Aerodynamics again!!

[angst]

Has anybody else noticed the similarities between the current era and 1979-1982 in as much as drivers talent being veiled by the cars they are driving. The drivers then,as now, complained that if the car wasn't right aerodynamically then that was it - end of story. So, where we used to have Rosberg failing to qualify his Fittipaldi in '81(and winning the WDC the folowing year), we now have Alesi struggling at the back of the grid.
If we really want a WDC then the aerodynamic quotient of racecar design has to be minimised. I know that other factors (horsepower, mechanical grip etc) will disadvantage drivers, but aerodynamics seem to have a particularly large effect on the drivers confidence in a car to do what he wants it to. It also tends to favour one particular driving style, and anything outside of that is penalised utterly (hence Alesi being outqualified by Heidfeld so often).
Before anybody says this is just an excuse for Alesi, it is not. I am using Alesi as the most obvious example of a driver who has always been very, very fast suddenly turned into a no-hoper by the car he has.

[Jo]

Wouldn't it be cool to drive on the ceiling?

[angst]

So long as you're not driving a Prost, the last place you need an engine failure is on the ceiling.

[R]

I think this is just another excuse for Alesi. Remember when he was team-mate to Gerhard Berger? They were fairly evenly matched, and I never heard anyone saying Berger was "very very fast", and a "potentially great driver hampered by poor material".

I like Alesi, and like most people I was completely overjoyed when he won his sole GP win in Canada in 95. I hoped many more would come, and I actually thought he would follow in the footsteps of TGF and certainly have a very good chance of becoming WDC in 96 when he (along with Berger) went to the all-conquering Benetton replacing TGF who went to Ferrari to get a new challenge.

And we know what happened. Alesi and Berger tore that team apart, the great Benetton team that had taken eleven GP wins in 95 (even Herbert could win for them! Twice!) did not get one single win in 96 when being driven by Alesi and Berger! They whinged and whined and tore the team apart. And what did Eddie Irvine and TGF say about the 95 Ferrari that Alesi and Berger had (surprise surprise) whinged and whined about? "It's not that bad!" So I'm sorry, but like Berger, Alesi doesn't have it in him to become WDC, or else, he would have done it by now. Lord knows he's had the chances.

[Dhru]

I agree that Gerhard Berger and Alesi did little for the Bennetton team in '96. But Alesi has said many times that the team always tried to set it up as Michael would've liked it, and refused to listen to his point of view. He may not be great in the dry, but he's one heck of a driver in the wet, remeber Spa '98?
Also, the only reason Herbert won twice (Silverstone and Imola) was because he was third man on the track when Hill knocked Michael off by trying to overtake him for the lead.
Dhru.

[LYM]

angst

I agree that aerodynamics advances had made a great impact in this year's races.(And maybe, the WDC...)

I was very impressed with McLaren's engines all along, but this year the Ferrari seems have improved on the cars' dimensions and regain the edge on speed.

But I don't think aerodynamics will dictate everything next year. BARHonda who is already very good on wings designs, needs to improve on their reliablity. Williams have exciting youngsters Ralf and Montoya, but probably not as skillful and experienced as MH & MS.

As for Prost, their engine is just pathetic and Alesi and Heidfeld are not to blame. And their miserable budgets...achillies heel to all the small teams in F1

[angst]

LYM, the point of my post was that it may be that BAR and Williams will NOT be any closer next year, unless they happen upon a good aerodynamist(?). The similarities with '79-'82 is that aerodynamics seem to be the overriding factor in F1. If the aerodynamic package isn't right then you can do nothing to compete, in effect you might as well pack your bags and go home. I hope that I'm wrong, but I don't think I am. By the way R, I thought Berger was a very fast driver - he did alright when he was teamed with Senna, who I don't think anyone would argue was one of the outstanding drivers of his era.

[Valve Bounce]

There is no doubt that aerodynamics plays a significant part in the success of a race driver. Did anyone hear TGF mention that they made a significant change to the settings during the first stop that enabled him to go faster in the second sector? How much a team will concentrate on the car's settings to suit one driver may be to the detriment of the other driver if he has a different driving style. However, F1 has gone muc too far along this road for this to be negated. You may as well go back to the slim wheels of the fifties. However, a lot can be gained if we can cut down the size of those damn billboards at the rear of the cars. By the way, I am listening to Ambassador Satch while I post this!!

