DRIVER ADJUSTABLE FRONT WINGS

[davester]

The SIMPLEST way to spice up the racing and allow cars to follow without destroying their front tyres would be to implement DRIVER ADJUSTABLE FRONT WINGS.

A following driver can increase front wing angle to make up for the lost downforce from turbulent air. The following car also gets to keep its aero balance and keep tyre life.

There you go, simple.

[OVERSTEER]

That has already been tried, in 2009 iirc.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by OVERSTEER

That has already been tried, in 2009 iirc.

Adjustable wings were tried, and they were a MISERABLE FAILURE!

OWT's work! Should have been called the "Aerodynamicists Union."

[Akrapovic]

Didn't make a difference since engineers worked out the optimum and they ran at optimum and everyone stayed where they were.

Maybe F1 should be trying to solve the cause of the problem, rather than trying to work around it with super duper wing flaps and boost buttons.

[nickyf1]

The front wings themselves were actually quite primitive in 2009.



And even before that, very few front wing elements and flaps. The wider front wings drove the evolution of what we see today.



I'm convinced that there never was a problem with F1. The supposed 'lack' of overtaking only became an issue when more people started watching it around 2007/2008, and since the changes to improve the racing, there hasn't been a single interesting Grand Prix.

Sure, some Grands Prix may be incident packed, and have some side by side action, but the bigger story of the race has been missing for quite some time.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by nickyf1

Sure, some Grands Prix may be incident packed, and have some side by side action, but the bigger story of the race has been missing for quite some time.

I am only interested in the ones that had side by side action and I can't recall any. The drivers and cars rely on good air and without it the car simply does not work and the drivers say they can't overcome that. Why do the cars need aero anyway? I have never seen a satisfactory answer to that question and going faster is not an answer as going faster does not necessarily guarantee a better RACE.

[AoB Special Stage]

Define a better race

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by AoB Special Stage

Define a better race

42

[steve_r]

The most effective way of improving racing IMO is a reduction on the reliance of aero grip and an increase in reliance on mechanical grip. Therefore cars can get closer to one another without the dirty air effect. How you do that is another story.

The second improvement that they are almost definitely NEVER going to use these days, what with KERs and all, is a return to less effective steel brakes resulting in larger braking distances. Therefore resulting in braking overtakes that can be done somewhere other than a 200mph straight into a 40mph corner. This may not be in the spirit of technical innovation of F1 though.

Sorry for the thread hijack.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by steve_r

The most effective way of improving racing IMO is a reduction on the reliance of aero grip and an increase in reliance on mechanical grip. Therefore cars can get closer to one another without the dirty air effect. How you do that is another story.

The second improvement that they are almost definitely NEVER going to use these days, what with KERs and all, is a return to less effective steel brakes resulting in larger braking distances. Therefore resulting in braking overtakes that can be done somewhere other than a 200mph straight into a 40mph corner. This may not be in the spirit of technical innovation of F1 though.

Sorry for the thread hijack.

It isn't in the spirit of F1, but you can twist it into a rule which makes it in the spirit of F1.

So we don't want brakes with too long a braking distance because it isn't efficient. But what we can do is give a maximum number of races a set of brakes can do, just like we do engines. If you say you're only allowed 10 sets of brakes a year, you'll get to tick the efficiency box, whilst increasing braking distances.

I think this method says more about how poorly thought out the F1 rules are and how easy they are to manipulate than anything else.

[AoB Special Stage]

Originally Posted by steve_r

The most effective way of improving racing IMO is a reduction on the reliance of aero grip and an increase in reliance on mechanical grip. Therefore cars can get closer to one another without the dirty air effect. How you do that is another story.

The second improvement that they are almost definitely NEVER going to use these days, what with KERs and all, is a return to less effective steel brakes resulting in larger braking distances. Therefore resulting in braking overtakes that can be done somewhere other than a 200mph straight into a 40mph corner. This may not be in the spirit of technical innovation of F1 though.

Sorry for the thread hijack.

I think part of the problem is with outbraking now has to do with the two most likely outcomes.

1) You slightly touch and break your car and/or get a penalty
2) You're passing Maldonado and he decides to swerve in front of you and sends you flying

[nickyf1]

What I really mean is that F1 never needed fixing, and now we're in this mess.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by steve_r

The most effective way of improving racing IMO is a reduction on the reliance of aero grip and an increase in reliance on mechanical grip. Therefore cars can get closer to one another without the dirty air effect. How you do that is another story.

The second improvement that they are almost definitely NEVER going to use these days, what with KERs and all, is a return to less effective steel brakes resulting in larger braking distances. Therefore resulting in braking overtakes that can be done somewhere other than a 200mph straight into a 40mph corner. This may not be in the spirit of technical innovation of F1 though.

Sorry for the thread hijack.

Someone else gets it also!!!!!!!!!!!! I thought I was on my own when it comes to braking distances and aero grip.

What is a good race, to me at least, watch this, FV's at Bathurst, it get better as the race gets longer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGu5LMqQ70Q

[stripedcat]

I think I remember hearing Martin Brundle say that the drivers ended up just using to adjust for tyre wear(sort of like a pitstop adjustment on the front wing) - as it wasn't that effective for actually using to overtake.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Casper

What is a good race, to me at least, watch this, FV's at Bathurst, it get better as the race gets longer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGu5LMqQ70Q

I am mostly just poking fun at you here but...

Single file through all the curves, passing via drafting only with what appears to be no real impact on final race results. I am sure it was exciting for that driver, but probably boring to watch as a track side spectator or via TV broadcast. You might as well be watching NASCAR restrictor plate racing on a superspeedway! (apologies to NASCAR fans)

Now I am done poking fun... What was nice to watch was that the drivers clearly trust each other and gave each other room while drafting on the straights. I did enjoy the video and also find lower pro and amateur classes much more fun to watch at times.

