Ask The Apex
- Thread starter Galahad
- Start date
Is it a complete nonsense that a tire de-lamination caused by debris requires a 5 place penalty?
I mean this has nothing whatsoever to do with the intended efforts of the regulation. If there was ever a case of force majeure, this be it.
Why is it? those are the rules and it is the same for everybody, would you be complaining if it were some other driver other than Lewis on the receiving end? Somehow I think not, actually I think you would be gleeful that Lewis had made up a place on the grid if it happened to a driver in front of him, it is best to apply logic to the whole grid rather than a single driver...
The fact is when a rule is written it has to be succinct you can't go around complicating it with yeah buts and no buts and if this and if that. if you did people would just take advantage, and in F1 this has been proven time and time again.
Just accept that it happened and get over it....
This is racing not a bloody crown court where you can argue if's when's why's and wherefores if we go down that route the start of the race would be delayed until god knows when and every out come of a race would be contested in Paris with the he blocked me and he ruined my race by running into me and my wheel wasn't fitted properly during the pit stop, defense bollocks....
The fact is when a rule is written it has to be succinct you can't go around complicating it with yeah buts and no buts and if this and if that. if you did people would just take advantage, and in F1 this has been proven time and time again.
Just accept that it happened and get over it....
This is racing not a bloody crown court where you can argue if's when's why's and wherefores if we go down that route the start of the race would be delayed until god knows when and every out come of a race would be contested in Paris with the he blocked me and he ruined my race by running into me and my wheel wasn't fitted properly during the pit stop, defense bollocks....
It may Irk him but we work with what we've got if he want's to change the rule then I suggest he sits everyone down and discusses it..
What does he suggest? Do away with the number of gearboxes used per season or introduce some kind of get out of jail free card....
I don't really care as long as it is the same for everyone....
But as it stands the rule was applied fairly and I'm sure that the rule was ratified by the teams in their cost cutting talks...
What does he suggest? Do away with the number of gearboxes used per season or introduce some kind of get out of jail free card....
I don't really care as long as it is the same for everyone....
But as it stands the rule was applied fairly and I'm sure that the rule was ratified by the teams in their cost cutting talks...
Just like the regulation dealing with gearbox reliability, this post doesn't make any sense in response to the issue raised. You've just seized on this as another way to try and get a few gratuitous jabs in.
It's really very simple. If the failure is caused by driver or team, a penalty is thoroughly deserved. If its caused by errant debris that causes a tire de-lamination, then penalizing a driver not only goes against the intent of the regs, if defies common sense.
When you are racing F1 at Indy.
When, and only when, the FIA decrees it to be so.
Josh
Champion Elect
Agreed, but only when it can be fully proven that it was caused by errant debris and it absolutely needs to be replaced and not just as a "pre-caution".
I doubt this will happen though because when was the last time the FIA displayed common sense?
I think the fuel consumption of a road car varies a lot if you are using heaters/aircon. As our summers are pathetic aircon is rarely needed hence the better mpg in the non winter months.
As for f1 cars I know the oil is heated to a specific temperature as they tolerances are so tight the engine won't even turn over until it has warmed through and expanded. I'm sure the fuel will also be at a specific temperature as well.
There is the issue of a warmer substance will have a greater volume than a colder substance but with the controlled fuelling rigs and high general temperature of an f1 car I don't see climate making too much of a difference.
As for f1 cars I know the oil is heated to a specific temperature as they tolerances are so tight the engine won't even turn over until it has warmed through and expanded. I'm sure the fuel will also be at a specific temperature as well.
There is the issue of a warmer substance will have a greater volume than a colder substance but with the controlled fuelling rigs and high general temperature of an f1 car I don't see climate making too much of a difference.
You are correct F1Yorkshire any electrical device used on a road will add to fuel consumption including the lights which are used far more in winter than summer, also driving style changes from summer to winter which also makes a difference....
On the other hand altitude does make a difference to an F1 cars fuel consumption the higher the track the thinner the air giving the car less power and more fuel consumption....
This used to be most evident at the Mexican Grand Prix with the track being 7000 ft above sea level...
On the other hand altitude does make a difference to an F1 cars fuel consumption the higher the track the thinner the air giving the car less power and more fuel consumption....
This used to be most evident at the Mexican Grand Prix with the track being 7000 ft above sea level...
Along with these points, car engines also run more efficiently when hot, and ambient temperature affects how long a car takes to warm up, and how efficiently it can stay at operating temperature.
F1engines rely on airflow for cooling, sand run hotter than road cars, but I think the key is air temp. With the air being warmer, hence less dense, it will contain less oxygen for the same volume, meaning a less efficient burn, I would assume that an f1 engine will be less efficient n the hotter weather.
F1engines rely on airflow for cooling, sand run hotter than road cars, but I think the key is air temp. With the air being warmer, hence less dense, it will contain less oxygen for the same volume, meaning a less efficient burn, I would assume that an f1 engine will be less efficient n the hotter weather.
http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2013/4/14512.html
Stuff about fuel in F1, sort of answers your question Jen?
Blog Zbod
Podium Finisher
All cars in general are faster/more fuel efficient when it's warmer because warm air is less dense than cool air. Less dense air causes less aerodynamic drag. Less drag = go faster.
Less dense air also reduces horsepower, but that relationship is linear, whereas drag changes at with square of fluid density. Meaning drag changes more from a given change in air density than BHP does. So the net result when it's warm is your car is faster on less horsepower (or goes further on less fuel).
But there are other factors that are more critical to fuel load than change in temperature, primarily the sheer speed of the circuit and the length of time the driver spends at full throttle. At Monaco, only about 45% of each lap is spent at full throttle. But at Spa and Monza, the figure is nearer 70%. So at some circuits, the driver spends a full third more of each lap at full suck that at others. That makes more difference to fuel load than any difference in temperature they're likely to encounter over the season (unless Bernie decides to move the Russian GP from the Black Sea to Siberia
).Similar threads
- Article
- Article
