80 replies to this topic

[Massa_f1]

After a couple of spins this weekend which looked to have been caused by activating the DRS do you think this new rule is dangerous.

I can easily see a massive high speed crash coming up in the future because of DRS being activated. Sutil was lucky today.

[Myrvold]

It makes it more difficult for the drivers. And that is good. Everything that makes it more difficult makes it a bit easier to do a mistake. That's just how it is. It isn't anymore dangerous than it should be!

[F.M.]

No, drivers just have to use it properly. Sutil's spin would have been the same when he floored the pedal too early.

Question I have: Does the rearwing in the race only work in the specified zone when they are within 1 second of the car in front, or are they only allowed to use it then, meaning they can mistakenly use it?

[Ross Stonefeld]

It's an F1 car, they're always going to be on the edge of control. Danger comes from not having adequate safety devices when they do crash.

[DrF]

No, drivers just have to use it properly. Sutil's spin would have been the same when he floored the pedal too early.

Question I have: Does the rearwing in the race only work in the specified zone when they are within 1 second of the car in front, or are they only allowed to use it then, meaning they can mistakenly use it?

It is deactivated unless they are in the zone and stuck behind a slower car.

What is all the fuss about the DRS? The F duct did the same thing.

[Massa_f1]

It is deactivated unless they are in the zone and stuck behind a slower car.

What is all the fuss about the DRS? The F duct did the same thing.

Ok maybe i am guilty of being overly dramatic with my opening post

[SchumiP1]

I'd like to see it being used in the rain. I don't like FIA banning it.

[ImDDAA]

Driving a car at 200mph dangerous?

[naiboz]

I quite liked seeing the wings working, and the different way's the teams implemented it

i dont see the wings as being any more dangerous than a driver stamping on the throttle mid corner

keep the wings, ditch kers

[F1ultimate]

Let's not forget that this is the first race of the season. Drivers under pressure are doing nothing but testing the limits of their cars so mistakes are bound to be made. The "Real" season doesn't start until the teams fly to Europe and have spent the first 3 races getting used to everything that's new i.e tires, KERS, DRS etc.

[Clatter]

After a couple of spins this weekend which looked to have been caused by activating the DRS do you think this new rule is dangerous.

I can easily see a massive high speed crash coming up in the future because of DRS being activated. Sutil was lucky today.

The spin was down to driver error in activating the wing at the wrong time. It's no different from giving a boot full of throttle at the wrong moment, or putting your wheels on the grass like RB. Don't blame the systems if the drivers use them incorrectly.

[george1981]

Personally I would like to see it's use restricted to the race to help overtaking, that's what it was meant for.
The adjustable front wing didn't work as intended becuase the drivers used it to help manage the tyres throughout the race, rather than to reduce the drag momentarily to help overtaking.

[R2D2]

OMG! Ban grass! Ban fake grass! Ban kerbs! Ban rain! Ban brakes! Ban throttles! (etc.)

[Les]

Its up to the driver to control it so I don't feel its dangerous. Its part of the challenge. It would probably be dangerous in my hands!

I wish it wasn't linked to some sort of gimmicky one-zone overtaking thing. Personally if we have to have it in F1 I would leave it as it is in qualifying - unrestricted for the whole lap both for attacking and defending drivers. I would also ditch KERS which seems like a failure in all senses being expensive, not that environmentally friendly and at only 80HP not really that significant to create much difference when you calculate the weight penalty. The wing I like as a concept for a speed boost on the straight but I don't like the gimmick element.

[Clatter]

Its up to the driver to control it so I don't feel its dangerous. Its part of the challenge. It would probably be dangerous in my hands!

I wish it wasn't linked to some sort of gimmicky one-zone overtaking thing. Personally if we have to have it in F1 I would leave it as it is in qualifying - unrestricted for the whole lap both for attacking and defending drivers. I would also ditch KERS which seems like a failure in all senses being expensive, not that environmentally friendly and at only 80HP not really that significant to create much difference when you calculate the weight penalty. The wing I like as a concept for a speed boost on the straight but I don't like the gimmick element.

