Question about 2010 overtaking.

[Speshal]

You certainly are right, and win the lemon puff FB gave me for winning the Japanese GP prediction game.

That was rubbish I would have expected somthin'inna'bun - one word doth not a reference make.

 

[teabagyokel]

You certainly are right, and win the lemon puff FB gave me for winning the Japanese GP prediction game.

That was rubbish I would have expected somthin'inna'bun - one word doth not a reference make.

He can have an old lemon puff in a bun?

 

[fat jez]

He can have an old lemon puff in a bun?

But you're cutting your own throat? I can have Brogan change your username to Dibbler if you prefer?

 

[teabagyokel]

But you're cutting your own throat?

I'm disemboweling myself honourably there

 

[DOF_power]

This would be unthinkable today, but back then the same cars or equivalent cars could pass each other.

Neither the cars nor the Monza circuit of the 1950's are even remotely equivalent to the cars and Monza circuit of 2010. Todays touring cars might have a similar performance, you might like to seek your motorsport fix there.

[quote="DOF_power":1u67hu1r]I'm sick of excuses and "they are closer" speeches; Hamilton was 2 seconds per lap faster BTW and still couldn't pass.

Pass whom? Where? What the...? Have you been drinking?[/quote:1u67hu1r]



I know that.

And that's mu point, I want cars to have movable aero - active suspensions to create a sort of an "active slipstreaming", where the car behind will get both more grip and less drag. Also I want rovals to return and the Tilkedromes and the double-triple-quadruple chicanes to disappear.

 

[MCLS]

And that's mu point, I want cars to have movable aero - active suspensions to create a sort of an "active slipstreaming", where the car behind will get both more grip and less drag. Also I want rovals to return and the Tilkedromes and the double-triple-quadruple chicanes to disappear.

And thus any excitement is lost

 

[Brogan]

And that's mu point, I want cars to have movable aero - active suspensions to create a sort of an "active slipstreaming", where the car behind will get both more grip and less drag. Also I want rovals to return and the Tilkedromes and the double-triple-quadruple chicanes to disappear.

So if I've got this right, your ideal race would be as follows:

Lap 1: Car A leads Car B but Car B is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 2: Car B leads Car A but Car A is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 3: Car A leads Car B but Car B is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 4: Car B leads Car A but Car A is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 5-65: Rinse and repeat.
Final Lap: The car behind wins simply due to the fact that it is able to slipstream on a long straight.

Is that about right?

 

[fat jez]

don't forget that these circuits wouldn't be suitable for Vettel as he only knows how to turn right and the ovals only feature left turns

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Brogan said:
[quote:dolhma60]DOF_power said:
And that's mu point, I want cars to have movable aero - active suspensions to create a sort of an "active slipstreaming", where the car behind will get both more grip and less drag. Also I want rovals to return and the Tilkedromes and the double-triple-quadruple chicanes to disappear.

So if I've got this right, your ideal race would be as follows:

Lap 1: Car A leads Car B but Car B is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 2: Car B leads Car A but Car A is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 3: Car A leads Car B but Car B is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 4: Car B leads Car A but Car A is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 5-65: Rinse and repeat.
Final Lap: The car behind wins simply due to the fact that it is able to slipstream on a long straight.

Is that about right?[/quote:dolhma60]

You got it; run all the races on ovals and add in some frequent 'Safety' Car intrusions to close up the racing, and you've got NASCAR.

 

[DOF_power]

And that's mu point, I want cars to have movable aero - active suspensions to create a sort of an "active slipstreaming", where the car behind will get both more grip and less drag. Also I want rovals to return and the Tilkedromes and the double-triple-quadruple chicanes to disappear.

And thus any excitement is lost

No it's not. Watch old Monza races from 67, 69. 71 or the Austria races or Rheims. The drivers simply pass and repass each other till the (photo) finish.

Excitement = passing and repassing, constant fighting for position, not 6-10 cars trains pukefests..

 

[DOF_power]

So if I've got this right, your ideal race would be as follows:

Lap 1: Car A leads Car B but Car B is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 2: Car B leads Car A but Car A is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 3: Car A leads Car B but Car B is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 4: Car B leads Car A but Car A is able to pass due to slipstreaming on a long straight.
Lap 5-65: Rinse and repeat.
Final Lap: The car behind wins simply due to the fact that it is able to slipstream on a long straight.

