• 31/05/2020 RRTCR4: Loch Drummond Long | 07/06/2020 MEARS V: Yahuarcocha | 21/06/2020 Bon Anniversaire Neuf

Formula One

Real-world motorsport related chat.
User avatar
DanThorn
Posts: 5321
Name: Dan Thorn
Car No: 802

Re: Formula One

Postby DanThorn » 07 Apr 2016, 16:39

I'm not sure it's really something to celebrate either, in the same way that if I spent a couple of weeks murdering people and then declared that I was going back to my 2015 policy of not murdering people I wouldn't expect or deserve rapturous applause. ;)
6x
Image

User avatar
PJTierney
Posts: 5872
Name: PJ Tierney
Car No: 45
Team: Goteki House
Wiki Page: PJ
Twitter: @PJ_Tierney
Location: Windsor, UK
Contact:

Re: Formula One

Postby PJTierney » 05 May 2016, 09:11

0x
Image

PJ Tierney | Web | Twitter | Instagram

Sam Hill
Pleb Club Gold Member
Posts: 920
Car No: 00
Wiki Page: Sam Hill
Steam ID: Tsunami_Sam
Twitter: @samh981
Location: Scotland

Re: Formula One

Postby Sam Hill » 12 Jul 2016, 21:35

For fear of sounding pathetically naive for expecting rationality from the FIA... Why was Rosberg punished instead of the team? What did he do wrong? Do the fia expect him to stick his fingers in his ears and sing so he can't hear the advice he was given? Or do the opposite of the advice? He's basically been punished for asking for help - which Hamilton and other drivers weren't punished for - it's outwith the driver's control whether the man on the radio tells him or not.

Or is expecting common sense too optimistic?
0x
"Can I drink the bread?"

"Is she (Dame Ellen MacArthur) the transvestite that wears the big, silly glasses?"

JoeNathan
Posts: 1337

Re: Formula One

Postby JoeNathan » 12 Jul 2016, 21:45

Sam Hill wrote:For fear of sounding pathetically naive for expecting rationality from the FIA... Why was Rosberg punished instead of the team? What did he do wrong? Do the fia expect him to stick his fingers in his ears and sing so he can't hear the advice he was given? Or do the opposite of the advice? He's basically been punished for asking for help - which Hamilton and other drivers weren't punished for - it's outwith the driver's control whether the man on the radio tells him or not.

Or is expecting common sense too optimistic?


Counter argument is "Win as a team, lose as a team." Also a small fine for a team of Mercedes' size wouldn't be much of a penalty.
2x

User avatar
DanThorn
Posts: 5321
Name: Dan Thorn
Car No: 802

Re: Formula One

Postby DanThorn » 13 Jul 2016, 06:26

Yup. Same rationaility behind gearbox and engine penalties etc. Fans always moan it's unfair to the driver but there isn't a better way.
2x
Image

User avatar
ajokay
Original Boss
Posts: 12054
Name: Alex Odell
Car No: 23
Team: POWA
Steam ID: ajokay
Twitter: ajokay85
Location: Herts, UK
Contact:

Re: Formula One

Postby ajokay » 13 Jul 2016, 07:46

Get rid of the radios.
2x
Have fun.

User avatar
craighypheno
Pleb Club Gold Member
Posts: 2345
Name: Craig Woollard
Car No: 86
Team: ByCraig Racing
Wiki Page: craighypheno
Steam ID: craighypheno
Twitter: Craig_Woollard
Location: Twickenham
Contact:

Re: Formula One

Postby craighypheno » 13 Jul 2016, 07:53

I don't think having radios is the problem. It's just a stupid overreaction to the driver coaching which was going on a while back. That is all they needed to get rid of.

Drivers should be left to the driving and the engineers should be left to the engineering as far as I'm concerned. If someone shouldn't be using seventh gear, then they should be allowed to be told not to use seventh gear.

It's one of many stupid, unnecessary rules in F1.
1x
Image

My Wiki Page | ByCraig Wiki Page

Best crash 2018. Best beard. Best RlyRism. Second-best dressed.

Craghypheno wrote:I don’t want a hug. I want three seconds a lap.

User avatar
Mr Flobadob
Posts: 1125
Name: Lee Harrison
Car No: 7
Team: The Offenders
Twitter: therealmrflob

Re: Formula One

Postby Mr Flobadob » 13 Jul 2016, 09:19

Unreliability creates unpredictable results.