Same here.

[Henrytheeigth]

Well I don't like it and we now have that and the kers icons to view. More graphics than on track action to view nowadays bah! I miss the 60's 70's 80's

[Mila]

regulations first implemented in 2009 have reduced the area of the rear wings, thus reducing the readability of sponsor brands, and, likewise, the benefit for sponsors to occupy that space. to better remedy this, under the guise of "sprucing up the show," FIA Inc. brought in the movable wing. thus the price a sponsor pays can be better rationalized, given that 2011 will be the year of the top-mounted-rear-facing camera, and sponsor brands will be given their close-ups on TVs everywhere. it's like going from Cineplex to Cinemascope in one easy step.

and, as an added bonus, the more often a driver muffs-up the buttons on his steering wheel--in that romantic molding of man and machine and mobile device (how soon before driver Tweets from the cockpit?)--the better the chances Allianz gets a return on its sponsorship of the SC.

one way or another, don't kid yourself that genesis of movable wings has anything to do with racing.

all in my cynical opinion.

Edited by Mila, 26 March 2011 - 14:09.

[R2D2]

to better remedy this, under the guise of "sprucing up the show," FIA Inc. brought in the movable wing.

Well, I remember it as the teams coming up with a solution to the modern problem of a following car losing 1s to 2s performance due to the dirty air. So this is a direct way to remedy the effect in that specific situation. It's not to make slow cars faster.

[Mila]

right, R2D2. then why not remove the wing completely? the answer is, of course, revenue.

[Owen]

After a couple of spins this weekend which looked to have been caused by activating the DRS do you think this new rule is dangerous.

I can easily see a massive high speed crash coming up in the future because of DRS being activated. Sutil was lucky today.

I totally agree. When it does go wrong it could really go wrong. The jury is out for me on this.

[Disgrace]

It was Sutils own fault, he decided to dump all of his rear downforce before the rear of the car had settled off the kerbs. Driver error.

I doubt we'll see such a thing again, it looked like a one-off error, especially now everyone has seen what actually happened.

It's only dangerous if the driver deploys it very incorrectly.

Edited by Disgrace, 26 March 2011 - 16:57.

[Longtimefan]

F1 is and always has been dangerous but the cars and tracks now and far FAR safer than ever.

I don't see a problem, if a driver thinks its too dangerous he can either not use it or quit and take up knitting.

Edited by Longtimefan, 26 March 2011 - 16:58.

[Myrvold]

Personally I would like to see it's use restricted to the race to help overtaking, that's what it was meant for.

The reason for using it as they want in practice and qual, is to make a gear ratio that makes it a good qual-lap as well. If not, they would be touching the RPM-limiter and not be able to overtake - like we have seen more than once the last years.

[OO7]

Personally I would like to see it's use restricted to the race to help overtaking, that's what it was meant for.
The adjustable front wing didn't work as intended becuase the drivers used it to help manage the tyres throughout the race, rather than to reduce the drag momentarily to help overtaking.

Allowing its use during qualification, will help with overtaking during race conditions due to necessary compromises with gearing.

[Tufty]

F1 is and always has been dangerous but the cars and tracks now and far FAR safer than ever.

I don't see a problem, if a driver thinks its too dangerous he can either not use it or quit and take up knitting.

Do you have any idea how sharp knitting needles are?!?!?!

Seriously though, I agree with this. Frankly I think the regs should be blown apart, removing all restrictions like when flaps can be used, which parts of the cars cannot move, where downforce can and can't be generated from... just restrict G-Forces somehow and there you go, the pinnacle of motorsport is the pinnacle of motorsport again.

As it is now, the FIA give us a tiny fraction of this, heavily regulated, and everyone complains after ONE MISTAKE that the DRS isn't safe.

