Ask The Apex
- Thread starter Galahad
- Start date
What is the budget of the average GP2 team?
Kamui-FastestChefInTheWorld
Points Scorer
I presume it's whatever the drivers pay them + some championship bonuses, so somewhere between 1-2 million would be my guess, but I'm not too sure 
[EDIT] After looking it up, it appears to be between 1-3 million, so not a bad guess
[EDIT] After looking it up, it appears to be between 1-3 million, so not a bad guess
Firstly why is this thread on page 2?
Secondly Caterham are running two reserve drivers in P1 on Friday. Who were the last team to do that?
Secondly Caterham are running two reserve drivers in P1 on Friday. Who were the last team to do that?
RasputinLives, after 2003 only one test driver could be nominated, and it hasn't occured since the re-introduction of friday drivers in 2010.
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
Maybe the pin fell out?
I unpinned it.
I figured we have way too many catch all threads and perhaps if people started posting new threads about specific subjects it may generate more activity.
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
As a rule I don't like too many rules but I wonder 
. Would it be feasible to re-pin it but give it a "thread rule" to define its purpose to minimise frivolous questions and daft responses better served by Gravel tTap and Off The (Pit) Wall threads.
When I first joined CTA I found Ask The Apex a very useful thread for getting to know the forum and many of the members. It was also nice to find the odd tech' question that I could contribute a response to without being drawn into a long debate about whether the tech' was any good or not.
I don't know if's my imagination or not but it does seem to have changed a bit with tit for tat Q&A creeping in. Upon reflection some of my own posts here seem to have deteriorated to a level of flippancy unworthy of the thread. For that I apologise and I would welcome the threads return to its rightfully pinned place with a sensible rule of thumb to guide its purpose.
. Would it be feasible to re-pin it but give it a "thread rule" to define its purpose to minimise frivolous questions and daft responses better served by Gravel tTap and Off The (Pit) Wall threads.When I first joined CTA I found Ask The Apex a very useful thread for getting to know the forum and many of the members. It was also nice to find the odd tech' question that I could contribute a response to without being drawn into a long debate about whether the tech' was any good or not.
I don't know if's my imagination or not but it does seem to have changed a bit with tit for tat Q&A creeping in. Upon reflection some of my own posts here seem to have deteriorated to a level of flippancy unworthy of the thread. For that I apologise and I would welcome the threads return to its rightfully pinned place with a sensible rule of thumb to guide its purpose.
Something that just occured to me and I'm now going to ask about is that with double DRS zones and double detection zones would a team benfit from flying in formation as it were?
Car 1 and 2 follow each other closely and Car 2 gets DRS boost through detection point one and passes Car 1. Car 1 stays close behind car 2 and picks up DRS boost and re-passes Car 2. If the drivers were to co-operate in this way and do this consistantly would this generate faster lap times and help push a team along in a race?
If so why have we never seen it tried?
Car 1 and 2 follow each other closely and Car 2 gets DRS boost through detection point one and passes Car 1. Car 1 stays close behind car 2 and picks up DRS boost and re-passes Car 2. If the drivers were to co-operate in this way and do this consistantly would this generate faster lap times and help push a team along in a race?
If so why have we never seen it tried?
It would work on an Oval and if a team is likely to try it, it would be at Monza. Ferrari have tried something similar in qualifying but seems to have failed in the attempts seen.
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
Yes indeed, RasputinLives Where there is the will to do it it could be done. Two DRS zones make the strategy possible as long as the two drivers are able to match each other on the rest of the track. Playing leapfrog was once a very common strategy in motorcycle racing, particularly in the old 125cc class. In fact, in the 125's Japanese riders in opposing teams used to co-operate using drafting to overtake on the straights but holding station on sections of track where passes would disadvantage both "co-operators". They would pace themselves to preserve tyre, etc and then pull the pin in the latter stages of the race and have a dust up for the win often right down to the line.
In some respects the strategy isn't too dissimilar to that used by cyclists positioning themselves to break out and away.from the peloton.
I'm sure it has been used in F1 in the past and slightly mystified that we don't see more of it these days.
In some respects the strategy isn't too dissimilar to that used by cyclists positioning themselves to break out and away.from the peloton.
I'm sure it has been used in F1 in the past and slightly mystified that we don't see more of it these days.
Jos the Boss
Champion Elect
Because three is the magic number?
EvilWhippet
Podium Finisher
Because less wouldn't give much info, and more would be more difficult to immediately draw a conclusion from?
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
This is only supposition but I would think that it predates F1 and is a carry over from the early days of motor racing when races
were held on much longer road courses. In the "old days" competitors were logged as they reached check points along the track a bit like they do today in rallying. There were two main reasons for that. The cars would have required quite as lot of maintenance which would have been done at specific checkpoints whilst the drivers took a rest break. The other reason would have been to allow for the progress of competitors to relayed back to the race organisers. Bear in mind also that the timing would have been carried manually by officials with stop watches.
The division of the modern day circuit into just three sectors was probably just a matter of convenience with regard to the introduction of electronic timing systems. I'll do some research and let you know if I find a definitive answer. That's if teabagyokel or F1Yorkshire don't get there before me!
were held on much longer road courses. In the "old days" competitors were logged as they reached check points along the track a bit like they do today in rallying. There were two main reasons for that. The cars would have required quite as lot of maintenance which would have been done at specific checkpoints whilst the drivers took a rest break. The other reason would have been to allow for the progress of competitors to relayed back to the race organisers. Bear in mind also that the timing would have been carried manually by officials with stop watches.
The division of the modern day circuit into just three sectors was probably just a matter of convenience with regard to the introduction of electronic timing systems. I'll do some research and let you know if I find a definitive answer. That's if teabagyokel or F1Yorkshire don't get there before me!
I don't have a definitive answer, my only experience with different amounts of timing sectors is from gaming where longer tracks do have more sectors.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
