Your opinion on 'Drag Reduction System'

[Daniel]

I sometimes think she feels I could do with a performance boost... :)

As far as irrelevant points go I merely disagreed with your comment about it being an improvement. Its a slippery slope when the entertainment becomes more important than the racing.



I disagree. F1, in fact motorsport in general, has always been an idea's factory with the best ideas being adopted by the commercial market. KERS is the example you use. KERS and specifically fly-wheels are being tested extensively in the long-haul trucking industry with double digit percentage reductions in fuel usage being realised. Its appropriate that F1 engineers be tasked with that techical challenge. It advances mankind.

Now the rules surrounding KERS I believe they got those wrong in that it was a "push to pass" item and that is the same with the DRS. Its "push to pass" and I don't believe that is the way for F1 to move forward.






Faster drivers getting past slower drivers easier begs the question as to how they got behind them in the first place. Why should a faster driver be able to get past a slower driver easier?

There is no doubt that an F1 car has a huge advantage when leading and there have been many changes made in the past few years with this in mind. Personally I don't see much of a problem in F1 as the races do pretty much finish in the order expected.

I don't think that the DRS will ever lend itself to "experience" making it better. Track/weather conditions is making it difficult to decide on the optimal positioning of the zone during a race weekend and technology changes from year to year may see most races in the future being affected negatively by the DRS if its adoption becomes permanent.

You're new to this F1 thing aren't you? Sometimes when a faster driver pits, he sometimes comes out on the track behind a slower driver. Hope that's not too complicated for you!

Why should a faster driver be able to get past a slower driver? Ummmm, well.... are you really asking this question? Whilst in Turkey it was too easy for faster drivers to get past, in the past you had to be stupidly quicker than the driver in front to get past and even then it was difficult. Some of the people on here seem to want to go back to the days where you had an overtake or two to talk about per half a season. That was boring, what we need is a happy medium. The FIA did something to make overtaking easier (which pretty much everyone asked for) and people are whinging about it not being perfect after a few races. Give it time and F1 will be better for it.

[ioan]

A rather sweeping statement there don't you think Ioan?

There are great F1 fans, about 5 to 10% of the whole IMO. The rest... :\

[ioan]

Yes processions, with lots of racing and no overtaking would be much better than highway passing, heck any of us could overtake like that.

[ioan]

No, but we don't like to see cars flying past others that have got absolutely no chance of defending. That is not racing. They need to sort out the aero problems in F1, not try and compensate for them with sh!tty systems like DRS. DRS is just so.....fake.

F1 is not about racing, it's about making money, lots of it.

[Sonic]

There are great F1 fans, about 5 to 10% of the whole IMO. The rest... :\

And naturally, the people on the board go to make up that 5% ;)

[ioan]

DRS is to F1 exactly what push to pass is for IRL.
This just shows how low F1 already got and still digging.

[ioan]

And naturally, the people on the board go to make up that 5% ;)

Exactly!

[Sonic]

Yes processions, with lots of racing and no overtaking would be much better than highway passing, heck any of us could overtake like that.

Doubt it. Most of us would shunt within a second.

[Sonic]

Exactly!

:D

Dude, never change!

[ioan]

Why should a faster driver be able to get past a slower driver?

Because he's better?
You mean they can't? Well then tough luck they should take some lessons from Kobayashi or Hamilton.

[ioan]

Doubt it. Most of us would shunt within a second.

C'mon, I thought you were part of those 5%. :p

[Daniel]

Yes processions, with lots of racing and no overtaking would be much better than highway passing, heck any of us could overtake like that.

So the sort of racing where you could watch the start, see the order after the first round of stops and then come back for the champagne and know the results is what we want?

Some of you guys seem like the sort of "connoisseurs" who could sniff, swill and spit out a glass of piss that had been dyed red to look like wine and comment on its fruity aroma, full bodied taste and tart aftertase on the tongue. F1 sucked most of the time other than when it was wet and the fact that the FIA felt the need to do something about it backs that up.

[ioan]

So the sort of racing where you could watch the start, see the order after the first round of stops and then come back for the champagne and know the results is what we want?

Some of you guys seem like the sort of "connoisseurs" who could sniff, swill and spit out a glass of piss that had been dyed red to look like wine and comment on its fruity aroma, full bodied taste and tart aftertase on the tongue. F1 sucked most of the time other than when it was wet and the fact that the FIA felt the need to do something about it backs that up.

If they fight for places I don't care if the order changes.
How the heck can people be so superficial and chose form over substance? :rolleyes:

[Sonic]

C'mon, I thought you were part of those 5%. :p

I said most ;) I'd be fine. Better than fine. Awesome. Legendary even.

[Daniel]

If they fight for places I don't care if the order changes.
How the heck can people be so superficial and chose form over substance? :rolleyes:

The fights were largely stacked in favour of the driver in front though. Personally I prefer the way things are now where qualifying isn't quite as important as before and managing your tyres is more important.

[Mark]

Agreed. For the first time in a long time if a driver is catching another they stand a very good chance of getting by.

I think it was a bit too easy in Turkey.

[Daniel]

Agreed. For the first time in a long time if a driver is catching another they stand a very good chance of getting by.

I think it was a bit too easy in Turkey.

Wouldn't you MUCH prefer it to be more or less impossible for a driver to get by and to almost need to risk an accident each overtake? That's muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch better!

I'm being sarcastic btw.

[Mark]

Yes? No? What was the question?

[Daniel]

Yes? No? What was the question?

Are you a connoiseur who longs for the old days of racing and is willing to criticise the sport when it tries to bring racing back?

[ioan]

Agreed. For the first time in a long time if a driver is catching another they stand a very good chance of getting by.

I think it was a bit too easy in Turkey.

Racing is not about catching someone it's about getting by. I suggest rally for those who don't care about racing as racing is defined.

[ioan]

Wouldn't you MUCH prefer it to be more or less impossible for a driver to get by and to almost need to risk an accident each overtake? That's muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch better!

I'm being sarcastic btw.

Not only sarcastic....

[Daniel]

Not only sarcastic....

Do you honestly prefer what we had before where a much better driver could be held behind by a far slower driver purely because of the way the aero works?

[Marbles]

It reminds me a bit of the Hanford device they used in CART on the super speedways for a few years. The device was used to create drag to slow the cars but it also created a huge hole in the air for the following car and it wasn't long before a similarly fast car would be able to draft by it. "Draft" doesn't really describe the huge slipstream effect it had. The referred to it as slingshot drafting as the tailing car appeared to have a JATO attached to it as it blew by the leading car. All cars had it and there was no switch to turn it on or off. It made the race a pretty exciting affair as lead changes took place almost every lap it seems. But, it was kind of a guilty pleasure for me. It was kind of like watching a high scoring hockey game with no goalie in the net. The team who had the puck last was likely to be the team that won. Sure the drivers had to be fast but the outcome was almost like something they had little control over.

[ioan]

Do you honestly prefer what we had before where a much better driver could be held behind by a far slower driver purely because of the way the aero works?

That never happened. A driver was kept behind because the slower drive in front had good defending skills or the one behind had less overtaking skills then what was needed, it was not only up to aero, and many drivers demonstrated that it is possible to overtake if you do it right.

Just think about Webber and Heidfeld against Alonso back in Monaco (2005?) where Webber was tooling around behind Alonso's Renault for endless laps, than Heidfeld in the very same car overtook Alonso at the 2nd attempt. Driver skill came into play there and that is what I want to see in racing.

[Daniel]

That never happened. A driver was kept behind because the slower drive in front had good defending skills or the one behind had less overtaking skills then what was needed, it was not only up to aero, and many drivers demonstrated that it is possible to overtake if you do it right.

Just think about Webber and Heidfeld against Alonso back in Monaco (2005?) where Webber was tooling around behind Alonso's Renault for endless laps, than Heidfeld in the very same car overtook Alonso at the 2nd attempt. Driver skill came into play there and that is what I want to see in racing.

I think what we want to see is a middle ground. A little bit of DRS to purely overcome the whole turbulence issue would be nice, I don't want DRS doing 100% of the work for the driver :)

[Whyzars]

You're new to this F1 thing aren't you? Sometimes when a faster driver pits, he sometimes comes out on the track behind a slower driver. Hope that's not too complicated for you!

I've been a spectator in the crowd to watch Prost, Senna, Mansell etc. so don't see myself as "New to this F1 thing...".




Why should a faster driver be able to get past a slower driver? Ummmm, well.... are you really asking this question?



Yep, that's exactly the question I'm asking.




Whilst in Turkey it was too easy for faster drivers to get past, in the past you had to be stupidly quicker than the driver in front to get past and even then it was difficult. Some of the people on here seem to want to go back to the days where you had an overtake or two to talk about per half a season. That was boring, what we need is a happy medium. The FIA did something to make overtaking easier (which pretty much everyone asked for) and people are whinging about it not being perfect after a few races. Give it time and F1 will be better for it.

It was too easy for faster drivers in Turkey because they got the DRS zone wrong. I would argue that they will get it wrong more often than right unless they dynamically adjust it throughout the race. Changing track conditions mean that the effectiveness of the DRS may always be changing. We haven't had a really wet race yet and the DRS could be a whole new animal during a race that starts wet and ends dry. In fact they may have been expecting rain in Turkey and that was why the DRS zone was so early.

As to "stupidly quicker" in the past I don't believe that has ever been the case in any motorsport. The "problem", if there is one, is explosive acceleration, traction and driver reflexes. The "solution" may be found in tools to address those three. The DRS addresses none of them as it makes cars "stupidly quicker" and that is why it is wrong.

Traction control, active suspension or myriad other mystery tricks coupled with the "one second" rule could overcome the acceleration and traction issue and driver skill will finish the job. At least this approach allows the lead driver some hope of defending the track position he has earned. As you say, it was too easy in Turkey...

[Sonic]

^^^

So just to clarify, you are against DRS, but not some other form of 'artificial' engineering solution to permit the following vehicle an opportunity to pass?

(not being sarcastic - truly interested).

[555-04Q2]

^^^

So just to clarify, you are against DRS, but not some other form of 'artificial' engineering solution to permit the following vehicle an opportunity to pass?

(not being sarcastic - truly interested).

Don't know about Whyzars standing on this, but I want to see a move away from modern F1 cars aero reliance to more emphasis on mechanical grip, which will automatically make it easier to pass. That's how it used to be, until Williams started with their wind tunnel testing and car designs that changed F1 from mechanical grip to aero reliance.

