Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Single Seater Racing > Formula One

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 14 Jun 2022, 14:44 (Ref:4115571)   #3976
NaBUru38
Veteran
 
NaBUru38's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Uruguay
Las Canteras, Uruguay
Posts: 10,352
NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!
Mercedes wants to ban porpoising to get a sporting advantage, not to improve driver health.
NaBUru38 is offline  
__________________
Nitropteron - Fly fast or get crushed!
by NaBUrean Prodooktionz
naburu38.itch.io
Quote
Old 14 Jun 2022, 14:59 (Ref:4115575)   #3977
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,798
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaBUru38 View Post
Mercedes wants to ban porpoising to get a sporting advantage, not to improve driver health.
I get and agree the spirit of your post. I doubt that Mercedes expects to "ban porpoising". That is like saying they want to "ban drag" or "ban friction". It is an outcome or a phenomena. You can't ban it. But no doubt, Mercedes may want regulation changes that are favorable to them and not favorable to their opponents. And they may use "driver safety" as the reasoning.

I think the proposal on the prior page might hit at the heart of the problem, but at the same time put the onus on Mercedes to address the issue within the current "technical regulations" given other teams have solved the problem and it's clear Mercedes could prevent this by making setup changes (given they will reduce the performance). Mercedes is not "owed" a quick car.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 14 Jun 2022, 16:20 (Ref:4115587)   #3978
bjohnsonsmith
Race Official
20KPINAL
 
bjohnsonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
United States
London, England
Posts: 23,143
bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaBUru38 View Post
Mercedes wants to ban porpoising to get a sporting advantage, not to improve driver health.

Surely though that would improve driver health and we won't see Lewis getting out of the car and rubbing his back?
bjohnsonsmith is offline  
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying."
Colin Chapman.
Quote
Old 14 Jun 2022, 17:01 (Ref:4115592)   #3979
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,798
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith View Post
Surely though that would improve driver health and we won't see Lewis getting out of the car and rubbing his back?
Wouldn't it just be easier to ban back pain? I don't think Mercedes doesn't care about their driver's health. I do think they care more about winning. Note, I am not saying they don't care at ALL about their driver's health and well-being. But if they did care about it MORE than performance, they already have the ability to solve that problem. And I am not just calling out Mercedes. I expect most teams would act this way. It's a bad position for both the teams and the drivers. This is why things like "safety" are mandated and not made voluntary.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 14 Jun 2022, 19:03 (Ref:4115631)   #3980
ScotsBrutesFan
Race Official
Veteran
 
ScotsBrutesFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Scotland
West Lothian
Posts: 5,695
ScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of FameScotsBrutesFan will be entering the Motorsport Hall of Fame
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith View Post
Surely though that would improve driver health and we won't see Lewis getting out of the car and rubbing his back?
I’m sorry, but there seems to be a lot of what I and others might
consider to be a team design issue, and a generic driver health issue because one driver having back pain.

It doesn’t require an FIA car setup mandate or rule change.

Porpoising has been around since the ground effect cars in days of yore. Teams and designers back then using the computing power of little more than a modern calculator worked out solutions.

For Mercedes there is solutions out there, whether that be ride hight, thicker carbon fibre resulting in less flex in the floor or other bodywork or something else that aerodynamicists (and I’m certainly not one of them) could implement.
Sure for each of those there could be detriment to overall performance, but within a budget cap you can’t have everything.

Perhaps the cheapest solution is just to remould Hamilton’s seat to accommodate cushioning.
ScotsBrutesFan is offline  
Quote
Old 15 Jun 2022, 00:04 (Ref:4115661)   #3981
Skam85
Veteran
 
Skam85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location:
Wherever the next race is
Posts: 2,812
Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!
Mercedes got it right for 8yrs in a row.
Mercedes got it wrong in 2022.

It's as simple as that.
Skam85 is offline  
__________________
Part time wingman, full time spud.
Quote
Old 15 Jun 2022, 06:43 (Ref:4115676)   #3982
V8 Fireworks
Veteran
 
V8 Fireworks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
V8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith View Post
The regs changed in 1988 regarding the driver's feet. Looking at this overhead comparison of McLaren's cars, the length of the car has increased behind the driver, in order to accommodate the fuel tank, the PU and the drive train, as well as having a longer nose.
The cars have a massive empty space between the engine and gearbox nowadays. It's basically a big spider frame which acts as a spacer for aerodynamic purposes, they put the inboard rear suspension in the gap but it could easily be moved on top of the gearbox instead:


Credit: Scarbs



The tailshaft runs under the inboard suspension back to the gearbox cartridge (the tailshaft has broken off on the HAAS).

