planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Oct 24, 2017 3:44 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 1:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 415
I've been watching F1 since around 1981 and until the Schuey years i never missed a race. Since then i watch what i can, but it's no longer the 'must see' sport of my youth.

Every year i say:

1. Restrict all Aero Grip - The reason is twofold. Firstly, Aero Grip is affected by the car in front and therefore makes overtaking more difficult. Secondly, Aero grip doesn't evolve through a race, it stays constant. The greatest races in the past were where the track & tyres evolved making decision making more difficult and different strategies viable (raining the most extreme version of this).
2. Increase Tyre Grip - As mentioned above, evolving grip makes for better races, tyres are the best (and really only) way to achieve this, so just give them the best range of tyres you can and allow people to use whatever they like, wherever they like.
3. Use Ground Effect - This can make up partly for lost Aero grip but don't increase it too far, or it will limit the effect of tyre grip, which needs to be a big factor in races.
4. Remove fake rules - DRS, enforced tyre stops, anything that means teams cannot choose their own strategy.

Number 1. is ALWAYS ignored by the F1 championship, why is this? Wings have even more stupid elements than ever and it ruins the look of the cars and ruins the racing.

I don't consider myself an Aero expert, but if i know how to fix overtaking, and have said the same thing for the last 5-10 years, why don't they get it?

I assume it comes down to the leading teams nixing anything that might mean they lose their current advantage?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1506
Location: Miami, Florida
No offense but I think you need a new sport to follow.

It's one thing to take issue with several things, it's a whole other ballgame when everything about it bothers you.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 415
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
No offense but I think you need a new sport to follow.

It's one thing to take issue with several things, it's a whole other ballgame when everything about it bothers you.


It's not quite everything is it? It's a lack of understand the basics of allowing overtaking in a non artificial way. If you sort out the Aero Problems which have been awful since the mid 00's, the sport would be fine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4478
While I agree that allowing some ground effect development it is still aero grip. It's just not as effected by driving through disrupted air.

Ground effect would make it easier to simplify the front wing because it then be less important to get the air away from the front tires and also fewer fiddley bits further back because you wouldn't have to worry as much about conditioning the air flow to the back wing. That said, Indy uses ground effect tunnels on the underside of the car yet they still have some pretty hideous front wings. It's hard to put the genie back in the bottle.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:06 am
Posts: 3184
Agree about the front wings. They are hideous and cause so many accidents/tyre-slashing/retirements.
Hypothetically if all aero wings and undersides were banned, would the cars not be too fast/unsafe for the circuits? All evolved together, and as usual no-one could foresee what would happen in years to come.

We can 'blame' the Chaparral Can Am cars from the late-sixties with their adjustable rear wings and then underbody fan-induced 'suction', then the Lotus F1 cars' underbody airflow from the late-seventies.

_________________
http://grandprixratings.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 5:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:37 am
Posts: 1622
I agree with the OP.

The bigger tyres for this year are a step in the right direction but they should have been coupled with a crackdown on front wing complexity, and instead of freeing up the aero rules to allow all sorts of new winglets and bigger bargeboards, they should have allowed more freedom to exploit the underbody for the purposes of ground effect.

And as far as the aesthetics go, I thought the cars that were right on the floor looked much better than the jacked-up rear ends we have now. I would rule that the ride-height be the same along the length of the plank but allow a bigger diffuser instead of the extreme rake.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 5:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4119
The new ownership seems a bit more incisive. Let's see if they try to tackle this issue. The last time F1 seriously tried to tackle this we ended up with DRS and KERS; neither of which was actually a solution. Oddly enough, despite record setting pace from last year's cars, we have moved to a more aero-dependent formula. The leadership of this sport has been horrific. I'm hoping the new owners will remedy that to some extent.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 10:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1506
Location: Miami, Florida
The argument of ground effects is a weak one because today's engines and space aged materials would mean that ground effects of the late 70's to early 80's would be antiquated and way outdated and the cars would be able to lap so fast that they'd still create dirty, turbulent wakes, thereby disrupting it for trailing cars, and just like today, the closer you follow, the more severe the effects.

The cars today are once again beautiful, almost as beautiful as they were Pre-2009 and Pre-ALL the nicknack winglets plaguing most of the cars. The front wings are WAAAAAY beyond what the regulation change in 2009 allowed but somehow, week after week, month after month, and year after year, the imposed simplistic design became increasingly more intricate, with more elements and components added, seemingly daily, and they've gone from this…

Image
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.p ... viewfull=1


To this…

Image
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/photo/mai ... -front-10/


Ti this…

Image
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... &start=930


Initially, the regs were "set in stone" but somehow teams pushed the envelope and no one stopped them so they continued. just as the tire pressure rules are being enforced, so too can the regs regarding wings. They can set the parameters for the main element as well as for supporting elements as well as how many are allowed and they govern the end plates. It rally is quite simple. Again, the problem has been the Geezer brigade that make up race control. They KNOW full well that teams will push the envelope in every regard but if they do nothing to curb violations, they become widespread because like little kids, teams will say in their defense (and rightly so) if they are allowed to do it, so can we.