[Daniel]

I've been a spectator in the crowd to watch Prost, Senna, Mansell etc. so don't see myself as "New to this F1 thing...".





Yep, that's exactly the question I'm asking.




It was too easy for faster drivers in Turkey because they got the DRS zone wrong. I would argue that they will get it wrong more often than right unless they dynamically adjust it throughout the race. Changing track conditions mean that the effectiveness of the DRS may always be changing. We haven't had a really wet race yet and the DRS could be a whole new animal during a race that starts wet and ends dry. In fact they may have been expecting rain in Turkey and that was why the DRS zone was so early.

As to "stupidly quicker" in the past I don't believe that has ever been the case in any motorsport. The "problem", if there is one, is explosive acceleration, traction and driver reflexes. The "solution" may be found in tools to address those three. The DRS addresses none of them as it makes cars "stupidly quicker" and that is why it is wrong.

Traction control, active suspension or myriad other mystery tricks coupled with the "one second" rule could overcome the acceleration and traction issue and driver skill will finish the job. At least this approach allows the lead driver some hope of defending the track position he has earned. As you say, it was too easy in Turkey...

Thanks for that quite frankly nonsensical post. So basically it seems like DRS did sleep with your wife/girlfriend :mark:

You have fail dismally to actually prove that there is something inherently wrong with DRS, merely the way it was executed in Turkey.

[Daniel]

Don't know about Whyzars standing on this, but I want to see a move away from modern F1 cars aero reliance to more emphasis on mechanical grip, which will automatically make it easier to pass. That's how it used to be, until Williams started with their wind tunnel testing and car designs that changed F1 from mechanical grip to aero reliance.


I think that's what everyone wants. I don't think that having aero is inherently good in terms of spectacle and I think if the cars can be kept rougly as fast (and safe) without it then all the better. Wider tyrs and active suspension would make for much racier cars IMHO. I still think DRS is a step in the right direction if aero is going to be kept, it just needs some tweaking.

[555-04Q2]

I think that's what everyone wants. I don't think that having aero is inherently good in terms of spectacle and I think if the cars can be kept rougly as fast (and safe) without it then all the better. Wider tyrs and active suspension would make for much racier cars IMHO. I still think DRS is a step in the right direction if aero is going to be kept, it just needs some tweaking.

Indeed. Wider tyres etc and less aero always makes for better racing. Another aspect to look at is brakes. F1 cars can brake from 300+ km/h to 80 km/h within 100 meters, which is rediculous! It lessens the chance to outbrake your opponent. Making the braking zone longer with less braking power as in the days gone by will also assist with overtaking opportunities.

[Daniel]

Indeed. Wider tyres etc and less aero always makes for better racing. Another aspect to look at is brakes. F1 cars can brake from 300+ km/h to 80 km/h within 100 meters, which is rediculous! It lessens the chance to outbrake your opponent. Making the braking zone longer with less braking power as in the days gone by will also assist with overtaking opportunities.

Agreed. Personally I'd have loved to see F1 cars with 17 or 18" wheels and some nice big cast iron discs rather than the carbon ones they have now.

[555-04Q2]

Agreed. Personally I'd have loved to see F1 cars with 17 or 18" wheels and some nice big cast iron discs rather than the carbon ones they have now.

Yebo yes :up: Probably will never happen, but at least we can dream :p :

[SGWilko]

DRS should be used to enable the following driver to set up the pass, not to enable hime to have passed with the wing still open. Once they get it right - and TBO in fairness to the FIA, they will only learn from their mistakes - the racing will likely be better as a result.

[Daniel]

DRS should be used to enable the following driver to set up the pass, not to enable hime to have passed with the wing still open. Once they get it right - and TBO in fairness to the FIA, they will only learn from their mistakes - the racing will likely be better as a result.

Definitely. If they can manage to progressively remove the DRS effect when the car gets alongside then IMHO DRS will really make the races come alive.

[Dave B]

Definitely. If they can manage to progressively remove the DRS effect when the car gets alongside then IMHO DRS will really make the races come alive.

How about that for a rule: use DRS if you're within a second of the car in front but you must release it the moment you draw level. Could that work?

[Mark]

How about that for a rule: use DRS if you're within a second of the car in front but you must release it the moment you draw level. Could that work?

I don't think having that sort of system is going to be practical. They just need to concentrate on what they've already been doing, i.e. allowing the DRS to get you alongside when you get to the braking zone, at which point DRS shuts down.

However, it's not just DRS that's improving things this year, we've seen a lot of overtaking and battling outside of the DRS areas too, which has to be to do with the tyres.

It's just a pity that most of the time the fight is for second place at best!

[Daniel]

How about that for a rule: use DRS if you're within a second of the car in front but you must release it the moment you draw level. Could that work?

I think the DRS would need to cut out gradually as it would be like an air brake cutting in suddenly which I think would be bad.

[Ranger]

If you want a simple (and admittedly dumb) idea that will work fantastically:

Let everyone have DRS all the time... except the leader, who doesn't have it at all.

[Daniel]

If you want a simple (and admittedly dumb) idea that will work fantastically:

Let everyone have DRS all the time... except the leader, who doesn't have it at all.

That artificially benfits the leader though, it'd be like Mario Kart 64 where if you had the blue shell you'd hang back and just before the end fire it off and take the win :D

[wedge]

How about that for a rule: use DRS if you're within a second of the car in front but you must release it the moment you draw level. Could that work?

Dear God no, no, no.

DRS is too much of a gimmick as it is.

I was sceptical but inquisitive but now get rid of the DRS system altogether. The tyres are fine as it is but DRS exaggerates the speed and grip differential.

[Whyzars]

Thanks for that quite frankly nonsensical post. So basically it seems like DRS did sleep with your wife/girlfriend :mark:

You have fail dismally to actually prove that there is something inherently wrong with DRS, merely the way it was executed in Turkey.


Tell me, what was nonsensical from my part? You're the one who keeps bringing up the nocturnal habits of the DRS.

You said cars in the past needed to be "stupidly quicker" to overtake. I disagreed with you on that because making cars "stupidly quicker" is what the DRS does. Cars were definitely able to overtake before the DRS.

Now the DRS does seem to be liked by the drivers but I suspect that it just makes their day at the office more fun. Ultimately they are still finishing in a predictable order. After two hours the cream will always rise to the top but would Webber have got past Alonso without the DRS?

There is no overtaking problem in F1 that I can see but the "one second" rule is the interesting innovation to come from the DRS. I can see that rule surviving and being the basis for some future developments but I can't see the DRS being on the cars next year.

The DRS zones should probably be dynamically adjusted by the stewards or, at a minimum, reduced automatically during the race i.e. the zone reduces by 5 metres per lap or similar. That may make the DRS less potent as the race progresses.

[Daniel]

Tell me, what was nonsensical from my part? You're the one who keeps bringing up the nocturnal habits of the DRS.

You said cars in the past needed to be "stupidly quicker" to overtake. I disagreed with you on that because making cars "stupidly quicker" is what the DRS does. Cars were definitely able to overtake before the DRS.

Of course cars were able to overtake before, but as I said.... they had to be stupidly quicker to stand a chance of getting past. So for instance you could have a Hamilton on fresh tyres behind a Trulli in an OK car on tyres which were a couple of laps old and your Hamilton had to more or less fry his tyres to give himself a chance of getting past someone who if he were in a Formula Ford race, would get passed far easier. The one second rule means that people aren't getting up behind other drivers just on the basis of DRS or anything.

What kind of sport DOESN'T want the cream to rise to the top? Essentially the way things were previously, the results weren't even decided by RACING, they were decided by drivers driving on their own on a track against the clock in qualifying. Sounds almost to me like rallying..... I LOVE rallying, but I don't want to see F1 cars doing it on a track.

[wedge]

The DRS zones should probably be dynamically adjusted by the stewards or, at a minimum, reduced automatically during the race i.e. the zone reduces by 5 metres per lap or similar. That may make the DRS less potent as the race progresses.

See, this is why we need get rid of DRS. We have another crazy idea.

[Mia 01]

I have noticed that Seb is very good att using DRS.

Is that a reason?

Ilike DRS.

[Dave B]

I have noticed that Seb is very good att using DRS.

Is that a reason?

Ilike DRS.
In fairness he's rarely been in a position to use it - he's usually the one in front.

[Daniel]

See, this is why we need get rid of DRS. We have another crazy idea.


OMG we should dress Wedge up in a clown suit.

See, this is why we need to get rid of Wedge. Daniel had a crazy idea.


Can anyone see the complete lack of logic in my statement? :mark: I call it the "butterfly flapping its wings in the jungles of Madagascar causes Rubin "hurricane" Carter to be wrongfully jailed in the USA" theory.

[Whyzars]

^^^

So just to clarify, you are against DRS, but not some other form of 'artificial' engineering solution to permit the following vehicle an opportunity to pass?.


Sure why not.

I've never seen the DRS as an engineering solution but I'm pretty sure there are engineering solutions to be had if the powers that be allow it.

I think that the "one second" rule is the best thing about the DRS and that could open up many opportunities for future development if they want to use it that way. Give teams a loose engineering brief for use in that "one second" window and see what they come up with. It could be very interesting.

[Daniel]

Sure why not.

I've never seen the DRS as an engineering solution but I'm pretty sure there are engineering solutions to be had if the powers that be allow it.

I think that the "one second" rule is the best thing about the DRS and that could open up many opportunities for future development if they want to use it that way. Give teams a loose engineering brief for use in that "one second" window and see what they come up with. It could be very interesting.

So again, no ideas, just an irrational dislike of DRS because of one race where it was too much of a factor.

[Whyzars]

So again, no ideas, just an irrational dislike of DRS because of one race where it was too much of a factor.

No, my opinion of the DRS has formed from every race this year equally. Each subsequent race provides further reinforcement.

Turkey for instance told me that they will likely get the zone wrong more often than they will get it right. It may be marginal but how do they truly expect to ever judge whether they got it right? Are journalists and commentators going to decide if the FIA had the zone right or wrong and on what basis will that be decided?

The potency of the DRS is affected by track conditions and pre-race decisions. There appears to be no provision for the stewards to remedy anything in the DRS once a race begins.

In each race the DRS has had issues. I haven't even touched on my concerns about the safety of the DRS.

[ioan]

I think what we want to see is a middle ground. A little bit of DRS to purely overcome the whole turbulence issue would be nice, I don't want DRS doing 100% of the work for the driver :)

DRS does not overcome the turbulence issue, it has nothing to do with it.

[ioan]

How about that for a rule: use DRS if you're within a second of the car in front but you must release it the moment you draw level. Could that work?