You can still see the tailshaft after Schumacher's Jeddah crash:



On this basis it would be quite possible to reduce the maximum wheelbase from 3600mm to 3300mm as long as the team's don't object. (The FIA originally proposed a 3400mm maximum wheelbase for 2022, but the teams only accepted 3600mm, or only 150mm down from the (uncapped) wheelbase which averaged about ~3750mm in 2021.)

Heck you could even mandate a maximum wheelbase of 3000mm and require the teams to mount the gear cartridge transversely like the 1995 Ferrari? Of course the gearbox would block much of the venturi tunnels, but tough.

Last edited by V8 Fireworks; 15 Jun 2022 at 06:50.
V8 Fireworks is offline  
Quote
Old 15 Jun 2022, 06:51 (Ref:4115677)   #3983
V8 Fireworks
Veteran
 
V8 Fireworks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,923
V8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the gridV8 Fireworks should be qualifying in the top 5 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skam85 View Post
Mercedes got it wrong in 2022.

It's as simple as that.
Aston Martin already reduced their porpoising significantly by bringing their new sidepods.

One for Mercedes to ponder perhaps.
V8 Fireworks is offline  
Quote
Old 15 Jun 2022, 07:26 (Ref:4115682)   #3984
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by VIVA GT View Post
I think that this is a very sensible solution as the bouncing appears to be a serious problem, not only towards the long-term health of the drivers, but it also has (road) safety implications too.
I think it is in the nature of racing drivers to endure discomfort in the pursuit of a good lap time and disregard the potential problems, so some sort of legislation would prevent teams from 'forcing' their drivers into such uncomfortable/dangerous situations.
The only potential drawback I can see in this is the possibility of teams not wanting their sensitive data to be common knowledge throughout the grid. (I know that up and down oscillation data won't give away too many secrets, but teams like to keep all of their data to themselves).

On the grounds of safety is the FIA not empowered to push through regulations on their own? Sure consult the teams but, I don't see much reason for genuine concern. If you do want to filter the data than just apply a true/false mechanism that does not give any date but just goes red if the porpoising exceeds the set parameters.


Quote:
Originally Posted by crmalcolm View Post
It would be very quick to implement. They just need to use the existing accelerometers and cameras in place for impacts, and define the parameters.




Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnoyedMoose View Post
Why bring in fancy rules to counteract the porpoising? It's 100% within the teams control to stop it. Yes the car would be slower but that's the penalty you pay for not designing a car as well as others. Teams and drivers are all acting like it's something that is impossible to control so the FIA must slow everyone down. I wonder why.....

I would also be a 100% in the teams power to built a very safe car at the expense of performance if the FIA did not prescribe a minimal weight. The fact is, that teams would compromise drivers health and safety to gain performance. It's just human nature, that's how we are wired and raised. Especially the competitive types that are needed to be successful in an F1 setting.

You need a governing body to protect the drivers health and safety from the natural desire of an F1 team to do everything for performance. It's so for minimal weight, for multiple other parameters and this would be just the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
I agree with what you are saying here, but I think how you are saying it is confusing people. Chilibowl and I talked about this same thing in the Mercedes thread a few months ago...

https://tentenths.com/forum/showthre...153954&page=38

You are not talking about some type of active control system, but rather a feedback loop that focuses on drivers health. In the discussion linked above, the idea was to use existing accelerometers that area already in place in the drivers earbuds. The FIA would probably set both a maximum threshold and also some type of measure of sustained impacts (accumulative over time) in which if a driver experiences this, there will be a penalty.

The point here is that drivers should not be in the position of telling their employers "raise the ride height to preserve my health". If given the option, the drivers will do as they are doing today. Trade health for speed. Given this will be car, track and setup dependent, teams should see via the data from free practice if they are going to run afoul of this regulation and adjust ride height. Will they be slower? Yes, but the alternative should be more painful (grid and/or finishing position reductions and if a team is a pervasive repeat offender, then potential point removal, etc.)

