planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:02 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

DRS - yay or nay
Get rid of it altogether 39%  39%  [ 11 ]
Keep it as it is - I like it 21%  21%  [ 6 ]
1 DRS attempt per race 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
5 DRS attempts per race 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
10 DRS attempts per race 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
Get rid after 2021 overhaul 32%  32%  [ 9 ]
Total votes : 28
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:29 am
Posts: 1905
I remember some years ago there was a thread debating DRS and its advantages and disadvantages, and I'm sure someone mentioned that there should be a limit to how many times drivers can use DRS in the race.

I'd rather it was gone, but if it's here to stay then I think a slight tweak is needed.

Personally I don't see the point of it in qualifying, but if they limit the use of it during the race then it opens up all sorts of strategic options for the drivers, rather than just trundling along in a queue of cars for lap after lap and gaining nothing, especially in the midfield. Do you use them all up early doors, or wait until near the end of the race when cars are struggling?

Take last weekend, for example. Hamilton was hunting down Max at a rate of knots and we all knew that once he was in DRS range then it was all over. But what if Lewis had already used all of his DRS attempts and still couldn't get past? I recall the RBR pit wall telling Max he had full power for the last 4 laps, but that made no difference with DRS.

Thoughts?

_________________
#KeepFightingMichael


Last edited by MistaVega23 on Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7632
I think as long as we have cars producing dirty air behind them, then it is almost necessary. We even see cars with the use of DRS struggling to match the speed of the car in front sometimes. So I will probably say keep it, but only because there is a fundamental problem with these cars


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7796
Location: Belgium
Remove it altogether. It was never needed in the first place. The very presence of the DRS is the reason why over the past 9 years we've seen all the small aerodynamic surfaces re-appear after they were banned for 2009.

Remove it, back it up with seriously restrictive rules on wing sizes, including the number of elements allowed, and the teams will find a way to get past a slower car. They will even pressure the FIA to do away with circus tyres, and perhaps even come to realize that all this artificiality isn't improving the racing, it's just making it even more obscenely expensive.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 296
Location: Suffolk, UK
MistaVega23 wrote:
Take last weekend, for example. Hamilton was hunting down Max at a rate of knots and we all knew that once he was in DRS range then it was all over. But what if Lewis had already used all of his DRS attempts and still couldn't get past? I recall the RBR pit wall telling Max he had full power for the last 4 laps, but that made no difference with DRS.


Had Hamilton not been able to pass in that situation it would have made a mockery of F1. Given Verstappen's tyres were dead I'm guessing Lewis would have got past somehow even without DRS, but at Monaco probably not. So I'd say with the current cars DRS is needed. After the 2021 changes hopefully not. Maybe the voting options should reflect this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:29 am
Posts: 1905
tim3003 wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
Take last weekend, for example. Hamilton was hunting down Max at a rate of knots and we all knew that once he was in DRS range then it was all over. But what if Lewis had already used all of his DRS attempts and still couldn't get past? I recall the RBR pit wall telling Max he had full power for the last 4 laps, but that made no difference with DRS.


Had Hamilton not been able to pass in that situation it would have made a mockery of F1. Given Verstappen's tyres were dead I'm guessing Lewis would have got past somehow even without DRS, but at Monaco probably not. So I'd say with the current cars DRS is needed. After the 2021 changes hopefully not. Maybe the voting options should reflect this?

Good shout. Added :thumbup:

_________________
#KeepFightingMichael


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 4:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32628
tim3003 wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
Take last weekend, for example. Hamilton was hunting down Max at a rate of knots and we all knew that once he was in DRS range then it was all over. But what if Lewis had already used all of his DRS attempts and still couldn't get past? I recall the RBR pit wall telling Max he had full power for the last 4 laps, but that made no difference with DRS.


Had Hamilton not been able to pass in that situation it would have made a mockery of F1. Given Verstappen's tyres were dead I'm guessing Lewis would have got past somehow even without DRS, but at Monaco probably not. So I'd say with the current cars DRS is needed. After the 2021 changes hopefully not. Maybe the voting options should reflect this?