[tazzoid]

But you see, this is what I mean!!! If you reduce the aerodynamic quotient, you change the sport! It's evolving, and that's just the direction in which it's heading! And I agree, it's very bad for the Alesi's etc. of F1, but (and I mean NO DISRESPECT to anybody by saying this) that's just tough for him. It's not like he's the only driver on the track, and if he can't cut it, he should move over to let somebody else try. That's why we have different motorsports - some people just don't gel. It's tragic, but it's true.

By the way - the aero package on the Ferrari was courtesy of SOUTH AFRICAN Rory Byrne!!!!! YAY!!!

[angst]

No, no, no, no, no. I used Alesi as the most obvious example, it doesn't matter who gets into that car it will not be competitive. I'm not arguing that F1 should be changed so that Jean Alesi may be competitive again. My point is that, as with '79-'82 the driver's input is so minimal that a driver like Alesi, who has proven he can compete at the front, is made to look like a nonentity. The problem specific to aerodynamics is that there are very few engineers who fully understand them, and when aerodynamics is THE most important factor of design then getting those details wrong means the car will not work at all, no amount of fiddling will get it to work. The cars become nervous and any slight mistake means the car instantly loses grip. Aerodynamics also cause problems with actual racing, as they lose downforce when following a car closely. By the way, what sort of downforce loss are we talking about? If you had two cars driving along a hypothetical ceiling, if the following car got too close, would it drop off the ceiling?

[tazzoid]

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood.

Bearing in mind that I am aminor and that my understanding of downforce etc is minimal, I think it would depend on the speed, because if there is not enough air passing under the car and around the aerofoils, the car will not be sucked down. If another driver gets too close, I think he is in the first driver's slipstream and all the air is being diverted around him. That's why he would come unstuck. I think. PLEASE corrrect me if I'm wrong, which I probably am.

[angst]

Tazzoid, you are absolutely right, it is the air being diverted around the following car that causes the loss in downforce, which is the point Valve Bounce (I think 'tis he) makes about the current wing designs. Oh, and I very rudely forgot to say - Welcome to ten-tenths, keep those posts coming, we always like to have different slants on the debates here.

[tazzoid]

Thanx, it's rather overwhelming here.

[Valve Bounce]

I think if you talk to any sailor and ask him about sailing in dirty wind, that will explain things for you. However, please note that those huge billboards behind the F1 cars do not act as wings - they act as deflectors. By deflecting the air, the downforce is proportional to the square of the velocity of the mass of air deflected. Unfortunately the resulting turbulance causes the front wing of the following car to be less effective. If we had that billboard horizontal and acting as a wing, we would have cars slipstreaming and overtaking would be hte rule rather than exception in F1.

[Gt_R]

Have those boards inverted and have racing in the air....

[Dino IV]

R: never heard anyone saying Berger was "very very fast"

No? I guess you missed a whole lot back then ...

I agree on your principle, angst, driver input is way too low to be a significant factor these days. Well TGF and Mika shook off DC and Rubinho but where talking major quality differences here. Put in faster guys and difference will be hardly noticable. On the other hand difference between i.e. the Prost and the Ferrari can't be belittled no matter what kind of super driver Alain contracts.
Cutting back aerodynamics will be one of the biggest factors, together with electronics. Watch cars feature an upgrade undertray make huge steps through the grid and see cars with a miss-designed undertray fall back.
I'd love to see FIA implement the good things CART taught us in F1 and combine it with open-end engineering, where F1 is famous for, on the other fields. No spectator will care if the front- and rear-wing, undertray and diffuser are standarized and the same design on every car. Nobody will notice if the only wire to the differential is for the diff-oil temperature sensor instead of electro-hydraulic ECU-controlled mapping the diff best for every other corner. So go ahead, Max, do your job and do it best. Stop cuddling with major car-manufacturers who know that the one that throws the most bucks at this game long enough wins it all. Somewhere along the way of the commercial uprising in F1, even the people who are responsible for guarding the sport, forgot what it's all about and where it's served best with: S-P-O-R-T. The whole more-safety-policy just was and is a way in protecting the big investors and car-companies; making sure that they know that if they keep that cash-flow going everything is gonna work out and that not some Alesi in a Prost with a well worked out design from minimal budget will pose a problem and snatch a WC from them.

[R]

Originally posted by Dino IV

No? I guess you missed a whole lot back then ...

I didn't intend my statement to be interpreted like that. My fault for not being specific.

My statement concerned this forum. There are several posters here who rate Alesi very highly, some even think he's faster than TGF, but I've never heard any of them saying the same thing about Berger. That was my point, but I can see that my previous statement was not well written and could be misunderstood.

I agree, angst, about Berger doing well when he was teamed with Senna. But I also think that both Berger and Alesi were faster in the early years of their careers than in the later.