I was happy when Hamilton couldn't be told how to fix his problem in Baku because otherwise it would've been a boring Mercedes 1-2 and there wouldn't have been Perez on the podium. It would have been more interesting to have Rosberg retire/fall back rather than another Mercedes 1-2.

F1 cars are generally more reliable these days anyway but if engineers are able to tell drivers how to fix their cars then it's a chance for a rare unpredictable result gone.
1x

User avatar
Kimstermagnum
Pleb Club Silver Member
Posts: 1140
Name: The First Baron of Banterville
Car No: 9
Team: The Unholy Alliance
Twitter: Kimstermagnum
Location: London

Re: Formula One

Postby Kimstermagnum » 13 Jul 2016, 09:19

If implementing the radio restrictions was an overreaction to driver coaching and specific car management then this is an overreaction to it affecting the most successful team the most. Things reach contagion far easier these days due to social media. It's the Walter Lippmann thing where contagion is amplified by the mob nature of social media. It's a psychological thing among fans (Of course this doesn't just affect F1) where they jump from one thing to another with no end goal of what they are trying to achieve teamed with a sport desperately trying to seem entertaining.

Anyway, before I end up writing an essay about Public Opinion, Manufacture of Consent and Public Relations, if we want engineers to engineer let's bring back pit-to-car telemetry, and bring ergonomics back into F1 (I can't be bothered to list all the things this includes, but it's quite a few things). Bring all the driver assistance back while we're letting the engineers do the engineering. Then the drivers can drive that.

In the end it is what it is now and it's the same rules for everyone.
1x

User avatar
Kimstermagnum
Pleb Club Silver Member
Posts: 1140
Name: The First Baron of Banterville
Car No: 9
Team: The Unholy Alliance
Twitter: Kimstermagnum
Location: London

Re: Formula One

Postby Kimstermagnum » 13 Jul 2016, 09:23

Mr Flobadob wrote:Unreliability creates unpredictable results.


And if F1 wants to continue the path of entertainment driven rule changes then removing this rule flies in the face of that because unpredictability is what creates sporting drama.

In the end we wouldn't be talking about this if there was a team who were close to Mercedes and making this interesting.
2x

User avatar
GremlinWon
Posts: 1783
Name: Thomas Alderton
Car No: 40
Steam ID: GremlinWon
Location: UK

Re: Formula One

Postby GremlinWon » 14 Jul 2016, 09:46

Why does Formula One ban some modern technology but allow others?
ABS, TC, and so on but allow things like the ERS systems?

Formula One used to be the most advanced motorsport in the world because of these new developments. Why are these developments now restricted? Think about it, if they had TS they could probably race closer and be alot quicker. If they had ABS they could brake later and make epic dives and so on.
Why does F1 use one of the most prehistoric tyres? Why do they need to be 5" and have a massive tyre wall instead? Also why don't they just make a tyre that goes to the end because the pitlane is virtually pointless unless you have a sticky wheel nut.
0x
ImageImage
Image

User avatar
camp_bell
Blue Flag Media Team
Posts: 3922
Name: Campbell Wallis
Car No: 64
Team: Kaibutsu Racing
Steam ID: camp_bell
Twitter: camp__bell
Location: Dumfries, Scotland

Re: Formula One

Postby camp_bell » 14 Jul 2016, 09:52

Why does F1 need a driver, really? A computer would weigh less and be so much more advanced.
0x
"He's rolled the car at Dunlop. How has he managed that? I'm genuinely impressed."

Sam Hill
Pleb Club Gold Member
Posts: 920
Car No: 00
Wiki Page: Sam Hill
Steam ID: Tsunami_Sam
Twitter: @samh981
Location: Scotland

Re: Formula One

Postby Sam Hill » 14 Jul 2016, 10:28

Lin1876 wrote:Why does F1 need a driver, really? A computer would weigh less and be so much more advanced.


Would have more of a personality too
3x
"Can I drink the bread?"

"Is she (Dame Ellen MacArthur) the transvestite that wears the big, silly glasses?"

User avatar
TommyWTF1
Original 8
Posts: 2344
Car No: 33
Team: The Indypendables
Steam ID: TommyWTF1
Twitter: TommyWTF1
Location: Leeds
Contact:

Re: Formula One

Postby TommyWTF1 » 14 Jul 2016, 11:53

GremlinWon wrote:Why does Formula One ban some modern technology but allow others?
ABS, TC, and so on but allow things like the ERS systems.


This is the thing that pisses me off the most about F1 currently, in trying to appeal to everyone (or just not having a clue what they want to be) it's become annoying for everyone.

