|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
19 Jul 2019, 19:05 (Ref:3918518) | #3576 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 950
|
I thought the change to 18" wheels for 2021 had already been agreed.
What is of interest is that the tender document from the FIA for the new tyre supply included a detailed requirement for them to degrade to a specified level over a stint length (I think I posted a link earlier in this or a similar thread). Now they want tyres that don't degrade, so would any of the other companies that looked at bidding for the trye supply consider launching an appeal to have the tender re-opened as the specification has changed? |
||
__________________
I haven't got a life, just an anorak. |
19 Jul 2019, 20:52 (Ref:3918535) | #3577 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
I believe the 18" wheels is not new (I think known for months), but moving away from tire specs that require poor durability to be engineered into the design is new. My take away is...
1. They are listening to the complaints about the current situation. I doubt anyone (teams, drivers, fans... probably Pirelli as well) is happy with the current spec. 2. The tire durability issue existed to create uncertainty in the race results. They must be confident that other 2021 changes will negate the need for the current tire spec. Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
20 Jul 2019, 01:19 (Ref:3918555) | #3578 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,219
|
And I think they've figured out the unexpected results lasted about as long as it took the engineers to figure out tire life so not long at all. Since it wasn't their idea there's no egg in their face for changing it
|
|
|
20 Jul 2019, 01:29 (Ref:3918557) | #3579 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
Quote:
Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
20 Jul 2019, 03:27 (Ref:3918561) | #3580 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,427
|
Bring different tyres each weekend, don’t tell them anything them and see who sorts it out best.
|
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
20 Jul 2019, 04:41 (Ref:3918565) | #3581 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,634
|
My memory of ground effects F1 is that the only position changes anywhere near the front of the field were due to mechanical problems and driver errors.There was virtually no on track passing.Will have to look through Autocourse lap charts for confirmation.
|
||
|
20 Jul 2019, 06:17 (Ref:3918571) | #3582 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 979
|
Newey is trying to preserve his and fellow engineers playground by arguing it's the tyres that are causing the lack of wheel to wheel battles.
Dear mister Newey, we don't want cars that might be a tiny bit better at close racing with current DRS. We want cars that are so good at close racing that DRS is no longer needed or at least it's need strongly reduced. If that means you engineers have less aero freedom I couldn't care less. Go work for Airbus or something. I hope FIA/FOM stay firm on this and I hope journo's are a bit more critical than just giving people a channel to work the public opinion for their own agenda's. |
|
|
20 Jul 2019, 09:34 (Ref:3918589) | #3583 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,330
|
Well we need cleaner bodywork for a start, none of those ugly winglets on there. And bringing in ground effect will help no end
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
20 Jul 2019, 09:45 (Ref:3918591) | #3584 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Yup Griff, and spec the undertray, nobody can see it anyway, so why should it be a performance differentiator?
Can also make sure the undertray is not overly sensitive to air entering it and it does not leave a dirty wake. Huge saving in time and money immediately. |
|
|
20 Jul 2019, 14:37 (Ref:3918604) | #3585 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,144
|
IndyCar uses ground effect and there is plenty of on track passing.
|
||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
20 Jul 2019, 15:04 (Ref:3918609) | #3586 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,330
|
And also plenty in GP2 when they used ground effect
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
20 Jul 2019, 22:17 (Ref:3918659) | #3587 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,345
|
Quote:
I don’t think it’ll be a repeat of those days & as others have said, it DOES work well in other current series. |
|||
__________________
“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 |
20 Jul 2019, 22:23 (Ref:3918660) | #3588 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,345
|
I was out last night with a few people who have been around Motorsport generally for decades - the whole lot had stopped watching F1 as a “mustn’t miss” experience but now just catch the odd race. Enthusiasm gonski.