The current regulations have examples of doing this already. For example the crash tests for the survival cells have specific deceleration targets that can't be exceeded. The challenge is to create regulations to protect drivers against aggregate acceleration (or more likely "jerk" which is the rate of change of acceleration) is that they would need to base the limits upon sound science and not be arbitrary values. For example they probably should not look at the measurements of what Hamilton or Russell is experiencing (when at it's worst) and saying "that is too much". That may very well be correct, but it needs to be backed up by some literature somewhere. But that data probably does exist somewhere. Someone has probably already researched this. Public military research would be a good place to look for this. Even if the data is incomplete, FIA could use it for guidance.

I frankly think the comments from some drivers (including recent ones by Russell) is actually asking for this type of regulation in a round about way. They are basically saying what I am saying above. Which is... If you leave it up to me, I am not going to say "no" to my team. But at the same time they say "it is a problem". So it is left up to everyone to put two and two together. That "someone" needs to address this. And I don't think this is about asking for more money to break the caps.

If this might not be fully enacted this year, it could be done this year as a voluntary experiment. Setup some prototype thresholds and review the data to see when it would have raised red flags. Provide this data to the teams during the year (after each time the car has a session, such as practice, qualifying, race). Then let the teams decide what to do. And... publish a public report at the end of the year. Maybe some teams may choose to dial it back if an end of the year report shows they are putting their drivers health at risk.

The other alternative is an active control system. Which is what I think some might think this proposal is. Which is effectively some version of active suspension. Which I have posted about before and there is no need to go into it here.

Richard

100% in agreement. I missed Chilibowl and your exchange because I don't generally often read team threads. Gary Anderson has also been suggesting it recently: https://the-race.com/formula-1/gary-...away-bouncing/

The big question is, is it really creating a potential health problem? The cars all have accelerometers on them and even the driver has an in-ear accelerometer. The FIA can look at this data and very quickly determine if the acceleration loads are too high and someone is going to suffer because of it, or if some teams are simply crying foul with no real problems other than an unwillingness to change their set-up to reduce the tyre bouncing.

I'm not dead set against active suspension long term as long as it leaves the driver of handling the car and the bumps and is cheap and light. but that would be something that could potentially be looked at longer term. For now the use of the accelerometers would seam a fast, cheap and fair solution.


Sure Mercedes would not like it because they then would loose the most performance, because they handled the phenomenon the worst. Well though look to them I would say. Do a better job next time, drivers health and safety goes first.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 15 Jun 2022, 07:33 (Ref:4115683)   #3985
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks View Post
The cars ... but tough.

Thanks for sharing, very interesting. So the wheelbase length is even more for aero purposes than I already expected. I though that more components for the electric side of things were positioned there as well. Well that makes the 2026 regulations target of a max 3.300mm wheelbase as completely plausible.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 15 Jun 2022, 12:05 (Ref:4115727)   #3986
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Some more consensus on the accelerator solution rolling in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRJH6qpsLIs
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 15 Jun 2022, 17:45 (Ref:4115782)   #3987
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,798
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxi645 View Post
Some more consensus on the accelerator solution rolling in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRJH6qpsLIs
I saw that yesterday.

Everyone seems to be gravitating to measuring some type of accumulative effect on the drivers. The question is how to apply penalties. In Scarb's scenario he says to make changes in parc ferme on "safety grounds", but he implies no penalty? That seems easy to game to me. Teams would purposefully run the cars very low to get extra speed (and qualifying position) and then raise the cars for a true race setup (no penalty?).

I think the simple solution is that each session if the car goes over the threshold, the teams are notified each time it happens live. On a second or third violation in a given session (assuming no setup changes between offenses), the FIA would/could black flag the car for that session.

This give the teams the ability to explore their setup in free practice and NOT go into qualifying or race with an offensive setup. If they do happen to show up in qualifying and trigger the threshold, they can still run that way in the race, but with a real potential to be black flagged/DNF for the race. If they don't want to run the risk after qualifying they can break parc ferme, take an appropriate grid penalty and adjust to a new race setup.

