Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 5 votes

S.Q.T. (stupid question thread)


  • Please log in to reply
3009 replies to this topic

#1051 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,895 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 09 March 2013 - 21:54

The term "passive DRS" really bugs me. It implies a connection with the "Drag Reduction System" that was brought in with the 2011 rules, when really it's a trick that could be used on any winged car ever. It's really confusing.

We don't say that 2010's F-ducted Mclaren had DRS, so "passive DRS" should be inadmissible too.

Edited by Risil, 09 March 2013 - 21:54.


Advertisement

#1052 Zoetrope

Zoetrope
  • Member

  • 1,069 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 09 March 2013 - 22:21

http://www.youtube.c...C8F7A33D3F85C1E

Great explanation of car mechanics with some visuals.

#1053 OfficeLinebacker

OfficeLinebacker
  • Member

  • 14,019 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 10 March 2013 - 13:08

Yeah, but in Nascar the pits are very tight and everybody comes in at the same time. Pulling out of pits is already a huge risk. If you choose the last box you can drive straight out and don't have to pull into the traffic.

F1 has rearely such traffic. Max 12 cars at onece. vs Nascar 30

Keep in mind that in an average NASCAR race, probably 5 drivers get nicked for speeding in the pit lane and the penalty is stop-and-go.

If you're the first or last pit stall, you're halving the number of times the driver has to manually meter his pit road speed.

#1054 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 317 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 10 March 2013 - 13:40

Yeah, but in Nascar the pits are very tight and everybody comes in at the same time. Pulling out of pits is already a huge risk. If you choose the last box you can drive straight out and don't have to pull into the traffic.

F1 has rearely such traffic. Max 12 cars at onece. vs Nascar 30


Not every track has tight pit boxes. What you say is more common at shorter tracks.

You can have more than 12 cars in the pits during an F-1 event if there is double stacking. I know that has happened by mistake at times, but strategy can come into play if you're going to or coming from rain tires.

NASCAR Sprint Cup races have a field of 43 cars.

Edited by flatlander48, 10 March 2013 - 13:42.


#1055 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 March 2013 - 15:24

Keep in mind that in an average NASCAR race, probably 5 drivers get nicked for speeding in the pit lane and the penalty is stop-and-go.

If you're the first or last pit stall, you're halving the number of times the driver has to manually meter his pit road speed.


Why? Do they not have to monitor their speed the whole length of the pit straight?

#1056 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,217 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 10 March 2013 - 15:44

Why? Do they not have to monitor their speed the whole length of the pit straight?

I like to watch the Nascar races but I'm no specialist, OLB and Ross can explain it better, but from I can watch on the TV images, the first pit stall is so close to the pit entry that the driver has to brake before the pit line or he/she will overshoot the box; therefore there is no risk this driver speeds in the pit entry process. On the other hand, the last pit stall is so close to the end of the pit lane that the driver pitting there doesn't reach the limit even with the throttle to the maximum when he drives off. That's why the drivers in the first and last stalls have half the number of chances of being caught for pit speeding. At least, that's what I've always thought (hope got it right).

#1057 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,250 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 10 March 2013 - 15:46

Yeah, you still have to do the entire pit lane at speed, but you only have to get to that speed once. Either coming in or going out. Everyone else has to do In and Out so there's two chances to go over the limit.

#1058 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 10 March 2013 - 15:50

Why? Do they not have to monitor their speed the whole length of the pit straight?


You don't have to worry as much about maintaining a certain speed as long. Entering the pits, the guy with the first spot might only have a few hundred feet (if that) before he has to stop. Not much worrying about keeping your car at a speed for a long period. Same exiting, at most tracks you don't have much distance from your stall to pit exit, so you can usually get away with just taking off and accelerating. No need to maintain any specific speed then. But if you pick a stall in the middle somewhere, you have to maintain a speed to that spot, and maintain a speed leaving that spot. More chances of going over.

Edited by HaydenFan, 10 March 2013 - 15:50.


#1059 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 March 2013 - 16:04

Yeah, you still have to do the entire pit lane at speed, but you only have to get to that speed once. Either coming in or going out. Everyone else has to do In and Out so there's two chances to go over the limit.


Sorry I still don't get it.

Surely every driver needs to get to that speed both on the way in and the way out regardless of where their pit is? Or are the first and last pits really that close to the timing zones that they are already slowing before the line and can't get back up to speed before the exit?