Yeah I posted something similar in another thread, Hamilton was 2.5 seconds quicker yet him passing Verstappen was simply a result of DRS, I'm just wondering is there a racing series were a 2.5s delta would not result in an easy overtake?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 26th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 5:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3255
Location: UK
I think there is a place for a push-to-pass system in the sport. I like the IndyCar system where you have a certain amount of time in "boost" mode that you can use at any point in the race, but once it's used up then it's gone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 5:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32628
j man wrote:
I think there is a place for a push-to-pass system in the sport. I like the IndyCar system where you have a certain amount of time in "boost" mode that you can use at any point in the race, but once it's used up then it's gone.

Yeah I was thinking about that in another thread, any such passing system is artificial so how can you like one and not the other?

Why does a spec series like Indycars need such a system I need to ask?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 26th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 8:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 697
Not really sure it is realistic to limit DRS over the race. With the current regs you need it to even get close, so if you start to limit it then it probably won’t achieve what it is meant to. It is there to nullify the loss of downforce when following another car so you really need it consistently over several laps as the gap closes from 1s to the point where you can attempt a pass. Some circuits that takes more time and laps than others so hard to find the right balance. I really do hope that the 2021 regs are a big enough improvement that they can start to completely remove DRS zones at circuits and hopefully reach a point where they have none on the calendar.

The other issue is lapped cars. If you limit the use of the DRS you will have situations where the leading car is affected by a lapped car, and not able to use DRS, and the following car could make an overtake with DRS. And they would be at potential disadvantage based purely on when and where they encounter backmarkers. It can already provide a better opportunity to overtake, but is relatively fair with the current rules.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 8:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 32628
WHoff78 wrote:
Not really sure it is realistic to limit DRS over the race. With the current regs you need it to even get close, so if you start to limit it then it probably won’t achieve what it is meant to. It is there to nullify the loss of downforce when following another car so you really need it consistently over several laps as the gap closes from 1s to the point where you can attempt a pass. Some circuits that takes more time and laps than others so hard to find the right balance. I really do hope that the 2021 regs are a big enough improvement that they can start to completely remove DRS zones at circuits and hopefully reach a point where they have none on the calendar.

The other issue is lapped cars. If you limit the use of the DRS you will have situations where the leading car is affected by a lapped car, and not able to use DRS, and the following car could make an overtake with DRS. And they would be at potential disadvantage based purely on when and where they encounter backmarkers. It can already provide a better opportunity to overtake, but is relatively fair with the current rules.

Yeah I think most of us know that, I just see this as a knee jerk reaction to Hamilton passing Verstappen in Hungary.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 26th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 8:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7796
Location: Belgium
MistaVega23 wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
MistaVega23 wrote:
Take last weekend, for example. Hamilton was hunting down Max at a rate of knots and we all knew that once he was in DRS range then it was all over. But what if Lewis had already used all of his DRS attempts and still couldn't get past? I recall the RBR pit wall telling Max he had full power for the last 4 laps, but that made no difference with DRS.


Had Hamilton not been able to pass in that situation it would have made a mockery of F1. Given Verstappen's tyres were dead I'm guessing Lewis would have got past somehow even without DRS, but at Monaco probably not. So I'd say with the current cars DRS is needed. After the 2021 changes hopefully not. Maybe the voting options should reflect this?

Good shout. Added :thumbup:
Does this mean I have to vote anew? And I think the added option for 2021 should be with the new rules, not a year later?

Pointing to Monaco is relevant of course, but if we're going to be critical of that track, let's not forget that for the current artificial run on track records, the cars were actually made wider again. Making them narrower was intended to make passing a bit easier back in the nineties, and defending that little bit more difficult. Which to me makes a lot more sense than adding the DRS and its silly rules.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 10:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 1137
Location: Kansas
I would not remove the DRS system until a year after the 2021 technical changes have been implemented. We need to see how the new technical regs. will fly. If it becomes apparent that passing can be accomplished without the DRS system then remove it. In some racing series back in the day, it was almost an advantage on some race tracks to come out of the last turn as a close second. The aero-slingshot effect was strong enough that the quicker car could use the draft to pass before the finish line.

