Driver adjustable bodywork!

snowy

Champion Elect
Brogan said:
Now for some good news.

He admitted the moveable rear wing was developed due to "fan-based pressure" to improve the spectacle of overtaking, but said it is not certain the innovation will actually debut.

"I think we have got to do a little bit more work on deployment and the sporting regulations that accompany it, and if we get that right we'll give it a go," said Whitmarsh. "If detracts or isn't right, it's easy to take it off. But let's have a look at it; it's a bit of an experiment."
Moveable rear wing idea could be ditched

+
 

cider_and_toast

Exulted Lord High Moderator of the Apex
Staff Member
Premium Contributor
developed due to "fan-based pressure"
I love the way they blame the fans for their silly ideas. What exactly have the OWG actually managed to do for the last 4 or 5 years?
 

teabagyokel

#dejavu
Valued Member
cider_and_toast said:
What exactly have the OWG actually managed to do for the last 4 or 5 years?
Allow me to demonstrate with a diagram:



The total achievements of the OWG!
 

Attachments

veravista

Rookie
Came to this post a bit late - surely Mark Webber already has driver adjustable bodywork? Seems to have had a few goes at already this season anyway...
 

Jru

Points Scorer
Contributor
Sorry to revive an old topic but I was thinking about the adjustable rear wing after its discussion on a different thread and wondering if perhaps there was anyway that instead of using it to decrease downforce for straights, they could find a way to give cars more downforce for corners? I realise that this would be harder because the corners need more balanced between the front and back of the car. If the fia are determined to have adjustable bodywork then this would provide at least more exciting looking overtaking than a driver just accelerating round a car on a straight, and may require a driver to have a bit more daring? Sorry if this is a stupid idea though - i'm no engineer/aerodynamicist.
 

snowy

Champion Elect
I can see why you may consider it but for it to be effective it would have to be the car behind gets extra and the car in front doesn't. This again would make it an artifice, also there is the safety aspect to be considered... The FIA has spent several decades fighting a war on downforce, they take it away and the teams find crafty ways of clawing it back.

The more downforce you have, the higher the G-forces, the quicker you go round the bend, the quicker you hit the wall. :givemestrength:
 

teabagyokel

#dejavu
Valued Member
Of course, the point I would raise is it will be ridiculous if the driver in front has no chance to defend. I want to see overtaking but not a turkey shoot.

So I agree with snowy!
 

Jru

Points Scorer
Contributor
I agree that I dont *want* adjustable wings that give a huge advantage - but if the FIA are determined would it not be better that the car must overtake around the outside of a corner than just on a straight? It would at least look more exciting :disappointed: Also I suppose the driver would need to judge activating the extra wing at the right time so as not to lose too much momentum into the corner, adding extra skill ...

Like I said though in principal I would rather that a faster car need no gimmick to be able to overtake a slower car in front bar the skill of the driver.
 

fat jez

Race Winner
Valued Member
Jru430, what you are proposing is effectively what we have this season with the F-duct developed by McLaren. They run more rear wing, which they can stall on the straights, reducing drag and which then provides more downforce going round corners.
 

Grizzly

Bear
Contributor
I can completely understand everyone's reservations, i have the same reservations, but we are not a racing team or a driver, we are sofa racers, the spectators and we haven't seen anything yet! The drivers are always opposed to change, especially the drivers at the front, so that really isn't news to me. The fans and media have moaned and moaned about the processional parade that is F1. The first possibly workable concept comes along and all we do is moan again!?

FOTA, via Martin W have confirmed to us that nothing is concrete, there's no testing to try it in so they will run it and play it by ear. What more or less can you do? if its crap, they'll loose it. If it turns the race to game of hopscotch, they'll remove it. If Mark Webber keeps taking flying lessons, they'll remove it.

Come on guys, WE have pressured F1 to do something, and the first suggestion of which we throw back at them?

As long as F1 is based around aerodynamics, overtaking will be tough, apart from replacing that traction with more rubber on the road or ground effect, cars will always struggle in the tow. All we can do is speculate on the wing, lets see how it works before slamming it. It could well yet add the chili and spice we need.
 

