|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
7 May 2000, 09:39 (Ref:716) | #1 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 390
|
Everybody is always talking about how regulations should be introduced on cars to make them overtakeable. I welcome this protest and support it in the fullest, but don'e we need track changes as well. Some tracks, in their design, just wont allow any passing moves, even if it was Indy car. Anyway just a thought.
|
||
|
7 May 2000, 10:55 (Ref:717) | #2 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 159
|
Int eh current open wheel world F1 is really safe. Comparing to others. Why change it is a great relitivly safe sport changing tracks just leaves gaps for accidents, I love the tracks the way they are all we need is a new one everynow and again.
|
||
|
9 May 2000, 14:48 (Ref:718) | #3 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 731
|
Three Wide at Spanish GP! They can if they want to! Look how close Dr. Hakkinenbush stayed to TGF until the 2nd regretable pitstop. Have the Macaroons found a way to negate the 'dirty-air' problem??
|
||
|
9 May 2000, 15:08 (Ref:719) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,512
|
Talking of dirty air, I watched a TV show recently where the team's Tech Chief was giving a guided tour around a current F1 car, and was pointing out what particular devices were for and why their design was so. He mentioned a certain number of hours were spent prior to each GP finalising the wing package for downforce suitable for the particular circuit. He then pointed out the Gurney strip fitted above each plane of the rear wing. When asked what their function was, did they allow fine adjustment, etc, the guy said the main reason for their inclusion was to create 'dirty air'.
It seems that creating this 'unfortunate side effect' has become a science in its own right. If these additional tuning strips could be legislated against, it's just possible that there would be many more overtaking opportunities than there are at present. But how do you determine the difference between these and legitimate aero items? Tricky one to unravel, that. Did anyone else see this programme? I can't remember when, what or who, but it was within the last month. |
||
|
9 May 2000, 17:26 (Ref:720) | #5 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 1998
Posts: 2,762
|
I was under the impression that a major portion of the wind tunnel time being used was for just the purpose of limiting the amount of usable downforce a trailing car can have. Eventually there will be a low denominator of acceptable drag versus downforce and the final frontier left to the aerodynamicist is finding ways to eliminate another car from being able to follow closely.
F1 cars are no more safe than CART cars or IRL cars as far as driver safety goes. I can't help but think that Senna would be alive today had he been racing a Reynard/Lola CART chassis instead of a Williams at Tamburello. The CART cars have a superior crush structure in their noses to the F1 machines. Greg Moore's wreck was not the fault of any inherit deficiency of his car, he struck a barrier with his head. Nothing was going to save him in that instance. I doubt that Schumacher would have been a seriously injured at Stowe last year had he the benefit that every CART driver gets fromt he design of their chassis. As far as resesigning tracks, every track has something about it that limits passing or at least discourages it. The only real thing that can be changed is the design of the cars so that racing in proximity is possible. |
||
|
9 May 2000, 17:50 (Ref:721) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 731
|
As for the GM incident. How about a PROPER standard rollover device that actually works. Let the aerodynamicist work it out but at least protect the most vulnerable part of the driver. FIA & CART.
|
||
|
9 May 2000, 19:28 (Ref:722) | #7 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 63
|
To be blunt modern F1 tracks are incredibly bland. The magnitude of Senna's death still hangs over the sport and the FIA's overreaction has decimated formula 1 curciut design and revision. I do agree that racing and overtaking seems to eeked its way back in the sport (let's hope for good, or will Mosely squash this too)If we can't have overtaking them lets introduce some faster corners. I for one find watching the cars go through Eau Rouge and R-3something exciting (at Sukuka I think thats the pathetic designation)the drivers are right on the limit. (some more than others)as tests of the drivers will and determination they are unparralleled in the sport. Over sanitising the sport has done nothing but harm.
|
||
|
9 May 2000, 20:19 (Ref:723) | #8 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 2,946
|
F1 cars today are FAR too over-dependant upon aerodynamic grip, thanks to the BONKERS reduction on the mechanical grip side of things with the intro of grooved tyres/narrow track etc. Bring back wide track, slick rubber and make the WINGS considerably smaller, then cars can follow and pass and have great racing. Slipstreaming is now a viable possibility. At present a car just can't get close enough, such is the loss in grip. If the speds are STILL too high, limit engine power, not grip. GRIP = FUN
Also, call me irresponsible, but can F1 be TOO safe? Too big gravel traps and areas of grass take spectators away from the action. There's no DANGER involved any more, which I always thought was part of motorsport's appeal. There's no risks (with the exception f you Eau Rouge's, Blanchemons, 130R et al, all fast corners with zippo crash protection) no fun. Oh well. Another weekiend, another dull circuit: The new Nurburgring sums up my point. TOO safe and sanitised. Bring back the old one! (if you dare!) |
||
|
9 May 2000, 20:49 (Ref:724) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 1998
Posts: 2,762
|
F1 cars have been reliant on aero grip since they made mandatory flat bottom cars. Thousands of pounds of grip can be generated with just venturi tunnels on the bottom of the car. This was first pioneered by Chapman in F1 at Lotus. Now it is not allowed and we have the current form of racing. At some of the ovals, CART teams use lift on the front wing to keep the car from bottoming out. That is how much downforce is generated by the undertray.
|
||
|
9 May 2000, 21:52 (Ref:725) | #10 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 6,038
|
Of course, the downside to having the venturi tunnels on the car is that if the car gets the slightest launch it goes flying into the air. From watching Cart and F1 races I would believe that the Cart cars are significantly lighter than the F1 cars based on the fact that they go flying high up into the air whenever they hit a bump the wrong way. That was involved in Gille Villeneuve's fatal accident. Sid Watkins discussed it in his book, but I seem to have misplaced it.
Cart cars can take heavier impacts better than F1 cars can for the simple reason that while there are plenty of big impact crashes at the super-speedways each year, very few occur in F1. And when they do occur they are often into a big tire barrier, and the driver comes out unhurt. In Cart it would be into concrete, and he would limp away. I think that F1's tracks are very safe, probably the safest in the world. However there are still corners that could be improved, so the problem will never be over. While the cars could take impact better, they rarely have to as they usually hit a tire barrier. They could use some work. |
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Treating Oil on a wet Track? (merged with 'Oil on the track') | Andrew Palmer | Marshals Forum | 25 | 9 May 2005 18:43 |
Ansan, South Korea track revealed (Autosport article + supposed track map?) | StickShift | ChampCar World Series | 2 | 30 Jan 2005 05:15 |
Track day Car | Chris Stockdale | Racers Forum | 1 | 11 Feb 2003 23:21 |
Track Changes | Matthopps | Formula One | 28 | 30 Jan 2003 11:41 |
Track Changes | Nordic | Sportscar & GT Racing | 44 | 20 Feb 2002 06:48 |