DRS begin of Racing?Best IDea
#1
Posted 14 June 2011 - 19:50
89% of all F1 Users like DRS. So its going to last till 2015 minimum.
Do U think DRS is the best Idea that the Formula 1 have ever made?
I think Yes.
Advertisement
#2
Posted 14 June 2011 - 20:01
Edited by ivand911, 14 June 2011 - 20:06.
#3
Posted 14 June 2011 - 21:04
I think DRS was a good idea to a serious problem but i think with the tyres this year, DRS is not all that neccessary and sometimes this year they have got the DRS zone way out of hand.
Is it fair when you have 1 driver simply able to press a button and blast past another as if he's driving a GP2 car.
Its also a double whammy in qualy as the car with the most downforce can use it in more places, making its advantage even bigger
I think as a driver you can defend against someone who is 10mph faster in the corners but you can't defend against someone who has 10mph more on the straights.
It definately had its impact at the end of the race on sunday and that was without actually using the thing but I'm still cautious as to how real so of these overtakes are.
Edited by joshb, 14 June 2011 - 21:04.
#4
Posted 14 June 2011 - 21:27
#5
Posted 14 June 2011 - 21:40
#6
Posted 14 June 2011 - 21:49
#7
Posted 14 June 2011 - 21:53
#8
Posted 14 June 2011 - 21:57
A fake overtaking help for slow choaches
Edited by Bonaventura, 14 June 2011 - 22:00.
#9
Posted 14 June 2011 - 21:59
I'd like to know where the OP gets the idea from that 89% of all F1 'users' (guess he means fans) like the DRS, and I'd like to know where he gets the idea from that it'll last until 2015 at least.
Indeed. The poll in this thread says anything but.
http://forums.autosp...howtopic=147413
#10
Posted 14 June 2011 - 22:06
#11
Posted 14 June 2011 - 22:10
You people tend to forget very easily... but some seasons most races were snorefests with pretty much nothing going on, only a couple of races at most were regarded as something thrilling. Only rain spiced things up a little bit, and that's quite sad. FFS in 2007 Nurburgring was considered a huge show and well yeah it was but with hindsight we've gotten more of that afterwards and it goes to show the rest of the races were unbearable and that real racing needs overtaking in any weather conditions, not only wet.
Many of you have been complaining over the years about the lack of overtaking and now that they finally came up with something that helps overtaking you just bash it. In the end it's just a question of how long and which the DRS zones are. With the right measure it can make racing very interesting. They haven't been able to bring any other solution so lets stick with DRS for a while and when cost problems are e
over let them look for new effective rules regarding aerodynamics that help overtaking. Right now pressing a button that opens a back wing is a much cheaper an effective aid to overtaking.
Except for KERS... which is costly, dangerous and makes no sense once DRS has come.
#12
Posted 14 June 2011 - 22:35
#13
Posted 14 June 2011 - 22:39
Racing requires overtaking.
You people tend to forget very easily... but some seasons most races were snorefests with pretty much nothing going on, only a couple of races at most were regarded as something thrilling. Only rain spiced things up a little bit, and that's quite sad. FFS in 2007 Nurburgring was considered a huge show and well yeah it was but with hindsight we've gotten more of that afterwards and it goes to show the rest of the races were unbearable and that real racing needs overtaking in any weather conditions, not only wet.
Many of you have been complaining over the years about the lack of overtaking and now that they finally came up with something that helps overtaking you just bash it. In the end it's just a question of how long and which the DRS zones are. With the right measure it can make racing very interesting. They haven't been able to bring any other solution so lets stick with DRS for a while and when cost problems are e
over let them look for new effective rules regarding aerodynamics that help overtaking. Right now pressing a button that opens a back wing is a much cheaper an effective aid to overtaking.
Except for KERS... which is costly, dangerous and makes no sense once DRS has come.
1. People weren't actually complaining about overtaking. What they were really complaining about was close racing. I'm blue in the face from referencing Mansell vs Senna at Monaco 1992. There was no overtake. Was it boring ?
2. KERS is not DRS. KERS is not an active overtaking aid, just like the turbo boost button wasn't. While KERS is costly, it does add to the racing, as the driving behind can use his KERS tactically in order to attempt an overtake. You might be happy to know that come 2013, KERS is likely to be blended with throttle.
#14
Posted 14 June 2011 - 22:53
The dirty air gives the car in front a fundamental advantage over the car behind. This is just as artificial as the DRS.
The DRS gives a fundamental advantage to the car behind.
