Question about 2010 overtaking.
- Thread starter DOF_power
- Start date
Speshal said:
What are you implying with that ?!
What's impossible about cars that already existed in the 70s and 80s like the A2, 88 twin chassis ?!
And the monocoque + frame was already used in the Jaguar D type in the 50s.
Technologically there's no problem, it's a matter is dogma.
FB said:
I don't the tri look, but most of its ideas are good.
OK, so you want to watch different cars racing. Why does it have to be called F1? Why can't be a different formula and leave F1 alone?
Not saying F1 doesn't need to change, but a lot of the things that are missing that would make it more exciting are down to Ecclestone's insistence on certain track types, e.g. no changes in elevation, rules on camber, etc. Yes, some of it is down to FIA regulations on what the teams can do with the cars, but there are several guilty parties involved who need to sort themselves out.
Not saying F1 doesn't need to change, but a lot of the things that are missing that would make it more exciting are down to Ecclestone's insistence on certain track types, e.g. no changes in elevation, rules on camber, etc. Yes, some of it is down to FIA regulations on what the teams can do with the cars, but there are several guilty parties involved who need to sort themselves out.
DOF_power said:
That you want 1950/60's style racing cars with modern technology that engenders multiple overtakes per lap until the final sprint to the line with 3 cars abreast, flashing past the chequered flag with 1/1000th's of a second in it.
To dream the impossible dream........
Andrea_Moda_Rules
Podium Finisher
Ive stayed away from this tread because od DOFs abrasive nature, if it is the language barrier then i apologize for that. 6-0-6 has taught me to stay away from threads that are likely to turn into mindless arguments
Looking at how this tread started by looking at numbers and how many overtakes there are in a race/season, Whilst there is a great section on overtaking and how many there have been over the years since 1983 its all too easy to get sucked into the stats and delare that somethings dull because "X" GP had 75 passes in 1999 and there were only 35 in 20010. I think we need to stray away from that nature because its not always what defines a great race. It could be the tension of the situation, seeing someone defend brilliantly against rival, a strategic battle between teams, or seeing drive exeptionally in difficult circumstances or in a Car that sohuld be able to give the performance that the driver is.
However i do think Formula 1 need to look at how to encourage more overtaking.
Whilst its easy to blame the new tracks we have seen prosessions at some of the more prodigious tracks, where great racing and overtaking is assositated.
Thats suggests to me the problem is two things, the Car and perhaps even the mind set of drivers today.
Sometimes Forumla 1 has a nuture to be slow sorting problems out and finding resoultions, or make changes that completly miss the route cause of the problem. things like rasing the front wing off the ground sometime in the mid 2000s always seemed like a flimsy soultion to the problem and did nothing to solve it.
The Aero-dyamics being too efficent appears to be the problem but every time there is a new rule teams find ways round it or ingenius ways to claw it back. I personally think the areo-dyamic rules should be tightened even further and rules elsewhere loosened.
Finally the FIA have appeared to do this a bit, by planning on allowing ground effect to a certain extent again. But i think this should be done further, I personally belive that engines should be de-regulated and engine suppliers sohuld be allowed to devlop engines and have a lot more scope on whats allowed, turbo's allow to use anything upto V12s but say that everyone musy use the same size fuel tank and it must be filled up at the start of the race.
A while ago Frank Dernie suggested that Aerodynamics may not be the problem but the Tyres, this must aslo be looked at, for instnce lets take Canada the tyres had very little grip there and wore quickly and it created one of the best races of the season.
DOF ideas however seem a little off the mark IMO.
For stuff like twin-chassis and older techonolgies, Whilst you can not uninvent techonlogy, some like the example DOf uses perhaps cannot be applied to modern F1. Using the example of twin chassis in modern F1 this will raise the weight in a series where there are tight tolerances and any advatanges gained could be lost. but then if you use my de-regulation theory some of these could be used tried out and would at the very least create variety between Formula 1 cars.
The Closed Wheel thing or 'shroweded suspension', There you are taking away the very essence of what F1 is, Then it might has well be the LMs then. I dont think saftey applies either, What we saw with Senna was a freak incident when his car hit the wall, and the cause of the wheel flying at him in the first place was somewhat todo with the angle he hit wall, the wheel getting trapped between the Chassis and the wall and escaping at an usula angle with none of the engery being able to dissapate.
Also with Ratzenburger he damaged the front wing on the lap prevous which caused to fail and has pointed out before it was a broken neck that caused his death.
