Top teams pass notes to improve overtaking !

[Knock-on]

http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2008/10/8472.html

I cannot believe this is true. Can it be? I mean, really true?

<Faints>

The 2009 Formula One season could see a lot more passing manoeuvres thanks to a unique collaboration between three of the sport’s leading teams. Backed by the FIA, top design engineers from Ferrari, McLaren and Renault worked together to help frame changes to the aerodynamic regulations that should make overtaking far less of a rarity.

Under current regulations, a driver typically needs to be as much as two seconds a lap faster than the car in front to have a realistic chance of passing. That should be cut to around a second next year thanks to a host of bodywork changes, including wider front wings that can be adjusted by the driver from the cockpit - a Formula One first.

Instigated by the FIA at the beginning of 2007, the Overtaking Working Group (OWG) - comprising Ferrari’s Rory Byrne, McLaren’s Paddy Lowe and Renault’s Pat Symonds - used McLaren’s advanced Formula One simulator to evaluate overtaking at Turn 1 of the old Barcelona circuit. Having established the existing ‘two seconds per lap’ requirement, they set about cutting that in half through aerodynamic changes.

They quickly learned that previous FIA proposals aimed at increasing overtaking, in particular the planned Centreline Downwash Generating (CDG) rear wing, had some major flaws. Utilising a conventional wind tunnel rather than computer-based Computational Fluid Dynamics, they instead came up with a series of new measures which should guarantee the desired effect.

The most obvious changes to the cars will be a taller and narrower rear wing, a shorter rear diffuser, and the loss of bodywork appendages such as deflectors, winglets and chimneys. Perhaps the most interesting revision, however, is to the front wing, which will become much wider. It will also be Formula One racing’s first (legal) moveable aerodynamic device, with the driver able to fine tune its settings from the cockpit.

“The flap will be controlled and monitored by the standard ECU,” explains OWG member Paddy Lowe. “The software in this unit is FIA-controlled, so it will only allow two adjustments per lap. The number of settings available to the driver will be up to the team, but the maximum flap angle range is +/- 3 degrees (i.e. 6 degrees total), so probably a team might provide one-degree steps.”

Having achieved their target of the ‘one second per lap’ requirement, it remains to be seen how the OWG’s measures will perform during an actual Grand Prix. Have they got the balance right? After all, many will rightly argue that overtaking in Formula One - the world’s premier motorsport series - should be difficult.

“In my view the reduction from two seconds to one is a very big and important step,” says Lowe. “We may indeed find that this is sufficient. Clearly a zero second per lap differential is nonsensical, so it is not as though we only made half the necessary progress! I also do not believe we want to make overtaking trivial if your car is at all faster - i.e. if we reduced that same number to 0.2sec/lap, say, then it would almost guarantee that any faster car could overtake any slower car without delay - a really quite boring prospect.”

It’s clear the changes should make for even more exciting racing, but that doesn’t mean they will make life any easier for the drivers. They already have a myriad of controls to deal with from the cockpit and next year will see the addition of not only adjustable wings but also KERS, the Kinetic Energy Recovery System (which could also boost overtaking).

As Lowe succinctly puts it, “Switch 'real estate' on the steering wheel is becoming as difficult to find as it is in the cockpit of a 747!”

[Dave B]

Don't use "OMG" and "WTF" in the same day, let alone the same post, lest people think you're a 12-year old Lindsay Lohan fan. :p

[Knock-on]

Don't use "OMG" and "WTF" in the same day, let alone the same post, lest people think you're a 12-year old Lindsay Lohan fan. :p

I don't even know who Lindsay Lohan is, never mind that she's 12 years of age :p

[wedge]

Mclaren deserves praise.

There was a time when McLaren used to veto every proposal put forward by the Technical Working Group on the grounds that going backwards would diminish F1 being the pinnacle. The aero regs for higher front wings were originally proposed during the off season of 2000 and weren't implemented till 2005.