They put in gimmicks like DRS and rubbish tyres to improve the show but have a set of regulations which means only one team can win unless they crash into each other.

I'd rather have the gimmick driven 2012 season where it was incredibly entertaining and had multiple winners, or the 2000 era season where it was flat out racing, then a horrible mix of both.
4x
Image

User avatar
DanThorn
Posts: 5321
Name: Dan Thorn
Car No: 802

Re: Formula One

Postby DanThorn » 14 Jul 2016, 12:00

GremlinWon wrote:Why does Formula One ban some modern technology but allow others?
ABS, TC, and so on but allow things like the ERS systems?

Formula One used to be the most advanced motorsport in the world because of these new developments. Why are these developments now restricted? Think about it, if they had TS they could probably race closer and be alot quicker. If they had ABS they could brake later and make epic dives and so on.
Why does F1 use one of the most prehistoric tyres? Why do they need to be 5" and have a massive tyre wall instead? Also why don't they just make a tyre that goes to the end because the pitlane is virtually pointless unless you have a sticky wheel nut.


You won't find ABS and TC in many professional motorsports, simply because it removes an element of skill from the drivers. Of course it would be faster to run with them, but they detract from the racing. Longer braking zones are actually better for racing than short ones because the margin to do something different to another driver and out brake them is much larger. The same goes for traction control - if everyone could just stamp on the throttle and get the optimum wheel slip without having to worry about spinning, the difference in driving styles becomes greatly reduced and racing becomes more processional. (I think in modern F1 traction control is simulated to a degree by the ECU, without actually being traction control). Besides, when they had traction control the sound of them crackling on the way out of a corner was chuffing awful.

The ERS is there because hybrid power is the whole way the motor industry is going and F1 had to follow suit in order to stay relevant. It lured Honda into the sport, and also kept Renault (and possibly Mercedes) on the grid - if they'd gone, you'd probably be looking at a whole grid full of Ferrari engines (with all the political power that comes with - not good), or a couple of teams with Ferrari engines and everyone else with much weaker powerplants (again, not good). The problem with F1 here is how restricted in season development is - it's better than it used to be, but this is the one area of the car where there are potentially massive gains to be made and things to be learned about the technology which could have a direct positive impact on the motoring world as a whole, but testing and upgrading of the units is so limited that engine manufacturers simply can't afford to take that risk. The WEC is way ahead in this area and I'd love to see a similar model adopted in F1.

The tyre sidewalls are indeed silly and out of date, and they need sorting. The trouble is that most of the suspension travel in an F1 car comes from the tyre sidewall, so going to a lower profile isn't just a simple case of fitting a different construction and sending them off - the cars would need a significant redesign in terms of the suspension, which in turn would change the way the cars behave, which in turn would have an effect on the aerodynamics and so on. It's a costly exercise and I'm sure it's something that will happen in the near future.

As for the tyres themselves, Pirelli had it right in their first couple of years. They were made to go off quickly on purpose because in the Bridgestone era, races which required the most tyre stops tended to be the most exciting (Canada 2010, for example). It opened up a whole load of strategy options for the teams and as a result there were some properly brilliant races - the 2011 Chinese GP is one of my favourite of all time. Then some small safety concerns coupled with lobbying from Red Bull (which ruined the 2013 championship) lead eventually to the tyres we have now, which are in that awful zone of being too hard to regularly allow for interesting strategy differences, but too soft to prevent them from just overheating and going off if the drivers use them in slightly the wrong way. And they still explode all over the place. They either need to go away and let Michelin come in with the kind of brilliant tyres they use in the WEC, or go back to making the incredibly soft, high-deg compounds they had a few years ago which provided lots of excitement. They improved things a bit this year with the extra compound every weekend, but it's still not great.

TommyWTF1 wrote:I'd rather have the gimmick driven 2012 season where it was incredibly entertaining and had multiple winners, or the 2000 era season where it was flat out racing, then a horrible mix of both.


Same.
3x
Image

Sam Hill
Pleb Club Gold Member
Posts: 920
Car No: 00
Wiki Page: Sam Hill
Steam ID: Tsunami_Sam
Twitter: @samh981
Location: Scotland

Re: Formula One

Postby Sam Hill » 14 Jul 2016, 12:03

I'd rather have no F1. If it was gone altogether it would open up the market to other, more deserving motorsports.
1x
"Can I drink the bread?"

"Is she (Dame Ellen MacArthur) the transvestite that wears the big, silly glasses?"

