all on its own

[ENGINE TUNER]

Imo, the problem with the latter is that most of the tracks in use today aren't suited to close racing, given the speed aerodynamics, and general performance of modern cars.

.Finally someone touches on the real problem.
All of todays track are outdated and too small and narrow.
The cars have outgrown them.
What we really need is the return of long tracks where they can stretch their legs and wide enough to have two (or more) racing lines, and of course real tires so that we have fewer marbles so we can use the wider track.

Can't make the tracks wider, much easier to make the cars smaller, which they should be doing for 2021, but aren't. Making the cars wider in 2017 was a huge mistake, they should have only make the tires a couple inches wider.

[dans79]

what do you mean "not quantified"? it's a number, it IS a quantity!

It's not quantified because it gives no reference to how far behind the car is when it hits a 50% loss in DF. And thats a damn important number. In other words is it loosing 50% of its DF when it's 50m back (roughly 5 care lengths), or when it's up the other cars tailpipe at 0.5m.


Also in response to your previous statement.

when the aero was simpler there was less wake, hence less tow

The 2021 rules are going to do the exact same thing, reduce wake, so they will still have the same issue I showed in the Senna vs Prost video.

Prost in a significantly faster car was stuck behind Senna for several laps, while his real competition Hill pulled a gap. Prost eventually won the race, but only because Hill's engine expired, something that's a lot less likely to happen today.

[izzy]

It's not quantified because it gives no reference to how far behind the car is when it hits a 50% loss in DF. And thats a damn important number. In other words is it loosing 50% of its DF when it's 50m back (roughly 5 care lengths), or when it's up the other cars tailpipe at 0.5m.
Also in response to your previous statement.

when the aero was simpler there was less wake, hence less tow

The 2021 rules are going to do the exact same thing, reduce wake, so they will still have the same issue I showed in the Senna vs Prost video.

Nikolas does say it depends on the configuration they're running, but 50% is obviously just equivalent to his 5-10% for 2021. The exact specification doesn't matter cos we don't have any numbers for the tow or anything else do we, drag, tyres, we just basically have that ratio.

A big part of it is not so much reducing the wake it's making them less sensitive to wake, with underbody instead of wing. So it's not going to be like 1993 cars, they'll get more tow but not more loss of downforce, kinda thing.

In any case they're obviously going to analyse it to bits, with their 1115 or 2300 cores and the teams as well, and make sure the cars can overtake. They'll drop or keep DRS depending, even at some tracks not others potentially. So it's not an argument that with all that work and expertise somehow they won't be able to enable a top car and driver to get past a midfield car and driver. It'll be hard, but just possible. They have all these brilliant F1 people working on that exact thing. It'll be wonderful

[dans79]

It's not quantified because it gives no reference to how far behind the car is when it hits a 50% loss in DF. And thats a damn important number. In other words is it loosing 50% of its DF when it's 50m back (roughly 5 care lengths), or when it's up the other cars tailpipe at 0.5m.
Also in response to your previous statement.

when the aero was simpler there was less wake, hence less tow

The 2021 rules are going to do the exact same thing, reduce wake, so they will still have the same issue I showed in the Senna vs Prost video.

Nikolas does say it depends on the configuration they're running, but 50% is obviously just equivalent to his 5-10% for 2021. The exact specification doesn't matter cos we don't have any numbers for the tow or anything else do we, drag, tyres, we just basically have that ratio.

A big part of it is not so much reducing the wake it's making them less sensitive to wake, with underbody instead of wing. So it's not going to be like 1993 cars, they'll get more tow but not more loss of downforce, kinda thing.

In any case they're obviously going to analyse it to bits, with their 1115 or 2300 cores and the teams as well, and make sure the cars can overtake. They'll drop or keep DRS depending, even at some tracks not others potentially. So it's not an argument that with all that work and expertise somehow they won't be able to enable a top car and driver to get past a midfield car and driver. It'll be hard, but just possible. They have all these brilliant F1 people working on that exact thing. It'll be wonderful

You give them way more credit, and have more confidence in them than I do. In the past we've had many many rule changes that were supposed to fix everything and nothing has ever worked.

[izzy]

You give them way more credit, and have more confidence in them than I do. In the past we've had many many rule changes that were supposed to fix everything and nothing has ever worked.

yes i know what you mean, and even recently there's been the f1app disaster and a few others, but this is the first time they are seriously engineering the F1 car to do certain things. In the past it's all been unintended consequences like when Charlie suddenly decided to lower the nose/wing for safety and omg the aero's got worse.

This time it's actual aeros, with unlimited CFD and setting out to make passing easier and so yes I do believe they will make it easier.

[strad]

IF there is less disturbance then they will be able to follow closer so it doesn't matter so much whether it's 1 meter (I wish) or 5 meters.. right now it's more like 50 and that is what makes it next to impossible to follow and set up a pass.

[ENGINE TUNER]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL20sWuccUk

This video shows exactly why we should have reversed grid sprint races. Watching the skill of Senna defending from Prost in a better cornering and more powerful Williams is something we should have got to see more often, rather than just watching the Williams pair cruise away. You provided proof against your argument, not for it.

[dans79]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL20sWuccUk

This video shows exactly why we should have reversed grid sprint races. Watching the skill of Senna defending from Prost in a better cornering and more powerful Williams is something we should have got to see more often, rather than just watching the Williams pair cruise away. You provided proof against your argument, not for it.

I don't think you understand, I don't care about the show in any way whatsoever. I care about f1 as a sport and as a technical pursuit.

[Just_a_fan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL20sWuccUk

This video shows exactly why we should have reversed grid sprint races.

It shows that Prost was never an aggressive racer as he had two or three passes done there but Senna was able to bully his way back. If that had been the other way round, Senna would have been past in a lap.

The video also reminds us how absolutely useless Andretti was. That seat was wasted for the season when some proper racing driver from a junior formula could have had it.