FB

Not my cup of cake
Valued Member
I don't think the problem is the adjustable rear win per se Grizzly, more the contrived nature of it's implimentation. My understanding is that if a car is 1 second or less behind another car the driver can "fire" the rear wing. How are they going to police this? With the best will in the world GPS tracking is not accurate enough to measure this. You can see a raft of complaints to the stewards at the end of every race as the teams argue that the car was a 10th or a 100th of a second further behind and therefore should not have been able to use the wing device.

This season has been exciting without the need for an adjustable wing, mainly because the rules have had a level of stability which means the teams have been able to design their cars properly. This combined with the outlawing of refueling has resulted in drivers having to overtake on the track.

Personally I can't see what we the fans would get out of this proposed change. I'd rather see what the outlawing of the double diffuser does as this should reduce the amount of turbulent air when cars are slipstreaming and see the rules of the front wing changed to enforce the 85mm height rule but also to limit the amount of vanes the teams can add.
 

sportsman

Sidecar racers have the biggest cojones
Contributor
Grizzly said:
As long as F1 is based around aerodynamics, overtaking will be tough, apart from replacing that traction with more rubber on the road or ground effect, cars will always struggle in the tow.
That I fully agree with.
I am totally opposed to this wing idea for the reasons I have already explained.
And just how watching one car drive past another on the straight can add anything to to the spectacle I simply cannot see.
The whole idea is ludicrous when anyone can see that its purely artifical.The answer is staring the whole of FOTA and the FIA in the face.
Cut aerodynamic downforce generated grip, increased mechanical grip and then we will see real racing.
Overtaking will be easier if overtaking in F1 would ever be easy.But at least the drivers skill will play an important part, rather than a dummy sat there, pressing a button and the driver in front who has defended against him trying to outbrake him and pass is powerless to do anything about it.
 

F1Yorkshire

Avatar for sale to the highest bidder
Contributor
I can see more Schumacher-esque overtaking defending if these wings get the approval. If your leading the race but suddenly the car behind you gets an extra advantage you will have to defend your line and make the driver behind back off or lose your position. The only way to do this is by using your 1 blocking manuever and force the driver behind onto the slower part of the track or towards the grass or wall.

It will also make the starts unfair. Driver A is on pole and makes a poor start. Driver B makes an excellent start from 2nd and takes the lead into the 1st corner. Driver A uses the adjustable rear wing and overtakes Driver B on the next straight and then uses their speed advantage to leave Driver B behind for the rest of the race.

Why should a driver who makes a mistake on the start be given a free chance to get back into the lead? We want to see racing but it has to be on equal terms and not artificially induced.
 

Grizzly

Bear
Contributor
FB - Absolutely, we have seen the drivers that can, pass. Those that can't, don't. This is another scale to measure them on IMHO. Those drivers that can hustle the car in front and shoot it down the inside earn huge respect from me.

Policing? well as i understand it your system will become active when you go through one of the three timing loops less than one second behind another car. You then have one press of the button, which activates the wing until you lift or brake. This means there would be certain key points on the circuit where you would need to be in position..... which opens up more discussion..... both positive and negative i suspect.

Sportsman - this is all speculation at this point, but I'm not sure the wing would be a one way ticket to blast past on the straight. The McLaren basically has the speed difference we are talking about generating already, and we've not seen them do that to the 'slow in a straight line' Red Bulls when Lewis is Behind. The PlayStation/artificial concept is very concerning, but there are an array of driver controls that effect racing we would not be without already, and KERS last year... Have you heard of Formula Palmer Audi? they use the VW turbo engine, and the drivers have 4 or 5, 5 second blasts of increased boost, it actually adds an interesting dimension to the racing.... the drivers that use it up off the start... and those that keep it for the last lap etc etc.

I'm NOT defending the concept, but everything but..