How do you police it?

[ioan]

Why not free up the design and set a budget limit?
Most will go straight for ground effects, which are the answer to being able to get close to the car in front. Problem solved.

But no, this smart arse buffoons will never come up with something simple and effective, only with complicated gimmicks that need to be detailed on 30 pages of regulations.

[Daniel]

No, my opinion of the DRS has formed from every race this year equally. Each subsequent race provides further reinforcement.

Turkey for instance told me that they will likely get the zone wrong more often than they will get it right. It may be marginal but how do they truly expect to ever judge whether they got it right? Are journalists and commentators going to decide if the FIA had the zone right or wrong and on what basis will that be decided?

The potency of the DRS is affected by track conditions and pre-race decisions. There appears to be no provision for the stewards to remedy anything in the DRS once a race begins.

In each race the DRS has had issues. I haven't even touched on my concerns about the safety of the DRS.

F1 drivers are big boys. I think they can handle DRS. I really don't agree that there've been issues at every track either.

[Daniel]

DRS does not overcome the turbulence issue, it has nothing to do with it.

OK I phrased it wrong. But basically in ye olde days you had to kill your tyres just to try and get past.

[gloomyDAY]

OK I phrased it wrong. But basically in ye olde days you had to kill your tyres just to try and get past.Duh! I thought that's what Pirelli was trying to do this season. The DRS is such a contrived piece of garbage, but seeing two guys duke it out due to the fact that their tires are at different levels is fun to watch.

[wedge]

DRS does not overcome the turbulence issue, it has nothing to do with it.

Greater speed differential helps. This should be with KERS, not DRS.


I have noticed that Seb is very good att using DRS.

Is that a reason?

Ilike DRS.

Challenging for podium position will be too easy for das Crash Kid though I was mightily impressed in trying to fend off Hamilton in China.


See, this is why we need to get rid of Wedge. Daniel had a crazy idea.


Can anyone see the complete lack of logic in my statement? :mark: I call it the "butterfly flapping its wings in the jungles of Madagascar causes Rubin "hurricane" Carter to be wrongfully jailed in the USA" theory.

I wasn't personally attacking you. I was attacking the collective ideas of advocating DRS. The more the ideas, deeper the hole is dug. There should be no halfway house. Either keep it for unlimited use or get rid of it.

[Daniel]

I wasn't personally attacking you. I was attacking the collective ideas of advocating DRS. The more the ideas, deeper the hole is dug. There should be no halfway house. Either keep it for unlimited use or get rid of it.

I know, and it wasn't personal back :) I was just trying to show how flawed your logic is/was :) Lets give DRS some time and let the FIA make some sensible tweaks and see where it takes us.

[wedge]

I know, and it wasn't personal back :) I was just trying to show how flawed your logic is/was :) Lets give DRS some time and let the FIA make some sensible tweaks and see where it takes us.

In China there was a lot of action that didn't involve DRS!

[Daniel]

In China there was a lot of action that didn't involve DRS!

Of course and DRS isn't always needed to make action happen, doesn't mean it's not needed some other times.

[Mark]

In China there was a lot of action that didn't involve DRS!

But was it? Did DRS allow the driver to close on the straight (but not pass) and then be close enough to challenge around the rest of the lap. Or did it allow that driver to overtake the slower car thus he was in a position to fight with the opposition ahead. i.e. DRS brings more into play than just passing your opposition.

[555-04Q2]

But was it? Did DRS allow the driver to close on the straight (but not pass) and then be close enough to challenge around the rest of the lap. Or did it allow that driver to overtake the slower car thus he was in a position to fight with the opposition ahead. i.e. DRS brings more into play than just passing your opposition.

I think what wedge means is there was more overtaking going on into, out of and around the slow corners (compliments of the Pirelli tyre wear and compound differences) than there were at the end of the back straight where the Dumb Racing Solution was active. China was a great advert of how gimmicky the overtaking the Dumb Racing Solution provides is compared to the other overtaking we saw that fine Sunday.

[Daniel]

I think what wedge means is there was more overtaking going on into, out of and around the slow corners (compliments of the Pirelli tyre wear and compound differences) than there were at the end of the back straight where the Dumb Racing Solution was active. China was a great advert of how gimmicky the overtaking the Dumb Racing Solution provides is compared to the other overtaking we saw that fine Sunday.

Different tracks will need different things to make overtaking possible.

[555-04Q2]

Different tracks will need different things to make overtaking possible.

Yes, but we don't need DRS ;)

I heard that DRS won't be used at Monaco as it is not safe. If this is true, DRS is even further tainted in my eyes :down:

[Daniel]

Yes, but we don't need DRS ;)

I heard that DRS won't be used at Monaco as it is not safe. If this is true, DRS is even further tainted in my eyes :down:

By your logic, the normal steering racks that they use on normal tracks are unsafe because they don't use them in Monaco.

[Bagwan]

They are talking about using it in the tunnel .

Why wouldn't that be a good idea ?

[555-04Q2]

By your logic, the normal steering racks that they use on normal tracks are unsafe because they don't use them in Monaco.

Thats only because of one corner on the Monaco circuit that is too tight to turn around with the standard rack!

[555-04Q2]

They are talking about using it in the tunnel .

Why wouldn't that be a good idea ?

Because DRS is a bad idea to start with :p :

[Bagwan]

Because DRS is a bad idea to start with :p :

You are preaching to the choir , sir .
“The overtaking we saw was more from tyre-performance difference than DRS." -Alonso .

By the way , it's "Dopey Racing System" , not "Dumb" .

Dump this Ridiculous System .
Doesn't Really make Sense .


"

[Daniel]

Thats only because of one corner on the Monaco circuit that is too tight to turn around with the standard rack!

Not apply that logic to Monaco with DRS in mind.....

[555-04Q2]

Not apply that logic to Monaco with DRS in mind.....

But the standard steering rack is not dangerous, it is only changed so that 24 cars don't get stuck in a traffic jam at the hairpin.

[555-04Q2]

You are preaching to the choir , sir .
“The overtaking we saw was more from tyre-performance difference than DRS." -Alonso .

By the way , it's "Dopey Racing System" , not "Dumb" .

Dump this Ridiculous System .
Doesn't Really make Sense .


"

I prefer the word Dumb :)

[Daniel]

But the standard steering rack is not dangerous, it is only changed so that 24 cars don't get stuck in a traffic jam at the hairpin.

But DRS is not dangerous, it's only not allowed so...... (I'm trying to help you here)

[555-04Q2]

But DRS is not dangerous, it's only not allowed so...... (I'm trying to help you here)

.....it's still a stupid system? :p : ;)

[wedge]

But DRS is not dangerous, it's only not allowed so...... (I'm trying to help you here)

Remember Sutil deploying DRS just a tad too early in Melbourne. Now imagine Yuji Ide doing the same thing...


But was it? Did DRS allow the driver to close on the straight (but not pass) and then be close enough to challenge around the rest of the lap. Or did it allow that driver to overtake the slower car thus he was in a position to fight with the opposition ahead. i.e. DRS brings more into play than just passing your opposition.

Hamilton passed Button on pit straight because he KERS in his pocket; and Rosberg at a different section of track because Hamilton had better grip.

[Daniel]

Remember Sutil deploying DRS just a tad too early in Melbourne. Now imagine Yuji Ide doing the same thing...

Yeah but if you put your right foot down too quick you can spin ;) Driver skill eh wot wot?

[Bagwan]

Here's what Rubens , chairman of the GPDA has to say about DRS at Monaco :


"I can see a race [filled] with safety cars. If they could listen still: I think Monaco is what it is. It is not overtaking territory," he said.

"Do they think they can introduce overtaking through the DRS? They possibly can, but they might hurt someone. That is a voice from experience."


It's not safe at Monaco .

That is , apparently , because the track is too tight .
Have they no driver skill eh wot wot ?

They must be worried about something .
Could it be those possible spins ?

Why would he think there would be lots of safety cars ?

Why is it that a mechanical passing aid isn't safe at all the tracks , and "may hurt someone" ?

Why is it needed at all when Alonso said that most of the passing was down to the differences in tires anyway ?

[Bagwan]

I prefer the word Dumb :)

I'm kinda liking "Dismal" , too .
And , "Doofus" isn't bad , either .
"Discombombulated" or "Discombooberated" also work well .

Damn Ridiculous System , if you ask me .

[ioan]

Of course and DRS isn't always needed to make action happen, doesn't mean it's not needed some other times.

It is just not needed, it's as simple as that.

[SGWilko]

They are talking about using it in the tunnel .

Why wouldn't that be a good idea ?

.....because off-line in the tunnel at Monaco is gonna see marbles galore, and is the only way to pass. Alonso, Hulkenberg and others have come a cropper in the tunnel, and that was without the Pirelli licorice twists. How's it gonna be with low downforce coupled with levels of grip akin to driving on ice?

It's gonna have to be on the start finish straight/kink.

[ioan]

.....because off-line in the tunnel at Monaco is gonna see marbles galore, and is the only way to pass. Alonso, Hulkenberg and others have come a cropper in the tunnel, and that was without the Pirelli licorice twists. How's it gonna be with low downforce coupled with levels of grip akin to driving on ice?

It's gonna have to be on the start finish straight/kink.

^ This. Or maybe up the hill after turn one.

[Bagwan]

.....because off-line in the tunnel at Monaco is gonna see marbles galore, and is the only way to pass. Alonso, Hulkenberg and others have come a cropper in the tunnel, and that was without the Pirelli licorice twists. How's it gonna be with low downforce coupled with levels of grip akin to driving on ice?

It's gonna have to be on the start finish straight/kink.

I hope you know that I knew this .
The bend , two thirds of the way through would be scary with the open wing . That's with one car .

Start finish straight deployment will send them into the squeeze of St. Devote even faster .
The run-off there will be busy .

[Daniel]

Start finish straight deployment will send them into the squeeze of St. Devote even faster .
The run-off there will be busy .

Can we please not mention St Devote? Can we make up another name for that part of the track? :-P

[Bagwan]

^ This. Or maybe up the hill after turn one.

I'm not sure it would have enough effect to be useful before you got to the bends near the top , as you start out at the bottom at pretty low speed .

Just ban the damn thing altogether at all the tracks .

[SGWilko]

I hope you know that I knew this .
The bend , two thirds of the way through would be scary with the open wing . That's with one car .

Start finish straight deployment will send them into the squeeze of St. Devote even faster .
The run-off there will be busy .

The important point though, lest we forget, is at least there is run off there.

