Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Formula 1

Old 26th May 2019, 20:55
  #7281 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,179
Originally Posted by Kiltrash View Post
Yawn

( I think I speak for the vast majority)
Well you don't speak for me! Watching Lewis keeping Max in check with bad tyres was just as much a nail-biter as it was watching Danny do a similar thing with not ERS last year (or Lewis doing 46 laps on a set of ultras the year before).

I appreciate that some people are determined not to like it - they fill the schedules with cooking, makeover and talent shows to keep them amused while the grown-ups enjoy F1...



PDR
PDR1 is online now  
Old 26th May 2019, 21:58
  #7282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not where I want to be
Age: 65
Posts: 212
And some grown ups enjoy watching where the action is, GP2, 3 and MotoGP, all classes.
Per
Ancient Mariner is online now  
Old 27th May 2019, 01:10
  #7283 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 585
Sadly I have to agree with PDR1. The race had me on the edge of my seat, and 'nail-biting' is the word I sent in an email to my daughter.
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 27th May 2019, 13:55
  #7284 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 1,159
I disagree, it had so much (more) potential, but it failed to materialise.

Were it not for Leclerc's kamikaze mission (which was due to another massive Ferrari mistake, again!!!) there would probably have been no safety car, no early pitstops, and no action.

Monaco is a procession, it's such a dull race. Unfortunately it's awash with money and "legacy", so they'll never get rid of it, but it is far from exciting.


I think to spice things up, every race should have 4 tyre options of which (at least) 3 must be used. As it is, they just crawl around one-stopping looking after the tyres, afraid to take any chances.


Also Max (ie Red Bull) deserved a bigger penalty. Minimum 10 second penalty, drive through would have been more fair.
There was an actual collision in the pit lane as a result of that unsafe release, actual debris went flying, where actual people are stood mere metres away. And it caused actual damage to Bottas as a direct result.
Unlike Giovanazzi who made a move to add some excitement (unlike the majority of other drivers) and yes he caused an accident, but there was no damage, no chance of injury, no risk at all, and he got a 10 second penalty.

Not at all consistent from the FIA, and that will have the danger of putting people off making moves again, like they did a few seasons ago.


Another thing, once again Lewis complaining all race long on the radio making out that he's having to do the impossible, this is wrong, that is wrong, getting worked up about it all.
Never hear other drivers like that on the radio, it's always Lewis.
It was pointed out on the BBC podcast that he probably does it "for effect' because he KNOWS it'll get broadcast on tv the minute he says it, and it all adds to the drama.
I wish he'd just stick to racing instead of moaning though.
LlamaFarmer is offline  
Old 27th May 2019, 14:23
  #7285 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by LlamaFarmer View Post
he probably does it "for effect' because he KNOWS it'll get broadcast on tv the minute he says it, and it all adds to the drama.
Solution:- stop reporting the comments - or would that take away some of the 'excitement'?
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 27th May 2019, 16:43
  #7286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tapping the Decca, wondering why it's not working.
Age: 70
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by LlamaFarmer View Post
It was pointed out on the BBC podcast that he probably does it "for effect' because he KNOWS it'll get broadcast on tv the minute he says it, and it all adds to the drama.
Perhaps it is in the hope that Red Bull will repeat it to Max, and he'll sit back and wait for Lewis to pit?

But then again they are used to Mercedes selling a dummy.

'a
aerobelly is offline  
Old 27th May 2019, 16:58
  #7287 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
What I learned from the car to pit radio was immediately after Max was given his 5 second penalty and his team told him that the only way to compensate was to get himself at least 5 seonds ahead of the rest - including LH.

Max needed no further encouragement - and he embarked on his quest with vigour!
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 27th May 2019, 17:56
  #7288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,986
I get more enjoyment reviewing my dash cam footage of my all to frequent trips round the M25 or into London
Kiltrash is offline  
Old 27th May 2019, 21:25
  #7289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,266
Originally Posted by jolihokistix View Post
Sadly I have to agree with PDR1. The race had me on the edge of my seat, and 'nail-biting' is the word I sent in an email to my daughter.
Sorry, while there was some suspense in wondering if a pass might actually take place (or if Max might take out Lewis, handing the race to Vettel), I'll take a race where they actually make passes any day of the week.
Compare the Monaco parade to what happened in just the last dozen laps at Indy - now THAT was exciting...