Advertisement

#1060 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 March 2013 - 16:07

You don't have to worry as much about maintaining a certain speed as long. Entering the pits, the guy with the first spot might only have a few hundred feet (if that) before he has to stop. Not much worrying about keeping your car at a speed for a long period. Same exiting, at most tracks you don't have much distance from your stall to pit exit, so you can usually get away with just taking off and accelerating. No need to maintain any specific speed then. But if you pick a stall in the middle somewhere, you have to maintain a speed to that spot, and maintain a speed leaving that spot. More chances of going over.


Ok, if they are really that close to the entrance\exit I can see the advantage, but they all have to travel the same length of pits so no one has an advantage as far as maintaining the correct speed is concerned.


#1061 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 10 March 2013 - 16:24

Ok, if they are really that close to the entrance\exit I can see the advantage, but they all have to travel the same length of pits so no one has an advantage as far as maintaining the correct speed is concerned.


But they do. Ross said it best before me, there are less risks. Have you driven on the road? It is easier to drive along the expressway at the posted speed limit than it is on a city road, where you have a stop light (in this case the actual pit stop). You want to get to the next intersection (or this case that pit stall) as quickly as possible, so you have a chance at going over. And when exiting the stop light (pit stall), you are risking going over due to the acceleration of the car.

There all a calculated risk, but when reducing those risks, history has shown that choosing a stall at the start of the pit lane or at the end of pit lane has proven to be more beneficial.

I feel with the addition of an ECU system on the cars now, it wouldn't be difficult to end the stupidity of having the driver maintain a pit road speed. It would help the actual on track action, and not add another risk for the drivers.

#1062 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 March 2013 - 16:43

But they do. Ross said it best before me, there are less risks. Have you driven on the road? It is easier to drive along the expressway at the posted speed limit than it is on a city road, where you have a stop light (in this case the actual pit stop). You want to get to the next intersection (or this case that pit stall) as quickly as possible, so you have a chance at going over. And when exiting the stop light (pit stall), you are risking going over due to the acceleration of the car.

There all a calculated risk, but when reducing those risks, history has shown that choosing a stall at the start of the pit lane or at the end of pit lane has proven to be more beneficial.

I feel with the addition of an ECU system on the cars now, it wouldn't be difficult to end the stupidity of having the driver maintain a pit road speed. It would help the actual on track action, and not add another risk for the drivers.


I'm not doubting that, just trying to understand why. I don't follow NASCAR so assumed that like F1 there is some distance between the pits and the entrance\exit. In F1 there is an advantage of having the first or last pit as you can go straight in or out which is quicker, but there is no advantage to anyone in regards to slowing down or accelerating to the pit limit.

#1063 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,250 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 10 March 2013 - 16:59

In pure time terms under green flag it doesn't make a significant difference. If anything the guy in the first stall might lose out because he has to brake earlier than everyone else, but he doesn't get to accelerate any earlier at the other end.

But it has two tactical advantages

-Less risk of busting the speed limit if you only have to do one adjustment. Pit speed in NASCAR is controlled by the driver's foot and looking at the rpm guage. So giving them one less chance to bust the speed limit can make all the difference. *cough* Montoya at the Brickyard 400 *cough*.

-When you have a safety car the running order is frozen outside of the pits, so once you hit the pit exit you can't overtake anyone (you can in the pits because it's wide enough so cars at speed can overtake cars pulling out, etc). So if you have the very last pitstall and a guy is coming up at 60mph, you only have to get to the line to 'win' the spot. Even if you're only doing 17mph and smoking your rear tires. If it was green the guy at speed would roll by you as you headed into turn 1, but under yellow as long as you beat him to the line you get that spot.

#1064 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 March 2013 - 18:19

So in NASCAR they don't have a pit lane limiter then?

#1065 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,217 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 10 March 2013 - 18:21

No, they don't

Edited by artista, 10 March 2013 - 18:22.


#1066 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 March 2013 - 18:24

OK.

Thanks for all the info, I understand the advantages now.

#1067 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 317 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 10 March 2013 - 19:03

So in NASCAR they don't have a pit lane limiter then?



I mentioned how that is done a page or 2 back...

