DRS practice and qualifying rules to be changed for 2013 (merged)
#1
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:44
#F1 FIA's Charlie Whiting confirms that from 2013 DRS can only be used in the official DRS zone during practice and qualifying. Previously drivers could use DRS wherever they wanted to around the lap on Friday and Saturday.
9:42 PM - 15 Nov 12
#3
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:47
How are the going to sort out that stuff with the gear ratios?
#4
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:49
Geoff
#5
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:49
Red Bull?
#6
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:50
They should to this as the ultimate compliment
#7
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:50
Now teams will gear the cars shorter for the 90 odd percent of the lap that isn't DRS assisted, so when the time comes to use DRS in the race they'll just bounce off the rev limiter.
#8
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:50
Edited by Obi Offiah, 15 November 2012 - 21:51.
#9
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:52
exactly, not a great idea in my book.Smooth FIA, real smooth. *Slow claps*
Now teams will gear the cars shorter for the 90 odd percent of the lap that isn't DRS assisted, so when the time comes to use DRS in the race they'll just bounce off the rev limiter.
#10
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:54
On the plus side this might benefit Mercedes, Lotus and their passive stall systems.
#11
Posted 15 November 2012 - 21:56
#12
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:13
The problem, and I'm assuming, is that it has become to big of a performance differentiator in qualifying when the intention for it's introduction was solely to aid overtaking.This change doesn't make any sense to me, and it could use some explanation. Despite that I actually hate whole idea of using DRS at any time, I do however understand for what it is used on Sunday. Who cares hwoever if they are using it on Saturday? They aren't racing to gain a track position, but a better lap time. Everyone has it, everyone can use it as much as they want, so what's the problem?
Can't say I'm disappointed by the change.
#13
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:13
#14
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:15
I guess I had the wrong impression.
#15
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:16
#16
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:19
Smooth FIA, real smooth. *Slow claps*
Now teams will gear the cars shorter for the 90 odd percent of the lap that isn't DRS assisted, so when the time comes to use DRS in the race they'll just bounce off the rev limiter.
Hmmmm I did initially think this, but drs helps now when all cars compromis quali and race gearing sometimes by big margin, so won't it surely work the same way with all cars again compromising drs gears etc
#17
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:19
In a way it makes sense, in that they only want you to use it in the same places you'd use it in the race, but as others have said, it does reduce the chances of compromising between quali and the race in terms of gearing, as you could basically either set your car up for overtaking in the race or set it up to get the ultimate lap time in quali with the hope of being able to pull clear of other cars around the DRS zone in the race.
Hopefully teams will have finally realised with Vettel's run last race that overtaking is EASY now if you have the DRS speed, and qualifying position doesnt really matter as much anymore.
The advantages of being able to sail past your opponents (in the race) massively outweighs the advantage in getting an extra spot or two further up the grid (in qualy).
#18
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:25
Meh, just get rid of it...
Our survey says... ding ding ding!
#19
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:28
Advertisement
#20
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:39
Formula 1 was fine for 60 years without it, it's unbelievable how the FIA is always trying to reinvent the wheel.
#21
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:42
Smooth FIA, real smooth. *Slow claps*
Now teams will gear the cars shorter for the 90 odd percent of the lap that isn't DRS assisted, so when the time comes to use DRS in the race they'll just bounce off the rev limiter.
Most of the lap they are not in 7th gear so I'm not sure it will make much of a difference, as it's in the DRS zones when 7th is used.
#22
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:43
#23
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:43
#24
Posted 15 November 2012 - 22:59
DRS sucks so much, just get rid of it.
Formula 1 was fine for 60 years without it, it's unbelievable how the FIA is always trying to reinvent the wheel.
with the current aero, if one car is 1 second behind another, then it loses a lot of down force and under steers badly, this has led to implementation of DRS, I have tried this situation in a sim and it is pretty annoying without DRS, unless you are 2-3 seconds faster than the car in front you will not be able to overtake.
There has been a lot of people within f1 talking about under steer whilst being behind another car, where have you been??
#25
Posted 15 November 2012 - 23:03
with the current aero, if one car is 1 second behind another, then it loses a lot of down force and under steers badly, this has led to implementation of DRS, I have tried this situation in a sim and it is pretty annoying without DRS, unless you are 2-3 seconds faster than the car in front you will not be able to overtake.
There has been a lot of people within f1 talking about under steer whilst being behind another car, where have you been??
Then fix the aero, but don't create an artificial solution.
#26
Posted 15 November 2012 - 23:12
The problem, and I'm assuming, is that it has become to big of a performance differentiator in qualifying when the intention for it's introduction was solely to aid overtaking.
Can't say I'm disappointed by the change.
Agreed.
In fact DRS use should not be allowed during qualifying at all if you look at the purpose for its creation.
#27
Posted 15 November 2012 - 23:30
#28
Posted 16 November 2012 - 00:02
"We are going to prohibit the use of the DRS during practice and qualifying except in the places where it's going to be used in the race," said Whiting.
"It's something that we told the teams about the other day, that we are doing it for safety reasons.
"There have been a number of incidents and drivers have told me that it's becoming increasingly prevalent [for the early deployment of DRS to cause problems].