User avatar
GremlinWon
Posts: 1783
Name: Thomas Alderton
Car No: 40
Steam ID: GremlinWon
Location: UK

Re: Formula One

Postby GremlinWon » 14 Jul 2016, 15:16

I'm all for the sport adding all the advancements and then only the richest being able to be in the sport. That's how it used to be.
I'm an aspiring engineer and it is quite painful to see over the past couple of years there hasn't been any improvements in some areas of the sport.
I know regulations have stopped that but how has WEC actually become more on an engineering term successful and on a racing front I would argue too. F1's decisions to develop hybrid systems to me was a great advancement. I think they needed to open up the rules a bit.

The tyre technology hasn't exactly gone anywhere further than it did 10 years ago, if anything maybe backwards due to keeping entertainment. However that said the new tyres coming next year will help get rid of some of the current woes but having wider tyres which is obviously more grip. more grip should allow closer wheel to wheel action.
The statement of autonomous cars is basically true but would it be racing then? But I'm very anti autonomous cars but why would that make it better than the racing currently? Simple answer is that it wouldn't I don't think because in theory the computer shouldn't do anything wrong unless something breaks.
Suspension technology involved in fact is rather dated too, it hasn't evolved much it's only gotten lighter and weaker in my opinion too. Road going cars have systems similar these days.

The aero stuff on the cars is all another world to me but would love to have a proper understanding of but from what I know the cars have too much aero or rely on it too much which affects everyone but the leader or the person with clean air ahead of them. That never used to be such a prominent factor to racing 4 years ago as it is now.

My biggest complaint in F1 is fuel saving. Fuel saving shouldn't exist in F1 or really a 2 hour race which I think is what F1 is still time limited to. Now there are really easy ways to solve this issue aswell which probably won't ever change because the sport couldn't possibly do something conventional but they are; allow refueling, increase fuel tank/weight allowance or restrict how much an engine can consume at once ultimately increasing your range of a tank of fuel.
0x
ImageImage
Image

User avatar
craighypheno
Pleb Club Gold Member
Posts: 2345
Name: Craig Woollard
Car No: 86
Team: ByCraig Racing
Wiki Page: craighypheno
Steam ID: craighypheno
Twitter: Craig_Woollard
Location: Twickenham
Contact:

Re: Formula One

Postby craighypheno » 14 Jul 2016, 15:33

GremlinWon wrote:My biggest complaint in F1 is fuel saving. Fuel saving shouldn't exist in F1 or really a 2 hour race which I think is what F1 is still time limited to. Now there are really easy ways to solve this issue aswell which probably won't ever change because the sport couldn't possibly do something conventional but they are; allow refueling, increase fuel tank/weight allowance or restrict how much an engine can consume at once ultimately increasing your range of a tank of fuel.


Refuelling won't stop the need for fuel saving. I have no idea where that myth came from. Fuel saving happened in the era prior to fuel saving, and it happens in other series where refuelling is allowed such as IndyCar.

Increasing fuel tank size will mean a weight increase. F1 cars are heavy enough as it, and only getting heavier for next year. I don't know what the point of adding even more weight on will be.

As for restrictions on how much an engine can consume at once, those restrictions are already in place.
0x
Image

My Wiki Page | ByCraig Wiki Page

Best crash 2018. Best beard. Best RlyRism. Second-best dressed.

Craghypheno wrote:I don’t want a hug. I want three seconds a lap.

User avatar
GremlinWon
Posts: 1783
Name: Thomas Alderton
Car No: 40
Steam ID: GremlinWon
Location: UK

Re: Formula One

Postby GremlinWon » 14 Jul 2016, 21:17

Point being is that there is so much less emphasis on fuel saving. It isn't really a factor in many racing series. Mark Webber has said that when he joined Porsche that when he races it's a 2 hour stint of at least 100% You don't get that in F1 at all, haven't had that in a long time.
It's gotten to the stage that Lewis can just maintain a gap until the end of the race aka not really trying and preserving a car also known as not racing but driving round in circles.
0x
ImageImage
Image

User avatar
craighypheno
Pleb Club Gold Member
Posts: 2345
Name: Craig Woollard
Car No: 86
Team: ByCraig Racing
Wiki Page: craighypheno
Steam ID: craighypheno
Twitter: Craig_Woollard
Location: Twickenham
Contact:

Re: Formula One

Postby craighypheno » 14 Jul 2016, 21:41

What emphasis? I barely even hear about fuel saving now in F1. I certainly don't see lifting and coasting to the sort of levels which exist in IndyCar. Its the tyres and the power units which have to be preserved more than anything, but the latter is almost certainly a necessity due to cost.
0x
Image

My Wiki Page | ByCraig Wiki Page

Best crash 2018. Best beard. Best RlyRism. Second-best dressed.