#1068 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 4,882 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 10 March 2013 - 19:09

No, they don't


I wonder why that is. I don't consider holding a low fixed speed a driver skill that should differentiate winners from losers

#1069 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 March 2013 - 19:17

I wonder why that is. I don't consider holding a low fixed speed a driver skill that should differentiate winners from losers


Do they have any other driver aids? Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the limiter removed and leaving it for the driver to look after.


#1070 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,250 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 10 March 2013 - 19:19

I wonder why that is. I don't consider holding a low fixed speed a driver skill that should differentiate winners from losers


There's no electronics on the car other than the fuel injection in the engine, so there really isn't a way to have a limiter without opening up the electronics to all kinds of issues.

#1071 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 455 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 11 March 2013 - 07:58

A good FAQ on NASCAR pitlane speed limit.

F1 uses timing loops too, but radar guns and telemetry can be used in addition. So you can't "cheat" by speeding temporarily.

#1072 Nahnever

Nahnever
  • Member

  • 257 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 21:46

Why did the 2007 tyres have threads on them, as opposed to a full slick surface?

#1073 JimboJones

JimboJones
  • Member

  • 80 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 21:51

Why did the 2007 tyres have threads on them, as opposed to a full slick surface?


Putting grooves in the tyres was Formula 1's way of trying to slow the cars down (less rubber on the tarmac).
One of the worst things they ever did...

#1074 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 455 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 12 March 2013 - 07:22

Putting grooves in the tyres was Formula 1's way of trying to slow the cars down (less rubber on the tarmac).
One of the worst things they ever did...


Although, in 2007 Bridgestone was the sole supplier, so they could have just made slicks with slower compounds as they did in 2009 and 2010. I suppose rule makers were just slow, politics etc...

#1075 ViMaMo

ViMaMo
  • Member

  • 5,029 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 12 March 2013 - 08:59

Remember Max was the boss.

#1076 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 1,753 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 12 March 2013 - 16:39

Is

Quote (http://www.autosport...t.php/id/105960): "Ricciardo needs to 'blow Vergne apart' to impress Red Bull"

EQUAL TO

Quote Daniel Ricciardo: "I definitely want to try and blow it apart if I can - do something special..."

...?

#1077 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 12 March 2013 - 17:28

Although, in 2007 Bridgestone was the sole supplier, so they could have just made slicks with slower compounds as they did in 2009 and 2010. I suppose rule makers were just slow, politics etc...


It was FIA regulations from 1998-2007 to have grooved tires. Was intended to like said above, reduce speeds by reducing grip, but aero advancements quickly replaced any speed lost by the tire changed. Rules in 2010 narrowed the front tires to take away grip and again slow the car down. Again, it really did not do much as it was quickly compensated by the engineers.

Is

Quote (http://www.autosport...t.php/id/105960): "Ricciardo needs to 'blow Vergne apart' to impress Red Bull"

EQUAL TO

Quote Daniel Ricciardo: "I definitely want to try and blow it apart if I can - do something special..."

...?


Daniel wants to beat his teammate pretty handily. He was bested by 6 points last season, but now Ricciardo wants to beat Vergne by at least 10 points. They were pretty close in times in testing, and I think this year Red Bull will cut both loose unless one steps up and takes the team deeper into the mid-field.

#1078 Vibe

Vibe
  • Member

  • 56 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 12 March 2013 - 17:47

Points meant nothing in a Toro Rosso last year driver quality wise.They would mostly score them if there was chaos on the track with the better teams and I think Vergne was just lucky to get in more convenient situations.I personally rate Ricciardo's performances higher...

Similar situation to Marussia almost beating Caterham for a championship place.Just found themselves in a more convenient situation...This is just my opinion though,I am fairly fresh to F1.

Edited by Vibe, 12 March 2013 - 17:48.


#1079 SR388

SR388
  • Member

  • 3,826 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 12 March 2013 - 17:53

What has been up with the past few years and the Engine Development freeze? I remember for a few years, the manufactures could not do anything to the engines to make them better. Is that still true? Is it still you can only make changes to the engines to help their reliability? Or are they able to make changes for power?

I personally never cared for the engine freeze. It was cool to see Honda bring out Suzuka-spec engines with nearly 1000hp.

Advertisement

#1080 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 1,753 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 12 March 2013 - 18:40

It was FIA regulations from 1998-2007 to have grooved tires. Was intended to like said above, reduce speeds by reducing grip, but aero advancements quickly replaced any speed lost by the tire changed. Rules in 2010 narrowed the front tires to take away grip and again slow the car down. Again, it really did not do much as it was quickly compensated by the engineers.