[Daniel]

I certainly don't feel that Monaco would be a safe place for DRS, but purely because it's a circuit where passing is difficult at the best of times.

[Bagwan]

Can we please not mention St Devote? Can we make up another name for that part of the track? :-P

I miss that guy .
He was always good for a giggle .

[Bagwan]

I certainly don't feel that Monaco would be a safe place for DRS, but purely because it's a circuit where passing is difficult at the best of times.

Isn't it a system that is supposed to help with that ?

So , you don't think it's safe ?
Why's that . Is it too hard to control ?

[Daniel]

Isn't it a system that is supposed to help with that ?

So , you don't think it's safe ?
Why's that . Is it too hard to control ?

I think overtaking in Monaco on the high speed bits (where DRS would be useful) is dangerous enough as it is. If it were my choice there wouldn't be a race there at all because the layout isn't condusive to racing with modern cars.

[ioan]

Just ban the damn thing altogether at all the tracks .

I wish we could do that.

[Bagwan]

I think overtaking in Monaco on the high speed bits (where DRS would be useful) is dangerous enough as it is. If it were my choice there wouldn't be a race there at all because the layout isn't condusive to racing with modern cars.

So you do think it's dangerous , then ?

It's "useful" , but would make it more dangerous ?

[Bagwan]

I wish we could do that.
Sadly , I think it may take what Rubens suggested might happen , to ban the damned thing .

I will try to find the quote where Rubens suggests that the guys making the DRS decisions should try running the tunnel using it , themselves , to see just how scary that will be .

And , remember , they'll have the chance to do so during quals , when it's not restricted to what they see as the safest zone to use it .

[Bagwan]

I found it :
"I just think it is wrong. I would love the people at the top to sit in the car and try to do the tunnel with the DRS open . In my opinion, they are waiting for something bad to happen. And when it happens, they will just say, 'oh, next year we will not have it for Monaco'. The drivers have not been listened to right now, and I think it is the wrong decision." - Rubens

[Daniel]

So you do think it's dangerous , then ?

It's "useful" , but would make it more dangerous ?

LOL you're funny. People agree that it's too dangerous for a particular track and it's not enough for you.

[Mark]

There's no such thing as 'dangerous' or 'safe' unless you're a Daily Mail reader.

[Big Ben]

LOL you're funny. People agree that it's too dangerous for a particular track and it's not enough for you.

You're funny too... like all wrestling fans. all funny people.

[Roamy]

well i thought it was too dangerous for monaco and then i thought how boring the race is and decided that it is not dangerous at all. Maybe Rubens should let hulkenburg drive this race!!

[Daniel]

There's no such thing as 'dangerous' or 'safe' unless you're a Daily Mail reader.

and then there's nothing that's safe if you're a daily mail reader :D

[Daniel]

You're funny too... like all wrestling fans. all funny people.

Dog, chair leg, fart, unfair mortgage rate rises.

[SGWilko]

Dog, chair leg, fart, unfair mortgage rate rises.

....stagflation, credit crunch, (hold sides of mouth apart with fingers) bankers - collective noun; wunch.

[Daniel]

....stagflation, credit crunch, (hold sides of mouth apart with fingers) bankers - collective noun; wunch.

:up:

[Bagwan]

LOL you're funny. People agree that it's too dangerous for a particular track and it's not enough for you.

I am just asking a simple question , Daniel .
Why is it too dangerous to use at Monaco ?

Tell me what could happen .

[Daniel]

I am just asking a simple question , Daniel .
Why is it too dangerous to use at Monaco ?

Tell me what could happen .

Dog, yellow, airplane, cable reel and conduit.

[SGWilko]

Dog, yellow, airplane, cable reel and conduit.

Don't forget Mrs Peacock and the Study......

[Daniel]

Don't forget Mrs Peacock and the Study......

Those aren't things I can see out the window here at work though.

Seriously, I've no idea what Bagwan is jibber jabbering on about. I agree that DRS shouldn't be used in Monaco, because it shouldn't be used in Monaco I'm supposed to just agree that it's dangerous everywhere? :rolleyes:

[Sonic]

My personal perspective is this;

As I've already mentioned I personally can't see the benefit of the system in Monaco, but as that is not the position of the FIA the drivers will a) either have to informally agree within the GPDA not to use it, or b) bravest driver gains an advantage .

In many ways B is the way things should be in competition, it's just not what I would want in Monaco - the place deserves a touch more respect that other circuits.

[Bagwan]

Too simple to answer ?

[Daniel]

Too simple to answer ?

Missan Micra, overhead powerline, folly and 5mph sign.

[Sonic]

I am just asking a simple question , Daniel .
Why is it too dangerous to use at Monaco ?

Tell me what could happen .

*raises hand* Ooooo, Oooo, me, me! I know the answer ;)

Just my personal view Bagwan, but what I like about DRS is it recreates those pre '70's slipstream boosts. Watching turkey last week was like watching Monza circa 1968.

However, big tows have never (to my knowledge) featured at Monaco. The huge speed difference, coupled with the narrowness of the Tarmac would leave me feeling a little uneasy about the use of the system (if I were lucky enough to be a GP driver - which is probably why I didn't make it ;) ) I actually don't have an issue with it in clear air.

[Mark]

Overtaking at Monaco is just unacceptable in the first place :p

[Daniel]

*raises hand* Ooooo, Oooo, me, me! I know the answer ;)

Just my personal view Bagwan, but what I like about DRS is it recreates those pre '70's slipstream boosts. Watching turkey last week was like watching Monza circa 1968.

However, big tows have never (to my knowledge) featured at Monaco. The huge speed difference, coupled with the narrowness of the Tarmac would leave me feeling a little uneasy about the use of the system (if I were lucky enough to be a GP driver - which is probably why I didn't make it ;) ) I actually don't have an issue with it in clear air.

He doesn't want your answer. He wants mine. He wants me to explain why I don't want it on a tight, twisty street circuit and then somehow apply the logic that because I don't feel it's safe at Monaco that it's not safe on any track which is completely faulty logic.

[Bagwan]

He doesn't want your answer. He wants mine. He wants me to explain why I don't want it on a tight, twisty street circuit and then somehow apply the logic that because I don't feel it's safe at Monaco that it's not safe on any track which is completely faulty logic.

And you want to duck the question because you don't want to hear the logic .

You want to call the logic "jibber jabber" , rather than hear it .

That's ok .
I'll debate with Sonic about it .

[Daniel]

And you want to duck the question because you don't want to hear the logic .

You want to call the logic "jibber jabber" , rather than hear it .

That's ok .
I'll debate with Sonic about it .

Seriously, what do you actually want me to say?

[Bagwan]

*raises hand* Ooooo, Oooo, me, me! I know the answer ;)

Just my personal view Bagwan, but what I like about DRS is it recreates those pre '70's slipstream boosts. Watching turkey last week was like watching Monza circa 1968.

However, big tows have never (to my knowledge) featured at Monaco. The huge speed difference, coupled with the narrowness of the Tarmac would leave me feeling a little uneasy about the use of the system (if I were lucky enough to be a GP driver - which is probably why I didn't make it ;) ) I actually don't have an issue with it in clear air.

Those "slipstream boosts" were naturally created .
All the extra speed came from the hole behind the car ahead .
Jumping out from behind into that airstream took serious bravery and car control .

Everyone had the same box of tools .

Turkey this year , every time that DRS straight came , if the tires were allowing them to get close enough to get in the zone , there was a pass .
The tires , essentially , were what made that difference .
The DRS just finished the job . There was no point fighting .


The real issue lies in how the cars cannot follow closely through the corners , due to the hole in the airstream behind .
If they cannot follow within that second through the corner , they don't get the tow , either with or without the DRS .

Without the addition of the tires making the cars run such a speed differentials , the DRS would be a total bust .

[Bagwan]

Seriously, what do you actually want me to say?

Post box , key fob , hammer drill .

[Sonic]

^^^^

B. I Agee with you in every single way, but you can't put the genie back in the bottle. F1 will not (some would argue can not) take the wings off the cars, therefore their is no 'natural' way to create that hole in the air for awesome slipstreaming battles.

That being the case I'll throw my lot in with DRS until something better comes along.

As I've said before, I wanted to hate it on principle, I really did, but it give F1 back something (artificially) it has lacked for a long time, and I am LOVING it!

[Daniel]

The real issue lies in how the cars cannot follow closely through the corners , due to the hole in the airstream behind .
If they cannot follow within that second through the corner , they don't get the tow , either with or without the DRS .

Without the addition of the tires making the cars run such a speed differentials , the DRS would be a total bust .

I don't agree that the tyres were causing all of the speed differential.

Again we're taking a bad example and making it the rule. DRS was overpowered in turkey and because of this I'm sure they'll turn it down (perhaps too far even) for other races.

[Daniel]

Post box , key fob , hammer drill .

I'm being serious here now :) What do you want me to say and I will either agree or disagree, I don't understand the point you're trying to make me make :)

[Bagwan]

^^^^

B. I Agee with you in every single way, but you can't put the genie back in the bottle. F1 will not (some would argue can not) take the wings off the cars, therefore their is no 'natural' way to create that hole in the air for awesome slipstreaming battles.

That being the case I'll throw my lot in with DRS until something better comes along.

As I've said before, I wanted to hate it on principle, I really did, but it give F1 back something (artificially) it has lacked for a long time, and I am LOVING it!

They've been stuffing that genie back into the bottle for many years , with banning winglets and barge boards , limitting size , and lifting wings off the ground .
Damn genie returns every time .

In those days there were also tires that created the close racing .

[wedge]

B. I Agee with you in every single way, but you can't put the genie back in the bottle. F1 will not (some would argue can not) take the wings off the cars, therefore their is no 'natural' way to create that hole in the air for awesome slipstreaming battles.!

+1 to what Bagwan said.

Instead of the genie in the bottle excuse (though I find it astonishing FOTA fully advocate DRS for 2013 onwards) here's an idea: get rid of DRS and tweak KERS instead.



I don't agree that the tyres were causing all of the speed differential.

Again we're taking a bad example and making it the rule. DRS was overpowered in turkey and because of this I'm sure they'll turn it down (perhaps too far even) for other races.

Did not you not notice Rosberg's car went junk quickly?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula_one/13334558.stm

Alonso stated: "When we followed Rosberg in the first couple of laps, it was impossible to overtake him but when he started to have tyre degradation it was very easy to overtake him. So it is more tyre-related."

[Bagwan]

I don't agree that the tyres were causing all of the speed differential.

Again we're taking a bad example and making it the rule. DRS was overpowered in turkey and because of this I'm sure they'll turn it down (perhaps too far even) for other races.


