R.I.P. wet weather F1 racing

[Matt]

Originally Posted by luke g28

...they dont have road car ride height.

Debatable. I've seen quite a few modified VW's with lower ride heights than an F1 car. They manage to drive around just fine.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Matt

Debatable. I've seen quite a few modified VW's with lower ride heights than an F1 car. They manage to drive around just fine.

These are 200mph VWs with a surf board 50mm off the tarmac?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Marbot

These are 200mph VWs with a surf board 50mm off the tarmac?

Not 200mph, try 120-150mph, and definitely less than 50mm between the underside of the car and the road.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Matt

Not 200mph, try 120mph, and definitely less than 50mm between the underside of the car and the road.

So you wouldn't want to go anywhere near a kerb with one of those then?

Also bear in mind that an F1 car has 50mm of clearance when stationary. The down force of an F1 car reduces that quite considerably. The faster it goes, the lower it gets, until it starts to gently wear away at the plank or starts surfing along on the water. Hit a puddle in the wrong place at too high a speed, and......

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Marbot

So you wouldn't want to go anywhere near a kerb with one of those then?

Also bear in mind that an F1 car has 50mm of clearance when stationary. The down force of an F1 car reduces that quite considerably. The faster it goes, the lower it gets, until it starts to gently wear away at the plank or starts surfing along on the water. Hit a puddle in the wrong place at too high a speed, and......

Not at all, haha.

There might be 50mm at the back, but the front is about 10mm, if that.

[Marbot]

That's still more than an F1 car, which will have no clearance at all on some parts of a track.

Just not the same thing at all really.

[Andy77]

Originally Posted by Marbot

So you wouldn't want to go anywhere near a kerb with one of those then?

Also bear in mind that an F1 car has 50mm of clearance when stationary. The down force of an F1 car reduces that quite considerably. The faster it goes, the lower it gets, until it starts to gently wear away at the plank or starts surfing along on the water. Hit a puddle in the wrong place at too high a speed, and......

F1 has proven at Monaco that it already allows way too low ride heights. Else neither Rosberg nor Perez would have been leveraged at the same spot that easy. Which directly throws an arc back to the overload of aerodynamic that causes pressing the car that low above ground.

[Vepe]

It´s truly R.I.P. for wet weather F1 racing...

But why??

F1 is the home for the ultimate technology, so why is it impossible to race when it rains?

If you can drive a road car in the rain, surely you can drive a F1 car...

Motorsport was dangerous, is dangerous and will be dangerous. You can´t change that.
All the driver know that. No question.

Accidents happen, in dry and wet conditions, fatal and non-fatal. Drivers know the risks, so if someone gets injured or killed, I can live without too much concerns about safety. And NO, I DO NOT WANT ANYONE TO GET INJURED OR KILLED. If it happens, it happens. That´s it.

When you know the risks you live with them, right? If you want to race in wet conditions, you race in wet conditions, right? And if you don´t want to, you don´t race, right? You shouldn´t stop the race when it starts to rain. Or should you? In some tracks, yes. In some others, yes if it rains hard enough. But not at every track.

And the tires... So you have Super Soft, Soft, Medium, Hard, Intermediate and Full Wet tires, but you previously had also Monsoon tires. I don´t give a s**t about you having 4 different dry compounds, when you´re missing the tire that allows you to race in extreme conditions. So what if it´s not green, or cost a bit more to make an extra set of tires. Actually if you go digging very, very deep, you can acctually accuse Pirelli, FIA, whoever for making the sport more dangerous.
Besides, since there´s no tyre war, the tyre quality has fallen...

Then we come back to drivers... I personally think that they don´t have balls compared to drivers of the 80´s and 90´s. They even complained about not seeing so good, because of the sun being so low. When did you hear an endurance driver complaning about the sun? And their cars are not as safe as F1s, but can reach speeds over 300 kph.

F1 cars should be able to race in wet conditions, but it seems that current cars just can´t.

[ujoint]

It's about the money and realization that an accident can take you out of the green forever. Driving in a less risk (rain) means you might live long enough to earn some big bucks and enjoy it. IMO.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Vepe

It´s truly R.I.P. for wet weather F1 racing...

But why??

F1 is the home for the ultimate technology, so why is it impossible to race when it rains?

Because the cars are designed as the ultimate technology IN THE DRY. Which is where the majority of races are held. If you were a team who specifically made a car that COULD drive fast in the extreme wet, then you would lose all the races in the dry.

Originally Posted by Vepe

If you can drive a road car in the rain, surely you can drive a F1 car...

Nope. How many people here drive their road car, in the pouring rain, as fast as they can, whilst racing other cars, with windscreen wipers turned off?

Originally Posted by Vepe

Motorsport was dangerous, is dangerous and will be dangerous. You can´t change that.
All the driver know that. No question.

Accidents happen, in dry and wet conditions, fatal and non-fatal. Drivers know the risks, so if someone gets injured or killed, I can live without too much concerns about safety. And NO, I DO NOT WANT ANYONE TO GET INJURED OR KILLED. If it happens, it happens. That´s it.

When you know the risks you live with them, right? If you want to race in wet conditions, you race in wet conditions, right? And if you don´t want to, you don´t race, right? You shouldn´t stop the race when it starts to rain. Or should you? In some tracks, yes. In some others, yes if it rains hard enough. But not at every track.

Er, not quite sure what you are getting at there.

Originally Posted by Vepe

And the tires... So you have Super Soft, Soft, Medium, Hard, Intermediate and Full Wet tires, but you previously had also Monsoon tires. I don´t give a s**t about you having 4 different dry compounds, when you´re missing the tire that allows you to race in extreme conditions. So what if it´s not green, or cost a bit more to make an extra set of tires. Actually if you go digging very, very deep, you can acctually accuse Pirelli, FIA, whoever for making the sport more dangerous.
Besides, since there´s no tyre war, the tyre quality has fallen...

It's not the tyre that is the problem - it's the car. They aquaplane on the undertray in deep standing water, at which point the tyres just become pointless bits of rubber at each corner of the car.

Originally Posted by Vepe

Then we come back to drivers... I personally think that they don´t have balls compared to drivers of the 80´s and 90´s. They even complained about not seeing so good, because of the sun being so low. When did you hear an endurance driver complaning about the sun? And their cars are not as safe as F1s, but can reach speeds over 300 kph.

F1 cars should be able to race in wet conditions, but it seems that current cars just can´t.

Maybe they are a bit more chicken. I don't know. Maybe they just don't want to kill themselves unnecessarily. Why make it more dangerous than necessary? (I have raced enduranced and the sun is a ***** and make it very difficult to see -and I was in a 2CV at 75mph. Must be very scary at 180mph)

[Vepe]

Because the cars are designed as the ultimate technology IN THE DRY. Which is where the majority of races are held. If you were a team who specifically made a car that COULD drive fast in the extreme wet, then you would lose all the races in the dry.

Yes, but if you go back, they had no problems racing in wet. Fuji 2007, remember. And if the ultimate technology CAN´T be used in THE WET, then it´s not ultimate technology...

Nope. How many people here drive their road car, in the pouring rain, as fast as they can, whilst racing other cars, with windscreen wipers turned off?

What does that mean, actually. Sure you won´t drive like that, but the fact is that you CAN.

Er, not quite sure what you are getting at there.

To put it simply, accidents happen in dry and wet. And the drivers themselves make the call to race or not. At least it should be like that. Of course, in some tracks, like Monaco, it´s too dangerous to race in extreme weather. But in Canada, you would have been able to race in the wet if you have had the monsoon tires. And I personally think that if they were still using Bridgestone tires, they might not had stopped the race.

It's not the tyre that is the problem - it's the car. They aquaplane on the undertray in deep standing water, at which point the tyres just become pointless bits of rubber at each corner of the car.

Well, it´s the tyre AND the car that is the problem...
Actually, the teams should be allowed to change the settings from dry to wet before the race, if it´s declared as a wet race. Since in wet setup, your ride height is higher, so it reduces the chance of aquaplaning.

Maybe they are a bit more chicken. I don't know. Maybe they just don't want to kill themselves unnecessarily. Why make it more dangerous than necessary? (I have raced enduranced and the sun is a ***** and make it very difficult to see -and I was in a 2CV at 75mph. Must be very scary at 180mph)

They don´t want to kill themseves, that´s quite obvious.
And no, it shouldn´t be more dangerous.
And the sun. I know that it´s very difficult to see and I didn´t say it wasn´t scary.

[Sodemo]

Fuji 2007 should be a lesson that you can race in the wet. Its just the drivers now don't have the balls to do it.

I found it most amusing that Eddie Jordan chose to ask Mark Webber if the conditions at Canada were raceable. Webber is well known to be one of the drivers which moans a lot about tracks and track conditions. Further contradictions at last years Korea event. The Red Bull drivers were saying that the conditions were totally undriveable. Yet after Webber crashed out he was interviewed and quizzed on the conditions and he said "they weren't too bad actually".

[ECW Dan Selby]

Yeh, Korea really killed it.

The day you let the lunatics 'run' the asylum is a bad day, and that's exactly what happened.

You should never be asking someone in title contention their opinion on whether a race should be happening.

Selby

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Vepe

Yes, but if you go back, they had no problems racing in wet. Fuji 2007, remember. And if the ultimate technology CAN´T be used in THE WET, then it´s not ultimate technology...

The ultimate technology is, arguably, the space shuttle. That doesn't launch if the weather is bad either. The ultimate mobile phone doesn't work underwater. The ultimate power boat is pretty hopeless on the M25.

Originally Posted by Vepe

What does that mean, actually. Sure you won´t drive like that, but the fact is that you CAN.

And you would crash and cause you and those around you a lot of injury. Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should.

Originally Posted by Vepe

To put it simply, accidents happen in dry and wet. And the drivers themselves make the call to race or not. At least it should be like that. Of course, in some tracks, like Monaco, it´s too dangerous to race in extreme weather. But in Canada, you would have been able to race in the wet if you have had the monsoon tires. And I personally think that if they were still using Bridgestone tires, they might not had stopped the race.

The circuit is irrelevant. If its too bad to race at Monaco it would be too bad to race anywhere else. Just because the walls are nearer doesn't make much difference. If you loose it you don't stop or shed much speed until you hit something hard. Couple of recent crashes at Le Mans show that.

Originally Posted by Vepe

Well, it´s the tyre AND the car that is the problem...
Actually, the teams should be allowed to change the settings from dry to wet before the race, if it´s declared as a wet race. Since in wet setup, your ride height is higher, so it reduces the chance of aquaplaning.

That would help, but there are always conditions that are beyond setup changes

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by JamesH

The ultimate technology is, arguably, the space shuttle. That doesn't launch if the weather is bad either. The ultimate mobile phone doesn't work underwater. The ultimate power boat is pretty hopeless on the M25.

check and mate!

[Vepe]

Originally Posted by JamesH

The ultimate technology is, arguably, the space shuttle. That doesn't launch if the weather is bad either. The ultimate mobile phone doesn't work underwater. The ultimate power boat is pretty hopeless on the M25.

Okay, mate. You win that one

But F1 should be able to race in the rain...

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Vepe

If you want to race in wet conditions, you race in wet conditions, right? And if you don´t want to, you don´t race, right? You shouldn´t stop the race when it starts to rain. Or should you? In some tracks, yes. In some others, yes if it rains hard enough. But not at every track.

As a point of comparison, our sailing club NEVER cancels a race. It is the skipper's decision whether to put to sea or not. Those who consider their boat and crew capable of handling the condition go and race. Those who don't, don't. Seemples.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

It is the skipper's decision whether to put to sea or not. .

Indeed. But how well does it go on the highway?

[wnut]

Complete idiocy!

No amount of skill will prevent this.

SPA 07

http://www.indyarocks.com/videos/Giant-F1-Crash-6841

Just plain bloody lucky nobody was killed!

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

As a point of comparison, our sailing club NEVER cancels a race. It is the skipper's decision whether to put to sea or not. Those who consider their boat and crew capable of handling the condition go and race. Those who don't, don't. Seemples.

And conditions are always wet. sorry.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

As a point of comparison, our sailing club NEVER cancels a race. It is the skipper's decision whether to put to sea or not. Those who consider their boat and crew capable of handling the condition go and race. Those who don't, don't. Seemples.

Sidney-Hobart 1998. Fastnet 1979. Sometimes the skippers do something stupid.

(I raced the Fastnet 1999 - a pretty smooth trip)

[sizzle]

Stop making excuses. If we weren't in such nanny state times they would race. If they didn't like it they would do a Lauda.

[Purist]

And the wheel tethers prevent another Spa '98 from happening again, so that's a non-issue now.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Purist

And the wheel tethers prevent another Spa '98 from happening again, so that's a non-issue now.

So, just not having wheels flying around makes it less dangerous to surf along in your aquaplaning car?

I suppose that the FIA could allow drivers to adjust the ride height of their cars from the cockpit, so that aquaplaning would be less likely. But that would only open up yet another can of worms.

[courageous]

Originally Posted by ECW Dan Selby

You should never be asking someone in title contention their opinion on whether a race should be happening.

Selby

This!

People like Trulli, Schumacher etc... Fine - but they should make it clear to Vettel (it is indrivable man) and Hamilton (let's go!) that their opinion will not count.