Daniel wants to beat his teammate pretty handily. He was bested by 6 points last season, but now Ricciardo wants to beat Vergne by at least 10 points. They were pretty close in times in testing, and I think this year Red Bull will cut both loose unless one steps up and takes the team deeper into the mid-field.


My point was Ricciardo never said what the headline wanted us to believe he said. This, sadly, is common practice in (F1) journalism...


#1081 olliek88

olliek88
  • Member

  • 4,047 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 March 2013 - 18:48

Points meant nothing in a Toro Rosso last year driver quality wise.They would mostly score them if there was chaos on the track with the better teams and I think Vergne was just lucky to get in more convenient situations.I personally rate Ricciardo's performances higher...

Similar situation to Marussia almost beating Caterham for a championship place.Just found themselves in a more convenient situation...This is just my opinion though,I am fairly fresh to F1.


Agree, Daniel was the faster of the two but had bad luck, mostly when in a good position, judging drivers in the lower midfield purely on points is pretty unwise, it just takes a couple of fluke results and you've got an unassailable lead.

#1082 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 12 March 2013 - 19:50

My point was Ricciardo never said what the headline wanted us to believe he said. This, sadly, is common practice in (F1) journalism...


I saw the article on the autosport.com main page and didn't click on it due to that practice. The title seemed as if it wanted to start a war of teammates in a team in which it really isn't needed.

#1083 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,895 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 March 2013 - 19:59

I saw the article on the autosport.com main page and didn't click on it due to that practice. The title seemed as if it wanted to start a war of teammates in a team in which it really isn't needed.


Isn't needed? Toro Rosso has been Boresville since 2009.

#1084 Nahnever

Nahnever
  • Member

  • 257 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 12 March 2013 - 20:52

Putting grooves in the tyres was Formula 1's way of trying to slow the cars down (less rubber on the tarmac).
One of the worst things they ever did...

Thank You :smoking:

#1085 Harry

Harry
  • Member

  • 182 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 12 March 2013 - 21:16

Just watching the 2007 AUS GP on Sky, Massa was getting understeer, his engineer suggested 2 clicks on front wing. What does that do to the front wing?

#1086 Absulute

Absulute
  • Member

  • 873 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 12 March 2013 - 21:19

Just watching the 2007 AUS GP on Sky, Massa was getting understeer, his engineer suggested 2 clicks on front wing. What does that do to the front wing?


More FW angle, more downforce, I'd imagine.

#1087 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 12 March 2013 - 21:22

Just watching the 2007 AUS GP on Sky, Massa was getting understeer, his engineer suggested 2 clicks on front wing. What does that do to the front wing?


On IndyCar's on ovals, a wing adjustment changes the angle of pitch (steepness of wing), so I would assume it would the pitch of some element of the wing.

This is the F2007 front end, so maybe part of the top element?

Posted Image

Edited by HaydenFan, 12 March 2013 - 21:22.


#1088 Harry

Harry
  • Member

  • 182 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 12 March 2013 - 21:25

So that would cause the wing to actively change it's angle? I didn't know there were moving parts on the front wing...

#1089 SR388

SR388
  • Member

  • 3,826 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 12 March 2013 - 21:27

So that would cause the wing to actively change it's angle? I didn't know there were moving parts on the front wing...


Well I know for a fact they can still take a wrench to the front wing during a pit stop to dial in or out some more downforce.

#1090 Harry

Harry
  • Member

  • 182 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 12 March 2013 - 21:38

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised by that. But to just alter a setting on your steering wheel which causes an automated adjustment to the wing is pretty special to me. How does it adjust? Hydraulics? Electronics? Crazyness...

#1091 benzine

benzine
  • Member

  • 132 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 12 March 2013 - 21:53

does the FOM transfer teams cargo to all tracks ?

#1092 MirNyet

MirNyet
  • Member

  • 908 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 12 March 2013 - 22:08

So that would cause the wing to actively change it's angle? I didn't know there were moving parts on the front wing...


The foils on the front wing are attached to screws which when turned will raise or lower the angle. Two clicks could be two turns. This would be done during the pitstop.

#1093 MirNyet

MirNyet
  • Member

  • 908 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 12 March 2013 - 22:10

does the FOM transfer teams cargo to all tracks ?