I am not making it up , Daniel .
Alonso said it was down to the tires , and it makes sense .

You don't get close by using the DRS , you get by , by using it .

The wings are still fat in the turns in the race , and the cars have thier normal differences in speed , just like in the past when we had a tire war .
The fuel goes down at roughly the same rate .
All is about the same , but for the tires .

That same hole in the air that makes it difficult to get close enough for a pass , DRS or no DRS , but the tires are making it possible right now .

In my humble opinion , the tires are making this device look much better to some than it really is .

Take it away , and after a very short while , I don't think either of us would miss it .

[airshifter]

Instead of the genie in the bottle excuse (though I find it astonishing FOTA fully advocate DRS for 2013 onwards) here's an idea: get rid of DRS and tweak KERS instead.



But what would the difference really be? KERS allows cars to both attack and defend and in most cases only those cars not running KERS suffer a real disadvantage when the following driver uses it. So it gives both cars a speed boost which often results in nothing at all. At least with DRS the driver overtaken has the chance to fight back on the next lap if they are actually as quick through the course as the driver that overtook them.

I just don't see all the anger over DRS. KERS to some extent did the same thing, since many teams didn't use it or had issues with it. Thus far DRS has worked for everyone the majority of the time. I agree it's a bandaid as compared to limiting the aero of the cars, but I can't see the FIA changing the "formula" quickly given the time and money the teams have invested in the aero construction.

Much like Sonic I accept that it is here and won't go away quickly.

And I also disagree that the use of DRS ensures a pass. There have been quite a few uses of DRS lap after lap that didn't result in the pass being made.

[Daniel]

I just don't see all the anger over DRS. KERS to some extent did the same thing, since many teams didn't use it or had issues with it. Thus far DRS has worked for everyone the majority of the time. I agree it's a bandaid as compared to limiting the aero of the cars, but I can't see the FIA changing the "formula" quickly given the time and money the teams have invested in the aero construction.

All I can say is that it must have slept with their wives/girlfriends :confused:

Agree about the bandaid thing :)

[Dave B]

Instead of "banning" DRS at Monaco, why not ban Monaco? Dreadful circuit which is only on the calendar because of its history and marketing potential. If Tilke designed a Monaco now, in 2011, we'd form an orderly queue to throw rotting fruit at him.

[Daniel]

Instead of "banning" DRS at Monaco, why not ban Monaco? Dreadful circuit which is only on the calendar because of its history and marketing potential. If Tilke designed a Monaco now, in 2011, we'd form an orderly queue to throw rotting fruit at him.

Agreed.

[ioan]

+1 to what Bagwan said.

Instead of the genie in the bottle excuse (though I find it astonishing FOTA fully advocate DRS for 2013 onwards) here's an idea: get rid of DRS and tweak KERS instead.

I agree with getting rid of DRS and using more KERS, the problem is that DRS is a dirt cheap solution compared to further improving the use of KERS.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Instead of "banning" DRS at Monaco, why not ban Monaco? Dreadful circuit which is only on the calendar because of its history and marketing potential. If Tilke designed a Monaco now, in 2011, we'd form an orderly queue to throw rotting fruit at him.

:(

Disagreed.

[Sonic]

:(

Disagreed.

+ 1.

If tilke designed the place now, he'd flatten the hill, install run off all the way to the med and generally suck the life out of one of the greatest challenges of a GP driver. You only need look at the list of winners to know that this place favours the greats - oh and Panis ;)

[Marbles]

Senna\Mansell Monaco 1992.

http://www.streetfire.net/video/senna-vs-mansell-at-92-monaco-gp_71309.htm

DRS would have been so wrong... not that it would certainly have helped Mansell.

[BDunnell]

I agree with getting rid of DRS and using more KERS, the problem is that DRS is a dirt cheap solution compared to further improving the use of KERS.

And it is a significant problem, because one represents the future far better than the other.

[Sonic]

And it is a significant problem, because one represents the future far better than the other.

I dunno, DRS has a part to play; I believe new fords already utilise their own form of DRS - the front grill closing at speed to reduce drag and improve economy.

Not that I'm against KERS you understand - I think everyone here knows my views on it.

[SGWilko]

Senna\Mansell Monaco 1992.

Is one of the myriad reasons why DRS should NOT be used at Monaco - closing speed differentials would be too great, and not enough clean clear space to effect a successful move.

Heck, even Alonso couldn't get past a Lotus for several laps last year.......

[Daniel]

Is one of the myriad reasons why DRS should NOT be used at Monaco - closing speed differentials would be too great, and not enough clean clear space to effect a successful move.

Heck, even Alonso couldn't get past a Lotus for several laps last year.......

I would agree with you, but Bagwan will pounce on me saying WHY? WHY? WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S TOO DANGEROUS?

So basically I think DRS should be allowed in Monaco purely to save me from being pounced upon :)

[SGWilko]

I would agree with you, but Bagwan will pounce on me saying WHY? WHY? WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S TOO DANGEROUS?

So basically I think DRS should be allowed in Monaco purely to save me from being pounced upon :)

I can see the Shoe exiting the tunnel with only three wheels on his wagon again.......

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Is one of the myriad reasons why DRS should NOT be used at Monaco - closing speed differentials would be too great...



They have a steering wheel, don't they? :p

[SGWilko]

They have a steering wheel, don't they? :p

Yep, but, sadly, that does not also control the car in front. Defending at Monaco is quite simple, act like you are an old giffer on the M25 i.e. stay in the middle of the road.

Unless DRS for monaco works Wacky Recers style, aint no-one getting by a car determined to defend. :p ;)

[Bagwan]

I would agree with you, but Bagwan will pounce on me saying WHY? WHY? WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S TOO DANGEROUS?

So basically I think DRS should be allowed in Monaco purely to save me from being pounced upon :)

I guess I take it that you agree with it being too dangerous .
And you agree with the quote .

It would be understandable for the FIA to ban it for Monaco on the basis that the straights are not long enough to benefit enough from the system .
Also , the track being very tight , it may be difficult to arrange even the one-second line , as the concertina effect is more pronounced there .

It seems , though , that the reasoning behind the FIA's decision to keep it active for Monaco is that the car should run as designed .

Now , there are two aspects to this issue , at least , that are important here , it seems .

One would be that the teams would be automatically obligated to design a wing to deal with only Monaco , or , at least , design the rear wing to be adaptable to this function .
And , that would be more expense .

And the other , likely more important (in thier eyes) , would be the liabilty set up by banning the use of a legal and perhaps even necessary part , thereby proving it something potentially dangerous , yet approved for racing at other venues .

So , they will tell us it's about the cost , and the real reason will be that they would rather see guys in the wall due to that speed differential , than put themselves at risk for a suit .


If it's dangerous here , it's dangerous at any track , as the only real difference is the run-off space .
Even though they have steering wheels , they still take to the air sometimes . Ask Mark and Heikki about closing speeds .



In a nutshell , the passes made with it are too easy .
It is only because of the tire disparity that they are able to get close enough for it to be too easy , and those tires would account for enough disparity on thier own , to make the pass count bigger anyway .
And , finally , it is dangerous , as you intimated earlier .

[Daniel]

Blah blah blah.

[Sonic]

Blah blah blah.

Eloquently put :p

[Mark]

If you don't understand the difference between Monaco and other tracks then you don't understand F1.

[Bagwan]

OK .
I guess this is no place for debate then .

That's fine with me .

[wedge]

But what would the difference really be? KERS allows cars to both attack and defend and in most cases only those cars not running KERS suffer a real disadvantage when the following driver uses it. So it gives both cars a speed boost which often results in nothing at all. At least with DRS the driver overtaken has the chance to fight back on the next lap if they are actually as quick through the course as the driver that overtook them.

I just don't see all the anger over DRS. KERS to some extent did the same thing, since many teams didn't use it or had issues with it. Thus far DRS has worked for everyone the majority of the time. I agree it's a bandaid as compared to limiting the aero of the cars, but I can't see the FIA changing the "formula" quickly given the time and money the teams have invested in the aero construction.

Much like Sonic I accept that it is here and won't go away quickly.

And I also disagree that the use of DRS ensures a pass. There have been quite a few uses of DRS lap after lap that didn't result in the pass being made.


In a nutshell , the passes made with it are too easy .
It is only because of the tire disparity that they are able to get close enough for it to be too easy , and those tires would account for enough disparity on thier own , to make the pass count bigger anyway.

The car in front cannot defend and thus it is not a 'fair' fight and therefore the racing is considered fake. KERS allows this and so this is a proper dog fight since both the car in front and behind can use this.

If you have a significantly inferior car you cannot defend 'properly'. Consider how Hulk fought hard to stay at the front at the Brazillian GP last year and the opposition breezing by Rosberg at Istanbul. The silly one-move-to-defend rule doesn't help either.

Regarding KERS, F1 has always been about the haves and have nots. Problems with KERS? Tough cookies, find a way to solve it. That is the F1 way eg. Mansell hated Williams' active suspension system in the 80s and Williams wanted to understand develop it.

BTW. A good fight doesn't always have to involve overtaking.

[Bagwan]

The car in front cannot defend and thus it is not a 'fair' fight and therefore the racing is considered fake. KERS allows this and so this is a proper dog fight since both the car in front and behind can use this.

If you have a significantly inferior car you cannot defend 'properly'. Consider how Hulk fought hard to stay at the front at the Brazillian GP last year and the opposition breezing by Rosberg at Istanbul. The silly one-move-to-defend rule doesn't help either.

Regarding KERS, F1 has always been about the haves and have nots. Problems with KERS? Tough cookies, find a way to solve it. That is the F1 way eg. Mansell hated Williams' active suspension system in the 80s and Williams wanted to understand develop it.

BTW. A good fight doesn't always have to involve overtaking.

Spot on , Wedge .

You are likely to get a "blah , blah , blah" , or a "you don't understand" , though .

[Daniel]

Spot on , Wedge .

You are likely to get a "blah , blah , blah" , or a "you don't understand" , though .

Better than your view which is that the guy in front should always have the advantage even if ultimately he's significantly slower.

[Bagwan]

Better than your view which is that the guy in front should always have the advantage even if ultimately he's significantly slower.

Oh , so now you want to debate , do you ?

Here's a little tip for you .
Don't try to put words in someone else's mouth .

That's not my view at all .

The guy in front should never be artificially disadvantaged .

[Malbec]

I guess I take it that you agree with it being too dangerous .
And you agree with the quote .