I've long found it interesting how some races become iconic, all out of proportion to the actual quality of the race. It's often been true of the Indy 500, but the actually racing at Monaco has been a joke for decades - and made even worse when they widened the cars a few years ago.
tdracer is online now  
Old 28th May 2019, 01:40
  #7290 (permalink)  
419
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 396
Originally Posted by Kiltrash View Post
I get more enjoyment reviewing my dash cam footage of my all to frequent trips round the M25 or into London
As you appear to despise F1 so much, why the hell do you watch it?
419 is offline  
Old 28th May 2019, 06:02
  #7291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,179
Originally Posted by 419 View Post
As you appear to despise F1 so much, why the hell do you watch it?
I'm guessing he doesn't - he just heckles things he doesn't understand.

If you want open-wheel wheel-to-wheel racing with no technical development and minimal tuning or optimisation to suit the driver then watch formula four. It's good stuff and looks like enormous fun, but the levels of performance are very low in comparison to F2 or F1, and it's a sterile technology zone. Some people get hung up on the litany about "give all the drivers equal cars and it would be brilliant". Well there are literally dozens of standard car classes from formula ford and formula renault upwards, so they can always watch those. A similar litany bleats about getting rid of the aero features as a panecea - well saloon/touring car classes do that. It slows the corners massively, and doesn't actually get rid of the aero development because as soon as you go faster than around 100mph you will find ways to tweak the car upperworks and especially underworks for significant gain. Some dinosaurs want a return to Costworth DFVs and H-Gate gearboxes, because they apparently suffer a fear of any technology found even on road cars later than 1965. It's just as well such Jurassic technophobes aren't found in (say) airliner cockpits or they'd be trying to get landing clearance by doing a low pass and reading the signals square next to the tower...

I think back over the last 30 years and struggle to find this mythical golden era where several seasons were closely fought with no technically dominant team. It never existed. Mercedes have done a superb job, building on the technical and organisational genius of Ross Brawn with the focus and mentoring of Wolfe and Lauda (to name but two). Why should they be abused for doing a better job? There are other teams with similar budgets, and arguably technical resources which are at least as good (if not better in the case of RB). They need to raise their game to meet the challenge. It clearly ISN'T just a matter of engine power. The top three teams for the last few years have been Merc, Ferrari and RB - using three different engines. The slowest car on the grid is the Williams, which uses the same engine and the Mercedes...

PDR
PDR1 is online now  
Old 28th May 2019, 08:41
  #7292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,266
PDR, the problem isn't the technology - it's the focus of the technology. For a long time, a big part of the justification for spending big money on F1 (and other racing) was that it "improved the breed" - advances developed on the track filtered down and made road cars better. Better tires and suspensions, dual clutch gearboxes, engine advancements. Today, about the only part of F1 that has real-world relevance is the hybrid engine tech, while some of the most basic technology that you see in everyday road cars is specifically banned from F1 - anti-lock brakes, traction control, and stability control for example. Instead, F1 teams spend untold millions on aerodynamic turd polishing with absolutely zero real world relevance. Worse, even the F1 teams admit that they have intentionally compromised mechanical grip to improve the aero - it's actually counter productive to real world relevance. I'm somewhat aghast that not even the 'spec' halo is spec - such is the focus on the aerodynamic turd polishing that even the halo's have sprouted aero bits (as an absolute minimum, they should make the aero shape of the halo spec).
Meanwhile rules aimed at reducing costs have largely had the effect of making the gap between the big three and the rest even bigger. Far from reducing costs, the season limits on the number of engines has caused the development costs to soar, while punishing drivers twice if they have an engine failure. Remember when there were 26 car fields? Now they're lucky to still have 20 - it wouldn't take much to see that drop to 16 or even 14 cars. Rules that sharply limit testing make entry of a new team nearly impossible, so where will they get the new blood if someone like Red Bull or Renault decide to pull out?

Ditch the aerodynamic turd polishing - make the cars at least a foot narrower (18 inches would be even better) and mandate simple, single plane front and rear wings (a silhouette formula would be even better). Put the focus on mechanical grip, not aero magic.
Sure, the cars will go slower, lap times will increase. Who cares? Does it really matter if they go through a corner at 100 mph instead of 125 mph?
tdracer is online now  
Old 28th May 2019, 08:49
  #7293 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 1,560
Yes, but ....

What PDR1 just wrote makes good sense, but I would disagree on one minor point: the importance of aerodynamics.

Aerodynamics is one thing that makes overtaking so difficult, when overtaking is much of what racing is all about. Look at MotoGP, for instance, how close the racing is there, when part of that must be that a MotoGP bike plus its rider is a pretty draggy and unaerodynamic thing compared to a Formula 1 car. This business of getting up close and then losing the downforce just does not apply to racing motorcycles to such an extent, so that you see guys racing close enough literally to touch, without the sort of boredom and disaster that often ensues with open-wheel cars.

Another argument against aerodynamics is that it has very little application to road cars, unlike all this business with turbos and hybridization.