Craghypheno wrote:I don’t want a hug. I want three seconds a lap.

User avatar
D0n M4730
Posts: 2691
Car No: 85
Team: Team Diablo/PSP Motorsports
Twitter: @D0n_M4730

Re: Formula One

Postby D0n M4730 » 15 Jul 2016, 07:21

GremlinWon wrote:from what I know the cars have too much aero or rely on it too much which affects everyone but the leader or the person with clean air ahead of them. That never used to be such a prominent factor to racing 4 years ago as it is now.


Actually, that is a problem which has existed and been widely known about since at least the 1990s. However, successive rule changes have never really addressed the issue.

As for all the other driver aids you mentioned, I believe that most of them were banned because the cars were becoming too fast. A car with TC will corner fast than a car without, and while in theory it might be less likely to crash, when it does come unstuck the accident will be worse as a result of the increased speed. On top of that you've got the fact that, as the others say, driver aids remove some of the skill from driving the cars. The public have always been critical if they think the cars are too easy to drive.
1x

User avatar
Lemm314
Pleb Club Gold Member
Posts: 1182
Name: April Carlsvard
Car No: 314
Team: Fury
Wiki Page: lemming77
Steam ID: lemm314
Twitter: Lemm314
Contact:

Re: Formula One

Postby Lemm314 » 15 Jul 2016, 08:03

On the subject of aero, one of the tricks which came up in 2006 (I think) was to just stick loads of extra stuff onto the car near the back to disturb the airflow behind the car and take downforce away from any cars behind as a result. The rules reacted pretty quick, but that might still be going on, just in a more sneaky and subtle way. Bad for those complicated front wings, especially since complicated is just another word for sensitive. :P

It's always been a factor since they first started building downforce into the cars. But it seems to have reached its most critical during the last 5-10 years.
0x
"April... You absolute bitch" - Neil 15/09/2017

User avatar
GremlinWon
Posts: 1783
Name: Thomas Alderton
Car No: 40
Steam ID: GremlinWon
Location: UK

Re: Formula One

Postby GremlinWon » 15 Jul 2016, 08:43

Why did they take away one of the best aero tricks such as Ground Affect?

And also I'm sorry, anyone that says to me don't have this because it makes the cars too fast and so the crashes are worse frustrates me. Motorsport can be dangerous, everyone that races accepts that, more importantly including the marshalls which are often the ones getting hurt rather than drivers. Not only that race car drivers have it far better off than motorcycle racers and they aren't complaining. It's their passion and it's what they do. You don't see the TT riders going, it's too fast and dangerous, we shouldn't race here anymore. Reality being it is dangerous and probably shouldn't but they do anyways.
0x
ImageImage
Image

Sam Hill
Pleb Club Gold Member
Posts: 920
Car No: 00
Wiki Page: Sam Hill
Steam ID: Tsunami_Sam
Twitter: @samh981
Location: Scotland

Re: Formula One

Postby Sam Hill » 15 Jul 2016, 09:26

A soldier's job is more dangerous than mine, but that doesn't mean we should stick a few IEDs around the factory to spice things up.
3x
"Can I drink the bread?"

"Is she (Dame Ellen MacArthur) the transvestite that wears the big, silly glasses?"

User avatar
camp_bell
Blue Flag Media Team
Posts: 3922
Name: Campbell Wallis
Car No: 64
Team: Kaibutsu Racing
Steam ID: camp_bell
Twitter: camp__bell
Location: Dumfries, Scotland

Re: Formula One

Postby camp_bell » 15 Jul 2016, 10:03

GremlinWon wrote:Why did they take away one of the best aero tricks such as Ground Affect?


Skirt failures, rock hard suspension that was ruining the drivers' backs, insane cornering speeds that were putting drivers and spectators in harm's way, G-forces that weren't far off causing the drivers to black out, the need to put the driver perilously far forward in the car, and the fact that this was all happening (and causing serious accidents) when the technology was still in early development.

Sure, IndyCar still uses ground effects but it's very controlled and they're still reliant on the big wings for much of their downforce. If you want to know why, look up what happened to Gordon Smiley.
0x
"He's rolled the car at Dunlop. How has he managed that? I'm genuinely impressed."


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest