R.I.P. wet weather F1 racing

[Matt]

Originally Posted by 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.

That.

I actually can't remember the last time they've stopped a non-NASCAR road race over here when it starts raining ridiculous.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Matt

That.

I actually can't remember the last time they've stopped a non-NASCAR road race over here when it starts raining ridiculous.

They do have quite a lot of ground clearance though, don't they?

F1 cars are very different animals.

[Purist]

He's talking about NON-NASCAR series, which means IndyCar/CART, ALMS, Grand-Am, etc. And a lot of those cars DO have rather little ground clearance, yet they still run in the rain, at least on road/street courses.

And YES, Marbot, eliminating wheels flying around and potentially hitting you DOES substantially reduce the danger!

And I don't automatically agree with the premise that a crash is inherently more likely in wet conditions. Yes, wet weather makes doing some things less advisable. However, the wet also makes it possible to come back from things that, in the dry, would be unrecoverable.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Purist

He's talking about NON-NASCAR series, which means IndyCar/CART, ALMS, Grand-Am, etc. And a lot of those cars DO have rather little ground clearance, yet they still run in the rain, at least on road/street courses.

And I don't automatically agree with the premise that a crash is inherently more likely in wet conditions. Yes, wet weather makes doing some things less advisable. However, the wet also makes it possible to come back from things that, in the dry, would be unrecoverable.

Oh really!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLwbwmRqJsM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59x-FM17pLc&NR=1

Do me a favour.

[Sodemo]

Surely its a double edged sword? If you had full wets on, they automatically raise the ride height of the car due to the increased tread depth. Regarding ride height, the drivers moan that they need more downforce in the rain, as it makes the car drive better and cope with standing water. However, the more downforce you put in a car, the greater risk of the car bottoming as the ride height of the car decreases with speed. So on one hand you want lots of downforce for the grip it offers, on the other hand you don't want a lot of downforce because it squashes the car into the ground and makes aquaplaning / bottoming more likely...

[Vepe]

Couldn´t the ride height/downforce/other wet settings issue be solved by allowing the teams to adjust their cars to wet setups during sunday?

[Vepe]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Oh really!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLwbwmRqJsM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59x-FM17pLc&NR=1

Do me a favour.

Wasn´t that part of the track concrete?

IIRC from my injuries, concrete is slippier than tarmac when wet...

[Marbot]

Sometimes the amount of water just simply overcomes the grip of the tyre, and you aquaplane on the track, just as you would on the road in a road car. Add into that, peaky power delivery and hair trigger brakes, and it's not difficult to see why many wet races get red flagged.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Vepe

Wasn´t that part of the track concrete?

IIRC from my injuries, concrete is slippier than tarmac when wet...

Looks like tarmac to me. They were going off the track everywhere IIRC. Tarmac can vary in grip from track to track, and on different parts of a track. As can concrete!

[wnut]

Gold Coast Honda 300 surfers paradise 2002

Look at these 2 clips and tell me there is any reason for open wheelers to run in the rain! It isn't even that wet!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7nOWoVnX9w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5Y-vkn1DI&NR=1

You cannot see in an open wheeler and it is just plain stupid!

[Purist]

Fine, I will tell you! It tests wet weather driving skill, and the visibility is the same for everyone except the leader. Yet many in the pack did NOT themselves make mistakes. Getting caught up in someone else's incident happens wet or dry, and is a fact of life; deal with it!

My intuition will NEVER accept that racing in the rain is impossible! It has been done by virtually every category of racing car for decades already! Therefore, not racing in the rain at all is unacceptable!

And apart from that, NONE of you can give me a consistent, concrete dividing line between what is a test of skill and what is stupidity. Besides, it's all relative, for plenty of people would tell you that racing at all is stupidity!

Finally, for a bit of perspective, the people in my family who nurtured my love for racing tow harder lines on the issues of rain racing and on-track contact than I do!

[wnut]

From the camera angle here you can see how innocuous the conditions look that resulted in the footage on pst #135 above.

http://www.v8central.com/cart/racenews.asp?newsitem=194

Michael Andretti and some of the others say that they could not see anything!

If you can't see it it is no longer skill it is just a game of chance and the drivers are playing with their lives! This is not an under tyred over weight touring class, they are top line single seaters.
Once a car begins to aquaplane at racing speed the driver is in the lap of the gods and skill ceases to have anything to do with the result.
Running at speed into accident debris (anything) you cannot see is stupidity!


When a set of conditions and circumstances exceed your ability to react to a likely and predictable situation you are involved in stupidity!

[Purist]

Then racing on ovals is default stupidity, because once that smoke cloud goes up, visibility is just that bad trying to navigate a wreck in progress ahead of you.

I've seen plenty of cars, including F1, recover quite smartly from lurid slides in the wet, slides that would NOT have been recoverable in the dry.

And I'm still not sold on the visibility issue. I can see a bit from those onboard shots, and my eyesight is utter crap compared to "normal" vision. That's one of those impasses though. You can't accurately show me just how well, or how little, the drivers can see in the rain, and since I can even see anything on those onboards in the wet, I'm pretty well convinced that the drivers MUST be able to see well enough, even in those conditions.

[sizzle]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Surely its a double edged sword? If you had full wets on, they automatically raise the ride height of the car due to the increased tread depth. Regarding ride height, the drivers moan that they need more downforce in the rain, as it makes the car drive better and cope with standing water. However, the more downforce you put in a car, the greater risk of the car bottoming as the ride height of the car decreases with speed. So on one hand you want lots of downforce for the grip it offers, on the other hand you don't want a lot of downforce because it squashes the car into the ground and makes aquaplaning / bottoming more likely...

Well then do what they should be doing anyway.P1ss off the aero and make the designers bring back mechanical grip!

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Purist

Then racing on ovals is default stupidity, because once that smoke cloud goes up, visibility is just that bad trying to navigate a wreck in progress ahead of you.

I've seen plenty of cars, including F1, recover quite smartly from lurid slides in the wet, slides that would NOT have been recoverable in the dry.

And I'm still not sold on the visibility issue. I can see a bit from those onboard shots, and my eyesight is utter crap compared to "normal" vision. That's one of those impasses though. You can't accurately show me just how well, or how little, the drivers can see in the rain, and since I can even see anything on those onboards in the wet, I'm pretty well convinced that the drivers MUST be able to see well enough, even in those conditions.

Have you ever race in the rain Purist, or are you happy just to watch other crashing in it? You attitude does seem to come from the grandstand side of the barrier.

Of course wet weather make accidents more likely - I cannot understand how you can believe the opposite. Both on road and on track, accident levels increase with rain levels - for a number of reasons - wet weather reduces visibility. Wet weather makes grip more unpredictable. Wet weather makes people make more mistakes.

I've raced in the rain in a Caterham 7 style car (see avatar), which is practically open wheel. Rain wasn't that bad but there was already a dramatic reduction in visibility caused by spray. Grip was all over the place, and people aquaplaned off the track in the previous race - on the straight.

And how to can see enough at 150mph with the levels of spray seen in an F1 race is beyond me.

Now, I'm not saying racing in the wet should stop, but there comes a level where the amount of rain/standing water makes the racing very dangerous, and the design of F1 and other open wheelers with high downforce means that level is quite low.

[Sodemo]

Its about striking a balance, and recently in the last year or so, F1 has lost the balance. If other series can race in the rain, in much worse conditions, why not F1, with its better drivers, more downforce and better brakes etc?

[Marbot]

Down force and better brakes can work against you in the wet, particularly if you're heading into a puddle or a stream of water. The Canadian race had streams of water going across the track. I think it might be a good idea for some to go and look at those images again...

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Down force and better brakes can work against you in the wet, particularly if you're heading into a puddle or a stream of water. The Canadian race had streams of water going across the track. I think it might be a good idea for some to go and look at those images again...

It depends on what footage you mean exactly, if you mean when the torrential rain came and it looked like the end of the world, then yes I don't think anyone can realistically suggest that people should be racing in that. However if you mean when the race had been restarted and we spent 15 laps or whatever it was behind the safety car for no real reason, then no, I disagree. As I and other people have said in this thread earlier, when the race was restarted behind the safety car, it was 100% full wet weather tyres domain. When it was green flagged some laps later it was intermediate, bordering on getting ready for slicks in a few laps.

Why take full wet tyres if they aren't going to race on them?

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

It depends on what footage you mean exactly, if you mean when the torrential rain came and it looked like the end of the world, then yes I don't think anyone can realistically suggest that people should be racing in that. However if you mean when the race had been restarted and we spent 15 laps or whatever it was behind the safety car for no real reason, then no, I disagree. As I and other people have said in this thread earlier, when the race was restarted behind the safety car, it was 100% full wet weather tyres domain. When it was green flagged some laps later it was intermediate, bordering on getting ready for slicks in a few laps.