Just yesterday we were at the BMW dealer, preparatory to being hauled over the coals after what had started as "Brake fluid change scheduled" for our common or garden variety 330Xd Touring. That; four disks; four sets of pads; two new rear tires because one, not even half-worn, had picked up a nail and Michelin does not make that model of run-flat, low-profile tire any longer; and a new €400 battery because the old one is seven years old. Like that infamous scene from Deliverance, this was.

Just to cheer myself up I had a look at the underside of the car while it was on the lift. It is pretty flat under there, except for little fences in front of each wheel, showing that even road cars now get a lot of aerodynamic stuff that the average owner never notices. I remember the Good Old Days, when I used to drive a Ford estate car with a 428-cubic inch V8. I would get that whale up to speed, when it was a real handful, and slowing back down ... I did not want to think about that much. 55 years on and you get a car that uses less than half the fuel to go half again as fast, probably ten times as safely, when much of that is down to technology developed first for racing.

The road car has no splitters, no barge boards, just a tiny sort of mock diffuser, a sort of pretend wing on the rear hatch, and that stuff on the underside of the car ... that is about it for aerodynamics on a typical, modern, high-performance road car, so why not go back to the Stone Age when it comes to aerodynamics on a Formula 1 car? No wings at all, no diffusers, no nothing. Make the cars squirrelly as hell in the corners but so what, if they are all that way? Put a downforce limit on the cars, even. Keep the other stuff but lose most of the investment in aerodynamics because it is pretty much a blind alley when it comes to "Racing improves the breed."
chuks is offline  
Old 28th May 2019, 09:48
  #7294 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 56
Posts: 59
[QUOTE
I've long found it interesting how some races become iconic, all out of proportion to the actual quality of the race. It's often been true of the Indy 500, but the actually racing at Monaco has been a joke for decades - and made even worse when they widened the cars a few years ago.[/QUOTE]

I too fail to understand that; I can take or leave F1, and will watch on a day with little else to occupy me, however I do usually keep an eye on the results, even if I don't always watch every race. The one I never make a point of watching is Monaco - the dullest event on the calendar.
Qualifying far outstrips the race in terms of excitement for the majority of tracks, and the other thing I notice is that the real racing tends to take place in the mid-field rather than at the front, and this is rarely shown on TV.
TLDNMCL is offline  
Old 28th May 2019, 19:56
  #7295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BC Canada
Posts: 414
Granted a lot of the excitement at Monaco was from the commentators 'talking up' this or that possibility. That's the kind of thing that rather spoils my enjoyment. However there was some genuine interest.

There were a few good shots of the cars in the corners that made a person wonder just how the drivers do it. In a couple of them we got a view that showed the cars twisted and turned so quickly is seemed almost impossible and some of the drivers appear to have mastered tha ability to 'drift' the cars even though we know that they must lose a ton of grip if they are not getting the airflow almost straight on. How the hell do they manage the throttle between zero and 900hp odd when it is on/off/ on/off in about three seconds?

I loved motor racing fifty years ago for all the reasons we know but really guys, it still beats watching golf hands down!
ChrisVJ is offline  
Old 28th May 2019, 22:09
  #7296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New Forest
Posts: 116
Said it before and I'll say it again, if they want to improve the racing spectacle ditch the blue flag. Let the best drivers prove they are the best drivers by getting through traffic. Why should two guys scrapping it out at the bottom of the field have to compromise their own races just to let a faster car/driver through?
AeroSpark is offline  
Old 28th May 2019, 22:44
  #7297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 79
Originally Posted by jolihokistix View Post
Sadly I have to agree with PDR1. The race had me on the edge of my seat, and 'nail-biting' is the word I sent in an email to my daughter.
Me too (or three)--not sure Monaco is ever a "good" race in terms of overtaking, but this was certainly an interesting one.
Tango and Cash is offline  
Old 29th May 2019, 01:44
  #7298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 585
Certainly I would like to see extra points for drivers who break the lap record either in quali or the race itself, not just for fastest lap of the race. It would be interesting to add an extra loop at Monaco that each driver has to take a certain number of times each race, but the subsequent re-merging would probably cause dirt rally disaster.

What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable mass? The mass was Lewis who needed to preserve his tyres so he did not want to go too fast. But he had to maintain an absolutely fine line between fast enough to stay ahead, and slow enough to eke out his tyre life. Behind him on longer-lasting tyres, needing to overcome a time penalty was an aggressive Verstappen. Was Verstappen going to risk everything and go for the overtake? He was seriously tempted and they did touch, but they both somehow managed to avoid disaster. This race was a measure of Max's emerging maturity as much as Lewis's calmly calculated race management.