Now with Ecclestone out, I wonder if his buddies will still make inconsistent rulings and turn a blind eye to certain things depending on which drivers and which teams are involved.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:02 am
Posts: 213
They have been trying to restrict aero grip in some way almost every year since 2009 until 2017, short of them completely neutering the cars I'm not sure what you'd expect. It's meant to be the most extreme and fastest racing series, and it has already been approaching the point where other much much more affordable series are nearly as fast.

What made F1 boring wasn't lack of overtakes to begin with, it's the utter dominance of a single team in 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016... It gets old, people dont want to see their favourite drivers racing for 3rd position while 2 other cars cruise around to easy wins in every race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:53 pm
Posts: 1354
Location: Canada
I would love to see more reliance on mechanical grip and less aero. I agree with Bigbazz though, in that major dominance is a threat. I still enjoy F1 but would like it if one team didn't blow everyone else away and if it was more aggressive and not about fuel or tyre conservation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 2:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:00 am
Posts: 558
Location: Running wide at Bergwerk
Downforce derived from ground effect is almost completely immune to the leading car's wash. The downforce is produced by the difference in size between the entry and exit of the floor tunnels, and relies on a combination of the moving road surface, and the pressure change through the tunnels thanks to the increasing air speed.

I'd like to see a ground effect system back in play, and like the OP cannot understand why it isn't even considered for F1. If you want evidence take a look at virtually any Indycar oval race from the last 40 years. Nose to tail running while pulling 4g.

_________________
"Guys I'm coming in, I'm having too much grip"
- Chanoch Nissany


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:53 pm
Posts: 1354
Location: Canada
jono794 wrote:
Downforce derived from ground effect is almost completely immune to the leading car's wash. The downforce is produced by the difference in size between the entry and exit of the floor tunnels, and relies on a combination of the moving road surface, and the pressure change through the tunnels thanks to the increasing air speed.

I'd like to see a ground effect system back in play, and like the OP cannot understand why it isn't even considered for F1. If you want evidence take a look at virtually any Indycar oval race from the last 40 years. Nose to tail running while pulling 4g.

I didn't realize that. Great comment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 7:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1506
Location: Miami, Florida
jono794 wrote:
Downforce derived from ground effect is almost completely immune to the leading car's wash. The downforce is produced by the difference in size between the entry and exit of the floor tunnels, and relies on a combination of the moving road surface, and the pressure change through the tunnels thanks to the increasing air speed.

I'd like to see a ground effect system back in play, and like the OP cannot understand why it isn't even considered for F1. If you want evidence take a look at virtually any Indycar oval race from the last 40 years. Nose to tail running while pulling 4g.

This is a bit off.

First off Ground effects are in fact NOT immune to wash from cars ahead.

They are less affected by wash, but they are affected nonetheless. And although Indy cars do feature ground effects, the system is not as powerful as you think. Oval tracks are indeed high banked and that reduces the amount of downforce needed to go around tracks at high speeds. As well, look at the simplistic wings and aero as compared to other open-wheel series. The wakes they create are far less dirty than most other cars. Additionally, the mere fact they all go in the same direction at near identical speeds means the cars can follow closely. If you look at accidents on high-speed ovals the vast majority of them occur when changes if direction are made and the ground effects offer very little in the way of recovering before either going around and/or smacking the walls. On true road courses Indy cars struggle to run nose to tail and the underside of the chassis is barely changed from oval setup. The wings on the other hand are changed.

Ground effects in F1 will not fix anything outside maybe reducing the amount of trincatry adorning wings and bodywork due to the added downforce it would bring.

The most sophisticated Ground Effects of all time were in the C.A.R.T. cars in the early to mid 90's and even then they struggled to follow nose to tail. At Cleveland GP where the track featured 2 long straights , drivers struggled to run nose to tail in the more technical sectors and passes would be made at the end of the long straights. As with F1, the faster packages can pass but they could not do it just anywhere.

https://youtu.be/OlkTuFSb0IM?t=2221 (WARNING… you might want to grab a fresh pair of underwear LOL)

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 8:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2498
Location: UK
Bigbazz wrote:
What made F1 boring wasn't lack of overtakes to begin with, it's the utter dominance of a single team in 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016... It gets old, people dont want to see their favourite drivers racing for 3rd position while 2 other cars cruise around to easy wins in every race.