[Gridfire]

Using the DRS a fraction of a second too early out of a fast corner is probably all too easy to do. Every driver will be pushing the very limit of when they can activate DRS in these circumstances. They will learn, and the best of them (considering that these are arguably the best racing drivers in the world) will not do it more than once. Braking a fraction too late or accelerating too early out of a fast corner would have pretty much the same effect and all racing cars in the world have brakes and accelerators...

I'm with the majority here: F1 is dangerous, if the drivers didn't like it they wouldn't take part. The last fatality in F1 was 17 years ago, and even though Massa came incredibly close in 2009, I'd say the sport is already more than safe enough considering the facts.

[Tufty]

Using the DRS a fraction of a second too early out of a fast corner is probably all too easy to do. Every driver will be pushing the very limit of when they can activate DRS in these circumstances. They will learn, and the best of them (considering that these are arguably the best racing drivers in the world) will not do it more than once. Braking a fraction too late or accelerating too early out of a fast corner would have pretty much the same effect and all racing cars in the world have brakes and accelerators...

I'm with the majority here: F1 is dangerous, if the drivers didn't like it they wouldn't take part. The last fatality in F1 was 17 years ago, and even though Massa came incredibly close in 2009, I'd say the sport is already more than safe enough considering the facts.

10 years, actually, but I presume you weren't counting the marshalls at Monza 2000 and Melbourne 2001...

[morrino]

It makes it more difficult for the drivers. And that is good. Everything that makes it more difficult makes it a bit easier to do a mistake. That's just how it is. It isn't anymore dangerous than it should be!

THIS!

Edited by morrino, 26 March 2011 - 19:03.

[Gridfire]

10 years, actually, but I presume you weren't counting the marshalls at Monza 2000 and Melbourne 2001...

Yeah, just the driver fatalities. They've beefed up the safety equipment around the track itself significantly since then and what the cars themselves are running should have no impact of the safety of track staff and spectators considering that they are still fundamentally the same vehicles.

[RichardF1fan]

Question I have: Does the rearwing in the race only work in the specified zone when they are within 1 second of the car in front, or are they only allowed to use it then, meaning they can mistakenly use it?

It only gets 'armed' and a light appear on the dash if they are within one second during the race. So you can't press it by accident.

[Tufty]

Yeah, just the driver fatalities. They've beefed up the safety equipment around the track itself significantly since then and what the cars themselves are running should have no impact of the safety of track staff and spectators considering that they are still fundamentally the same vehicles.

True, I take your point. F1 does actually have a remarkable safety record post-Senna.

[rolf123]

I would like to see a manually operated actuator. So the wing doesn't just fall open in a sudden split second.

Let the best drivers like Schumi master the DRS in the same way as a good driver masters the throttle and brakes.

Heck, bring back 2 brake pedals. More control to the drivers and separate the good from the bad.

[Dmitriy_Guller]

Oh, no, drivers can push it too far and lose control! What an unacceptable situation in racing.

Personally, I always thought they should they should go further. There should be a third pedal in the car, the one that flatten out the wing (without any restrictions). That way there would probably never be any flat corners: even if you can make it through with a full throttle, you would still have to know how far you can push the "wing pedal".

Edited by Dmitriy_Guller, 26 March 2011 - 21:27.

[Rob]

I'm sure that before, the "no moveable aero" rule was because there could be a big accident if one of the mechanisms broke.

[Dmitriy_Guller]

I'm sure that before, the "no moveable aero" rule was because there could be a big accident if one of the mechanisms broke.

That could be one of the reasons. I think the more important reason is that it pushes the performance envelope that much further out. Having full downforce when you need it, and no drag when you don't, will lead to some very insane speeds. A large percentage of the power of the modern F1 cars is used to not make the cars go faster, but to make them stick better. That's a very major compromise that movable wings can remove.

[Clatter]

I'm sure that before, the "no moveable aero" rule was because there could be a big accident if one of the mechanisms broke.

