DRS to be banned....

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

I fail to see the issue with DRS in Monaco. In the past turbo-engines and active suspensions (including its stall device) were used in Monaco. Why would DRS suddenly cause a safety issue.

It's a balance issue. The car is generating a lot of downforce going through the tunnel. It is also a right handed curve. If you operate the DRS whilst the car is at the limit going through the tunnel, then something very bad is likely to happen.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

However, if Pirelli can manufacture tyres "for the show" as they do now. Whats stopping them from developing a tyre with a huge slip angle in mind?

The aerodynamics don't tolerate or work well going sideways.

[neiltb]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It's a balance issue. The car is generating a lot of downforce going through the tunnel. It is also a right handed curve. If you operate the DRS whilst the car is at the limit going through the tunnel, then something very bad is likely to happen.

but are they on the limit going through the tunnel? speeds are high, therefor, df is high, yes balance will change but 'these are the best drivers in the world (tm)'.

they have practice to try it out and figure out if they need to change line, how to set up the car to utilise it. Any driver that figured it out is now being penalised because of someone elses safety concern. It is a driver operated device, he and he alone has the discretion to use it.

[NaBUru38]

It's also so dangerous to press so many buttons at the same time.

[Purist]

The tunnel is NOT "on the limit" for these cars, unless it's pretty wet, and the only way it's going to be that saturated is if they still water the tunnel when it rains outside. Wingless F1 cars were capable of going flat-out through the tunnel, and we haven't had those in more than 40 years.

BTW, if it's that wet, you're NOT going to want to use the thing anyway, because you're going to want the downforce more than you'll want the potentially higher top-end speed.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Purist

The tunnel is NOT "on the limit" for these cars, unless it's pretty wet, and the only way it's going to be that saturated is if they still water the tunnel when it rains outside. Wingless F1 cars were capable of going flat-out through the tunnel, and we haven't had those in more than 40 years.

It's nothing to do with the amount of downforce. It's to do with the shift in downforce ratio from rear to front when the DRS is activated, which is quite considerable and very sudden. Upsetting that balance suddenly, when the car is travelling in anything other than a straight line, could have grave consequences for the driver(s).

Originally Posted by Purist

BTW, if it's that wet, you're NOT going to want to use the thing anyway, because you're going to want the downforce more than you'll want the potentially higher top-end speed.

If it's declared a 'Wet' practice, qualifying or race, DRS is automatically disabled.

[JeremySmith]

Aside from the points you make Scott, I just think for Monaco there is not enough time to operate KERS, DRS and get the car round that circuit in one piece..

I am not sure how many of you have walked the streets in Monaco, but it is very tight and that is before ARMCO is erected...


The exit of the tunnel is rather narrow if my memory serves me well..

[Purist]

Marbot, if it's really so unsettling on any curve, then they better not use it at Spa. And Suzuka and Interlagos could be problematic in that case as well.

Seriously, does that one piece of wing (among how many total, not to mention the diffuser) produce even 1/6th of the rear downforce? The drivers probably get more disturbance caused by heavily marbled tires or an out-of-balance wheel. Drivers also do other things themselves in the cars that significantly alter the balance anyway, like adjusting the weight-jacker or the brake bias.

And like I said, the tunnel isn't even close to being "on the limit" in the dry anyway.

I think the DRS could make a difference either on the pit straight or the run through the tunnel. Even with extra weight (more fuel on-board), and just 30-60hp advantage, the turbo Renault RE30Bs were able to power past the atmospheric V8s and V12s on the pit straight in 1982.

[strider]

It seems a perfectly sensible idea to me.

Potentially, there's not much benefit to had from DRS at Monaco, but there are some disadvantages.

Anyway, the people who make the decision will know more about it than we do.

[ASCII Man]

Oh no, F1? Difficult?! Unheard of! Shouldn't be allowed and all that!
Lets be sensible and make it easier on these ki... Wait, I can't even finish that sentence.

[nickyf1]

DRS would be great if the entire field couldn't turn it off

[wnut]

Originally Posted by nickyf1

DRS would be great if the entire field couldn't turn it off

Great idea!

[Andy77]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It's the Elephant in the room that everyone seems to be ignoring.

But it seems that it's necessary for F1 to have to be the fastest (in terms of lap times) open wheel series for it to have any credibility among so called 'fans'. This requires F1 cars to have far greater downforce (with resulting drag and turbulence) compared to other open wheel series. The DRS allows for this to remain so, but also allows for the possibility of overtaking.

The world speed records on circuits (average speed per lap) are hold by motorcycles and sports cars. Ulster GP, Mosport & Le Mans , in that order are the top 3.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Andy77

The world speed records on circuits (average speed per lap) are hold by motorcycles and sports cars. Ulster GP, Mosport & Le Mans , in that order are the top 3.

..and F1 seems to carefully avoid letting anything that could challenge its lap times running on the circuits it uses.