_________________
Mission WinLater


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 09, 2019 12:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 697
Mort Canard wrote:
I would not remove the DRS system until a year after the 2021 technical changes have been implemented. We need to see how the new technical regs. will fly. If it becomes apparent that passing can be accomplished without the DRS system then remove it. In some racing series back in the day, it was almost an advantage on some race tracks to come out of the last turn as a close second. The aero-slingshot effect was strong enough that the quicker car could use the draft to pass before the finish line.

If they have any sense then this is what they will do. They add /remove DRS zones leading up to races so if the regs seem to have done the trick then I don’t see why they can’t just remove all the DRS zones on any given weekend anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 09, 2019 11:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:25 pm
Posts: 457
Siao7 wrote:
I think as long as we have cars producing dirty air behind them, then it is almost necessary. We even see cars with the use of DRS struggling to match the speed of the car in front sometimes. So I will probably say keep it, but only because there is a fundamental problem with these cars

And no matter how the regulations get written - the engineers will make air coming off the cars as dirty as inhumanly possible.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 472
I hope this is all moot as when we get to 2021 DRS will not be needed* and the cars can race naturally again.

*I am of course assuming that Ross Brawn and co. will be able to get the car design rules spot on so that dirty air is minimal and the cars can run close together.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 9:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4138
Perhaps the driver leading the WDC has no DRS, the driver in second has it but it only opens a tiny bit, little more opening for the driver in 3rd and all the way down to last place where they have a button to completely eject the rear wing!

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 296
Location: Suffolk, UK
Fiki wrote:
tim3003 wrote:

Had Hamilton not been able to pass in that situation it would have made a mockery of F1. Given Verstappen's tyres were dead I'm guessing Lewis would have got past somehow even without DRS, but at Monaco probably not. So I'd say with the current cars DRS is needed. After the 2021 changes hopefully not. Maybe the voting options should reflect this?


Pointing to Monaco is relevant of course, but if we're going to be critical of that track, let's not forget that for the current artificial run on track records, the cars were actually made wider again. Making them narrower was intended to make passing a bit easier back in the nineties, and defending that little bit more difficult. Which to me makes a lot more sense than adding the DRS and its silly rules.


The changes of 1998, to narrower track cars with grooved tyres achieved nothing. They were an aesthetic disaster too, which finally after 20 years the FIA has realised. It's not the width of the cars that stops overtaking - it wasn't a problem in the 80's. And tracks aren't so narrow that it makes much difference, especially not those of the Tilke generation. Getting close enough to the car in front to mount a challenge is the problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 296
Location: Suffolk, UK
mmi16 wrote:
And no matter how the regulations get written - the engineers will make air coming off the cars as dirty as inhumanly possible.


I have thought for some time that the FIA ought to set pre-season wind-tunnel tests for F1 car designs: the downforce of the scale model car is measured in clean air, then it's measured again with another identical car just infront. If the reading has decreased by say 20% or more then the design is not allowed. That would make designers change the philosophy you criticise them for..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 697
tim3003 wrote:
mmi16 wrote:
And no matter how the regulations get written - the engineers will make air coming off the cars as dirty as inhumanly possible.


I have thought for some time that the FIA ought to set pre-season wind-tunnel tests for F1 car designs: the downforce of the scale model car is measured in clean air, then it's measured again with another identical car just infront. If the reading has decreased by say 20% or more then the design is not allowed. That would make designers change the philosophy you criticise them for..

