|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
1 Dec 2022, 23:22 (Ref:4135787) | #4126 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,024
|
Excellent, bring it on. It will make the racing more exciting. I’d do it by turning down the power unit.
|
||
__________________
Brum brum |
2 Dec 2022, 02:36 (Ref:4135793) | #4127 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,112
|
Quote:
I agree that there might be some level of floating this publicly for other purposes. Such as... It was floated internally, has supporters, but also has detractors that consider it dumb. And putting it out in public as a way to kill it before it gains momentum and becomes much harder to stop. I think to actively penalize someone whose only crime is to be leading the race doesn't sit well with me and probably a majority of fans. Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
2 Dec 2022, 09:42 (Ref:4135819) | #4128 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,692
|
This season past has shown we don't need DRS anymore. The cars can now follow closely that we should just let the drivers decide how and when to overtake. At least they are now proposing to limit DRS though.
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
2 Dec 2022, 10:00 (Ref:4135827) | #4129 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,293
|
Quote:
i still think they need to lower that front wing, get it working in cleaner air, my guess is they prioritised the underbody aero load rather than the front wing aero so when a car is behind another the higher front wing is more disturbed than say if it was scraping the tarmac. There is a reason why in nearly all modern racing disciplines that use aero that they will try and get as close to the ground as possible for the front aero device, as such I don’t follow the thinking behind placing the front wing a foot into the air. |
|||
|
2 Dec 2022, 15:24 (Ref:4135882) | #4130 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,955
|
with a new team set to take over for Brawn and leading up to the 2026 changes, i suspect there will be a number of 'new' ideas put forward aimed at making the racing more 'exciting' by breaking it down into 'more digestible' clips more suited to the length of a social media tweet/clip.
or perhaps the new team will try to make things more 'traditional'? at this point, i dont know who the new group of people who will be coming in or what their philosophies about racing are? but cynically i suspect its about low costs with greater monetization and/or if Liberty are looking to sell now as they believe they have added significant value to sport. of the 3 core people Liberty brought in, Chase Carey, Sean Bratches, and now Ross Brawn all gone from the day to day operations or now just in advisory roles or seen at the expensive races...do have to wonder what Liberty's future with the sport is? |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
2 Dec 2022, 15:58 (Ref:4135886) | #4131 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,112
|
To me, while F1 can still improve, I think they should use a light hand at the moment. See how things progress under this new formula (financial and technical regulations). Small changes vs. large revolutionary shifts.
The worst thing that can happen is that new people come in and feel the need to "make a mark" and make changes just to show they are doing something. Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
2 Dec 2022, 19:56 (Ref:4135904) | #4132 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,955
|
Quote:
maybe this year the competition seemed unbalanced but that's more on account of Merc and Ferrari not getting it right which imo had very little to do with the rule set per say and more to do with their own internal team workings...if that makes sense. to be honest, if there is any (easily achievable) change i would like to see...top of my list right now would be more oversight on the teams and how they talk to the press. no doubt there is some advantage to this storm in a netflix teacup approach but the acrimony has, for me anyways, become a major distraction. would like to see fines and censures applied to reign it in. for me there is a big difference between letting people talk/show their personalities vs enabling a platform that encourages people to act like entitled clowns. right now its too much of the latter imo. |
|||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
5 Dec 2022, 21:58 (Ref:4136208) | #4133 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 243
|
DRS can't go away soon enough for me. Getting rid of it along with the winglets that are still in the cars would be great. Things such as standard mirror shapes and mounts that cannot be turned into an aero device. The only wing type devices should be the front and rear wings. Suspension components should have a clearly defined shape/profile that everybody must follow with no deviations allowed.
Speaking of wings, single element front wings, or 2 element at most. I'd like a return to refueling just to bring another strategic element back into play. I'd also prefer an open engine formula, ala WEC/IMSA, but I know that's a pipe dream. If we're going to stick with hybrids, then go ahead and put motors in the front wheels. I'm sure Audi would love to be able to advertise this as Quattro just like they did with the prototypes. |
||
|
5 Dec 2022, 23:37 (Ref:4136212) | #4134 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,014
|
Quote:
I am in favour of what you propose though. You'd ideally reduce the front tyre section width significantly (from the oversized 305mm back down to the traditional 245mm) and either drop the weight distribution rule or put the mandatory weight distribution more rearwards. This would hopefully spell an end to the spacer that currently exists between the engine and gearbox. The 1980's cars like the FW09-FW11 had the one element front wing as they had a much more rearwards weight distribution (you'll note that the rear wing was still very large back then, particularly on some of earlier cars when there was a loophole allowing two extra legality boxes ahead of the main rear wing). Williams FW09, note the **huge** rear wing despite the single element front wing: Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 5 Dec 2022 at 23:43. |
||
|
6 Dec 2022, 06:27 (Ref:4136233) | #4135 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 15,907
|
And the front wing of the Fw09 is not full width either. It is between the width front wheels. Current front wings are still enormous. This is significant.