[Andy77]

Originally Posted by wnut

..and F1 seems to carefully avoid letting anything that could challenge its lap times running on the circuits it uses.

Monza is 4th in the list I think but its record came from a sports car as well. On the other hand I somehow cannot imagine a motorcycle going round Abu Dhabi as fast as it does round the Ulster GP course.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It's a balance issue. The car is generating a lot of downforce going through the tunnel. It is also a right handed curve. If you operate the DRS whilst the car is at the limit going through the tunnel, then something very bad is likely to happen.

The stall device which was an inherent part of the active suspension caused a balance switch too. And imagine what happened when drivers turned up the turbo boost.

[Adam43]

I'm not actually bothered if F1 is faster, but

Originally Posted by wnut

..and F1 seems to carefully avoid letting anything that could challenge its lap times running on the circuits it uses.

Really? I can't recall other series not being allowed to run at, say, Monza or Spa.

Originally Posted by Andy77

Monza is 4th in the list I think but its record came from a sports car as well.

Really? Surely an F1 car is faster round Monza?
Or are we talking about the late '60s and early '70s?
And I'm pretty sure that an F1 would destroy the lap record at Le Mans. Irrelevant that such a thought is.

Now ovals might be a different matter...

[garcon]

I wonder if an F1 car of the time could have taken the Le Mans lap record from the prototypes back in the days before the safety fascists put those 'orrible chicanes on the Mulsanne?

And how fast the F1 car would actually have been around the twisty bits if you geared it to match the prototypes down the straight?

And vaguely linking to DRS - now THAT is a straight where DRS might be useful...

[SALEEN S7R]

Just to fan the flames, the fastest LMP1 time of recent years at Monza was when the Le Mans series last raced there back in 2008. The pole time was a 1:31.528, now though the cars are signifcantly faster than that thanks to the likes of the Audi R18 etc. As for top speeds, at Le Mans I would guesstimate that you could see a top speed of around 225mph for a top LMP1 in qualifying trim in a tow.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by garcon

And vaguely linking to DRS - now THAT is a straight where DRS might be useful...

Depends where you paint the line!

Originally Posted by SALEEN S7R

Just to fan the flames, the fastest LMP1 time of recent years at Monza was when the Le Mans series last raced there back in 2008. The pole time was a 1:31.528, now though the cars are signifcantly faster than that thanks to the likes of the Audi R18 etc.

So, about 10s than an F1 car. Which is quite impressive really.

[SALEEN S7R]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Depends where you paint the line! So, about 10s than an F1 car. Which is quite impressive really.

Thats what I would guess, yes. Although I would say a 1:26 or 1:27 is on the cards for Monza these days in LMP1. They are about the same speed as a front running GP2 car, maybe quicker depending on the circuit. Take off the restrictors of the LMP1's though and then I think you would see faster times than in Formula 1 at the moment.

Back to the topic.

[Adam43]

Yes I agree, if you change the regulations you can have a faster car.

I think they should have DRS, even if it doesn't really help overtaking. Might as well. It may help one overtake? The drivers don't have to use it.

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Andy77

The world speed records on circuits (average speed per lap) are hold by motorcycles and sports cars. Ulster GP, Mosport & Le Mans , in that order are the top 3.

I have just noted a few comparisons of lap times between F1, LMP1, and Moto GP at the circuits they all use or have recently used. The F1 lap times are taken from qualifying in 2010, as are they all where available and relevant (ie if it was a wet qualifying I have used the race fastest lap.

Silverstone (All used the new layout last year)
LMP1 (2010 Silverstone 1000k pole): No. 7 Allan McNish Audi Sport Team Joest 1:43.475

F1 Lap Record (2010 pole): Fernando Alonso Ferrari Ferrari 1'30''874 233.374 Km/h avg

Moto GP Lap Record: Jorge Lorenzo Fiat Yamaha Team Yamaha 2'03.308 172.3 Km/h avg 321.8kph max

Catalunya
F1: 2010 Pole Mark Webber Red Bull Renault 1'19''995 209.488 km/h avg.

MotoGP
Jorge Lorenzo Fiat Yamaha Team Yamaha 1'34.515 303.6 173.0 kph ave 308.6 kph max

LMP1: A bit out of date, but the LMP1 lap record (from 2008 LMS race) is 1’31.875

Hungaroring
LMP Record (2010 H'ring 1000klms) LMP1 Jean-Christophe Boullion Rebellion Racing 1:32.888

F1 2010 pole: Sebastian Vettel Red Bull Renault 1'18''773 200.216 km/h

Spa
LMP1: (Pole 2010 Spa 1000KLm) No. 3 Sébastien Bourdais Team Peugeot Total 1:57.884

F1 2010 pole: Mark Webber Red Bull Renault 1'45''778 238.371 km/h avg

Sepang
F1 (race f/l): Mark Webber Red Bull Renault 1'37''054 205.605 km/h avg

MotoGP: Jorge Lorenzo Fiat Yamaha Team Yamaha 2'01.537 164.3 Km/h avg 309.2km/h top


In terms of top speeds ever....

