81 replies to this topic

[PlatenGlass]

This is exactly what they tried in 2009...

What did they try exactly? They changed to slicks that year, but I didn't notice any real move to reduce the dependence on aero grip. It was a very feeble attempt to do whatever it is they tried to do. In any case, changing to slicks was just undoing the stupid mistake they made in 1998 when there were already problems with overtaking anyway. They weren't moving into any positive new ground. Just going back to where they were before when the problem already existed.

 

Edit - Bascially cars still couldn't follow each other because they didn't do what they were supposed to do.

Edited by PlatenGlass, 15 August 2020 - 16:57.

[KWSN - DSM]

Really, why don't you go ahead and name one? They have tried to solve this for at least 20 years now, I remember the issue of overtaking being discussed in 1999 and the rule changes in 2009 were supposed to make overtaking easier, but achieved nothing. If they can't figure it out in 20 years, I think it's safe to say DRS is our best bet.

 

Everyone knows.

 

Less aero grip, more mechanical,

[absinthedude]

Off the top of my head, no, but it was discussed quite extensively at the time. I’m sure you have sufficient internet search skills to find relevant examples yourself.

 

It was perfectly logical for aero/design teams to do this. Designing a car that was difficult to get close to and overtake was part of the game. Spoiling the air reaching the front wing of the car behind was part of the game, possibly still is.

[Celloman]

What did they try exactly? They changed to slicks that year, but I didn't notice any real move to reduce the dependence on aero grip. It was a very feeble attempt to do whatever it is they tried to do. In any case, changing to slicks was just undoing the stupid mistake they made in 1998 when there were already problems with overtaking anyway. They weren't moving into any positive new ground. Just going back to where they were before when the problem already existed.

 

Edit - Bascially cars still couldn't follow each other because they didn't do what they were supposed to do.

They reduce rear wing by 75%, diffuser was moved rearwards to reduce impact of dirty air and front wings were moved closer to ground. Overall it was the biggest one year aero reduction the cars had ever seen. That plus the change to slicks should have seen a big increase in mechanical grip to aero ratio. There is no reason why the new rules couldn't fail exactly like the 2009 changes did. I hope I am wrong, but according to overtaking statistics, the only change that had any positive impact came in 2011 with introduction of DRS and fragile Pirelli tires.

Edited by Celloman, 15 August 2020 - 19:53.

[PayasYouRace]

The 2009 rules didn't fail. The cars that year could follow a lot closer than they could in 2008. Unfortunately a lot of development undid that improvement very rapidly.

 

Anyway, the 2022 ruleset should be more successful. We've learned a lot since then.

[Requiem84]

The 2009 rules didn't fail. The cars that year could follow a lot closer than they could in 2008. Unfortunately a lot of development undid that improvement very rapidly.

Anyway, the 2022 ruleset should be more successful. We've learned a lot since then.

They always thought the new rules ‘would solve’ things.

They never really did, because the people making the rules are less smart, have less resources, less creativity and less time than the people building cars for those rule sets.

[KWSN - DSM]

They always thought the new rules ‘would solve’ things.

They never really did, because the people making the rules are less smart, have less resources, less creativity and less time than the people building cars for those rule sets.

 

More that they cater to the teams, rather than laying down rules which can not abused to the point they, I am sure they are as smart as most, they do not have the aero background the teams aero people do, but I do not really think that preclude writing rules which would stem the extent to which aero grip is the prime grip for the cars.

 

Flat bottom

Set square centimetres of wings

No barge boards

No aero between axles

 

Or something like that.

[PlatenGlass]

They reduce rear wing by 75%, diffuser was moved rearwards to reduce impact of dirty air and front wings were moved closer to ground. Overall it was the biggest one year aero reduction the cars had ever seen. That plus the change to slicks should have seen a big increase in mechanical grip to aero ratio. There is no reason why the new rules couldn't fail exactly like the 2009 changes did. I hope I am wrong, but according to overtaking statistics, the only change that had any positive impact came in 2011 with introduction of DRS and fragile Pirelli tires.

I still think they could have done a lot more as the cars were still getting a lot of aero grip that could be damaged by a car in front. Plus, the problem has existed for at least 25 years (so 15 years then), and this single weak attempt shows how little they tried before introducing DRS.

[PayasYouRace]

More that they cater to the teams, rather than laying down rules which can not abused to the point they, I am sure they are as smart as most, they do not have the aero background the teams aero people do, but I do not really think that preclude writing rules which would stem the extent to which aero grip is the prime grip for the cars.

 

Flat bottom

Set square centimetres of wings

No barge boards

No aero between axles

 

Or something like that.