|
||
|
20 Jan 2023, 16:19 (Ref:4140755) | #4136 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,955
|
talk about changes to the 2026 cars.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f1...2026/10422851/ from the article: Speaking at Autosport International last week, F1 chief technical officer Pat Symonds said the following performance of the 2026 cars would be “even better than the ’22 cars”. DRS is set to remain part of the rules package, but Symonds explained how the active aerodynamics could be used to augment downforce and make up for the amount lost when it is closely following a car in front. “We won’t lose DRS, because there’s totally active aerodynamics on the ’26 car,” said Symonds. the one line that got me though was this: “Our idea now is to augment the downforce back to where it should have been if the leading car wasn’t there.” as a philosophy i think i like this approach. as a side thought/concern tho...how much of this works if there are more than 20 cars on track at the same time? rather the leading car doesnt necessarily mean leading in position...so with more cars on track, will the front runners now have more chances to use DRS against back markers as well as benefit from the addition of more active aero concepts? |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
20 Jan 2023, 21:28 (Ref:4140785) | #4137 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,112
|
Quote:
My take is that it sounds like they are looking to allow for the natural pace of the cars to exist. So if you catch someone under DRS, but you loose downforce when you get close (the classic issue) you can catch, but not pass. And it is particularly bad if you are in a DRS train. I suspect this active aero is about increasing reducing drag to catch and then increase downforce as you get close so you can put yourself into a position to pass. They are contrary goals in a sense (usually more downforce = more drag). But I expect they want to find a way to increase downforce dynamically in an efficient (low drag) way. Devil is in the details on how they do this. Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
21 Jan 2023, 00:57 (Ref:4140798) | #4138 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,732
|
Quote:
This is not meant as a personal criticism but just as a way of showing how varied peoples opinions are. |
|||
|
21 Jan 2023, 08:50 (Ref:4140818) | #4139 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,692
|
Really DRS needs to go. The cars can follow a lot closer now, so why do we need it? It's outstayed it's welcome
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
23 Jan 2023, 15:58 (Ref:4141016) | #4140 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,955
|
|||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
23 Jan 2023, 17:12 (Ref:4141026) | #4141 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,112
|
My crystal ball is fuzzy, so take this with a grain of salt. I think the solution will be more prescribed and probably less elegant than flexible wings. Where will this "new" active aero exist? Who knows. DRS already at the rear. Maybe the new will impact the underbody or more likely front wing? Just like how DRS is specifically controlled, I expect active aero will be the same. It will be a specific solution that lives within a specific place, with specific movement, triggered in specific ways, etc. Much easier for the FIA to govern and determine/enforce legality that way.
Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
9 Feb 2023, 21:39 (Ref:4143318) | #4142 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,112
|
It seem that most everyone (well almost everyone) wants the cars to be on a diet. But we can't quite get there. I have to say... I am not shocked. I just don't see them having the cars drop in weight without removing some level of complexity or "complication" that might be imposed upon the teams.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/p...tion/10429894/ Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
10 Feb 2023, 08:16 (Ref:4143348) | #4143 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,692
|
FIA ignores teams concerns shock. To be fair it would have been very hard to achieve at short notice, so it's probably best to leave things as they are
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
10 Feb 2023, 17:09 (Ref:4143388) | #4144 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,955
|
Quote:
putting aside the logic of lighter smaller cars...why would the teams that came in at the lower and originally set 796kgs weight object to the minimum weight now being held the same as last year's higher 798kgs? all things being equal, wouldn't the lighter 796kgs car teams have an extra 2kgs to play around with/distribute in a more optimal fashion then the teams constrained by the 798kgs weight (ostensibly set by weight they cannot redistribute in a more optimal fashion)? or as the year goes on move around that 2kgs of weight as needed to strengthen their floors or wherever? out of my element here for sure but also combined with a poorly worded article i think? |
|||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
11 Feb 2023, 01:40 (Ref:4143419) | #4145 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,112
|
Quote:
I do find it interesting that given it seems a big advantage to being under weight that teams still struggle to get to weight or under weight. I am not discounting the struggle, but hey... it is F1!! Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
11 Feb 2023, 10:17 (Ref:4143440) | #4146 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,692
|
The main problem of reducing the weight limit is it punishes heavier drivers and means a lot of them have to go on diets, which can be dangerous. We've seen drivers pass out post race a couple of times because of it.
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
11 Feb 2023, 12:28 (Ref:4143454) | #4147 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,112
|
Quote:
Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
11 Feb 2023, 12:33 (Ref:4143456) | #4148 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,112
|
I just looked up how the driver ballast works. It is driver + seat that is 80kg. So seat/cockpit is location of ballast to get up to minimum.
Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
12 Feb 2023, 09:16 (Ref:4143506) | #4149 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,692
|
That's probably a sensible solution, means heavier drivers aren't punished and won't need to get down to a ridiculous light weight
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
26 Feb 2023, 13:41 (Ref:4144982) | #4150 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,857
|
I dont get it, banning tyre warmers seems like a sensible decision to introduce more variables and reliance on driver skill. So why is it so controversial?
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Rules] Are more rule changes necessary ? | Marbot | Formula One | 51 | 27 Sep 2009 17:19 |
F1 future rule changes | TheNewBob | Formula One | 57 | 20 Dec 2006 09:19 |
Sensible ideas for future technical regs anyone?/Rule changes - more to come [merged] | AMT | Formula One | 74 | 12 Nov 2002 16:09 |
Future Tourer Future | Crash Test | Australasian Touring Cars. | 13 | 17 Jul 2002 23:01 |