If they are equalised, fair enough. the fia do not enough to ensure this.
But it still does not solve the problem of dirty air, so you will never see close racing through corners. It is not a solution, only a quick fix.
#15
Posted 14 June 2011 - 23:04
I don't like DRS and I prefer boring races than free overtakes.
#16
Posted 14 June 2011 - 23:27
For me its very simple.
The dirty air gives the car in front a fundamental advantage over the car behind. This is just as artificial as the DRS.
The DRS gives a fundamental advantage to the car behind.
If they are equalised, fair enough. the fia do not enough to ensure this.
But it still does not solve the problem of dirty air, so you will never see close racing through corners. It is not a solution, only a quick fix.
How is an inherent disadvantage of the dirty air "artificial".
What about the slipstream itself. Isn't this an advantage to the following car down the straight ? How about giving the car in front another advantage to compensate for this. How about, when a car is 1 second behind him, he can use the DRS ?
Can you give any logically reason why the dirty air disadvantage should be compensated for while the advantage of the following car using the slipstream should not be ?
Edited by Ali_G, 14 June 2011 - 23:32.
#17
Posted 14 June 2011 - 23:45
#18
Posted 14 June 2011 - 23:48
The DRS is simply a stop-gap to solve a problem which will take a long time to understand, and properly solve. Until the FIA and teams commit to solving the aero issue full time, the DRS is what we will have.
But they did, and then about a month ago the FIA pulled the plug on those aero changes.
#19
Posted 15 June 2011 - 00:25
Advertisement
#20
Posted 15 June 2011 - 03:14
Isn't a thread on this already? Plus I don't see the point of making a new thread about this after every race, especially since DRS isn't going anywhere...
Yes it is, it's making yet another easy pass on the car in front!
Couldn't resist.
#21
Posted 15 June 2011 - 09:24
1. People weren't actually complaining about overtaking. What they were really complaining about was close racing. I'm blue in the face from referencing Mansell vs Senna at Monaco 1992. There was no overtake. Was it boring ?
Of course it wasn't boring and we can all see the merit of an occasional great defensive drive. However back then, that only happened because it was Monaco. Any other track and Mansell surely would've breezed past with the speed advantage he had there - in fact it only made for such an exciting finish because Mansell looked almost quick enough to pass, and because we were used to the pass happening in every other race.
Fast forward to 2011, with DRS. It's still extremely difficult to pass at Monaco, favoring defensive driving. Any other track and that's not the case. So essentially we have the exact same situation you want, just through an artificial mean.
How is an inherent disadvantage of the dirty air "artificial".
What about the slipstream itself. Isn't this an advantage to the following car down the straight ? How about giving the car in front another advantage to compensate for this. How about, when a car is 1 second behind him, he can use the DRS ?
Can you give any logically reason why the dirty air disadvantage should be compensated for while the advantage of the following car using the slipstream should not be ?
Because the dirty air disadvantage nowadays it's far, far greater than the slipstream advantage. Unlike in the golden days of F1 when things were the other way around. Okay, it's sort of akin to trying to alter the laws of physics, there's no absolute right and wrong regarding how strong should the dirty air be against the slipstream advantage, but if this tends to make F1 more entertaining, why not.
#22
Posted 15 June 2011 - 10:17
#23
Posted 15 June 2011 - 10:28
How is an inherent disadvantage of the dirty air "artificial".
Becuase it prevents the car following from using its superior pace through the corners, thus ensuring no overtaking through corners in dry conditions. I.E F1 1995-2011 onwards because they've done sod all about it.
If the dirty air was a visible flow everyone would be whining about it, moreso than DRS. Once they solve the dirty air problem (which they will never) they can get rid of DRS.
Btw, dont get me wrong, I hate the DRS. But its a nesseceray evil for the moment. In canada it was appallingly **** though.
#24
Posted 15 June 2011 - 10:35
Obviously a Jenson fan
You do know he did most of the overtaking from the back before DRS was enabled right ?
#25
Posted 15 June 2011 - 10:54
Becuase it prevents the car following from using its superior pace through the corners, thus ensuring no overtaking through corners in dry conditions. I.E F1 1995-2011 onwards because they've done sod all about it.
If the dirty air was a visible flow everyone would be whining about it, moreso than DRS. Once they solve the dirty air problem (which they will never) they can get rid of DRS.
Btw, dont get me wrong, I hate the DRS. But its a nesseceray evil for the moment. In canada it was appallingly **** though.