This incentivizes teams to figure out BEFORE qualifying if they have a setup that puts them at risk for problems during the race.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Old 15 Jun 2022, 18:20 (Ref:4115785)   #3988
chillibowl
Veteran
 
chillibowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Canada
winnipeg, canada
Posts: 9,716
chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!
surely the implied penalty would be having to start the race from the pitlane no?

edit: never mind...i get what you are saying now, a parc ferme change under safety grounds wouldn't trigger a pit lane start.
chillibowl is offline  
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there
I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place
Quote
Old 16 Jun 2022, 18:30 (Ref:4115940)   #3989
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Well it has been decided:

https://the-race.com/formula-1/fia-i...afety-reasons/
Taxi645 is offline  
Quote
Old 16 Jun 2022, 19:27 (Ref:4115954)   #3990
NaBUru38
Veteran
 
NaBUru38's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Uruguay
Las Canteras, Uruguay
Posts: 10,352
NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!NaBUru38 is going for a new world record!
Oh wow, FIA bends back to Mercedes.
NaBUru38 is offline  
__________________
Nitropteron - Fly fast or get crushed!
by NaBUrean Prodooktionz
naburu38.itch.io
Quote
Old 16 Jun 2022, 19:54 (Ref:4115958)   #3991
bjohnsonsmith
Race Official
20KPINAL
 
bjohnsonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
United States
London, England
Posts: 23,143
bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaBUru38 View Post
Oh wow, FIA bends back to Mercedes.

According to Ted Kravitz, this is not what Merecedes want.


https://fb.watch/dHgUlHx1Dp/
bjohnsonsmith is offline  
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying."
Colin Chapman.
Quote
Old 16 Jun 2022, 20:08 (Ref:4115963)   #3992
Anyopenroad
Veteran
 
Anyopenroad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
England
London
Posts: 1,442
Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!Anyopenroad has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaBUru38 View Post
Oh wow, FIA bends back to Mercedes.
Is it necessarily to Mercedes' advantage? If the FIA simply set a limit to porpoising then Merc will have to do whatever they are currently reluctant to do to fix it, like raise ride height, whereas other teams with less of a problem won't have to do anything so drastic.
Anyopenroad is offline  
__________________
I like taking pictures of cars going round tracks, through forests and up hills.
Quote
Old 16 Jun 2022, 20:10 (Ref:4115964)   #3993
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
I think Mercedes will strongly dislike the short term sollution (the g-force metering), but will like the potential medium term approach (possibly a simple form of active suspension). Possibly that's the way the FIA can provide a short term sollution, while still keeping everyone somewhat happy.
Taxi645 is offline  
Quote
Old 16 Jun 2022, 20:10 (Ref:4115965)   #3994
broadrun96
Veteran
 
broadrun96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
United States
Posts: 11,208
broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!broadrun96 is the undisputed Champion of the World!
It seems more like the FIA has bent to the teams NOT being competent enough to actually build a damn car OR fix the problems. Instead it's the old days pre-Jackie Stewart days of the team considering the driver just another part of the car, and a weak one at that. MB could attempt to fix the car or bring them in but that's not the engineering answer of fastest way to answer the question. Ferrari seems to have less need to run the plank on the ground but Canada seems like they would be MB bouncing with top end speed.

Seems like a rule that shouldn't be needed but have a feeling MB gonna get bit in the ass on this one first. Or Aston Martin and give Stroll something to whinge on about again since he's been quiet a minute
broadrun96 is offline  
Quote
Old 16 Jun 2022, 21:51 (Ref:4115979)   #3995
Tourer
Veteran
 
Tourer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Australia
Sideways
Posts: 4,345
Tourer is going for a new lap record!Tourer is going for a new lap record!Tourer is going for a new lap record!Tourer is going for a new lap record!Tourer is going for a new lap record!Tourer is going for a new lap record!
Taxi645 nailed it back in post 3971 - accelerometers (or at least, data analysis) is the plan from the FIA. Sounds like a reasonable approach to me that should hopefully result in the teams that HAVEN'T sorted themselves out to make changes to how they run their cars (or the design of their cars) and the teams that HAVE sorted themselves out pretty much continue as they are or very close to it.