The regulations should just include specific Air flow requirements behind a car that are written to aid close racing and limit dirty air - perhaps even limiting air flow in certain areas.They all have those Aero rake sensors that sit behind the cars in testing anyway which they could use to regulate it. Teams get called up for air flow testing in practice just like they get called to the weigh scales where they do a lap at the start of practice with an aero rake attached to make sure they achieve the requirements.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 4:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 2183
Location: Miami, Florida
Yes there should be a limit… Abolish it forever!!!

_________________
HAMILTON :: VERSTAPPEN :: LECLERC :: BOTTAS :: VETTEL :: SAINZ :: NORRIS
KVYAT :: RAIKKONEN :: RUSSEL :: ALBON :: RICCIARDO :: HULKENBURG :: PEREZ
STROLL :: MAGNUSSEN :: GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: GIOVANAZZI :: KUBICA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 12:48 pm
Posts: 38
With all else remaining the same DRS is a necessity, it should be removed from overtaking back markers though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 6:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7796
Location: Belgium
tim3003 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
tim3003 wrote:

Had Hamilton not been able to pass in that situation it would have made a mockery of F1. Given Verstappen's tyres were dead I'm guessing Lewis would have got past somehow even without DRS, but at Monaco probably not. So I'd say with the current cars DRS is needed. After the 2021 changes hopefully not. Maybe the voting options should reflect this?


Pointing to Monaco is relevant of course, but if we're going to be critical of that track, let's not forget that for the current artificial run on track records, the cars were actually made wider again. Making them narrower was intended to make passing a bit easier back in the nineties, and defending that little bit more difficult. Which to me makes a lot more sense than adding the DRS and its silly rules.


The changes of 1998, to narrower track cars with grooved tyres achieved nothing. They were an aesthetic disaster too, which finally after 20 years the FIA has realised. It's not the width of the cars that stops overtaking - it wasn't a problem in the 80's. And tracks aren't so narrow that it makes much difference, especially not those of the Tilke generation. Getting close enough to the car in front to mount a challenge is the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd0LMH6yijA

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 6:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4138
We need DRS at the moment I'm afraid, but as someone else mentioned, you shouldn't get it when you're lapping someone. Or if you do still get it then the blue flag rule should be removed.

I still think making a decent reduction in braking ability would help enormously. Longer braking zones allow for more late braking attempts.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 296
Location: Suffolk, UK
Fiki wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
tim3003 wrote:

Had Hamilton not been able to pass in that situation it would have made a mockery of F1. Given Verstappen's tyres were dead I'm guessing Lewis would have got past somehow even without DRS, but at Monaco probably not. So I'd say with the current cars DRS is needed. After the 2021 changes hopefully not. Maybe the voting options should reflect this?


Pointing to Monaco is relevant of course, but if we're going to be critical of that track, let's not forget that for the current artificial run on track records, the cars were actually made wider again. Making them narrower was intended to make passing a bit easier back in the nineties, and defending that little bit more difficult. Which to me makes a lot more sense than adding the DRS and its silly rules.


The changes of 1998, to narrower track cars with grooved tyres achieved nothing. They were an aesthetic disaster too, which finally after 20 years the FIA has realised. It's not the width of the cars that stops overtaking - it wasn't a problem in the 80's. And tracks aren't so narrow that it makes much difference, especially not those of the Tilke generation. Getting close enough to the car in front to mount a challenge is the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd0LMH6yijA


Yes we all remember Hakkinnen vs Schumacher at Spa in 2000. But so what? The fact that it rains once in 10 years doesnt stop it being a drought..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2019 10:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7796
Location: Belgium
tim3003 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Pointing to Monaco is relevant of course, but if we're going to be critical of that track, let's not forget that for the current artificial run on track records, the cars were actually made wider again. Making them narrower was intended to make passing a bit easier back in the nineties, and defending that little bit more difficult. Which to me makes a lot more sense than adding the DRS and its silly rules.