F1Y - very interesting point on the grid, could we negate qualifying?? probably not, because we will all be in the same position and also, the system would not be active until the first two laps have been completed.
 

sportsman

Sidecar racers have the biggest cojones
Contributor
I know its just speculation at this moment Grizzly.But when this idea was first reported in the F1 press I did a bit of homework and wrote this article.I know about Formula Palmer Audi.But the difference in that is that all the cars are indentical.They are supplied and prepared by Palmer Sport.

http://www.formula1journal.com/2010/07/ ... tsman.html
 

Grizzly

Bear
Contributor
OK I think I finally understand what you and FB are saying. Most fans and the media have praised the innovation of the F-duct and the concept of reducing drag on the straights, but the frustration is perhaps stemming simply from the way the FIA & FOTA have suggested they would use it, or maybe more appropriately; control it.

If its use were not governed however, it would not have any benefit to the racing, just increase straight line speed for everyone and the potential for faster harder crashes, which the FIA obviously don't want.

I'm sure there is a way to make a concept like this work to aid the racing. What that solution is, who knows! I do think the sport should try it to find out for sure, because if they don't, we'll never know.
 

snowy

Champion Elect
Luca di Montezemolo fears that the adjustable rear wing has the potential for differing interpretations...

"As for the rear wing, I hope we start the season with total clarity as regards the regulations,"


http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/88525


The Bahrain GP continues to haunt F1, this knee jerk reaction is not only potentially dangerous, totally stupid, and ill conceived and people in F1 are only now becoming aware it's another double diffuser/flexy front wing/F-Duct minefield... :bored:

Ross Brawn was rubbing his hands with glee when everyone jumped on board his little Berniesk type scheme. :crazy:
 

Chad Stewarthill

Champion Elect
Contributor
Brogan said:
What happens when there are 3 or more cars in a row separated by 1 second or less?

How are they going to measure the time gap between every car continuously?
Worse than that, in a train of three or more cars is the second car deemed to be the lead car relative to the third car, etc etc? If so, only the driver of the rearmost car in any train would be able to activate the wing.
 

Chad Stewarthill

Champion Elect
Contributor
Grizzly said:
Come on guys, WE have pressured F1 to do something, and the first suggestion of which we throw back at them?
Not me! I have never believed that there should be more overtaking merely for the sake of overtaking, and have said as much on here and elsewhere more than once.
Anyway, I am not against adjustable wings in principle, just the idiotic and mis-judged intention of limiting when and by who they can be used. And as a fan of the F-Duct, even keeping that would not be a long-term answer to the overtaking problem; neither would that other artificial booster device, KERS. any such innovation, including the double diffuser and the EBD, are only any use as long as they afford an advantage over the field to their initiating team. As soon as other teams develop their own versions, that advantage is lost and the next one must be sought. A smaller, residual advantage may remain due to one team having a better or more efficient design than the competition, but the biggest difference is the initial one.
All of which suggests to me that more freedom to innovate, rather than more prescriptive regulations, would be far preferable. 'Divergent Governance', anyone?
 

Grizzly

Bear
Contributor
You don't necessarily have to have an advantage, but you do need to be able to get close and stay close to the car in front, which we generally can't in F1... In BTCC (possibly not a great example because not open wheel) where there is little to no aerodynamic instability caused by cars racing nose to tail you can really hustle one another.

However KERS is possibly less to your description than the F-duct because KERS will always be limited use and retain some kind of driver management which will allow it to become an advantage for different drivers at different stages of a race/lap, eg; lead driver punches the KERS out of the bend onto the straight to try and gain some space to the chase car. Chase car with a good corner exit manages to hold onto the KERS boosted car in the slip stream only to use his own KERS toward the end of the straight and take the best line into the Tilke Chicane at the end...

Chad Stewarthill said:
never believed that there should be more overtaking merely for the sake of overtaking
Chad Stewarthill said:
more freedom to innovate, rather than more prescriptive regulations, would be far preferable. 'Divergent Governance', anyone?
Indeed!

We began to head this direction in this Thread
 
Top Bottom