That’s basically what we have now, and the only reason we do have bargeboards is that there needs to be a defined area for the sidepods intakes which the teams take advantage of. 

[KWSN - DSM]

That’s basically what we have now, and the only reason we do have bargeboards is that there needs to be a defined area for the sidepods intakes which the teams take advantage of. 

 

That is very much not what we have now.

[PayasYouRace]

That is very much not what we have now.

Flat bottom? Yes we have that now.

Square centimetres of wings? Yes, though defined by a box rather than just the area.

No barge boards? Yes, with the exception of the region for intakes as exploited by the teams.

No aero between axles? Same as previous point.

[ATM]

Well, the 2009 rules really did away with a lot of the aero apendix all cars had and allowed closer following. Even by looking at pictures, the 2009 cars were much cleaner, whilst the 2008 ones were starting to look like roaches.

Too bad they relaxed the rules and we’ve got roaches again. King size too.

[Beri]

DRS is, at the moment, the only reason why we are actually seeing overtakes. Aside from disintegrating tires.
If the next gen cars are as good as the FIA predicts them to be, perhaps DRS could be banned.

Oh who am I kidding? This gimmick is here to stay. Sadly.

[Dolph]

More that they cater to the teams, rather than laying down rules which can not abused to the point they, I am sure they are as smart as most, they do not have the aero background the teams aero people do, but I do not really think that preclude writing rules which would stem the extent to which aero grip is the prime grip for the cars.

 

Flat bottom

Set square centimetres of wings

No barge boards

No aero between axles

 

Or something like that.

 

You really should look at the 2022 rules and their announcement and all the people who were involved. I'm sure you'll be amazed...

 

Here you go:

https://www.youtube....h?v=3JddVHuPmCM

 

Just a little background on one of the guys as well:

 

Nikolas Tombazis

• 1992–1993: Benetton Formula aerodynamicist
• 1993–1995: Benetton Formula chief aerodynamicist
• 1997: Scuderia Ferrari aerodynamicist
• 1998–2003: Scuderia Ferrari chief aerodynamicist
• 2004: McLaren chief aerodynamicist
• 2005: McLaren project chief director
• 2006–2014: Scuderia Ferrari chief designer
• 2016-2017: Manor F1 Team chief aerodynamicist

• 2018-present: FIA Head of Single Seater Technical Matters

 

That's a pretty solid aero background, if you ask me.

Edited by Dolph, 16 August 2020 - 04:09.

[absinthedude]

I have some hope that the 2022 rules will help. I also hope that the "appendages" can be done away with. Simply because  they look awful. I was watching some grands prix from 2006 last night and even though the cars were far from pretty, they looked a good deal better than 2020. 

[Lotusse7en]

Really, why don't you go ahead and name one? They have tried to solve this for at least 20 years now, I remember the issue of overtaking being discussed in 1999 and the rule changes in 2009 were supposed to make overtaking easier, but achieved nothing. If they can't figure it out in 20 years, I think it's safe to say DRS is our best bet.

How about getting rid of the multitude of aero appendages - keep the basics and let the aero men work with just that 

[shure]

How about getting rid of the multitude of aero appendages - keep the basics and let the aero men work with just that 

Isn't that also what they tried to do in 2009?

[PayasYouRace]

Isn't that also what they tried to do in 2009?

That is exactly what they did in 2009 and it worked. The only “appendages” left are those in the little exploitable boxes that are required for other parts of the car. Compare a current car to a 2008 car and you’ll see how clean the current cars are.

[Pingguest]

Everyone knows.

 

Less aero grip, more mechanical,

 

And as soon as Formula One embraces the concept of "less aero grip, more mechanical [grip]", people start to complain about cars being too slow.

[Sterzo]

Those of us who watched F1 for 20+ years prior to the introduction of DRS recall designers intentionally creating rear wings that would disturb the subsequent airflow sufficiently to prevent anyone from following too closely...

 

 

That's startling. I seemed to have missed it. Can you cite some examples and sources?

 

 

Off the top of my head, no, but it was discussed quite extensively at the time. I’m sure you have sufficient internet search skills to find relevant examples yourself.

 

Anything I find talks of turbulence being undesirable because it creates drag, definitely not something you'd do deliberately. There's no reference to your claim in books by Newey, Barnard or Southgate or anything else I've ever read. If you don't know a source, maybe you're mistaken.

 

[PayasYouRace]

Anything I find talks of turbulence being undesirable because it creates drag, definitely not something you'd do deliberately. There's no reference to your claim in books by Newey, Barnard or Southgate or anything else I've ever read. If you don't know a source, maybe you're mistaken.