The changes of 1998, to narrower track cars with grooved tyres achieved nothing. They were an aesthetic disaster too, which finally after 20 years the FIA has realised. It's not the width of the cars that stops overtaking - it wasn't a problem in the 80's. And tracks aren't so narrow that it makes much difference, especially not those of the Tilke generation. Getting close enough to the car in front to mount a challenge is the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd0LMH6yijA


Yes we all remember Hakkinnen vs Schumacher at Spa in 2000. But so what? The fact that it rains once in 10 years doesnt stop it being a drought..
Leaving Schumacher's questionable defence to one side, it shows a faster car overtaking without DRS, simply because it is faster. Which is what you would expect.
It doesn't show the potential benefit of the narrower cars, but it should be clear to any fan that on a narrow circuit, making the cars wider will not improve your chances of easy overtakes. What it does show is that the racing is better if you don't go for downforce overkill (by making the cars wider and the wings wider still). That rule change was simply aimed at being able to flash the messages of track and lap records , which some viewers will believe to be "awesome".

That rule change, over this and last season, shows that F1 doesn't necessarily want better racing, if it can make the viewers believe that the artificial show is "good enough". The introduction of DRS was also just that. The need was for a fundamental change in the way F1 (and open wheel racing in general) looks at downforce. It was the brief the Overtaking Working Group was given a decade ago.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 296
Location: Suffolk, UK
Fiki wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Pointing to Monaco is relevant of course, but if we're going to be critical of that track, let's not forget that for the current artificial run on track records, the cars were actually made wider again. Making them narrower was intended to make passing a bit easier back in the nineties, and defending that little bit more difficult. Which to me makes a lot more sense than adding the DRS and its silly rules.


The changes of 1998, to narrower track cars with grooved tyres achieved nothing. They were an aesthetic disaster too, which finally after 20 years the FIA has realised. It's not the width of the cars that stops overtaking - it wasn't a problem in the 80's. And tracks aren't so narrow that it makes much difference, especially not those of the Tilke generation. Getting close enough to the car in front to mount a challenge is the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd0LMH6yijA


Yes we all remember Hakkinnen vs Schumacher at Spa in 2000. But so what? The fact that it rains once in 10 years doesnt stop it being a drought..
Leaving Schumacher's questionable defence to one side, it shows a faster car overtaking without DRS, simply because it is faster. Which is what you would expect.
It doesn't show the potential benefit of the narrower cars, but it should be clear to any fan that on a narrow circuit, making the cars wider will not improve your chances of easy overtakes. What it does show is that the racing is better if you don't go for downforce overkill (by making the cars wider and the wings wider still). That rule change was simply aimed at being able to flash the messages of track and lap records , which some viewers will believe to be "awesome".

That rule change, over this and last season, shows that F1 doesn't necessarily want better racing, if it can make the viewers believe that the artificial show is "good enough". The introduction of DRS was also just that. The need was for a fundamental change in the way F1 (and open wheel racing in general) looks at downforce. It was the brief the Overtaking Working Group was given a decade ago.


I agree with much of what you say.The 2017/18 aero changes are yet more evidence of the FIA's incompetence when it comes to setting rules. Hopefully the new Liberty management has learned from this. The signs are that it is taking a longer-term and technically researched view rather than just making the knee-jerk reactions of the past. (I have started another thread to discuss the return to ground-effect and how it should help.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2019 8:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 2183
Location: Miami, Florida
yodasarmpit wrote:
With all else remaining the same DRS is a necessity, it should be removed from overtaking back markers though.

It's only a necessity if the goal is to satisfy the wishes of fans whom don't know what they're watching. I'd rather watch a race with 5 brilliant overtakes than a race with 27 meh overtakes facilitated ONLY because of DRS. High speed overtakes or ones made by outbraking opponents brilliantly is what we need, not some device conjured up to make it easier because it takes far less skill and testicular fortitude to do it that way.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VERSTAPPEN :: LECLERC :: BOTTAS :: VETTEL :: SAINZ :: NORRIS
KVYAT :: RAIKKONEN :: RUSSEL :: ALBON :: RICCIARDO :: HULKENBURG :: PEREZ
STROLL :: MAGNUSSEN :: GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: GIOVANAZZI :: KUBICA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:37 am
Posts: 231
Was ambivalent about DRS, until it robbed Schumacher of a potential victory/2nd place in Canada 2011. Band-aid solutions like DRS do nothing for the spectacle of racing - just last week, I would have relished seeing how long Verstappen could keep Hamilton behind on shot tyres - with DRS, there wasn't even a fight for the lead.