It would be understandable for the FIA to ban it for Monaco on the basis that the straights are not long enough to benefit enough from the system .
Also , the track being very tight , it may be difficult to arrange even the one-second line , as the concertina effect is more pronounced there .

It seems , though , that the reasoning behind the FIA's decision to keep it active for Monaco is that the car should run as designed .

Now , there are two aspects to this issue , at least , that are important here , it seems .

One would be that the teams would be automatically obligated to design a wing to deal with only Monaco , or , at least , design the rear wing to be adaptable to this function .
And , that would be more expense .

And the other , likely more important (in thier eyes) , would be the liabilty set up by banning the use of a legal and perhaps even necessary part , thereby proving it something potentially dangerous , yet approved for racing at other venues .

So , they will tell us it's about the cost , and the real reason will be that they would rather see guys in the wall due to that speed differential , than put themselves at risk for a suit .


If it's dangerous here , it's dangerous at any track , as the only real difference is the run-off space .
Even though they have steering wheels , they still take to the air sometimes . Ask Mark and Heikki about closing speeds .



In a nutshell , the passes made with it are too easy .
It is only because of the tire disparity that they are able to get close enough for it to be too easy , and those tires would account for enough disparity on thier own , to make the pass count bigger anyway .
And , finally , it is dangerous , as you intimated earlier .

While I think a lot of your points are absolutely true, I don't think DRS is going to make as much of a difference at Monaco where Vmax isn't that high certainly compared to China or Turkey. I think speed differentials due to tyre wear is going to be far more important, plus the problems going offline thanks to all the marbles being worse with the current tyres.

[Bagwan]

While I think a lot of your points are absolutely true, I don't think DRS is going to make as much of a difference at Monaco where Vmax isn't that high certainly compared to China or Turkey. I think speed differentials due to tyre wear is going to be far more important, plus the problems going offline thanks to all the marbles being worse with the current tyres.

I can agree with that , as the way they've been talking about the tires "falling off the cliff" might spring a few surprises .


I can also agree with your bit about the DRS .
As I mentioned , "ban it for Monaco on the basis that the straights are not long enough to benefit enough from the system ." .

So , it seems to me it's both useless AND dangerous for Monaco .

[airshifter]

The car in front cannot defend and thus it is not a 'fair' fight and therefore the racing is considered fake. KERS allows this and so this is a proper dog fight since both the car in front and behind can use this.

If you have a significantly inferior car you cannot defend 'properly'. Consider how Hulk fought hard to stay at the front at the Brazillian GP last year and the opposition breezing by Rosberg at Istanbul. The silly one-move-to-defend rule doesn't help either.

Regarding KERS, F1 has always been about the haves and have nots. Problems with KERS? Tough cookies, find a way to solve it. That is the F1 way eg. Mansell hated Williams' active suspension system in the 80s and Williams wanted to understand develop it.

BTW. A good fight doesn't always have to involve overtaking.

We saw how quickly Jenson got past Felipe at Albert Park didn't we? Lap after lap of using DRS in a car that was at the time quicker on track, yet he finally made the pass before the DRS zone using the pit entry. ;)

And thus far, we've seen at every single race how the DRS often does not ensure a pass. More likely it ensures a pass when it would have been probable without DRS. It's also resulted in people making a pass and coming into the corner too hard, resulting in the overtaken car getting the position back.

The only real "blow by" passes have been with a quick following car staying very close coming into the DRS zone, and then using both KERS and DRS to make the pass seem easy. Of course if it really was easy Jenson would have passed Felipe on the first try at Albert Park.

Problem with DRS? Tough cookies, they should find a way to keep someone from getting close enough to use it.

[Daniel]

Problem with DRS? Tough cookies, they should find a way to keep someone from getting close enough to use it.

I've heard that driving faster than the guy behind sometimes helps :D

[SGWilko]

I've heard that driving faster than the guy behind sometimes helps :D

Why didn't they think of that? Doh!!!

[Daniel]

Why didn't they think of that? Doh!!!

It makes you think doesn't it? :p

[BDunnell]

I almost think the DRS debate will pale into insignificance if Bahrain goes ahead.

[wedge]

Airshifter, I wholeheartedly agree that the racing was terrific in Australia, except for this point:


Problem with DRS? Tough cookies, they should find a way to keep someone from getting close enough to use it.

It is the tyres that has made the difference. Tyre degradation was minimal in Melbourne. Where was horrendous build up of marbles?

DRS has/can have the effect of exaggerating the slipstream/speed differential which I do not like.

[Daniel]

Airshifter, I wholeheartedly agree that the racing was terrific in Australia, except for this point:



It is the tyres that has made the difference. Tyre degradation was minimal in Melbourne. Where was horrendous build up of marbles?

DRS has/can have the effect of exaggerating the slipstream/speed differential which I do not like.
But it's not exactly easy to get within a second of the car in front.

[Mark]

That's the point isn't it, that if the car behind gets within a second, that usually means that the car in front is going slower anyway.

[Daniel]

That's the point isn't it, that if the car behind gets within a second, that usually means that the car in front is going slower anyway.

Of course.

[wedge]

That's the point isn't it, that if the car behind gets within a second, that usually means that the car in front is going slower anyway.

But not at the expense of 'fake' racing.

It seems we've gone from one extreme to the other: boring-good dry races; good-great (but fake) dry races. I'd rather plump with the former.

[Bagwan]

John Watson's view :

“I think we've had a lot of substantial changes and obviously the tyre change has been the biggest factor. In the last GP, we saw a huge amount of overtaking, although maybe not a huge amount of motor racing. I always look to see motor racing and personally I don't need KERS or DRS – I don't feel they are necessary. The tyre situation currently will provide enough in terms of drop off and strategy and while there has been a lot of overtaking, I don't know how much of it has been what I would call motor racing."

Spot on , John .

[Daniel]

But not at the expense of 'fake' racing.

It seems we've gone from one extreme to the other: boring-good dry races; good-great (but fake) dry races. I'd rather plump with the former.

What is fake though? Personally I feel that all this aero BS is fake too and results in fake races where fake slow drivers can hold up fake fast drivers.

That people would rather see fake racing where no one passes anyone and results are based more or less on qualification and pit strategy rather than seeing fake racing where a driver who is better than another driver is able to pass him.

[Daniel]

John Watson's view :

“I think we've had a lot of substantial changes and obviously the tyre change has been the biggest factor. In the last GP, we saw a huge amount of overtaking, although maybe not a huge amount of motor racing. I always look to see motor racing and personally I don't need KERS or DRS – I don't feel they are necessary. The tyre situation currently will provide enough in terms of drop off and strategy and while there has been a lot of overtaking, I don't know how much of it has been what I would call motor racing."

Spot on , John .

If John enjoys a good procession then perhaps he should camp out in a cemetary non?

[BDunnell]

What is fake though? Personally I feel that all this aero BS is fake too and results in fake races where fake slow drivers can hold up fake fast drivers.

That people would rather see fake racing where no one passes anyone and results are based more or less on qualification and pit strategy rather than seeing fake racing where a driver who is better than another driver is able to pass him.

I'm afraid I think your reasoning is a bit faulty here, Daniel. You seem to be suggesting that qualifying, for example, is a gimmick along the lines of DRS, when it is an intrinsic part of motor racing. There is simply no comparison between the two, even if said comparison is only being used to make a point.

I find it rather sad that there now seem to be those who have given up on the idea of good racing being produced through anything other than artificial means.

[BDunnell]

If John enjoys a good procession then perhaps he should camp out in a cemetary non?

No, Watson is right, in my opinion. No dry F1 race with that amount of overtaking has ever left me as cold as did Turkey, because I knew it was not happening for the right reasons.

[Bagwan]

If John enjoys a good procession then perhaps he should camp out in a cemetary non?

Included in the quote was this : "The tyre situation currently will provide enough in terms of drop off and strategy ..." .

He enjoys motor racing .

[Daniel]

No, Watson is right, in my opinion. No dry F1 race with that amount of overtaking has ever left me as cold as did Turkey, because I knew it was not happening for the right reasons.

I agree to a certain extent, but we're 4 races in and DRS has IMHO been overpowered during only 1 gp :)

[Bagwan]

No, Watson is right, in my opinion. No dry F1 race with that amount of overtaking has ever left me as cold as did Turkey, because I knew it was not happening for the right reasons.

And , spot on BDunnell .

My feelings exactly .

[Daniel]

I'm afraid I think your reasoning is a bit faulty here, Daniel. You seem to be suggesting that qualifying, for example, is a gimmick along the lines of DRS, when it is an intrinsic part of motor racing. There is simply no comparison between the two, even if said comparison is only being used to make a point.

I find it rather sad that there now seem to be those who have given up on the idea of good racing being produced through anything other than artificial means.
I didn't mean to give that impression, I merely felt in the past that qualification had a little too much influence on where the driver finished in the race.

When talking about fake racing I was talking about the factors which up until this year made it very hard for cars to overtake other cars even when they were quite a bit faster.

Good racecar design and good racing are mutally exclusive things and measures need to be taken to ensure racing still happens. Does anyone here honestly think that if for instance Adrian Newey could design a feature into his cars to purposely disrupt the airflow going onto cars behind to make his cars nearly impossible to overtake, that Newey wouldn't put it on his cars? You could yammer on about it being the pinnacle of aero design, but if it screws up the racing then it screws up the racing.

If you ask me, the best thing that could happen to F1 would be to put a body over the wheels. Drivers wouldn't be too scared to put in a gutsy move for fear of losing a front wing or a wheel. I know people will slag me off for this but does it really matter if there's a body over the wheels? whether there are 6 wheels? v8's? v10's? As long as the racing is exciting then it doesn't matter. I agree that Turkey was boring because passing wasn't as difficult as it should be, but on other tracks I'm sure they'll get DRS right and it'll make for racing which isn't processional, but at the same time which doesn't involve easy passes.

[Daniel]

And , spot on BDunnell .

My feelings exactly .

I agree too, but just because it was wrongly setup on one track doesn't mean that it will be the same on other tracks :)

[Bagwan]

Will it be the same percentage of successful deployment as we've had so far ?

That's a 25% failure rate . Are we to expect another 4 races that are spoiled ?
Does that include Monaco , where we already know it may create real problems ?

Are we looking forward to three quarters of a good season ?

[Daniel]

Will it be the same percentage of successful deployment as we've had so far ?

That's a 25% failure rate . Are we to expect another 4 races that are spoiled ?
Does that include Monaco , where we already know it may create real problems ?

Are we looking forward to three quarters of a good season ?

