Ground Effect. Should it be forced through for 2013.

Should ground effect aero be forced through for 2013 against the teams wishes ?


  • Total voters
    23

Greenlantern101

Super Hero And All Round Good Guy
Contributor
The formula 1 teams have agreed to drop the proposed ground effect aerodynamics package for 2013.

This would have seen the return of ground effect aero but with much reduced wing sizes. The majority of the downforce would of been created from under the floor. The idea was this ground effect down force would be much less likely to suffer loss in performance from closely following a car in front.
This would allow closer following through the corners and subsequently make it easier to get a slip stream on the straights.

The result, more overtaking without having to rely on controversial complicated technology such as DRS.

I think the F1 teams have got this wrong. Badly wrong. The FIA's proposals make total sense, we have seen overtaking reduce as aero efficiency increases. In my opinion these aero rules are the best idea for improving F1 since I started watching it in 1984.

I guess the F1 teams are against it for cost reasons. I can't think of another good reason.

However here's the good news. The FIA can FORCE the changes through. They have until the end of June to decide whether to do this. I can only hope and pray that Jean Todt does the right thing for F1.

Should the FIA force these changes through against the teams wishes ? For me the answer can only be YES.

source
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula_one/13412925.stm

p.s. This is my first article on CTA. I have been dipping in and out with the near demise of 606, but I think I have found my new favorite forum. :)
 

RasputinLives

Leave me alone I'm on Smoko
Contributor
Another newby form the 606 exodus here.

I couldn't agree with you more on the groud effect rule GL. For me it was the complete solution to all this DRS stuff we have going on and would have been interesting to see which drivers could adapt too it.

I think theres 2 things going on with FOTA at the moment -

First of all the big teams want to preserve the status quo. You have to remember that until 2009 the same 4 teams had dominated F1 for 25 years. The big rule shake up in 2009 let Red Bull and Brawn/Merc into the party and whilst they are determined to stay there the other teams are determined not to have the risk of someone else slipping in front of them by having the cheek to design a better car than them!

Secondly I think FOTA want the FIA to try and push the rules through - would give them the perfect excuse to threatern to break away again and to gain other things they want in the peace talks that would occur to try and stop this happening - i.e. they can force through the whole Rupert Murdoch thing and count the cash.
 

Andyoak

Race Winner
I'm tempted to hold back on voting for this but I've gone for YES 2014 or later...

This is a tricky area and I think that viewing ground force (as proposed) as a holy grail to overtaking is wrong. This won't be ground force as we remember it from the 80's and the front and rear wings will still have a significant contribution to grip. Subsequently the cars will still be affected by disturbed air but to a lesser extent.

You are correct in saying that the FIA can force through the changes but this would have to be in theory. Ultimately the FIA has to be pragmatic and keep the teams on side; especially if Jean Todt wants their support with any spats he may have with Bernie. The teams, rightly in my view, seem of the opinion that the development costs far outweigh the benefits when put alongside the other major changes that are being implemented. From what I understand they haven't thrown out the proposal but deferred. This is sensible if you want to manage your budgets... although if you want a dose of cynicism / conspiracy theory, maybe they wanted to keep a flat floor to justify bigger sponsorship billboards / aero wings.

Finally, the FIA aren't going to get rid of wings anytime soon... they are as much a part of the look that defines F1 as the open wheels. Their size and complexity will fluctuate as will the cars overall but true radical change is unlikely.
 

Andyoak

Race Winner
Some fair points Rasputin but I'm going to be generous to the teams and say that though they like the status quo they are also aware that if the same teams win all the time the sport will stagnate and lose viewers / money. Ultimately these guys are competitors agianst each other and they want to beat whoever can challenge them.

Finally, hello both... I don't know how to award stuff or even if I can but I'm sure Bro and the others will make you welcome.
 

sportsman

Sidecar racers have the biggest cojones
Contributor
Welcome Greenlantern.
Yes ground effects should be forced through by the FIA.
I don't buy Whitmarshes excuses that the teams have no knowledge of this technology.Its not new and and there are designers in F1 who do have experience of ground effect.
Indycars still use ground effects.So how come the highest paid supposedly best engineers and designers are unable to do it.
 

Brogan

🦶 Leg end
Staff Member
Finally, hello both... I don't know how to award stuff or even if I can but I'm sure Bro and the others will make you welcome.
Anyone can Like any post or profile comment - which is where I usually say Hi to new members.
http://cliptheapex.com/members/greenlantern101.1457/
http://cliptheapex.com/members/rasputinlives.1057/

There's also the Hello thread: http://cliptheapex.com/threads/the-hello-thread.14/

Back on topic.
Absolutely ground effects should be forced through against the wishes of the teams.
All of the studies have shown that less reliance on wings will produce more overtaking as cars are able to follow more closely without being concerned about turbulence or "dirty air".

Maybe then we can get rid of DRS...which I have made my views about quite clear.
 