Richard

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I am mostly just poking fun at you here but...

Single file through all the curves, passing via drafting only with what appears to be no real impact on final race results. I am sure it was exciting for that driver, but probably boring to watch as a track side spectator or via TV broadcast. You might as well be watching NASCAR restrictor plate racing on a superspeedway! (apologies to NASCAR fans)

Now I am done poking fun... What was nice to watch was that the drivers clearly trust each other and gave each other room while drafting on the straights. I did enjoy the video and also find lower pro and amateur classes much more fun to watch at times.

Richard

I can assure you Richard no one passes anyone across the top of Bathurst, the drops on the other side of the wall are way too much to risk it. In fact open wheelers were banned from the place until very recently as it was deemed to dangerous for them.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by nickyf1

I'm convinced that there never was a problem with F1. The supposed 'lack' of overtaking only became an issue when more people started watching it around 2007/2008, and since the changes to improve the racing, there hasn't been a single interesting Grand Prix.

Originally Posted by nickyf1

What I really mean is that F1 never needed fixing, and now we're in this mess.

im not sure i follow...are you saying the problems/issues F1 has now was because of unnecessary 'rules fixing' and F1 never needed fixing in the first place so if things had continued as they were from the mid 2000s things would be fine today?


you used 07/08 as a benchmark but in 09 we lost Honda and BMW and Toyota the following year all citing reasons like global economy, lack of sustainability (spiraling costs), diminishing returns in terms of technology crossover and advertising potential (decreasing TV numbers)...losing three major manufactures in 2 years has to indicate that something needed fixing no?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Casper

I can assure you Richard no one passes anyone across the top of Bathurst, the drops on the other side of the wall are way too much to risk it. In fact open wheelers were banned from the place until very recently as it was deemed to dangerous for them.

Like i said, mostly poking fun at you. IIRC, there actually was one pass of the camera car up on top (where he was late on gas due to foot stuck under brake and guy behind got a run on him).

To the point earlier of what is good racing? IMHO, I think it happens when you have relatively equally matched solutions, but solutions that individually have different strengths and weaknesses. There are some great onboard footage of this years LeMans in which Audi and Porsche were going at it. No car was best at all places on the track. Porsche might pass the Audi coming out of a corner as it put more hybrid power down, but Audi might actually brake later and retake the position at the end of the straight. All the while dealing with traffic from other prototypes and GT cars.

It has all strayed away from the OP topic. Regarding the topic of this thread, I agree with others in that it likely would not have a big impact on sprint racing (F1). The conditions don't change much, so assuming your engineers have done a good job, you probably would not need to do much adjusting over the life of the race. Endurance racing might be a different thing however given the potential for more variably in track conditions over the life of a race.

Richard

[chillibowl]

to be honest im not sure how i would define 'good racing' either. i feel like i know it when i see it but cant quantify it any better then that.

on topic, what exactly is the problem with a driver adjustable front wing?

the benefits are clear i would have thought...driver gets to make the choice themselves (an idea that everyone loves) so manually adjusted elements mean go flat/less drag for the straights, more downforce for the corners. its basically a variation on the DRS system that the drivers can use at will anywhere on track and for better or worse DRS has allowed cars to follow more closely for the remainder of the lap while. of course it also promotes some pretty mundane passes at the end of straights but im ignoring that part of it for this argument.

anyways i dont think the idea should be discounted due to the 2009 season. i dont think we really got to see the adjustable wing in isolation as all the focus was on double diffusers and iirc the rules regarding when and how many times a driver could employ a front wing adjustment during a lap was limited to 1 or 2 times and maximum number of degrees. potentially the benefits were erased by the race rules committee.

a good idea but perhaps one not fully realized.

[wnut]

Motorsport magazine's podcast with Tony Southgate highlights how Mercedes are currently running two wind tunnels, one of which runs 24/7.

Southgate, flat out says that going down the aerodynamic route was the biggest mistake that motor racing ever made, and Roebuck suggests that the best solution to the current F1 problem would simply be to remove the front wings entirely, the best possible answer!

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1...hgate-podcast/

All covered in the first four minutes!

[wnut]

Originally Posted by AoB Special Stage

Define a better race

This: Hamilton and Vettel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDkK8a4jHZ8

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by wnut

This: Hamilton and Vettel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDkK8a4jHZ8

The leader of that race didn't quite reach the heights of those in second and third!

[AoB Special Stage]

Originally Posted by wnut

This: Hamilton and Vettel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDkK8a4jHZ8

Matter of perspective really. That was a good show for the people in stands, but for the man in radioactive green and silver, this couldn't have gone much better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxGWVE0mmTg

[wnut]

Originally Posted by AoB Special Stage

Matter of perspective really. That was a good show for the people in stands, but for the man in radioactive green and silver, this couldn't have gone much better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxGWVE0mmTg

Have a look how little downforce is available to a FormulaE car compared to an F1, and how little rubber they have on the road.
Unsurprisingly they are better racing cars capable of racing one another.

[AoB Special Stage]

Originally Posted by wnut

Have a look how little downforce is available to a Formula E car compared to an F1, and how little rubber they have on the road.
Unsurprisingly they are better racing cars capable of racing one another.

Their downforce is actually pretty high, they tend to run low settings for energy saving purposes, but their tyres have to last though all the sessions (FP1, FP2, Q, R). Ecclestone was right about one thing regarding Michelin for sure. Oh, and they have a little bit of ground effect.