[Dave B]

Wait.... I've seen this thread before somewhere! :p ;)

Serious head on. Does this not strike anybody as a load of gimmickry? Movable wings, which don't sit well with safety or cost-cutting agendas? Push-to-pass buttons thinly disguised as a green measure?

And how does having a standard ECU and stifling engine devopment help the speed difference between teams?

F1 has completely lost its way. :s

[Knock-on]

I'm not too sure about all of it but if it improves overtaking and the spectacle, I'm all for it.

Besides. adjusting a degree of wing is just the same as playing with the brake bias isn't it?

Plus, we get rid of all those stupid winglets like the pantyliners on the front of the Honda.

It's just wrong to have to have a 2 second advantage to effect a pass and 1 sec seems about the right amount to me. It means that the more aggressive drivers are more likely to be able to excel.

[wedge]

Wait.... I've seen this thread before somewhere! :p ;)

Serious head on. Does this not strike anybody as a load of gimmickry? Movable wings, which don't sit well with safety or cost-cutting agendas? Push-to-pass buttons thinly disguised as a green measure?

And how does having a standard ECU and stifling engine devopment help the speed difference between teams?

F1 has completely lost its way. :s

I'd disagree. F1 has been screaming out at a new direction that doesn't involve great emphasis on aero and software/electronics/hydraulics.

[ioan]

Wait.... I've seen this thread before somewhere! :p ;)

Serious head on. Does this not strike anybody as a load of gimmickry? Movable wings, which don't sit well with safety or cost-cutting agendas? Push-to-pass buttons thinly disguised as a green measure?

And how does having a standard ECU and stifling engine devopment help the speed difference between teams?

F1 has completely lost its way. :s

Agreed.

[ioan]

It's just wrong to have to have a 2 second advantage to effect a pass and 1 sec seems about the right amount to me. It means that the more aggressive drivers are more likely to be able to excel.

1 second is just as wrong as 2 seconds in required advantage to be able to overtake.

Given that top F1 cars are within a few tenths of each other the only thing that will improve is that the top teams will have less problems overtaking the lesser cars, but they will struggle to pass each other in normal conditions.

I would say that these 3 guys only worked in a direction that will give their teams an advantage over the slower cars, but will not endanger their own teams competitiveness. :s

[schmenke]

...Serious head on. Does this not strike anybody as a load of gimmickry? Movable wings, which don't sit well with safety or cost-cutting agendas? Push-to-pass buttons ...

That's exactly what went through my mind upon reading that :s
It would be much less gimmicky if an unlimited amount of adjustments were permitted.

[Knock-on]

1 second is just as wrong as 2 seconds in required advantage to be able to overtake.

Given that top F1 cars are within a few tenths of each other the only thing that will improve is that the top teams will have less problems overtaking the lesser cars, but they will struggle to pass each other in normal conditions.

I would say that these 3 guys only worked in a direction that will give their teams an advantage over the slower cars, but will not endanger their own teams competitiveness. :s

I disagree.

The problem we have is cars cann't follow close enough for drivers to outbrake and get a run.

By minimising the air disruption and allowing a driver with similar pace to be agressive, you are likely to see the better drivers shine.

If you couple this inititive with a restructuring of the points system to reward higher placed finishers more, then you will get more racing instead of just sitting on a good points finish.

Personally, I think it's crazy that a driver can contemplate defending a 7 point lead by finishing in second for 3 races.

[K-Pu]

The problem is that we have heard lots of things about changes wich will improve overtaking, and not many of them have come forward.

Some because were totally wrong, some others because of politics, who knows. Reducing aero efficiency is a good start, but having engines frozen is a great step backwards because this way you´ll maybe save costs but at the same time you are dooming a team (for good or bad) to stay in their position some more years because they can´t improve their engine or the others can´t do the same with theirs.