No doubt it'll all get very political in both the short and long term but it feels like the FIA has so far taken a sensible and balanced approach to this one as no doubt they, as well as all of us (& of course blind freddy) can see that porpoising and bouncing doesn't create safety issues for all teams, just some of them.
Tourer is offline  
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue
Quote
Old 16 Jun 2022, 23:24 (Ref:4115984)   #3996
Skam85
Veteran
 
Skam85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location:
Wherever the next race is
Posts: 2,812
Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!Skam85 has a real shot at the championship!
Mercedes and hamilton successfully ousted Michael Masi only for the new powers that be to ban jewellery

They have now made enough noise about their own flawed car design to get the rules changed which will surely cost even more performance

Be careful what you wish for
Skam85 is offline  
__________________
Part time wingman, full time spud.
Quote
Old 17 Jun 2022, 05:45 (Ref:4116000)   #3997
Sodemo
Veteran
 
Sodemo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
United Kingdom
Solihull, West Mids, UK
Posts: 11,147
Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!Sodemo has a real shot at the podium!
I don’t really know what they were hoping to achieve, it’s not like the fia were all of a sudden announce a brand new aero design or allow active suspension from the next Grand Prix.
Sodemo is offline  
Quote
Old 17 Jun 2022, 07:13 (Ref:4116013)   #3998
Taxi645
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Netherlands
Posts: 979
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the gridTaxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourer View Post
Taxi645 nailed it back in post 3971 - accelerometers (or at least, data analysis) is the plan from the FIA. Sounds like a reasonable approach to me that should hopefully result in the teams that HAVEN'T sorted themselves out to make changes to how they run their cars (or the design of their cars) and the teams that HAVE sorted themselves out pretty much continue as they are or very close to it.

No doubt it'll all get very political in both the short and long term but it feels like the FIA has so far taken a sensible and balanced approach to this one as no doubt they, as well as all of us (& of course blind freddy) can see that porpoising and bouncing doesn't create safety issues for all teams, just some of them.

Well Richard and Cillibowl were on to it much earlier in the Mercedes thread. Also it might indeed be better to look at accumulative effect like Richard proposed rather than only limiting it to porpoising frequencies cause some are running so low and stiff that the painful G-forces are also coming from the bumps in the road, which could fall outside the porpoising frequencies.


I must say, I'm quite impressed by the pace by which the FIA has taken this up. They won't have though this out just after Bakuh. Probably were contemplating this approach for a while already, but the Bakuh events and driver reactions probably made up their minds and rightly so.
Taxi645 is offline  
__________________
Constructive discussion: A conversion where participants are maximally open to yet critical of each others (and their own) arguments, with the intend of enhancing the knowledge, understanding and/or handling of it's subject.
Quote
Old 17 Jun 2022, 07:35 (Ref:4116017)   #3999
S griffin
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,325
S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!
The FIA trying to limit porpoising has nothing to do with Merc. What they are doing is trying to not make it so uncomfortable for the drivers that it gives them physical problems. And it's not just the Mercedes drivers that have had this problem. Other drivers have said similar things. Gasly has spoken out about these concerns. But of course Karen Horner has been trying to claim that Merc drivers are deliberately playing up how bad it is to get the FIA to change the rules, but he's just doing his usual s*** stirring
S griffin is offline  
__________________
He who dares wins!
He who hesitates is lost!
Quote
Old 17 Jun 2022, 12:43 (Ref:4116064)   #4000
Richard C
Veteran
 
Richard C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,798
Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!Richard C is the undisputed Champion of the World!
You know, history is full of multiple people independently coming up with the same idea at the same time. But it does seem weird that we were talking publicly over a month ago about the idea the FIA ended up picking. It makes me wonder who reads this forum.

The decision is NOT what Mercedes wants. I think the part in which a committee or such is formed to discuss technical regulations changes is mostly the FIA throwing Mercedes a bone. I don't see anything coming out of that given most teams have solved the problem and there is a work around for those teams who have not. I made the point earlier. Mercedes is not owed a quick car.

Richard
Richard C is offline  
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one."
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[Rules] Are more rule changes necessary ? Marbot Formula One 51 27 Sep 2009 17:19
F1 future rule changes TheNewBob Formula One 57 20 Dec 2006 09:19
Sensible ideas for future technical regs anyone?/Rule changes - more to come [merged] AMT Formula One 74 12 Nov 2002 16:09
Future Tourer Future Crash Test Australasian Touring Cars. 13 17 Jul 2002 23:01


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:46.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.