FOM arrange for all transport outside of europe as part of the deal. Its all done together to save money. this was one of the things Bernie brought to the sport.

#1094 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,895 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 March 2013 - 22:15

The foils on the front wing are attached to screws which when turned will raise or lower the angle. Two clicks could be two turns. This would be done during the pitstop.


Obvious point, but it bears repeating for our most fresh-faced users that driver-adjusted wings were only made legal (in a controlled sort of way) in 2009.

In 40 years time, when F1 finally edges over the 100,000th DRS-assisted overtake milestone, that will be the answer to a particularly sadistic F1 trivia question, What year were adjustable wings allowed back into Grand Prix racing?

#1095 MirNyet

MirNyet
  • Member

  • 908 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 12 March 2013 - 22:19

Obvious point, but it bears repeating for our most fresh-faced users that driver-adjusted wings were only made legal (in a controlled sort of way) in 2009.

In 40 years time, when F1 finally edges over the 100,000th DRS-assisted overtake milestone, that will be the answer to a particularly sadistic F1 trivia question, What year were adjustable wings allowed back into Grand Prix racing?


They were dropped again however in 2011. As of now, only the rear wing is adjustable by the driver between two states and only in the DRS zones. Even the front wing adjusts were limited to a certain number per lap. The ban on movable aero (which comes from the 60's) is more than out of date with the current tech levels in the sport. Shame that we were not allowed some active aero, could lead to some interesting advances - and interestingly is one area where road cars are actually surpassing F1.

#1096 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 12 March 2013 - 23:37

They were dropped again however in 2011. As of now, only the rear wing is adjustable by the driver between two states and only in the DRS zones. Even the front wing adjusts were limited to a certain number per lap. The ban on movable aero (which comes from the 60's) is more than out of date with the current tech levels in the sport. Shame that we were not allowed some active aero, could lead to some interesting advances - and interestingly is one area where road cars are actually surpassing F1.


I think you'd be in a place not much different that today. Whereas the road cars like the McLaren MP4-12c or the SLR McLaren have bits that raise to keep the car planted. In F1, I feel it would be the opposite, and we'd see what DRS does when activated, automatically on every lap, and every form of straight to the point that they might almost design the rear wing out of the sport. Williams tried, but decided not to (for a non-stupid question thread) I have no idea about.

Posted Image

Was watching the Top Gear episode with Kimi on television earlier today and it got me thinking, and a question for this thread, "Who is Lotus F1 Team?" Does Lotus have more than a sponsorship piece in the team? Wikipedia says that Genii Capital owns the team and Lotus is a "Branding Partner". What is a branding partner?

#1097 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,250 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 12 March 2013 - 23:43

The rights to use the Lotus name because it helps market the team and sell merchandise.

That Williams wing was from a 1997 Monza test, we'd have to assume as a super low downforce trial for that track only.

#1098 flatlander48

flatlander48
  • Member

  • 317 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 12 March 2013 - 23:57

I think you'd be in a place not much different that today. Whereas the road cars like the McLaren MP4-12c or the SLR McLaren have bits that raise to keep the car planted. In F1, I feel it would be the opposite, and we'd see what DRS does when activated, automatically on every lap, and every form of straight to the point that they might almost design the rear wing out of the sport. Williams tried, but decided not to (for a non-stupid question thread) I have no idea about.

Posted Image



More like an overgrown diffuser than a wing...

#1099 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 13 March 2013 - 00:17

Why don't poor teams... just buy more money?

Advertisement

#1100 Harry

Harry
  • Member

  • 182 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 13 March 2013 - 01:18

The foils on the front wing are attached to screws which when turned will raise or lower the angle. Two clicks could be two turns. This would be done during the pitstop.

Thank you, but what are the foils? Could you use that picture above to show me? And how would they have made the effect in the pit stop? What would they have done to complete the change of the '2 clicks front wing' steering wheel setting? I don't think they'd have time to get the drill out :lol:

Obvious point, but it bears repeating for our most fresh-faced users that driver-adjusted wings were only made legal (in a controlled sort of way) in 2009.

In 40 years time, when F1 finally edges over the 100,000th DRS-assisted overtake milestone, that will be the answer to a particularly sadistic F1 trivia question, What year were adjustable wings allowed back into Grand Prix racing?

Not to contradict, but as I say the race was 2007, two years before 2009. So what's the deal?

Edited by Harry, 13 March 2013 - 01:21.