Why take full wet tyres if they aren't going to race on them?

I agree that the safety car probably stayed out a bit too long (but then I wasn't there, in either the safety car or the race cars, so can not be entirely sure), but some comments here seem to say they should be driving whatever the conditions. That's the part I disagree with. At the restart, it was probably too dangerous to be racing, hence the safety car. The track gave up a racing line much quicker than I expected, and presumably, the race director expected as well.

[Purist]

I'd love to be a driver, but lack of eyesight means I can't even pass the eye exam to get a road license, much less a competition one (poor eyesight due to optic nerve damage, NOT due to poking an eye out as it were). Of course, if I listened every time someone told me that I shouldn't even comment because I can't do or see something, I'd never say a word in my life!

And like I said, I've seen some lurid slides in F1 cars in the wet, that in the dry would have meant a spin off the track. Also, in the wet, you are more vigilant, because there are things you take for granted in the dry that you cannot when it rains. Therefore, since you're paying closer attention, you make fewer mistakes.

Now, on the road, people just don't pay attention, rain or shine, and I'd like to see more arrests for reckless endangerment on our public highways. Thankfully, F1 drivers do NOT have navigational systems, cell phones, and fast food and coffee in their laps to distract them from their driving.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by JamesH

Have you ever race in the rain Purist, or are you happy just to watch other crashing in it? You attitude does seem to come from the grandstand side of the barrier.

Of course wet weather make accidents more likely - I cannot understand how you can believe the opposite. Both on road and on track, accident levels increase with rain levels - for a number of reasons - wet weather reduces visibility. Wet weather makes grip more unpredictable. Wet weather makes people make more mistakes.

I've raced in the rain in a Caterham 7 style car (see avatar), which is practically open wheel. Rain wasn't that bad but there was already a dramatic reduction in visibility caused by spray. Grip was all over the place, and people aquaplaned off the track in the previous race - on the straight.

And how to can see enough at 150mph with the levels of spray seen in an F1 race is beyond me.

Now, I'm not saying racing in the wet should stop, but there comes a level where the amount of rain/standing water makes the racing very dangerous, and the design of F1 and other open wheelers with high downforce means that level is quite low.

You are right on the money here JamesH.
If you have not experienced it you just have no idea!

Like wrapping a towel round your eyes and sprinting through a messy workshop.

Nothing like doing over a ton and looking at the trackside scenery to gauge your position! If its on the track and stopped / slower you are going to hit it and may never even know what it was.

The old story - race driver arrives at the Purley Gates and St Peter says
StP: "Are you a Jehovah's witness?"
RD: "Don't know, I didn't even see the bloody accident!"

[browney]

We seem to be extrapolating arguments out to the worst conditions.

Obviously if the conditions are terrible and dangerous they should not race. Having drivers hurt from racing is not what any of us want. However, in the last wet race it appeared that the safety car stayed out way to long, to the point where people were thinking or even going on intermediates. This seems wrong. They maybe just need to have a think about allowing racing in slightly worse conditions than they appear to set as the benchmark in the most recent few cases.

[Flavio Galtieri]

Originally Posted by browney

We seem to be extrapolating arguments out to the worst conditions.

Obviously if the conditions are terrible and dangerous they should not race. Having drivers hurt from racing is not what any of us want. However, in the last wet race it appeared that the safety car stayed out way to long, to the point where people were thinking or even going on intermediates. This seems wrong. They maybe just need to have a think about allowing racing in slightly worse conditions than they appear to set as the benchmark in the most recent few cases.

Spot on!

Many people here will have raced in worse conditions than the safety car laps in Canada. As an amateur you have the option of staying in the paddock if you don't fancy it, or slowing down if that's your thing. Meanwhile a few hundred spectators huddle together for cover.

Millions of people around the world are watching F1 however, it's not the same. We are entitled to expect paid professionals to race in conditions such as those under the never ending safety car laps. It's not a case of wanting to see people hurt, of course not, it's just showing a modicum of respect to your audience, who in the end pay the wages.

[Marbot]

If, as race director, you think that there is more than an even chance that there will be a safety car deployed in the first few laps - you play it safe. We may not like that, but that's how it is when you have millions watching something that could cost someone their life.

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by Marbot

If, as race director, you think that there is more than an even chance that there will be a safety car deployed in the first few laps - you play it safe. We may not like that, but that's how it is when you have millions watching something that could cost someone their life.

Exactly.