I know engine freezing is not the point of this thread, but IMO this solution will not bring F1 to a new world unless they think seriously about their own rules.

[Bagwan]

Get rid of winglets . That's good .
Reduce the size of the rear wing . That's good .
Less diffuser . That's good .

Increase the size of the front wing . That might give back some of the grip lost , and make a driver braver , so could be good , but more aero means less driver , so , bad move .
Make the wing moveable . That's a bad , bad idea . Sure , it might give a guy more grip if he needed it , or it might reduce drag if he needed , but to reverse those with a slight malfunction could mean the end for the one caught out . Bad , bad idea .

[truefan72]

The problem is that we have heard lots of things about changes wich will improve overtaking, and not many of them have come forward.

Some because were totally wrong, some others because of politics, who knows. Reducing aero efficiency is a good start, but having engines frozen is a great step backwards because this way you´ll maybe save costs but at the same time you are dooming a team (for good or bad) to stay in their position some more years because they can´t improve their engine or the others can´t do the same with theirs.

I know engine freezing is not the point of this thread, but IMO this solution will not bring F1 to a new world unless they think seriously about their own rules.

agreed

[Miatanut]

Increase the size of the front wing . That might give back some of the grip lost , and make a driver braver , so could be good , but more aero means less driver , so , bad move .

You can't just increase the size of the front wing. The car has to have aero balance. You don't want a car which transitions to terminal oversteer at 180 mph on a sweeper! I think the concept behind the driver-adjustable front wing is that a driver can dial-in more downforce at the front when he is right up on the gearbox of a leading car. We will see how that works out, because it will lead to a car where if the driver doesn't take it out of that configuration when he drops a way back from the leading car, he's going for an unpleasant ride. Not exactly a confidence-builder!

[schmenke]

...I think the concept behind the driver-adjustable front wing is that a driver can dial-in more downforce at the front when he is right up on the gearbox of a leading car. ...

I didn't think that the turbulant air trailing the lead car would provide much downforce, even with a few extra degrees of wing? :mark:

[ShiftingGears]

How will the larger front wing help increase overtaking at all?

[Miatanut]

I didn't think that the turbulant air trailing the lead car would provide much downforce, even with a few extra degrees of wing? :mark:

Crank-in more wing and you'll get more downforce. They get downforce now even when they are right up on the gearbox of the car in front, it's just that the front end washes out because it has less than it needs.

The problem I would see is that, in the heat of battle, a driver forgets to dial out the added front downforce when he's back in clean air, pushes the car to the limit, then it goes around because the aero balance is all messed-up.

Maybe since they are at full throttle so much of the time, this would just mean the driver can't use as much throttle as he's used to at that point on the track and that reminds him to dial-out the added front wing, so the terminal loose condition is unlikely to occur.

[jens]

With adjustable front wings we will get a new variant of excuses explaining crashes: "Wing didn't function after I had pressed the button, so I crashed as I didn't expect the car to behave that way." :p :

[Bagwan]

Adjustable twice a lap brings the protest : "He changed his wing three times ! He can't do that !"

"I'm sure I saw it flex while it was adjusting !" .

Will they have flexibility in the adjustments ?
Will they be able to adjust the flexibility ?

Will they be flexible enough to adjust ?

There's all kinds of room to breath with moving wings , and all kinds of room in the WMSC courts for moving suits to the forefront in the championship .

Gosh , wouldn't that be great ?

Bad , bad idea . Bad .
Really bad .

[Miatanut]

Adjustable twice a lap brings the protest : "He changed his wing three times ! He can't do that !"

"I'm sure I saw it flex while it was adjusting !" .

Will they have flexibility in the adjustments ?
Will they be able to adjust the flexibility ?

Will they be flexible enough to adjust ?

There's all kinds of room to breath with moving wings , and all kinds of room in the WMSC courts for moving suits to the forefront in the championship .

Gosh , wouldn't that be great ?

Bad , bad idea . Bad .
Really bad .