Precisely this. Over the years I've watched F1 with and without KERS, DRS, refuelling, durable tyres, grooved tyres, V10s, V8s, V6 hybrids and god knows what else but whether or not a season was interesting to watch only really came down how closely matched the top few teams were.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:57 am
Posts: 907
Location: Brazil
Bigbazz wrote:
What made F1 boring wasn't lack of overtakes to begin with, it's the utter dominance of a single team in 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016... It gets old, people dont want to see their favourite drivers racing for 3rd position while 2 other cars cruise around to easy wins in every race.


But this is quite difficult to move away from with every team acting as a constructor and building their own cars, as well as engine suppliers having their own teams and supplying their customers with subpar units.

_________________
Image

"Ask any racer, any real racer... It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning is winning." (Dominic Toretto, "The Fast and The Furious")


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 415
j man wrote:
Bigbazz wrote:
What made F1 boring wasn't lack of overtakes to begin with, it's the utter dominance of a single team in 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016... It gets old, people dont want to see their favourite drivers racing for 3rd position while 2 other cars cruise around to easy wins in every race.

Precisely this. Over the years I've watched F1 with and without KERS, DRS, refuelling, durable tyres, grooved tyres, V10s, V8s, V6 hybrids and god knows what else but whether or not a season was interesting to watch only really came down how closely matched the top few teams were.


I disagree. Although a large part of the entertainment is 2 or 3 teams fighting for position at the top, when every track starts behaving as Monaco and cars can only overtake via pit stop strategy you'll find things get extremely boring, extremely quickly.

The best years were the early 80's for the following reasons:

- Huge amount of grip generated by tyres: This meant a variance in tyres within the race caused different compounds to be faster or slower based on the grip of the circuit, the fuel in the cars , the wear rate of the cars and the weather.
We are getting closer to this.
- Ground Effect grip: This allowed cars to generate downforce without being screwed by following another car.
Needs to come back.

- Poor Aero Design: Didn't add a huge amount of grip compared to today's cars, meaning that following another car didn't reduce it by much. The offset of slipstreaming on the straight completely over-rode the drawback of following on a corner.
We really need to limit this, this biggest issue in F1.

- Huge amounts of innovation: A lot of teams had no idea what they were doing and were coming to races with completely new designs for elements of the car. This meant a car upgrade could knock 2 seconds a lap off from race to race.
I have no idea how we innovate anymore. The gains are so small, that a huge amount of money has to be invested to gain 0.2s a lap

- Poor reliability: Along with innovation came unreliability, some races ended up with even less than 6 cars finishing.
Due to the gains being small, the innovations are also not very risky (Unless you are creating new engine like Honda!), meaning each car is a known quantity and it's really dull year to year once a team has an advantage.

- Racing was 'cheap': You had a full grid.
Racing is expensive and the money is not shared out well anymore, hopefully fixed soon.

- Variance in car behaviours: Ferraris were fast on the straight, and poor on the corners, at one track they could be 2-3 seconds faster than everyone else, and then at another 2-3 seconds slower. How the drivers managed on the poorer tracks, won championships.
Nowadays, If a car is 0.8s faster than another car, it is like that EVERYWHERE. There are very minor variances, but because the design constraints are so tight, everyone's cars look the same and perform similarly. The more money you chuck at those constraints, the tiny amount better you will be.

- The Blue Flag: Back in the day, drivers didn't have to move over (Andrea De Cesaris anyone?) and this meant even if you were first, your car had to be set up for overtaking or you'd get stuffed in traffic. Nowadays everyone jumps out of the way, meaning you just set up your car to be fast on the corners before the straights and the guy behind is never close enough to get past, boring, boring, boring.

- More mistakes: Drivers in the past were less fit, but they did have to drive much more difficult cars. Mistakes means more passing opportunities and more mixed up race finishes.
The cars handle better (Better aero, tyres, etc) now and have semi automatic gears etc. I'd suggest trying to remove as many aids as possible. Ayrton Senna always used to drive at the limit of the car's handling, but the car every now and then would buck, or fidget and he'd have to correct. These days the cars are consistent, they don't skid, they don't buck, they don't wobble, they are very trustworthy and therefore drivers can drive faster with less risks. Higher speed is not fun to watch, driving skill is fun to watch. This is why wet races are more exciting, drivers are reacting to the track each corner, learning the limits, and testing reactions and that is why some drivers are bloody awful at it.

-No Pit Communication: If something was going wrong with the car, the driver would have to be part mechanic, and try and fix it themselves or dive back to the pits, losing positions.
These days, the team with the best computer system, the ability to reboot software, the best analytics to see when the fuel is too low, when they can use the boost button, change the brake balance. All that should be driver decisions, not a team of 60 people back at the HQ. You find a lot less reliability if every team didn't know something was going to go wrong in 20 laps time.


If we had all those things back, even if a team did have a car that was faster than other teams, you'd still get a lot of races with a lot of variance, and likely the balance of power would be constantly shifting. The easiest one to start with is Aero and get the overtaking improving.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group