An alternative to the ARW

[LegendaryM]

First off, i'd like to say that i think the arw is quite a good idea, but it is poorly implemented as all the passing will happen on the straights. Would it not be better to artifically increase the cars downforce instead of reducing its drag as it closes up to another car. This would have the effect of negating the effect of the turbulent air completely if it was tuned correctly. Also it would mean passing would happen in corners, not on straights, which is more interesting. It would also be a permanent fix as even if bodywork regualations are changed, designers will claw back downforce, and dirty air will become more of an issue again

This could be achieved by allowing the front wing to incrementally move closer to the ground as a car gets closer to the one in front
There would also have to be some way to increase downforce at the rear to keep the balance the same. Im not really sure what this could be, perhaps increasing the height/angle of the diffuser

[Robbobnob]

Though i see your point, the front wing flap adjust introduced in 2009 was intended for this very thing, though it rarely if ever made a difference when following behind a car as turbulent losses were too great.

What they are trying to do with the 2013 regulations is decrease reliance on wings for downforce and bring back ground effect, which is less prone to turbulent losses in the wake of a car. however i still dont see this solving the over taking problem.

in order to increase overtaking F1 has to move from its reliance on Downforce and focus more on mechanical grip with a engine with more torque, or remove the ban on moveable aero devices which enable the cars to change their grip systems in the wake of another car.... oh and reduce the size of the front wing to about 70% of the current size

[satlan]

To be honest, I don't really like the solution of (temporarily) changing the aerodynamics of the car to aid overtaking. No moveable aero at all, that's what we all grew up with.
I think the best method to create an artificial advantage, because that's what we're talking about here, is to regulate KERS. We all saw in 2009 that it's quite a big advantage to have a better acceleration and a higher top speed. Just google "Hamilton overtakes 2009" or look how Kimi won Spa in 2009. So my idea would be to give the car behind a higher limit of energy usage, and/or decrease the limit on the car in front.
In my opinion this would be a far better method than changing the aero properties of a car or that silly tire rule where you have to use both compounds.

Btw, to meet your idea halfway, I think it might be better to allow lowering the car to increase ground effect, a sort of regulated active suspension you might say.

[raymondu999]

Does ground effect actually reduce the effects of turbulence on the following car, or does it reduce the turbulence produced by the leading car? I was under the impression it was the latter.

[raymondu999]

Just picked up the March issue of F1 Racing mag, and apparently, I'm reading that FIA are going to paint white lines on the track to denote the start of the DRS-usable zones. They'll also paint another line to denote the 1s gap. So for instance, Car A and Car B are on track. Car A is leading, Car B is trailing. If Car B's front wings have reached the first line, and car B's trailing edge has NOT cleared the 2nd line, then they are within DRS range. in laymen terms, if both cars have parts overlapping the part of track denoted between the two lines, they are within DRS range. HOWEVER, this will be done in the last braking zone before the DRS area.

I hope that makes sense

[bot6]

It's overly complicated and will be a mess when racing.

Best solution would be no movable devices, no positive discrimination for overtaking, and reducing the downforce and wake on the cars by making rear wings and diffusers smaller still. And the front wing too to balance it out.

Mechanical grip and same weapons for all.

[hollowBallistix]

It's overly complicated and will be a mess when racing.

Best solution would be no movable devices, no positive discrimination for overtaking, and reducing the downforce and wake on the cars by making rear wings and diffusers smaller still. And the front wing too to balance it out.

Mechanical grip and same weapons for all.

I'm all for this,

I'd like to see the return of active suspension too, so the ride height & aero efficiency under the car can be maintained, i'd imagine this would give back a bit of an advantage in the downforce lost due to the wing changes but wouldn't be as sensitive in the wake of another car ?

[marekk]

Then maybe just blue flag cars, if someone is 1s behind ?
Much cheaper and safe then all this ARW/KERS/movable FW things.
And there is a reason, we don't have light airplanes racing league jet: aerodynamics wan't work in disturbed flow's.
For real racing, limit downforce.
Cars, not low flying planes

[Robbobnob]

how about bringing back refueling, together with the new tires it would open up strategy. and flag the silly q3 race qualifying loads... but keep the tire rule

i feel this way we would see some exciting races with the order changing (particularly from Kobayashi)

also remove the wings, as they are the most prone to turbulent losses (also quite intrigued as to what the cars would look like)

[volarchico]

Just picked up the March issue of F1 Racing mag, and apparently, I'm reading that FIA are going to paint white lines on the track to denote the start of the DRS-usable zones. They'll also paint another line to denote the 1s gap. So for instance, Car A and Car B are on track. Car A is leading, Car B is trailing. If Car B's front wings have reached the first line, and car B's trailing edge has NOT cleared the 2nd line, then they are within DRS range. in laymen terms, if both cars have parts overlapping the part of track denoted between the two lines, they are within DRS range. HOWEVER, this will be done in the last braking zone before the DRS area.

I hope that makes sense

How do you paint a "1s gap"? I guess they could estimate, but the length of a 1s gap is variable based on speed.

[raymondu999]

I guess that's why it's done in a braking zone, where the distances will be minimal, and hence the discrepancies minimal too?