With moveable areo, Its something i strongly dissaporve of, It could be very dangerous if it fails and also could create a flip side to the overtaking and that it becomes too easy. Formula 1 the pinnicle of track racing should promote Driver Skills has well has techonlogy, If it becomes too easy to overtake then the driver infront becomes non-entertiy and the skills of a good defensive driver anulled.
I agree that DOf that F1 need to promote more different thing rather then the relience of areodyamics. with Turbos, ground effect hopefully making a return hopfeully its a step in the right direction.
Sorry for the log post but thats just my .....erm...2 Dollors? Lol
Looking at how this tread started by looking at numbers and how many overtakes there are in a race/season, Whilst there is a great section on overtaking and how many there have been over the years since 1983 its all too easy to get sucked into the stats and delare that somethings dull because "X" GP had 75 passes in 1999 and there were only 35 in 20010. I think we need to stray away from that nature because its not always what defines a great race. It could be the tension of the situation, seeing someone defend brilliantly against rival, a strategic battle between teams, or seeing drive exeptionally in difficult circumstances or in a Car that sohuld be able to give the performance that the driver is.
However i do think Formula 1 need to look at how to encourage more overtaking.
Whilst its easy to blame the new tracks we have seen prosessions at some of the more prodigious tracks, where great racing and overtaking is assositated.
Thats suggests to me the problem is two things, the Car and perhaps even the mind set of drivers today.
Sometimes Forumla 1 has a nuture to be slow sorting problems out and finding resoultions, or make changes that completly miss the route cause of the problem. things like rasing the front wing off the ground sometime in the mid 2000s always seemed like a flimsy soultion to the problem and did nothing to solve it.
The Aero-dyamics being too efficent appears to be the problem but every time there is a new rule teams find ways round it or ingenius ways to claw it back. I personally think the areo-dyamic rules should be tightened even further and rules elsewhere loosened.
Finally the FIA have appeared to do this a bit, by planning on allowing ground effect to a certain extent again. But i think this should be done further, I personally belive that engines should be de-regulated and engine suppliers sohuld be allowed to devlop engines and have a lot more scope on whats allowed, turbo's allow to use anything upto V12s but say that everyone musy use the same size fuel tank and it must be filled up at the start of the race.
A while ago Frank Dernie suggested that Aerodynamics may not be the problem but the Tyres, this must aslo be looked at, for instnce lets take Canada the tyres had very little grip there and wore quickly and it created one of the best races of the season.
DOF ideas however seem a little off the mark IMO.
For stuff like twin-chassis and older techonolgies, Whilst you can not uninvent techonlogy, some like the example DOf uses perhaps cannot be applied to modern F1. Using the example of twin chassis in modern F1 this will raise the weight in a series where there are tight tolerances and any advatanges gained could be lost. but then if you use my de-regulation theory some of these could be used tried out and would at the very least create variety between Formula 1 cars.
The Closed Wheel thing or 'shroweded suspension', There you are taking away the very essence of what F1 is, Then it might has well be the LMs then. I dont think saftey applies either, What we saw with Senna was a freak incident when his car hit the wall, and the cause of the wheel flying at him in the first place was somewhat todo with the angle he hit wall, the wheel getting trapped between the Chassis and the wall and escaping at an usula angle with none of the engery being able to dissapate.
Also with Ratzenburger he damaged the front wing on the lap prevous which caused to fail and has pointed out before it was a broken neck that caused his death.
With moveable areo, Its something i strongly dissaporve of, It could be very dangerous if it fails and also could create a flip side to the overtaking and that it becomes too easy. Formula 1 the pinnicle of track racing should promote Driver Skills has well has techonlogy, If it becomes too easy to overtake then the driver infront becomes non-entertiy and the skills of a good defensive driver anulled.
I agree that DOf that F1 need to promote more different thing rather then the relience of areodyamics. with Turbos, ground effect hopefully making a return hopfeully its a step in the right direction.
Sorry for the log post but thats just my .....erm...2 Dollors? Lol
Speshal said:
Can I also just point out that the 1971 Italian Grand Prix was excellent because it was exceptional, and that kind of thing did not happen every week! While there was a lead change every 2 minutes in that race, the race before it, for example, was lead flag-to-flag by Jo Siffert.
On Senna and Ratzenburger, please don't play Hindsight Geniuses. Its too easy to do, and too difficult to prove.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article