 

Indeed, it’s a bit of a myth that seems to spring up around here but I’ve never seen it referenced in any professional setting. Intentionally putting out a lot of turbulence is just going to make you slower. You can try to play with the wake of the car a little bit to make it fall in a way that will disrupt another car, but that would be secondary to gaining performance.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

Are you serious?
DRS is the same for everyone. Engine modes definitely aren't.
I do think it's a bit unfair to ban multiple engine modes, but it will probably result in a closer field.

Nor are PUs so what’s your point? Unless you want a totally spec series?

[KWSN - DSM]

Flat bottom? Yes we have that now.

Square centimetres of wings? Yes, though defined by a box rather than just the area.

No barge boards? Yes, with the exception of the region for intakes as exploited by the teams.

No aero between axles? Same as previous point.

 

So no.

[KWSN - DSM]

You really should look at the 2022 rules and their announcement and all the people who were involved. I'm sure you'll be amazed...

 

Here you go:

https://www.youtube....h?v=3JddVHuPmCM

 

Just a little background on one of the guys as well:

 

Nikolas Tombazis

• 1992–1993: Benetton Formula aerodynamicist
• 1993–1995: Benetton Formula chief aerodynamicist
• 1997: Scuderia Ferrari aerodynamicist
• 1998–2003: Scuderia Ferrari chief aerodynamicist
• 2004: McLaren chief aerodynamicist
• 2005: McLaren project chief director
• 2006–2014: Scuderia Ferrari chief designer
• 2016-2017: Manor F1 Team chief aerodynamicist

• 2018-present: FIA Head of Single Seater Technical Matters

 

That's a pretty solid aero background, if you ask me.

 

I look forward to 2022 and hope they finally got the rules right.

 

You are correct - very correct - that Tombazis have as solid aero background as possible.

[KWSN - DSM]

And as soon as Formula One embraces the concept of "less aero grip, more mechanical [grip]", people start to complain about cars being too slow.

 

The infatuation with fastest lap and track records is one of the problems, it does not matter if the cars are 10 seconds a lap slower, if they can follow and overtake each other.

[PayasYouRace]

So no.

 

You've asked for rules that are what we have now and I explained why. I assume you are actually thinking of something a bit more specific but which wasn't what you typed.

[KWSN - DSM]

You've asked for rules that are what we have now and I explained why. I assume you are actually thinking of something a bit more specific but which wasn't what you typed.

 

You are countering with stating what I say already exist, when your post clearly show that it does not.

 

So no.

[Pingguest]

The infatuation with fastest lap and track records is one of the problems, it does not matter if the cars are 10 seconds a lap slower, if they can follow and overtake each other.

 

I do have the same opinion, but it seems the common fan has a different one.

[PlatenGlass]

You really should look at the 2022 rules and their announcement and all the people who were involved. I'm sure you'll be amazed...

 

 

 

 

All very good, but it also depends how the committee is organised. You can get all the best people together but still have a poor decision-making process where you get all the worst compromises. Not that I'm saying that's what's going to happen for 2022 of course!

[KWSN - DSM]

I do have the same opinion, but it seems the common fan has a different one.

 

I do not think so.

 

Montoya held the fastest ever F1 lap from 2004 to 2018, rules changes and track changes in between were not used as a reason to explain it away, currently record held by Raikkonen.

 

From 1971 to 2017 the fastest lap at Le Mans was the one set by Rodriquez, there were untold changes to rules, regulations, track configuration but the Rodriquez lap was the one being referred to all the time.

 

Common and hardcore fans have no issue with the records, they are interested i the fastest in the current cars... and you can have the commentators explain.

 

"The fastest lap under these regulations are the one Verstappen just did, you may ask why this is 11 seconds slowed than the lap by Perez last year - After the reset in the regulations, where we are now under rules with an engine powered by two elastic bands and no wings. the overall speed does go down - these are are not easier to race, on the contrary only the very best can get them to perform at the highest level, which is why we see Hamilton and Verstappen so much in front of everyone else, including their team mates"

[PayasYouRace]

You are countering with stating what I say already exist, when your post clearly show that it does not.

 

So no.

Because what you asked for, is what we have now. Stop being obtuse and be more specific and clarify what you want and why it’s different to what we actually have.

[KWSN - DSM]

Because what you asked for, is what we have now. Stop being obtuse and be more specific and clarify what you want and why it’s different to what we actually have.

 

I am not obtuse, you countered to my post stating it was already here, which it patently is not - I clearly wrote 4 bullet points, not a whole loy yo explain, nothing hidden between the lines, I mean exactly what I wrote, and your reply state this is what we have, and it is not.

 

 You are the obtuse one between the two of us. 

 

The discussion likely belong in one of the many 'what should F1 do threads' rather than this one.