And why not compensate for the following driver having the advantage of the slipstream ? If you compensate for dirty air, surely the lead driver should be compensated for the other driver using the slipstream using your logic ?
#26
Posted 15 June 2011 - 10:55
You do know he did most of the overtaking from the back before DRS was enabled right ?
Here's me thinking passing in F1 without DRS was night on impossible.
#27
Posted 15 June 2011 - 10:57
When it's wet? And in Canada? Really?Here's me thinking passing in F1 without DRS was night on impossible.
Edited by trogggy, 15 June 2011 - 10:57.
#28
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:02
When it's wet? And in Canada? Really?
Ok then, what makes passing so easy in a wet Canada and why can't those principals be designed into the rules rather than artificial aids. It is a rhetorical question; more power than grip and lengthened braking areas.
#29
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:03
And why not compensate for the following driver having the advantage of the slipstream ? If you compensate for dirty air, surely the lead driver should be compensated for the other driver using the slipstream using your logic ?
Becuase the slipsteam advantage these days is negligible, especially compared to the disadvantage of running in dirty air.
At the races where theyve got the drs right, the effect has been similar to an 80's or early 90's style sliptsream in my opinion.
I hate the DRS, I really do. But theres nothing to be done about dirty air. I cant belive that the 2013 aero change has been dumped for this sh** to be honest. But it probably wouldnt have done anything, same as 09.
#30
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:04
Because the dirty air disadvantage nowadays it's far, far greater than the slipstream advantage. Unlike in the golden days of F1 when things were the other way around. Okay, it's sort of akin to trying to alter the laws of physics, there's no absolute right and wrong regarding how strong should the dirty air be against the slipstream advantage, but if this tends to make F1 more entertaining, why not.
Just to state, I have no problem with the advantage given by a slipstream. It's nothing but a logical argeument.
My problem, is that to compensate for the disadvantage given off by dirty air, you shouldn't manufacture a completely unrelated advantage.
Take the passes on Schumacher for instance.
Using DRS
There was only one dry line. Button and Webber both passed MS before the braking zone.
If there was no dirty air
There was only one dry line. MS would obviously have stayed on the dry line. Both Button and Webber would have had to brake in the wet part of the track. No way would they have got past.
As you can see, compensating for dirty air using DRS lead to two very different outcomes.
Using DRS instead of fixing the aero also tends to force overtakes at the end of straights only. Fixing the aero would allow much closer racing through corners and you would imagine more overtaking in most parts of the track.
#31
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:05
Ask the overtaking working group - it should be simple enough.Ok then, what makes passing so easy in a wet Canada and why can't those principals be designed into the rules rather than artificial aids. It is a rhetorical question; more power than grip and lengthened braking areas.
Oh, hang on, they got it wrong last time, didn't they.
#32
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:10
Ask the overtaking working group - it should be simple enough.
Oh, hang on, they got it wrong last time, didn't they.
The overtaking working group is a self-serving body more akin to the inmates running the asylum than anything else.
#33
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:10
Becuase the slipsteam advantage these days is negligible, especially compared to the disadvantage of running in dirty air.
At the races where theyve got the drs right, the effect has been similar to an 80's or early 90's style sliptsream in my opinion.
It most certainly isn't negligable.
The reason it seemed negligable in the past few years is due to the rev limit coming in. Drivers would get into a slipstream, but as there is a rev limit, the car would quickly reach this limit and simply couldn't go any faster. In the past, the engines would allow a certain amount of over rev in such a situation to take full advantage of the slipstream.
Possibly the only benefit I like from DRS is the gearing issue. As DRS is run fully in qual, teams must gear the car for a top speed with the DRS rear wing open. This means that the cars are no longer hitting the rev limiter during races.
#34
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:11
When it's wet? And in Canada? Really?
I should have included an eyes rolling smilie.
#35
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:12
Ask the overtaking working group - it should be simple enough.
Oh, hang on, they got it wrong last time, didn't they.
They didn't get it wrong though. They just didn't go far enough. Most of the drivers reported they could follow a bit closer but just not enough.
The earlier point I made about the rev limiter cannot be discounted either for the 2009 and 2010 seasons.
Edited by Ali_G, 15 June 2011 - 11:16.
#36
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:22
I doubt you'd say that ifDRS is nonsense it's a shame for F1
A fake overtaking help for slow choaches
#37
Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:27
That's called getting it wrong.They didn't get it wrong though. They just didn't go far enough. Most of the drivers reported they could follow a bit closer but just not enough.