"One could argue that the early deployment of the DRS is not much different to early deployment of the throttle, but the DRS is an on/off switch whereas the throttle can be modulated."
"The whole point of the DRS was to improve overtaking opportunities in the race," said Whiting.
"We didn't really want to have it used in qualifying and practice before but we were worried that we may not have effective DRS systems.
"Now I believe [based on] all the information we have, we should not see any reduction in the power of the DRS.
"Teams will still use it because even though they're allowed to use it in perhaps two places on the circuit, the benefit will still be there.
"I'm sure that it will work just as it does now."
Ed Straw thinks similarly in the linked article. I doubt that they are correct, but we will see.
#29
Posted 16 November 2012 - 00:03
#30
Posted 16 November 2012 - 00:06
#31
Posted 16 November 2012 - 00:15
Then fix the aero, but don't create an artificial solution.
Precisely, i said long ago that the way to fix this issue is to put in rules that at certain distance behind a car there should be aerodynamic pressure of XYZ value. In short the aerodynamic of the car shouldn't disturb the air behind at level it does today.
#32
Posted 16 November 2012 - 00:20
Edited by tarmac, 16 November 2012 - 00:21.
#33
Posted 16 November 2012 - 00:41
#34
Posted 16 November 2012 - 00:41
Autosport reports
Ed Straw thinks similarly in the linked article. I doubt that they are correct, but we will see.
DRS is in danger of becoming something mainly used by midfield teams. Even before this rule change, Red Bull and sometimes McLaren have been running lower gear ratios, which give an advantage at the start of the race in clean air but make overtaking very difficult, especially towards the end of the race. Vettel's changed setup in Abu Dhabi was an exception of course.
#35
Posted 16 November 2012 - 00:58
So Lotus style duct is a must now
Except nobody can get it to work, and it only gives a slight boost in top speed anyway.
#36
Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:01
Edited by Obi Offiah, 16 November 2012 - 01:40.
#37
Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:05
Its there already, its called KERS.Get rid of DRS, introduce push to pass.
#38
Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:14
Smooth FIA, real smooth. *Slow claps*
Now teams will gear the cars shorter for the 90 odd percent of the lap that isn't DRS assisted, so when the time comes to use DRS in the race they'll just bounce off the rev limiter.
Some would argue if it makes DRS less effective that is a good thing.
Bad idea, for reasons noted in this thread already. Now it feels like an artificial overtaking aid as opposed to a genuine technological asset.
It is an artificial overtaking aid.
I suppose they will claim the change is based on safety grounds.
They have. I think that means the FIA can push through a new rule without opposition.
Get rid of DRS, introduce push to pass.
What's the difference?
#39
Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:26
Advertisement
#40
Posted 16 November 2012 - 04:18
There was nothing strictly artificial about DRS itself unless you consider movable aerodynamic devices 'artificial' in the face of the old regulations. Overtaking zones were the artificial part, DRS itself was not. By moving the use of DRS exclusively into the overtaking zones, they're highlighting its use as an artificial overtaking aid as opposed to a technological challenge.It is an artificial overtaking aid.
I don't understand why nobody ever bothers to separate the DRS technology itself from overtaking zones, because they're two entirely different concepts.
#41
Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:38
Who will this effect the most?
Red Bull?
Obviously.
#42
Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:14
#43
Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:22
#44
Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:44
Who will this effect the most?
Red Bull?
Mercedes had the most invested in ddrs. I'm glad it's being banned outside of racing.
#45
Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:20
Mercedes AMGWho will this effect the most?
Red Bull?
#46
Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:28
There was nothing strictly artificial about DRS itself unless you consider movable aerodynamic devices 'artificial' in the face of the old regulations. Overtaking zones were the artificial part, DRS itself was not. By moving the use of DRS exclusively into the overtaking zones, they're highlighting its use as an artificial overtaking aid as opposed to a technological challenge.
I don't understand why nobody ever bothers to separate the DRS technology itself from overtaking zones, because they're two entirely different concepts.
Of course its bloody artifical if only the chasing driver is allowed to use it.
This change makes absolutely no sense in terms of gearing. Cars will now gear for a slower top speed and DRS will essentially be useless.
#47
Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:33
Great news. This could be huge advantage for Lotus if their passive device system works!
Yeap
Also from the Lotus supporter perspective thise rule change seems good because Lotus don't have the most efficient DRS and good top speed (at least in the second half of this season)
#48
Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:36
Except nobody can get it to work, and it only gives a slight boost in top speed anyway.
Depends on the track, there were reports it was worth around 0.5 sec at Spa
#49
Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:59
There was nothing strictly artificial about DRS itself unless you consider movable aerodynamic devices 'artificial' in the face of the old regulations. Overtaking zones were the artificial part, DRS itself was not. By moving the use of DRS exclusively into the overtaking zones, they're highlighting its use as an artificial overtaking aid as opposed to a technological challenge.
I don't understand why nobody ever bothers to separate the DRS technology itself from overtaking zones, because they're two entirely different concepts.
You're right, I sometimes make that mistake. I'm fine with DRS as a technology, just don't like the stupid overtaking zone system.
#50
Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:19