For anyone who missed Jolyon Palmer's take on it.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/48428176

Last edited by jolihokistix; 29th May 2019 at 02:01.
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 29th May 2019, 09:07
  #7299 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Niki Lauda
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 29th May 2019, 10:40
  #7300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,179
The thing is that you can't "dump the aerodynamics". The performance of any vehicle that's going to do more than 100mph withing inches of the ground will always be massively influenced by aerodynamic forces. It's not just the straight line drag or the straight line downforce - it's how the centre of pressure moves with yaw and pitch angles, whether the floorpan stalls or not and what it does to the flowfiled around the car. If you ban front and rear wings all you do is place an even greater emphasis on the flow field under the floor and how the wheels & suspension interact with it. Teams will spend just as much money finding the prefered trade-offs to get the best overall package. In fact it would be worse, because while wing surfaces are relatively easy to develop in CFD and prove in a tunnel the same cannot be said of the flow under the floor and around the sidepods. As long as you have the wing surfaces as the dominant influence on this flow it's less important, because the main function of the foreplane is to condition and direct the flow into the floor (relatively little of it is about front-end downforce and grip). WIthout the foreplane designers would need to spend thousands of hours in CFD and tunnel work and the differences between the good and the poor ones would be much more pronounced. You can't uninvent thius stuff.

Also remember that the aero stuff isn't solely about drag & downforce. A large part of it is concerned with mitigating the nmessy flow around the wheels, and an even bigger partof it is about providing the required cooling/heating for engine, transmission, battery, brakes etc. A current F1 car has to be able to dump around 300kW of raw heat from the infernal combustion engine alone, and they are not allowed to use external skins as cooling surfaces (a safety rule to protect marshals, pit crews and drivers). Even if you somehow "dumped the aero" to reduce the loss of grip for a following car you would STILL suffer problems because the follwong car would be running in the heated air from the car in front and so would quickly overheat.

Over the years many attempts have been made to reduce the aero significant. Teams work together to agree a new "less aero" formula, and then as soon as it's implemented they will go off and find the loopholes or opportunities the new rules present. Look back to 2009, when the new formula was supposed to massively reduce the ground-effect contribution from the floor pan. The idea of the new rules was to reduce diffuser downforce by 50%. Even while the rules were in prep Ross Brawn (as chair of the tech working group) warned that they'd found ways to recover all the lost diffuser effect, but he was ignored. So when the 2009 season started the Brawn team's "double diffuser" concept (using holes in the vertical faces of the side tunnels) was suddenly dominant, and those of Toyota and (I think) WIlliams were nearly as good.

It's very difficult to ban a piece of physics. Back in the 1970s free-cflight model aeroplane competitions had become extremely technical, using materials, equipment and techniques that were expensive for many keen model flyers. There was a drive to get back to the simpler, less technical basics of a few decades before (sound familiar?) so they invented a new kind of competition called "vintage" which required designs that were published before a specific date (some time in 1950 IIRC). Then they found that just reverting to "simple" balsa and tissue designs still didn't do it. Modern competitive model flyers knew MUCH more about how to trim and tune these models than their predecessors did. There were new and fundamentally different approaches to how to set up a model for a high-powered climb followed by a min-sink glide. One such approach was to use "wash in*" on the inboard wing panel of the spiral climbing turn - this allowed a much more optimal climb trim without compromising the glide, but it took a lot of skill and patient trimming to get it to work. People complained that this was against the "spirit of the rules" (whatever that means) so under pressure the organisers banned these "modern trimming techniques". One day a chap called John O'Donnell had a vintage model called a Scram which performed a beautiful spiral climb and flat glide. People looked at his model and accused him of using the proscibed wash in. He denied it, and said it just had a random warp after being out in the sun all morning.

It would be the same for a "no aero F1". Unless you had a single car design used by everyone it would be impossible to frame rules that banned all aero while allowing teams to actually design individual cars. There are plenty of single-design race classes, but F1 is supposed to be developmental. All this "improving the breed for road cars" stuff is all very well, but it can't apply to EVERY aspect of the car. They've done massive amounts of work on safety (EuroNCAP started as an F1 programme) and in rapidly maturing hybrid technologies, but as road cars aren't allowed to do more than 90mph they fundamentals of F1 will always be irrelevant to road use.

Comparisons to MotoGP are spurious (I find MotoGP extremely boring - a mother pushing a pram can corner faster than those wimps!), but why is there no similar complaint that it should be focussed on improving the breed for road bikes? Surely MotoGP should have sections of the track with queues of cars to thread between, and all the bikes should have a pizza box on the back with points being deducted for each degree centigrade drop in pizza temperature at the end of the race...

PDR

* "Wash in" is a slight increase in angle of wing incidence from root to tip - a twist in the wing.
PDR1 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.