Poll Should it stay or should it go now

[johnnoble1990]

At the start of the year i couldn't decide if i wanted DRS to come into the sport, and i have to say, a year on, and i am still in a similar situation. Sure, it has created more overtaking, but a lot of it has been a little bit too easy. I also think that there would've been more overtaking anyway with KERS and more importantly the pirelli tyres. I also feel it has taken away drivers skill from overtaking.

I also wonder whether the DRS would be better at the start of the straight, rather than the end, and then have it shorter. That way the DRS might be able to get a car out of the dirty air and into the slipstream, allowing them to duel from then on without the DRS.

What is everyone elses opinion on this? Should it stay or go?

 

[Brogan]

My opinion on it hasn't changed.

A dire introduction to F1 which should have remained on the piece of paper entitled "Things to do to make F1 more appealing to casual fans: AKA How to remove all skill from overtaking".

All it has done is dumb down the sport and give an unfair advantage to the driver(s) behind.

 

[Wombcat]

I think it should stay. Maybe it gives an unfair advantage to those behind,, but that's only to compensate the unfair disadvantage of the dirty air.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

I think it should stay, just to get us through 2012. The 2013 regs should mix it up a bit. We could definitely do without it in qualifying, though.

 

[gethinceri]

Can you turn this into a poll? it would be good to see that.

 

[jez101]

No surprise here, I still like DRS. The issues are in the length of the zones and the locations of the activation points which can easily be changed.

The "advantage" neutralises the "disadvantage" of the dirty air that the car is in. DRS has replaced slipstreaming, which no longer works because the airflow coming off the back of cars has been made so turbulent that there is no "hole in the air" any more. See here http://www.f1-forecast.com/pdf/F1-Forecast-Tech-11.pdf for a lot, lot more. (written in 2007)

As for qualifying, I think it adds to the skill. Anyone who has played F1 2011 knows that you can easily lose the back end with the slot open

 

[sportsman]

My opinion on it hasn't changed.

A dire introduction to F1 which should have remained on the piece of paper entitled "Things to do to make F1 more appealing to casual fans: AKA How to remove all skill from overtaking".

All it has done is dumb down the sport and give an unfair advantage to the driver(s) behind.

Well said.Seconded.I was opposed to it from the start and am even more opposed to it now.

 

[FB]

In terms of achieving its aim DRS has been a relative success - ceratinly at some tracks more than otthers. What I would rather have seen is either its unrestricted use in qualie and race or its controlled use in both. The ultimate objective has to be to get round the "dirty air" problem which can only be controlled by radical changes to the car design, which the engineers will then get around.

At the moment I feel it's a bit of a "half pregnant" situation, leave it as a tool for drivers to use when they think they can i.e. it becomes a skill they have to learn how to handle just like the throttle, KERS and brakes, or do away with it altogether.

 

[Brogan]

Like a duct or something which the driver can activate as and when they like?

Oh wait...

 

[Incubus]

What were the most exciting edge-of-your-seat overtakes this year?
Vettel on Alonso at Monza perhaps? Or Hamilton on the same Alonso in Germany? Alonso on Button at Interlagos? I'm sure you can think of a few more.
All conducted without te need for DRS, and all the better for it.

 

[FB]

Like a duct or something which the driver can activate as and when they like?

Oh wait...

Problem there was some of the teams came up with rather daft ways to activate the system. Seeing the Ferrari drivers going one handed through Eau Rouge has to be one of the stupidest things anyone ever though of doing. Other than that I accept your point.

 

[jez101]

Further reading on turbulence

http://mccabism.blogspot.com/2010/06/sources-of-turbulence-in-f1.html

it may be that modern F1 aerodynamics create some degree of Kelvin-Helmholtz turbulent instability. If two parallel adjacent layers of airflow have different velocities, then the velocity shear will induce such turbulent instability.

I'm guessing a bit, but I suspect that blowing the outer edge of the diffuser creates these different velocities on the horizontal plane to add to those on the vertical plane (see the blue low and yellow high http://www.racecar-engineering.com/technology-explained/diffusers-engineering-basics-aerodynamics/)

I also wonder if this explains why slipstreaming almost seems easier through high speed kinks than on straights - because through the kink, you are kind of avoiding some of the wake which has gone straight out the back of the other car.