Or, just eliminate the no movable aero devices ban completely. F1 did it because F1 did a bad job of copying what Hall & Co. were doing, so they had wing failures.

[wedge]

Go back to lower front wing. Ex-designer Gary Anderson is one person amongst many who support this because a lower wing is supposedly less susceptible to the turbulent wake.

[Miatanut]

Go back to lower front wing. Ex-designer Gary Anderson is one person amongst many who support this because a lower wing is supposedly less susceptible to the turbulent wake.

This is one I've been wondering about. A lower front wing can take advantage of ground effect. It would be super pitch sensitive, so maybe that's the problem.

[Whyzars]

A movable front wing is a recipe for an unintentional oversteer event isn't it?


The teams already know how to slow cars down as they do it a couple of times every race - add weight.

In my opinion F1 needs to bring in a handicapping system based on WDC points. The system would be cheap and safe and predictable and encourage continual performance improvements throughout the season. I realise that it is viewed as "penalising success" but if it means that the racing is less reliant on random factors such as safety cars then it can only be a good thing.

I would start at 2kg per WDC point and tweak the system from there.

:)

[Knock-on]

A movable front wing is a recipe for an unintentional oversteer event isn't it?


The teams already know how to slow cars down as they do it a couple of times every race - add weight.

In my opinion F1 needs to bring in a handicapping system based on WDC points. The system would be cheap and safe and predictable and encourage continual performance improvements throughout the season. I realise that it is viewed as "penalising success" but if it means that the racing is less reliant on random factors such as safety cars then it can only be a good thing.

I would start at 2kg per WDC point and tweak the system from there.

:)

Increased weight is increased dander in a crash. Bad idea :(

I also hate the idea about handicapping although some would argue that the FIA have been piloting it already ;)

[wedge]

A movable front wing is a recipe for an unintentional oversteer event isn't it?

Adjustable twice per lap so if you're stuck behind a car, in the turbulent wake, then you can minimise some of the understeer to try to make a pass.

[Garry Walker]

Too much nonsense about overtaking.

[ShiftingGears]

Too much nonsense about overtaking.

Why is it nonsense?

[schmenke]

A movable front wing is a recipe for an unintentional oversteer event isn't it?


The teams already know how to slow cars down as they do it a couple of times every race - add weight.

In my opinion F1 needs to bring in a handicapping system based on WDC points. The system would be cheap and safe and predictable and encourage continual performance improvements throughout the season. I realise that it is viewed as "penalising success" but if it means that the racing is less reliant on random factors such as safety cars then it can only be a good thing.

I would start at 2kg per WDC point and tweak the system from there.

:)

I would no longer follow the sport.

[schmenke]

Too much nonsense about overtaking.

Agreed.

[ioan]

A movable front wing is a recipe for an unintentional oversteer event isn't it?


The teams already know how to slow cars down as they do it a couple of times every race - add weight.

In my opinion F1 needs to bring in a handicapping system based on WDC points. The system would be cheap and safe and predictable and encourage continual performance improvements throughout the season. I realise that it is viewed as "penalising success" but if it means that the racing is less reliant on random factors such as safety cars then it can only be a good thing.

I would start at 2kg per WDC point and tweak the system from there.

:)

No thanks.

[ShiftingGears]

A movable front wing is a recipe for an unintentional oversteer event isn't it?


The teams already know how to slow cars down as they do it a couple of times every race - add weight.

In my opinion F1 needs to bring in a handicapping system based on WDC points. The system would be cheap and safe and predictable and encourage continual performance improvements throughout the season. I realise that it is viewed as "penalising success" but if it means that the racing is less reliant on random factors such as safety cars then it can only be a good thing.

I would start at 2kg per WDC point and tweak the system from there.

:)

Or you could fix the safety car rules instead of introducing another stupid gimmick.

[Whyzars]

Or you could fix the safety car rules instead of introducing another stupid gimmick.