Is that about right?

That's nonsense what you're talking about.

There is also late brake passing vs. long straight passing with cars configures separately, multiple lines thru the corners and strategy involved with some drivers preserving tires and/or fuel and positioning themselves.

 

[Brogan]

That's nonsense what you're talking about.

No, based on your post history, that's the nonsense you talk about.

It's been said before and not just on this forum but on every single forum you post on, but I'll say it again, if you don't like F1, don't watch it.
No amount of your whinging about it is ever going to make a difference.

 

[DOF_power]

You got it; run all the races on ovals and add in some frequent 'Safety' Car intrusions to close up the racing, and you've got NASCAR.

Are you clueless about NASCAR or what ?!

NASCAR has phantom cautions and double file restarts because the modern cookie cutter 1.5 - 2 mile ovals and sensitive COT don't allow passing (just like F1).
NASCAR is just as crappy as F1, but simply has more gimmicks.


The NASCAR slipstream passing you're talking about died in the early to mid 80s.

 

[DOF_power]

That's nonsense what you're talking about.

No, based on your post history, that's the nonsense you talk about.

It's been said before and not just on this forum but on every single forum you post on, but I'll say it again, if you don't like F1, don't watch it.
No amount of your whinging about it is ever going to make a difference.

No that's the nonsense you talk about.
Racing was overtaking based on slipstreaming and performance (per sector or full length) difference.

Ever the chicanes and aero crap came along in the late 60s and early to mid 70s things just got worse and worse and worse.

And the things that could have improved racing again (movable wings, ground effects, active suspensions, 4WD,
KERS, progressively banked corners) were banned, restricted to pointlessness or dismissed.

 

[Brogan]

Like I said, don't like it, don't watch it.

 

[fat jez]

And the things that could have improved racing again (movable wings, ground effects, active suspensions, 4WD,
KERS, progressively banked corners) were banned, restricted to pointlessness or dismissed.

Most of those were banned or restricted for safety reasons, as car speeds were getting dangerously high for the circuits. Given we haven't lost a driver since Ratzenberger and Senna in 16 years, I'd say it has worked. Perhaps the racing isn't as exciting as it used to be, but it's a heck of a lot safer and I think that's a not unreasonable tradeoff.

 

[FB]

Wow, 6-0-6 hits Clip the Apex

I've got to agree with Brogan DOF_Power. You come onto a forum to express an opinion, which your perfectly entitled to do, but you have to accept that most (all?) of us here simply don't agree with you. Yes, modern F1 has problems but to suggest taking it back to the stone age is the solution is nonsense (remember Pol Pot tried that in Cambodia and it ended VERY badly).

Just out of interest is there a form of motor sport you do enjoy? If so a) why don't you watch that and b) can you explain what F1 could learn from it.

 

[DOF_power]

[quote="DOF_power":9dd9qr8y]
And the things that could have improved racing again (movable wings, ground effects, active suspensions, 4WD,
KERS, progressively banked corners) were banned, restricted to pointlessness or dismissed.

Most of those were banned or restricted for safety reasons, as car speeds were getting dangerously high for the circuits. Given we haven't lost a driver since Ratzenberger and Senna in 16 years, I'd say it has worked. Perhaps the racing isn't as exciting as it used to be, but it's a heck of a lot safer and I think that's a not unreasonable tradeoff.[/quote:9dd9qr8y]



They were banned due to political reasons.

It would have been easy to use electronic top speed limitation (like on german cars) and a fixed amount of fuel (like in the 84-88 seasons)

Ratzenberger and Senna died because cars designed for active suspensions, TC and Co. didn't have them anymore.
Also in america IMSA GTP sport-prototypes used actives suspensions and ground effects and were just fine. The first HANS device was used in the late 80s.

Enclosing the suspensions on F1 car (like on an Arrows A2 ground effects car) plus HANS would have saved both Senna and Ratzenberger.

 

[fat jez]

and c) please feel free to discuss it in general motorsport

 

[fat jez]

Personally, I'd be all in favour of a fixed amount of fuel if they lifted the engine restrictions.