It was, but the rule was brought in a long time ago when components were no where near as robust as they are now. That's why it was consider safe to allow them now.

[MonzaF1]

Motor racing si supposed to be dangerous.

The wing thing is just a load of rubbish. I hope it DOES cause problems because it will be banned the idiots at the FIA.

[Ben Wilson]

I'm sure that before, the "no moveable aero" rule was because there could be a big accident if one of the mechanisms broke.

The original movable areo was very different to DRS, they mounted the wings directly to the hubs so they didn't have to compromise the suspension to handle the aero loads.

they also used very slender wings and mounting arms:


It was really a big accident waiting to happen..

[Lada Lover]

It's ******** but what do you expect from monkeys.

[Nathan]

No more dangerous than a throttle pedal.

[nomeg1]

Don't know if it is dangerous, but in Melbourne, it was a "Flop" !

Charles Whithing to ToileF1.fr :

"It is true that the efficiency of the system was not ideal in Melbourne. The straight line is too short and before the turn is too fast. We'll see what happens in Malaysia and China, and then we will adapt the system if necessary"

Although it gave (they report) a gain in speed of about 10-12 km/h to the drivers who used it in Melbourne, it has not helped to improve overtaking opportunities.
In total, we can certainly count on the fingers of one hand the overtaking under braking for turn one; made ​​through the rear wing.

[Ross Stonefeld]

It worked what, three times? I think it was okay actually. If it was people just zooming by on the front straight like they were overtaking a school bus on the highway, everyone would be outraged.

It created the opportunity to pass, but didn't garuntee it. That's a pretty good system imo.

Though I would have modified the DRS zone to also include the run into turn 3. Because it seemed like they could close on the car in front going down the straight with the DRS and then actually attempt an overtake on the next straight.

[hughcdavies]

I've got 2 problems with the DRS.

1. It didn't work, as Button not passing Massa proved.

2. It ment the qualifying laps where massively faster than the race laps, some thing around about 7 seconds. That's above the 107 rule that stopped the HRTs racing. The reason being you could use it all around the lap in qualifying and only for a limited space in certain circumstances in the race.

Now I've got a question. What happens if a driver comes in to the zone behind another car and DRS is enabled for the straight, and then the car in front goes in the pits. Is the DRS enabled car still able to use the DRS despite the fact his prey has pitted?

[Ross Stonefeld]

It doesn't know who the car in front is or what it's doing, only that you are close enough to it. Once you get the DRS confirm from the timing loop you can use it.

[Ali_G]

I've got 2 problems with the DRS.

1. It didn't work, as Button not passing Massa proved.

2. It ment the qualifying laps where massively faster than the race laps, some thing around about 7 seconds. That's above the 107 rule that stopped the HRTs racing. The reason being you could use it all around the lap in qualifying and only for a limited space in certain circumstances in the race.

The system clearly did not give a 7 second time advantage in qualifying. How possibly could it do so.

This system is going to wreck racing. Passing is going to become far far too easy at Malaysia. People will just breeze by and that will be that.

[Ross Stonefeld]

I bet they won't.

[Delbert]

They should allow it for a full sector if the chasing car is within 1 second at the timing loop. That would be much better.

[hughcdavies]

OK 5.4 seconds.

Fastest race lap Massa, 1:28.947

Fastest Qualifying Vettel 1:23.529

It's still no where near a true race pace.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Uh, that's about what the gap was between pole and fastest race lap at the first race last year...

[King Six]

Unless the teams do a Kobayashi and put on fresh tyres for like the last three laps, you're going to have big gaps between pole and fastest lap of the race. It's totally different conditions anyway, even if you take out the DRS factor. They're nursing the tyres/engine/fuel at the end of races.

I think the balance was good in terms of the DRS not being a farce but not being useless either. They'll need to keep the zone about 800-ish meters on most tracks I reckon.