Technical Moveable rear wings (DRS)

[sportsman]

This was the first F1 car I saw live in 1955.Fangio was in the other one at British GP at Aintree.
And to see them in a four wheel drift at 170mph is a specatacle that modern F1 can only dream about.

Mercedes Benz W196

And these cars raced on the track.Try kerb hopping in these and it was all over.

 

[johnnoble1990]

Yes the corner speeds would be lower, resulting in slower lap times.But that in itself is not so important.
Even if lap times are slower cars that can follow each other closely and ovetake would more than compensate for lower speeds.
Problem is that far to many F1 fans are Brmm Brmm minded kids and are only intersted in top speeds.
Driver skills are lost on them.

Ah see i'm exactly the opposite to a Brmm Brmm kid. I follow F1 as a sport, and therefore driver skill is more interesting to me than the cars.

 

[teabagyokel]

Well as far as "the show" is concerned, the DRS ticks all the boxes because the casual armchair viewer can watch it flipping up and down, accompanied by the flashy red and green on-screen graphics.

Oooh, shiny, shiny.

Well, we all love shiny!

But I'd rather see Fernando Alonso stuck behind Vitaly Petrov for 200 laps than ever see him past! But I guess thats just me!

However, the real overtaking should be like Alonso's winning pass at the German Grand Prix last year.

I think its far more of an issue that people think teams are contriving race results than if no-one is overtaking. It would be much healthier if F1 was boring but fair!

Not that no overtaking necessarily implies boredom, of course!

To the casual viewer it seems that the rules are totally inconsistent; there is nothing more likely to disenfranchise someone from a sport. Jean Todt needs to take note of this as much as Sepp Blatter, in my opinion!

Problem is that far to many F1 fans are Brmm Brmm minded kids and are only intersted in top speeds.
Driver skills are lost on them.

I blame Jeremy Clarkson!

 

[sportsman]

My interest in F1 is the engineering technology.Not aerodynamic technology.
The actual racing itself is of secondary importance.Thats why I dislike the engine freeze and mandated bore and stroke sizes and restrictions on configuration.
2.4 litres.Any configuration.Unlimited KERS.
Set amount of fuel for the entire weekend and let the teams get on with it.
Reduce aero down force.Allow ground effect but no sliding skirts.

 

[johnnoble1990]

Well as far as "the show" is concerned, the DRS ticks all the boxes because the casual armchair viewer can watch it flipping up and down, accompanied by the flashy red and green on-screen graphics.

Oooh, shiny, shiny.

Haha. Even as a fan from the POV of it being a sport, i'm a bit unsure of the DRS. It is for the XBox generation, which i guess i am part of technically.

I don't like going into conversations like this. Last 4 years F1 has been more exciting than it has ever been since i was old enough to watch it. When we start talking about ways to fix it, it makes it sound like it is broken, which for me it isn't. I don't want to start dreaming up my perfect motor sport. Think i might try to stick to the now. DRS could yet prove to be a revelation, but i can understand why petrolheads will never except it because from that POV it has nothing to do with motor racing.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Last 4 years F1 has been more exciting than it has ever been since i was old enough to watch it. When we start talking about ways to fix it, it makes it sound like it is broken, which for me it isn't. I don't want to start dreaming up my perfect motor sport. Think i might try to stick to the now. DRS could yet prove to be a revelation, but i can understand why petrolheads will never except it because from that POV it has nothing to do with motor racing.

That sounds a very sensible approach you have there. And even though I am unlikely ever to think of the DRS as a good thing, I think that ideas like that shouldn't necessarily be dismissed out of hand.

Who's to say that some people didn't think, once upon a time,
"Seat belts? What do we want those for?" or
"Let's not be having any daft things like metal barriers - straw bales are much better", or
"Tyres without any tread? You must be stark raving mad!"

 

[johnnoble1990]

That sounds a very sensible approach you have there. And even though I am unlikely ever to think of the DRS as a good thing, I think that ideas like that shouldn't necessarily be dismissed out of hand.

Who's to say that some people didn't think, once upon a time,
"Seat belts? What do we want those for?" or
"Let's not be having any daft things like metal barriers - straw bales are much better", or
"Tyres without any tread? You must be stark raving mad!"

Ha. The seat belts one made me laugh. I saw a documentary on Senna last year where they spoke about the resistance from fans and drivers for rules addressing safety. The sport had to lose it's greatest driver for them to start taking it seriously and since then we haven't lost anyone. I'd be shocked these days if we were to lose one of the top drivers. It would be devastating.

 

[Andyoak]

It was interesting watching 'Grand Prix: The Killer Years' last night for some of the comments by Jackie Stewart and John Surtees... I came away thinking that there was a certain inevitability that we have ended up where we are; I suspect this is where Chad is coming from. The sport has always been changing and will continue to change to deal with what the teams, drivers and spectators demand.