Imagine Spa 2000 with Hakkinen having DRS to overtake Schumacher....it's just sad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:18 am
Posts: 59
The thing I'd change at the moment is not give it to leaders following back markers. They already have blue flags to help them through, there's no need for DRS as well

It'd create more opportunity to challenge the leader by the car behind
At the moment any traffic negates the DRS advantage the challenger to the leader may have, because the leader gets DRS from a back marker ahead

There's zero need for that, take it away and there would be more passing opportunities among the leading pack


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4138
Imagine reverse DRS.

So, on straights, all cars run in normal configuration so there's no advantage on top speed but when they're within a second of a car, they can increase the front and rear wings to offer them more downforce in corners, thus allowing them to follow closer. Once on the straight, it's a fair fight for a pass.

Just a thought.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 296
Location: Suffolk, UK
Asphalt_World wrote:
Imagine reverse DRS.

So, on straights, all cars run in normal configuration so there's no advantage on top speed but when they're within a second of a car, they can increase the front and rear wings to offer them more downforce in corners, thus allowing them to follow closer. Once on the straight, it's a fair fight for a pass.

Just a thought.


Trying to just give a car more downforce in the corners would be very hard, since the downforce is all lost due to following the car infront. The more you add, allowing closer following, the more of it will be lost by that closer following.
Also it would be dangerous to have drivers fiddling with wing settings just before they enter a corner - probably under braking..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4138
tim3003 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Imagine reverse DRS.

So, on straights, all cars run in normal configuration so there's no advantage on top speed but when they're within a second of a car, they can increase the front and rear wings to offer them more downforce in corners, thus allowing them to follow closer. Once on the straight, it's a fair fight for a pass.

Just a thought.


Trying to just give a car more downforce in the corners would be very hard, since the downforce is all lost due to following the car infront. The more you add, allowing closer following, the more of it will be lost by that closer following.
Also it would be dangerous to have drivers fiddling with wing settings just before they enter a corner - probably under braking..


The car in front doesn't get extra downforce. Their wing stays the same. The following car had front and rear wings that add extra angle of attack when closer to the car in front. Therefore, what little stable air there is coming off the car in front is utilised more by the following cars.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7796
Location: Belgium
Asphalt_World wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Imagine reverse DRS.

So, on straights, all cars run in normal configuration so there's no advantage on top speed but when they're within a second of a car, they can increase the front and rear wings to offer them more downforce in corners, thus allowing them to follow closer. Once on the straight, it's a fair fight for a pass.

Just a thought.


Trying to just give a car more downforce in the corners would be very hard, since the downforce is all lost due to following the car infront. The more you add, allowing closer following, the more of it will be lost by that closer following.
Also it would be dangerous to have drivers fiddling with wing settings just before they enter a corner - probably under braking..


The car in front doesn't get extra downforce. Their wing stays the same. The following car had front and rear wings that add extra angle of attack when closer to the car in front. Therefore, what little stable air there is coming off the car in front is utilised more by the following cars.
What you're describing is more or less what the 2009 configuration was all about. But even before it could be judged on its merits, the double diffuser was put on the cars by a few teams, including Brawn and Toyota.
The 2009 configuration was probably not the complete answer to the problem, and just like DRS it employed movable aerodynamics (until then strictly forbidden!). But it would have been interesting to see how well, or badly, it would have performed as designed.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


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: FormulaFun, Lojik, Lt. Drebin, trento, UnlikeUday 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