Bagwan, why can't you sit down and have a proper discussion rather than extrapolating your "data" and making ridiculous statements.

Frankly, without DRS I think some of the other races we had would be far more boring than they were.

For me, previous years were more like three quarters of a **** season where the order of qualification more or less dictated the end result of the race, rather than how fast the driver/car was on the day.

I get it, you don't like DRS, doesn't mean that everyone else hates it too, or that it will be as unbalanced as it was in Turkey for the rest of the season.

[SGWilko]

John Watson's view :

“I think we've had a lot of substantial changes and obviously the tyre change has been the biggest factor. In the last GP, we saw a huge amount of overtaking, although maybe not a huge amount of motor racing. I always look to see motor racing and personally I don't need KERS or DRS – I don't feel they are necessary. The tyre situation currently will provide enough in terms of drop off and strategy and while there has been a lot of overtaking, I don't know how much of it has been what I would call motor racing."

Spot on , John .

If that was JYS commenting, presumably you would dissagree with the old fart......?

[Daniel]

If that was JYS commenting, presumably you would dissagree with the old fart......?

Personally I never place a huge amount of weight on this opinion of any driver who has been out of the sport for as long as some of the people who tend to blab on about F1. They don't really represent the way that the person with his butt in a carbon fibre race seat, in the grandstand or on the sofa at home feels or thinks about F1 at the moment.

Standard layout for a post for some members of this forum



Their opinion

Opinion of race driver who's not been driving competitively for over 20-30 years which agrees with them

Statement about how this makes them right and how the thread should be closed down

[Bagwan]

Bagwan, why can't you sit down and have a proper discussion rather than extrapolating your "data" and making ridiculous statements.

Frankly, without DRS I think some of the other races we had would be far more boring than they were.

For me, previous years were more like three quarters of a **** season where the order of qualification more or less dictated the end result of the race, rather than how fast the driver/car was on the day.

I get it, you don't like DRS, doesn't mean that everyone else hates it too, or that it will be as unbalanced as it was in Turkey for the rest of the season.

Why , may I ask , can you not simply respond to any of my questions , rather than calling my statements "ridiculous" ?

Previous years did not have tires like they have now .

Some others have stated they also do not like it .
Why intimate that I think everyone hates it ? You clearly don't . It doesn't help your argument .

What guarantee is there that they will get it right at all for the rest of the season ?
There are already people wondering about the length of the zone in Barcelona .

[Bagwan]

If that was JYS commenting, presumably you would dissagree with the old fart......?

Why would you think that ?
I have nothing but respect for him .

[Bagwan]

Personally I never place a huge amount of weight on this opinion of any driver who has been out of the sport for as long as some of the people who tend to blab on about F1. They don't really represent the way that the person with his butt in a carbon fibre race seat, in the grandstand or on the sofa at home feels or thinks about F1 at the moment.

Standard layout for a post for some members of this forum

"Some of the people who tend to blab on..." also quote Fernando in this very thread , who does sit in carbon fibre .

But , what do you care , since it's easier to try to discredit my opinion by dismissing a real F1 driver , than to respond to simple questions .

[BDunnell]

I didn't mean to give that impression, I merely felt in the past that qualification had a little too much influence on where the driver finished in the race.

When talking about fake racing I was talking about the factors which up until this year made it very hard for cars to overtake other cars even when they were quite a bit faster.

Good racecar design and good racing are mutally exclusive things and measures need to be taken to ensure racing still happens. Does anyone here honestly think that if for instance Adrian Newey could design a feature into his cars to purposely disrupt the airflow going onto cars behind to make his cars nearly impossible to overtake, that Newey wouldn't put it on his cars? You could yammer on about it being the pinnacle of aero design, but if it screws up the racing then it screws up the racing.

I agree with you up to a point, as one has to ask why we become interested in any sport. The answer, surely, is because of the element of close competition which makes it exciting. Whether the sport is darts, bowls, snooker, football, cricket, athletics, F1 or anything else, we want to see a contest. This is what renders sport something we want to watch. Were it not the case, were the technology (for example) the interesting part, F1 would consist of qualifying and nothing more. Why bother racing in that case? No, sport has to be something people want to watch. This is not some modern phenomenon connected with wanting to see 'a show' — rather, it is the reason people have been excited by sport since time immemorial. If sport ceases to be exciting, it loses its raison d'etre.

Where our views diverge is that I simply don't like the means by which the increased amount of overtaking in F1 this season has been achieved. Far rather to take a step back and make the wings smaller, in my opinion. There is nothing wrong with slowing motorsport down a bit — far from it. In sportscar racing, it had to happen because the speeds being attained were becoming ridiculous. I don't consider those cars to be any less exciting to watch as a result. Motorsport is not all about outright speed. Some might consider the simplification of F1 aerodynamics to be an unduly retrograde step, but they are probably the sort of people who are interested in golf because of the club technology. F1 innovation used to be interesting to the casual viewer when it involved cars with six wheels, or fan cars. Nowadays, with the technology being hidden, that is no longer the case. I think a 'back to basics' approach combined with less prescriptive legislation in certain (but not all) areas would be best.



If you ask me, the best thing that could happen to F1 would be to put a body over the wheels. Drivers wouldn't be too scared to put in a gutsy move for fear of losing a front wing or a wheel. I know people will slag me off for this but does it really matter if there's a body over the wheels?

Well, it has been done before, by Mercedes and Connaught. But, as far as I'm concerned, F1 ceases to be F1 and becomes DTM or sportscar racing if it's anything other than an open-wheeled formula.

[BDunnell]

Personally I never place a huge amount of weight on this opinion of any driver who has been out of the sport for as long as some of the people who tend to blab on about F1. They don't really represent the way that the person with his butt in a carbon fibre race seat, in the grandstand or on the sofa at home feels or thinks about F1 at the moment.

Stewart and Watson tend to represent my views pretty well. And I suspect there are those in the paddock today who may well feel the same, but can't say so.

[truefan72]

here is a solution for monaco, just make the entire track drs active and allow drivers to pick and choose where they would want to pass or defend
both the car in front and behind may use the drs
it would reward the brave,bold and cunning; add an extra element to the race, neutralize any perceived advantage and maybe provide a spectacular show.

[ArrowsFA1]

Stewart and Watson tend to represent my views pretty well. And I suspect there are those in the paddock today who may well feel the same, but can't say so.
Indeed, and their views reflect those of another former driver I spoke with yesterday who is simply exasperated by the changes. "It's not racing is it" was his general view.

Mind you I did have to chuckle when he was talking about the tyres, the properties of which he felt hadn't changed much in the 30yrs since he'd used them on the '81 Arrows :p They didn't last then and they don't last now.

[Daniel]

I agree with you up to a point, as one has to ask why we become interested in any sport. The answer, surely, is because of the element of close competition which makes it exciting. Whether the sport is darts, bowls, snooker, football, cricket, athletics, F1 or anything else, we want to see a contest. This is what renders sport something we want to watch. Were it not the case, were the technology (for example) the interesting part, F1 would consist of qualifying and nothing more. Why bother racing in that case? No, sport has to be something people want to watch. This is not some modern phenomenon connected with wanting to see 'a show' — rather, it is the reason people have been excited by sport since time immemorial. If sport ceases to be exciting, it loses its raison d'etre.

Where our views diverge is that I simply don't like the means by which the increased amount of overtaking in F1 this season has been achieved. Far rather to take a step back and make the wings smaller, in my opinion. There is nothing wrong with slowing motorsport down a bit — far from it. In sportscar racing, it had to happen because the speeds being attained were becoming ridiculous. I don't consider those cars to be any less exciting to watch as a result. Motorsport is not all about outright speed. Some might consider the simplification of F1 aerodynamics to be an unduly retrograde step, but they are probably the sort of people who are interested in golf because of the club technology. F1 innovation used to be interesting to the casual viewer when it involved cars with six wheels, or fan cars. Nowadays, with the technology being hidden, that is no longer the case. I think a 'back to basics' approach combined with less prescriptive legislation in certain (but not all) areas would be best.



Well, it has been done before, by Mercedes and Connaught. But, as far as I'm concerned, F1 ceases to be F1 and becomes DTM or sportscar racing if it's anything other than an open-wheeled formula.

As always I agree that DRS didn't work well in Turkey, that much is clear to all concerned :) I think however if its tweaked so rather than allowing people to pass, it merely puts them on a slightly more equal footing then I think people won't be so negative about it.

I agree about the technology, sure it's interesting for anoraks like us who appreciate the design and the creative interpretation of the rules, but like you say, for most people it's hidden and boring.

Personally I'd have no issue with F1 being DTM or Sportscars, but that's just me. I see nothing inherently good about F1 being open wheeled. It's just the way it was and that's the only reason why it is how it is now.

I'd be quite happy to watch 20 something of these on a track on a Sunday if it were possible.

http://www.indiancarsbikes.in/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Red-Bull-X1-race-car-in-Gran-Turismo-5-image.jpg

Or if they looked like these

http://www.quattroworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/R15coupe.jpg
http://www.mulsannescorner.com/Peugeot908-1.jpg
Then that'd be fine too

I simply see no reason other than nostalgia, for keeping it as an open wheel series :)

[ArrowsFA1]

I simply see no reason other than nostalgia, for keeping it as an open wheel series :)
Isn't that a bit like saying you see no reason other than nostalgia for football (soccer ;) ) to be played with a round ball?

The point is that F1 is an open-wheel series. That is part of what makes it F1. Cover the wheels and close the cockpits and it becomes sportscars, not F1. We already have a sportscars series, and a DTM series for that matter. Fans of one may not necessarily be fans of the other because each series is distinct and different.

[Daniel]

Isn't that a bit like saying you see no reason other than nostalgia for football (soccer ;) ) to be played with a round ball?

The point is that F1 is an open-wheel series. That is part of what makes it F1. Cover the wheels and close the cockpits and it becomes sportscars, not F1. We already have a sportscars series, and a DTM series for that matter. Fans of one may not necessarily be fans of the other because each series is distinct and different.

Well I think that it would still be different to DTM because of the tracks being different and the fact that DTM is a sillouhette series. It's different to sportscars because there is more freedom in sportscars for the configuration of the engine and the fact that an F1 race lasts 2 hours at most and a sportscar race lasts far longer and involved driver changes.

I simply don't believe that if just before the race, all the teams put fairings over the wheels, that millions would switch off in disgust. This reminds me a lot of how some people in the WRC forum were up in arms when the FIA took co-drivers names off the windows of the car because they felt it would confuse people with single digit IQ's into thinking that Colin McRae was co-driving and Nicky Grist was driving. I digress of course, but I feel that a change to chosed wheel or at the very least faired wheels would make for better and safer racing.