So DRS feels a bit 'playstation' to some - so be it, we live in a playstation world. I had to chuckle when (I think it was Eddie Jordan) put down Martin Brundle for complaining about it with reference to the old Turbo Boost button (very Sega for people of my generation)... plus ca change.

Well done to johnnoble1990 for putting this so well.

Me, well seeing as we've got it I'm still hoping it works and eventually is freed for use on the whole circuit...

 

[Jen]

Ha. The seat belts one made me laugh. I saw a documentary on Senna last year where they spoke about the resistance from fans and drivers for rules addressing safety. The sport had to lose one of it's greatest drivers for them to start taking it seriously and since then we haven't lost anyone. I'd be shocked these days if we were to lose one of the top drivers. It would be devastating.

It wouldn't be devastating (only personal things are thus in my world) - it has/had always been a dangerous sport and that was part of it's attraction for both fans and drivers - Senna was just the last in a long line of "greats" and others to perish doing what they loved.

Would we want to return to those days when drivers died - no. Do we want to see racing - yes. Do we or the drivers/teams want constant interference - no.

A little less "technical" regulation and both we and the drivers could return to the essence of the sport - motor racing!!

 

[johnnoble1990]

Well done to johnnoble1990 for putting this so well.

Everyone is so nice on this forum.

It wouldn't be devastating (only personal things are thus in my world)

I guess i meant from a personal point of view, rather than the morality of it. F1 is dangerous, we know it, the drivers know it. It is part of the thrill - but if, god forbid, Lewis was to have an accident that took his life i would be distraught that i wouldn't get to see someone so gifted race ever again. This is probably why everyone was so devastated when Senna died. It wasn't so much to do with the danger of the sport, because drivers sign up for that, it was the fact that we lost someone that had such an impact on the sport.

I believe a similar thing happened to Nascar when they lost Dale Earnhardt.

 

[sportsman]

I watched a lot of F1 through the killer years.
The seat belt issue did have some merit.In those days fire was the biggest danger.The drivers literally sat in the middle of the fuel tank which unlike todays tanks was made of aluminium and they split frequently split open in a crash.
Many of the top drivers didn't like the idea of being strapped in the car for that reason.They hoped that in the event of crash that they would thrown out of the car, rather than being trapped in an inferno.
In many ways you can't apply todays thinking to the events as they happened all those years ago.
I know that seat belts are essential.But when I started driving in 1962 cars simply didn't have seat belts fitted.

 

[Speshal]

Apparently the DRS regulations are going to be looked at by the FIA after China.

 

[johnnoble1990]

Apparently the DRS regulations are going to be looked at by the FIA after China.

I think that was always the plan to give it a few races. Tbf, i can't remember anyone being stuck unable to overtake in the race.

 

[Brogan]

Tbf, i can't remember anyone being stuck unable to overtake in the race.

Button?

 

[johnnoble1990]

Button?

True, but i wouldn't put it in the same category as the ones i am thinking about (i.e Alonso-Petrov). He managed to overtake him later in the race using the DRS and almost did in the early exchanges except for some impressive defending from Massa. I don't have any problem with drivers being unable to overtake if the defending is good. That kind of wheel to wheel dual is what i watch the sport for.

 

[FB]

Is there any reason why the driver has to activate the DRS (Oh how I hate TLA's!)? Couldn't the teams set up something track side or via the cars GPS (AAARRRGGGHHH another TLA) to fire the wing automatically?

 

[Brogan]

IDK FB, IMO yes.




Seriously though, I expect that sort of outside assistance is against the rules.
Not to mention, a driver needs to be in control at all times.

 

[johnnoble1990]

Is there any reason why the driver has to activate the DRS (Oh how I hate TLA's!)? Couldn't the teams set up something track side or via the cars GPS (AAARRRGGGHHH another TLA) to fire the wing automatically?

I had to google TLA. It made me laugh that there is an acronym for a phrase describing an acronym. I'm guessing the GPS idea would be against the rules. Plus, there is a skill to opening the wing (Sutil) and if the driver wasn't expecting it he might lose control or it might get opened to early.

 

[Albies Dog]

Does anyone know why there is unlimited use of the DRS during practice and Quali and then limit it during the race. The drivers complain that it is a distraction and then they have to flip it on every corner during Quali, trying to drive on the edge and avoid other people.

So whats the point in allowing indesciminate use during Quali?

 

[Galahad]

I suppose a reason for allowing use in practice and qualifying is to allow the drivers to familiarise themselves with the system, and develop a feel for when they can activate the wing safely; and how it affects the car balance.

Of course, you could still do that by allowing usage in practice, but restricting it in qualifying. Who knows?