Every one of them complained about the current tyres resulting in drivers striking it around rather than actually, you know, racing. We talked about 2021 quite a bit with enthusiasm sparking up - based on my straw (red wine) poll - 2021 can’t come soon enough. |
||
__________________
“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 |
20 Aug 2019, 15:20 (Ref:3923519) | #3589 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,144
|
Ferrari aren't too happy about standard parts, for 2021.
https://classic.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/145470 |
||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
20 Aug 2019, 17:21 (Ref:3923526) | #3590 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,330
|
Well they wouldn’t, would they? Then again non standard parts haven’t got them a title of late
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
20 Aug 2019, 21:44 (Ref:3923558) | #3591 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
I assume it's all part of the negotiations for the 2021 regulations. Ferrari, like everyone, has an agenda that drives their actions.
Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
22 Aug 2019, 14:55 (Ref:3923763) | #3592 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,719
|
FOM's 2021 design hits the wind tunnel.
that diffuser looks crazy and if they can actually push through a set of regs that reduces the wake as much as this test is suggesting then all the power to them. whether it works or not remains to be seen but i applaud the more involved and proactive approach compared to the prior owners/administration. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/a...K7PjTBxtS.html |
||
__________________
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 |
22 Aug 2019, 18:47 (Ref:3923796) | #3593 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
Quote:
Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
23 Aug 2019, 11:46 (Ref:3923863) | #3594 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
I hope that they have compared the F2 cars in the wind tunnel with their ideas.
Following on the results of the OWG in 2009; extremely poor; which is proudly quoted by Symonds and looking at the large three element front wing and collating it with Lewis' earlier observations that he believed that they had made very little advance in solving the current problems from a drivers' point of view, I am deeply skeptical. Then add: You might be wondering why the research and development teams haven’t put a second car behind the front car to test the wake. Symonds says that is “not necessary”. Really! Hope this lot are being paid at the end of the 2021 season following a practical demonstration of how good their changes are! Last edited by wnut; 23 Aug 2019 at 11:55. |
|
|
23 Aug 2019, 12:17 (Ref:3923871) | #3595 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,719
|
That robot arm rake deal seems alright no?
Are they even able to run 2 cars on a rolling wind tunnel? |
||
__________________
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 |
23 Aug 2019, 13:26 (Ref:3923880) | #3596 | |||||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
Quote:
I also tend to think that things are better now than before. But no doubt, we can debate this forever and provide examples of driver who think it is better or not. At this point I am looking more toward the future. And I expect they have learned from what did or didn't work from prior efforts. So the question is... what should they do differently this time? As you say.. run multiple cars in the tunnel? Quote:
Quote:
First, I think with the movable rake, they can pretty accurately measure what is going on behind the leading car. Ideally, yes, they should then run two back to back (in various configurations), but that leads to your question chilibowl about space. The full article has lots of info. It says that teams typically run 60% models. But to view more of the wake effect in the same tunnel size, they went with a 50% model. So that gives them more space being the car to gather "wake" data. Then if you wanted to run two cars, the models have to be even smaller. Which starts to create problems with trusting the results. When asked about running two cars in the tunnel the answer was (quote from article)... Quote:
Richard |
|||||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
23 Aug 2019, 13:48 (Ref:3923882) | #3597 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,330
|
I really don’t see why they can’t keep researching it. It’ll help them achieve the right target eventually. Still I have high hopes with the underbody downforce
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
23 Aug 2019, 16:02 (Ref:3923888) | #3598 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,803
|
Quote:
Richard Last edited by Richard C; 23 Aug 2019 at 16:09. |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
23 Aug 2019, 18:48 (Ref:3923895) | #3599 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,330
|
Keep researching how to make cars that produce close racing. You can’t just settle on one solution, you have to explore all avenues
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
23 Aug 2019, 19:04 (Ref:3923897) | #3600 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,144
|
When Swift, one of the manufacturers competing for the 2012 IndyCar design, came up with the concept of the 'Mushroom Busters', to reduce the wake, something they had already been using in Fornula Nippon.
http://www.f1network.net/main/indy-r...37/swift-ideas |
||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 |