Speshal

World Champion
Valued Member
Maybe then we can get rid of DRS...which I have made my views about quite clear

Really? where? LOL

I'm with Mr B on this one, yes they should for the reasons stated.
 

Galahad

Not a Moderator
Valued Member
Objectively I agree that the teams have made the wrong decision, but there's a huge amount of politics/posturing involved, and I'm not sure that it's really the best idea for the FIA to force the changes through - or even whether, realistically, Todt can do so.
 

Grizzly

Bear
Contributor
I don't really see the teams problem either. I think it is more a resistance to change as opposed to anything else, which top teams will always dispute because it reduces the stability of their position.

Maybe then we can get rid of DRS...which I have made my views about quite clear.

Yeah, its more than likely the DRS would be unnecessary, but then, its not really necessary with the tyres we have this year anyhow. Slightly off topic I know, but I think the tyres have made a larger impact on the racing this year than DRS and if the rule makers could have foreseen that, i don't think DRS would have needed to be a reality.
 

Chad Stewarthill

Champion Elect
Contributor
...maybe they wanted to keep a flat floor to justify bigger sponsorship billboards...
What, especially for Mark Webber you mean?

Hi Greenlantern; good to see you here and a great article.

I'm afraid I really don't know enough about the subject to have a firm view either way at the moment, but I'll watch the argument with great interest. All I would say is that anything which reduces the harmful effects of the wake from one car on the aerodynamics of the following one would be good. Whether that is achieved by using a shaped underfloor or smaller wings and fewer add-on devices, I'm not sure.

How about safety? Is there any risk that a car which is solely or predominantly dependent on its floor for downforce could lose it all, suddenly and with dramatic effect, if being launched Petrov style over a kerb or bump? Or is that just as likely with wings?
 

Andyoak

Race Winner
Hadn't considered the Webber angle... more Webber's in F1 and more like Hot Wheels... come to think of it why don't Hot Wheels sponsor F1?

I'm sure a big move to ground effect would carry a bigger risk of take-off (Petrov style).
Wasn't that one of the main reasons for banning ground effect originally?

I think ground effect has been sacrificed by FIA to keep the small turbo hybrids... the best decision in my view.
 

Grizzly

Bear
Contributor
How about safety? Is there any risk that a car which is solely or predominantly dependent on its floor for downforce could lose it all, suddenly and with dramatic effect, if being launched Petrov style over a kerb or bump? Or is that just as likely with wings?

I believe your correct there, although the cars will not be 'sealed' to the ground like before, so the effect will be less like a switch, but they are still entirely dependent on fine clearances that when opened up, loose all effect. Where wings are wings as long as they are moving forward...
 

teabagyokel

#dejavu
Valued Member
I think Ground Effect may be the way forward, but the FIA must work on a consensus basis lest FOTA are forced to take up their threat. A belligerent FIA will not be good for F1 or the FIA, so I have to vote no.
 

MCLS

Anti F1 fan
Valued Member
Why do I think the main reason the teams dont want Ground Effect is that it would mean spending more money?
 

Chad Stewarthill

Champion Elect
Contributor
It's not as if they are making a secret of the fact:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula_one/13412925.stm
Williams technical director Sam Michael said the teams had been reluctant to go down the route of a shaped floor because it involved a lot of work and expense and there were uncertainties over the outcome:
"The only point of contention between Fota and the FIA has been on the tunnelled floor, having a shaped undertray.
Everything else is pretty much the FIA proposal, or pretty close to it with just some tweaks.
The biggest concern was that it's a massive amount of investment for the teams. It's quite a big departure."
 

Road of Bones

MTC Mole
Contributor
I was disappointed that FOTA have voted not to go down the ground-effect route, but given the likely expense of development allied to the change in engine regs, you can see their point.

Actually, the FIA/FOTA horsetrading over specs and regs is getting quite interesting, what with FOTA dismissing Todt's proposal to bring back in-season testing, and now declining ground-effect in favour of reduced aero, and even trying to freeze the engine change in favour of fuel-limitation instead...hmm - reading that back, it rather looks as if FOTA are drawing a series of lines in the sand and daring the FIA to try and cross them. Perhaps they feel emboldened by the Newscorp/Exor backing?
 

Brogan

🦶 Leg end
Staff Member
Surely it would be best to introduce all the radical changes at once, instead of constantly having to make a series of major design changes over a period of years?

So bring in the new floor, get rid of DRS, 18" wheels, narrower front wing, etc.

Just think, for once all of the teams would pretty much be on equal footing.
Now that would be a season worth watching!
 

RevMaxPower

Banned
Surely it would be best to introduce all the radical changes at once, instead of constantly having to make a series of major design changes over a period of years?

So bring in the new floor, get rid of DRS, 18" wheels, narrower front wing, etc.

Just think, for once all of the teams would pretty much be on equal footing.
Now that would be a season worth watching!

EXACTLY! Couldn't agree more. Level the whole game up - well for a while anyway. Currently both ends of the grid are poles apart... (No pun intended.)
 
Top Bottom