* F1 fastest ever speed reached was Montoya at Monza, recording IIRC 374 kp/h. (Practice, Monza 2005)

* In LMP1/Sports Cars, on the original Mulsanne the highest speed ever achieved was in 1988 by Roger Dorchy in a WM Peugeot P88, at either 405kph or 407kph, (250mph in approx UK speak) depending on where you read it. Michelin supplied special narrow tyres to aid the drag reduction.

* The fastest ever average speed for an F1 lap was back in 2004 at Monza..... Rubens Barrichello, in his Ferrari F2004 V10 averaged 260.395 km/h on his pole lap. There have been marginally faster (maybe 1/10th) laps in practice or Q2.

Incidentally, you mentioned the Ulster GP, Mosport & Le Mans as being the fastest tracks (average speed per lap) of all time. Hmmm, not really seeing it to be honest.....

Looking at the Ulster GP website even now, the fastest ever lap of all classes (on the current 7.401 mile circuit) is recorded at 133.997 mph (say 216 kph) ..... That is slower than Spa.

It is only dubbed as ‘the world’s fastest road race’ by the organisers.
Perhaps they mean actual fastest for a public road based course, not including pukka purpose built tracks exclusively used for racing. There claims just dont stand up.

The Ulster GP fastest ever all classes average speed of 133.997mph is marginally faster than the outright fastest lap on the Isle of Man TT layout, which currently stands at 131.511 miles per hour (211.646 km/h). With the IoM TT layout being public roads also, although the speed is fast, it is certainly slower than the Dunrod track now used by the UGP.

Or maybe the UGP refer to the original circuit used for the event, pre moving the event to Dundrod in 1953..... the original circuit being the 20.5 mile Clady Circuit, although I very much doubt that even with the 7 mile straight lap speeds would have been much slower given the bumps (one reason the Clady Circuit was dropped) and of course the potential speeds given the relatively limited technology of those days. .

Le Mans is of course also a public roads based circuit...... the fastest ever lap speed there was set by Hans Stuck in 1985, driving a Porsche 962 to a lap of 3:14.80 (average lap speed of 251.815 km/h)

Still short of Barrichello's 2005 Monza lap, and indeed short of just about every dry Monza GP since 2000.

So those two tracks I can understand that they might be specifically 'public road racing tracks'. However, I dont understand the Mosport Park claim to top 3 highest average speed at all..... I am pretty sure it is not a road (as in public road) track, so does not fit in with the road race category of track such as the Ulster GP at Dunrod. It certainly does not seem to haave hosted any spectacularly fast lap speeds compared to other tracks.

Specifically, Mosport Park claim the fastest ever recorded lap of the track was by Rinaldo Capello, in an Audi R10 TDI, in qualifying for the 2008 Grand Prix of Mosport, with a time of 1:04.094..... Certainly reasonably fast as thats an average speed of 138.116 mph (223.75 kp/h). But certainly not the stuff of records amongst other bespoke racing circuits.

In fact, based on last year F1 qualy times the alleged Mosport track record mentioned is certainly slower than quite a few F1 races.... for starters faster GPs include Spa, Monza, Albert Park, Silverstone (current track), and Suzuka.

TBH, I don't think the Moto GP times are that close at all in terms of average speed, although they do quite well in terms of actual top speeds achieved, MotoGP are seemingly comfortably slowest of the F1 LMP1 and MotoGP categories.

For instance you will see they are 'quite a lot' slower in the comparisons I listed above. As a further example, at Phillip Island last year, Casey Moaner's Moto GP pole lap time of 1'30.107 is about on par with times set by 40 year old F5000's from the PI Historic meeting last month, and barely faster than a V8 Supercar lap time. (V8SC are within 2 seconds of Moto GP times.)

Im not sure that Moto GP would be troubling either F1 or LMP1 cars on the same tracks in terms of lap times.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by E.B

Im not sure that Moto GP would be troubling either F1 or LMP1 cars on the same tracks in terms of lap times.

Not a chance!

MotoGP bikes regularly beat F1 cars for top speed on some of the circuits that they both use. But the bikes lack of downforce and grip (or an F1 cars over abundance of downforce and grip) means that it doesn't stand a chance when the track is going in any direction other than a straight line.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Many things were a lot less sophisticated back then. Tyres included.

Hmmm, everyone is on here whinging about overtaking and the artificial nature of measures to allow overtaking, that is right isn't it? They are also on here about how good it was when overtaking was a natural course of events and cars actually moved and slid and drivers did things like apply opposite lock, Right? Now all those things happened in the time you call unsophisticated, Right? I rest my case.