Anyway, getting back to the topic, I think this is why we need DRS. Either that or a complete rethink of car design...? DRS seems a bit easier somehow?

 

[Incubus]

Depends what you think of as the ultimate aim. Personally I prefer no overtake with drivers fighting for long periods over the course of several laps to a DRS Mickey Mous overtake e with the quicker car behind effortlessly breezing past - and no fight at all.

 

[Abnash24]

drs is more of a necessity now because teams purposefully channel air into where one could get a slipstream so he doesnt, drs is just a replacement that works quite well when measured well. eg: abu dhabi

 

[mjo]

No DRS in practice and qualifying - allows teams to 'cop' out on straight line speed, so the same teams are always dominating rather than, say, Toro Rosso doing well on circuits like Monza. Also, different strategies in setup have been somewhat nullified.
In the race, it should be used, if the circuit is good for overtaking, then in the places where it isn't the main place to pass e.g. the Bus Stop. Not like the race in Spa, where the zone was placed in the normal overtaking zone.
On circuits where it is pretty much impossible to overtake on, such as Valencia, the DRS should be used as it is now with two separate zones.

\Some racing and overtaking is better than no races and overtaking at all.

 

[KekeTheKing]

"How to remove all skill from overtaking".

All I'll say is that cars have been making quote-unquote "easy" passes for decades.

The straights of Paul Ricard, Jacarepagua, Kyalami, and Buenos Aires were breeding grounds for the kinds of overtakes that are roundly criticized today.

Should every single position through the field have to be fought for as if it were for the lead?

 

[Andyoak]

Keep it but derestrict it... here I go again

It's a driver controlled aero tool to compensate for the loss of slipstreaming caused by dirty air. We have to have it because the FIA won't reduce / get rid of wings and return to a reliance on mechanical grip.

My reading of those that don't like it (nothing personal Bro') is the restrictions; and the F-Duct was good because it did the same job wherever the driver wanted. Therefore derestrict it's use then there cannot be any arguement about unfair advantages; inability to defend; fakery and Gameboy racing.

The arguements claiming it will be too dangerous / cause cars to fly off the track don't make sense; especially when made by supporters of the F-Duct. Cars will go off the track when the driver fails to read when the car is over its limits and that can be through tyres, suspension, DRS and F-Duct; weather; wind; surface conditions (independently or a combination).

We didn't have forums when semi-automatic gearboxes and active suspension were introduced but we did have letters pages in Motorsport News. I'm sure I remember equally vociferous opinions at that time. We lost active suspension (a shame) and kept semi-automatic gearboxes. I suspect development costs played a factor in that decision.

But to pull myself back on track the semi-automatic box was hated because it made changing gear too easy and reduced the opportunity for some of the most common passes; those caused by selecting the wrong gear. By allowing free use of DRS I believe we are reintroducing an element where the driver can make a mistake and create a passing opportunity. That and the fact it deals with dirty air are reasons enough for me to say keep it... until something better comes along.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I never liked it when it was just an idea and I don't like it now it has been used get rid.

 

[Brogan]

Should every single position through the field have to be fought for as if it were for the lead?

No, but DRS passes are about as skillful as passes in the pits or those made on drivers who have the blue flag waved at them.

The arguements claiming it will be too dangerous / cause cars to fly off the track don't make sense

Especially considering use is unrestricted during qualifying.

 

[GeoffP]

We've spent a season listening to MB and DC harp on about how amazing the cars are with their cornering ability, how different from their day.....

Then believe that DRS making it easier to pass on the straight has brought back the "good old days" of passing.

Who are we trying to kid, if cars corner too predictably and are better on the straight if you lose some drag, but the drivers are nervous because of the unpredicatability of switching DRS on and off, seem the answer is to reduce the rear wing for the full lap - expose the cornering talent and allow the straight line passes... But don't believe DRS is the solution, all it's done is help expose the problem.