Always remember that the biggest race in Australia is a handicap event and no-one would have it any other way... ;)


I don't see why folks are so against weight being used as a way to even up the teams in F1.

Coming into the final 3 races of the season, at 2kg per WDC point, Hamilton would only be carrying 14 kgs more than Massa but 162 kgs more than Button. I believe that the Honda would be competitive under those conditions. Over a whole season of progressive increases would likely never see Honda get that large a difference and that is the point of results based handicaps - if they're done right they handicap rather than cripple.

Weight handicapping has to be far better than a major manufacturer being convincingly beaten week in week out. These are the best drivers in the world, in the best cars in the world, but the majority of the grid are unable to showcase their skills because of minimal differences in car performance.

:)

[ShiftingGears]

Always remember that the biggest race in Australia is a handicap event and no-one would have it any other way... ;)

Doesn't mean F1 has to stoop to that level.


These are the best drivers in the world, in the best cars in the world, but the majority of the grid are unable to showcase their skills because of minimal differences in car performance.

:)

That's how grand prix racing has always been, and always should be. If the backmarker teams don't like it, they hound sponsors for more money and design a better car.

Handicapping is a gimmick. It's a stupid way to artificially level out the competition for those who don't deserve it.
When you rely on measures like that you don't end up with a sport, you end up with a joke.

[ioan]

I don't see why folks are so against weight being used as a way to even up the teams in F1.

We've got GP2 and A1GP for level playing fields.
F1 isn't about artificially level performances.

[Knock-on]

Always remember that the biggest race in Australia is a handicap event and no-one would have it any other way... ;)


I don't see why folks are so against weight being used as a way to even up the teams in F1.

Coming into the final 3 races of the season, at 2kg per WDC point, Hamilton would only be carrying 14 kgs more than Massa but 162 kgs more than Button. I believe that the Honda would be competitive under those conditions. Over a whole season of progressive increases would likely never see Honda get that large a difference and that is the point of results based handicaps - if they're done right they handicap rather than cripple.

Weight handicapping has to be far better than a major manufacturer being convincingly beaten week in week out. These are the best drivers in the world, in the best cars in the world, but the majority of the grid are unable to showcase their skills because of minimal differences in car performance.

:)

I think we can take this further.

How about this ;)

[Whyzars]

If the backmarker teams don't like it, they hound sponsors for more money and design a better car.


...or take the cheaper alternative and simply close up shop.

In the current economic climate "backmarker" teams may have difficulty finding funds when podium time is so unlikely and, in a competition that practices "freezing", I can't see too many "better" car's being designed.


Handicapping is a gimmick.

And freezing engine development in a competitive MOTOR sport isn't a gimmick? Some would argue that grooved tyres were a gimmick as they became F1'centric or even that two race engines and KERS are gimmicks?

Anyway, whats one more "gimmick" if it gives a major sponsor a couple of tenths of a second that keeps them happy and in the competition.



It's a stupid way to artificially level out the competition for those who don't deserve it.

Its not stupid at all.

Honda/Toyota/BMW etc. have earned their stripes in F1 and don't "deserve" to be off the podium week after week. You appear to have a view that half a ton will be dropped on McLaren and Ferrari after the first race and that is simply incorrect.

You would have to agree, on current results, that neither Honda, Toyota or BMW will win any of the remaining 3 races. With a correctly implemented and fair handicapping system in place then, by this stage of the season, teams should be far closer and the competition more open so that the last 3 races would have more victory possibilities. It doesn't mean that they WILL win but it does mean that they COULD win.

You need to be thinking along the lines of "Would handicapping make the racing more entertaining or improve overtaking?". I believe the answer is a definite "possibly".


When you rely on measures like that you don't end up with a sport, you end up with a joke.

I disagree and believe that no-one will care after the first few races, especially the drivers, as the cream will always rise to the top.


:)

[jens]

Honda/Toyota/BMW etc. have earned their stripes in F1 and don't "deserve" to be off the podium week after week. You appear to have a view that half a ton will be dropped on McLaren and Ferrari after the first race and that is simply incorrect.

You would have to agree, on current results, that neither Honda, Toyota or BMW will win any of the remaining 3 races. With a correctly implemented and fair handicapping system in place then, by this stage of the season, teams should be far closer and the competition more open so that the last 3 races would have more victory possibilities. It doesn't mean that they WILL win but it does mean that they COULD win.


Me as a Toyota supporter don't prefer to see them winning, when the performance of top teams is hindered or they are dropped to the back with a safety car. Such win would create no satisfaction, because the knowledge "They may have got a lucky win, but this doesn't change the fact they still suck" persists. A win on pure merit is what creates joy and happiness. Safety cars, weight penalties, reverse grids or whatever simply devalue the worth of a win.

WTCC is a good example, how unfair can the weight penalties be. In recent years I remember championship leader starting from somewhere P15 for multiple races in a row, because his car was so heavy he couldn't do anything. And guy, who was leading (!) the championship before the last race weekend, was basically screwed, because he was the heaviest of all and couldn't score any points. So can you believe - if you want to win the title, do your best not to lead the championship before the last race. How strange can racing become?

[ShiftingGears]

...or take the cheaper alternative and simply close up shop.

That's why, in theory, cost cutting measures are being implemented.


In the current economic climate "backmarker" teams may have difficulty finding funds when podium time is so unlikely and, in a competition that practices "freezing", I can't see too many "better" car's being designed.



And freezing engine development in a competitive MOTOR sport isn't a gimmick? Some would argue that grooved tyres were a gimmick as they became F1'centric or even that two race engines and KERS are gimmicks?

Freezing engine development would have to be one of the worst decisions ever implemented by the FIA. I don't see how grooved tyres are a gimmick, as they're just tyres. I don't like the idea of KERS being like Push to Pass, but the FIA needs to make F1 slightly more environmentally friendly. [/QUOTE]


Anyway, whats one more "gimmick" if it gives a major sponsor a couple of tenths of a second that keeps them happy and in the competition.

It's another step which further removes F1 from its roots as a sport, and further towards a 'show'.





Its not stupid at all.

Honda/Toyota/BMW etc. have earned their stripes in F1 and don't "deserve" to be off the podium week after week.

It is stupid. You have to constantly earn your stripes - it's F1. Yesterday's results and former glories mean nothing when you are mediocre in the present. You would deserve podiums by being the best in the present.

It's up to the teams, drivers, everyone, to constantly improve.


You appear to have a view that half a ton will be dropped on McLaren and Ferrari after the first race and that is simply incorrect.

Well it is not. I don't care what the degree of handicapping is, I don't agree with the principle of handicapping the best teams because someone thinks that some strange reason, lesser teams deserve to be constantly fighting for wins.


You would have to agree, on current results, that neither Honda, Toyota or BMW will win any of the remaining 3 races. With a correctly implemented and fair handicapping system in place then, by this stage of the season, teams should be far closer and the competition more open so that the last 3 races would have more victory possibilities. It doesn't mean that they WILL win but it does mean that they COULD win.

You need to be thinking along the lines of "Would handicapping make the racing more entertaining or improve overtaking?". I believe the answer is a definite "possibly".

It wouldn't improve the racing in my opinion, because it'd just make it more of a joke. It'd be like NASCAR in the way that they try to manufacture entertainment by having a caution flag ten laps from the end. Not only does it devalue the achievements of the teams and drivers in the race up until that point, it makes a mockery of real close finishes. The finishes where the lesser teams aren't handicapped.




I disagree and believe that no-one will care after the first few races, especially the drivers, as the cream will always rise to the top.


:)

Maybe your average fans won't care. But the true fans who care about F1 as a sport will care.