[SGWilko]

Mind you I did have to chuckle when he was talking about the tyres, the properties of which he felt hadn't changed much in the 30yrs since he'd used them on the '81 Arrows :p They didn't last then and they don't last now.

Am I allowed to say "told you so"? :p

[Daniel]

Am I allowed to say "told you so"? :p

No you're not. It's against forum rule's and I've reported you :angryfire :p

[SGWilko]

No you're not. It's against forum rule's and I've reported you :angryfire :p

:bigcry: stinky wee poo! ;)

[Daniel]

:bigcry: stinky wee poo! ;)

You said poo! Reported! :mark:

[SGWilko]

You said poo! Reported! :mark:

:bigcry: :bigcry: I'm gonna tell on you.........

[Mark]

Children please :mark:

[SGWilko]

Children please :mark:

He started it.......

[555-04Q2]

Isn't that a bit like saying you see no reason other than nostalgia for football (soccer ;) ) to be played with a round ball?

The point is that F1 is an open-wheel series. That is part of what makes it F1. Cover the wheels and close the cockpits and it becomes sportscars, not F1. We already have a sportscars series, and a DTM series for that matter. Fans of one may not necessarily be fans of the other because each series is distinct and different.

:up:

[Daniel]

He started it.......

You just know we're both going to get a letter back home to our parents. Where are you going to hide yours? I'm going to leave mine on the bus.

[SGWilko]

You just know we're both going to get a letter back home to our parents. Where are you going to hide yours? I'm going to leave mine on the bus.

Dog's gonna eat mine..........

[wedge]

As always I agree that DRS didn't work well in Turkey, that much is clear to all concerned :) I think however if its tweaked so rather than allowing people to pass, it merely puts them on a slightly more equal footing then I think people won't be so negative about it.

It's enough of a gimmick as it is.

More and more people are saying the tyres have gave us the better racing.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/9491764.stm

F1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone has heaped praise on Pirelli for being daring enough to produce tyres that degrade quickly, saying they are "90%" responsible for the change in spectacle in the 2011 F1 season. Pirelli's manufacturing of tyres that are only good for 15-25 laps has led to teams changing their strategies.

The changes were far too radical. I'm not saying it out of hindsight as of this year because it was evident last year in Bahrain let alone Canada that we needed softer tyres.


Personally I'd have no issue with F1 being DTM or Sportscars, but that's just me. I see nothing inherently good about F1 being open wheeled. It's just the way it was and that's the only reason why it is how it is now.

I'd be quite happy to watch 20 something of these on a track on a Sunday if it were possible.

In the 80s and early 90s (and someone please add more as my knowledge of endurance racing of that era is limited) IMSA and WSPC (Norisring) had 'sprint' races with drivers in individual cars and really gave the drivers a good workout - mentally and physically over a season.

IIRC the Grand Prix style races for IMSA were mainly on street courses and well worth looking up on youtube for.

[Daniel]

It's enough of a gimmick as it is.

What is is about this thread which makes some people unable to form a reasonable argument? You don't like it how it is at the moment and if they change it to make it better than that's still not better? :confused:

[Bagwan]

What is is about this thread which makes some people unable to form a reasonable argument? You don't like it how it is at the moment and if they change it to make it better than that's still not better? :confused:


That is from a guy who replies "Blah , blah , blah" to questions .


I noticed something in the second practice .
Drivers were passing each other , despite BOTH having the flap open .

I do still have some reservation about it's safety , but some of that concern would be lesser if they were to allow the use of the system at all times , like they just ran in practice .
The closing speeds were enough to get by , but the guy in front isn't handcuffed .

[Daniel]

That is from a guy who replies "Blah , blah , blah" to questions .


I noticed something in the second practice .
Drivers were passing each other , despite BOTH having the flap open .

I do still have some reservation about it's safety , but some of that concern would be lesser if they were to allow the use of the system at all times , like they just ran in practice .
The closing speeds were enough to get by , but the guy in front isn't handcuffed .

I think having prescribed zones is a bit stupid, make it the drivers decision when to deploy it, I agree with that. I also think care needs to be taken to ensure that like in Turkey it doesn't simply enable people to pass, it needs to be set up so that it enables people to get alongside other drivers rather than simply drive around them.

[Bagwan]

I think having prescribed zones is a bit stupid, make it the drivers decision when to deploy it, I agree with that. I also think care needs to be taken to ensure that like in Turkey it doesn't simply enable people to pass, it needs to be set up so that it enables people to get alongside other drivers rather than simply drive around them.

We seem to have reached some "middle ground" here , Daniel .

The real problem for me in believing in this DRS lies then , in if the system is only deployed in those prescribed zones , it is very possible to get it wrong , and we all suffer an embarassment like Turkey , where the guy in front often preferred to move aside , rather than risk serious defence of his position .

If it was open for all sessions and racing , it entirely removes the "sitting duck" issue .
It's a large part of why I dislike it .
I would certainly dislike it less if nobody was hobbled .

[wedge]

What is is about this thread which makes some people unable to form a reasonable argument? You don't like it how it is at the moment and if they change it to make it better than that's still not better? :confused:

Tyres, tyres, tyres

Do you not comprehend that this has been difference to the racing?

[Daniel]

I do.

[Bagwan]

Tyres, tyres, tyres

Do you not comprehend that this has been difference to the racing?

Tiring , isn't it ?
(sorry , couldn't resist)

[CNR]

FIA investigating Ferrari rear wing (http://www.planet-f1.com/driver/3213/6942906/FIA-investigating-Ferrari-rear-wing)

[airshifter]

Tyres, tyres, tyres

Do you not comprehend that this has been difference to the racing?

I agree, and think that the tires this year have had a much more significant difference in car speeds as compared to KERS or DRS. At Turkey it appears that many if not most passes in the DRS zone were essentially a "done deal" before the DRS zone started. Though KERS and DRS contributed to the pass, it looked as if at least a few cases the passing car really didn't need either of the systems.

[UltimateDanGTR]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91556

the DRS will have two zones from Canada onwards. In montreal, this will be on the long straight after the hairpin and the start/finish straight. Unfortunatly, there is only one detection zone still, meaning that if the pass doesn't come off in the first zone, the follower will have another chance. But this means if the overtake is done in the first zone, they will be able to pull away in zone 2. This could have been really good if they had a second detection zone letting the driver who had possibly just been overtaken fight back, producing some great battling hopefully through turns 1 and 2 in Montreal whilst also being fair on both drivers.

Such a shame.

[ioan]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91556

the DRS will have two zones from Canada onwards. In montreal, this will be on the long straight after the hairpin and the start/finish straight. Unfortunatly, there is only one detection zone still, meaning that if the pass doesn't come off in the first zone, the follower will have another chance. But this means if the overtake is done in the first zone, they will be able to pull away in zone 2. This could have been really good if they had a second detection zone letting the driver who had possibly just been overtaken fight back, producing some great battling hopefully through turns 1 and 2 in Montreal whilst also being fair on both drivers.

Such a shame.

Just goes to show that the FIA do not thoroughly think about these changes before applying them.

[Sonic]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91556

the DRS will have two zones from Canada onwards. In montreal, this will be on the long straight after the hairpin and the start/finish straight. Unfortunatly, there is only one detection zone still, meaning that if the pass doesn't come off in the first zone, the follower will have another chance. But this means if the overtake is done in the first zone, they will be able to pull away in zone 2. This could have been really good if they had a second detection zone letting the driver who had possibly just been overtaken fight back, producing some great battling hopefully through turns 1 and 2 in Montreal whilst also being fair on both drivers.

Such a shame.

Yeah I agree. An opportunity missed there I feel.

Plus, if they are going to start creating multiple passing spots per lap I would also advocate a move towards push to pass. Anyone can open the flap at these places regardless of the situation, but only for a limited time per race. IMO it would add another layer of skill to a system I already enjoy.

[Daniel]

Even I have to admit that 2 zones and only one detection zone is stupid.

[Whyzars]

Lots of stops, busy pit exit, a narrow straight and a DRS zone - its going to be an interesting mix in Spain.

[UltimateDanGTR]

Just goes to show that the FIA do not thoroughly think about these changes before applying them.

can't argue with that.

[steveaki13]

That is a really stupid situation, why have they studied this and come to a decision to allow two DRS zones in Canada, but at the same time not thought it through enough to think it might be a good idea to have a second detection zone, a waste of a bit of common sense.

Typical FIA rule makers and fiddlers.

[Mark]

Looks like the zone isn't long enough in Spain!

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Looks like the zone isn't long enough in Spain!

All the overtaking so far is because of the tyres.

[ioan]

Another strange strategy move for Vettel. Sure the car looks bad in dirty air behind the Ferrari, however with todays tires being slightly out of sync might cost you a handful of places.

Interesting to see that Alonso and Ferrari copy this strategy.

I wonder how will McLaren react given that they have their drivers on different strategies up to now.

And Lewis gets the fastest lap of the race right now.

Vettel counters with a 1.5 seconds faster lap.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Another strange strategy move for Vettel. Sure the car looks bad in dirty air behind the Ferrari, however with todays tires being slightly out of sync might cost you a handful of places.

Interesting to see that Alonso and Ferrari copy this strategy.

I wonder how will McLaren react given that they have their drivers on different strategies up to now.

And Lewis gets the fastest lap of the race right now.

Vettel counters with a 1.5 seconds faster lap.

This isn't DRS related?

When Hamilton does pit his tyres should be faster than Vettel. But I think Hamilton is racing for 2nd place now.

[ioan]

That stupid last chicane is killing the racing on this track, without it you wouldn't even need gimmicks like DRS.

[ioan]

The blistering on the Ferrari's tires is impressive.

Meanwhile Massa doing some skating on those hard tires.

[ioan]

Alonso has to go 25 laps on the last stint on hard tires?! His previous stint on hards was a only bit over 10 laps before the performance was gone.

[ioan]

Last pit stops are supposedly done now so the fight for 1st will be on track.

All of a sudden Vettel may use KERS again?!

And Heikki might bring out the SC.

[ioan]

Typical Trulli crap when he mixes in the front running battles. He will never learn, the sooner he goes the better. :down:

On the other hand, Hamilton has his hands full of buttons, first use the blue then use the yellow one. What next?

[ioan]

Great race by Vettel! Congratulations! :up:

Sorry for the off topic, please move my blabbering to teh right place or delete it.

[AndyL]

Looks like the zone isn't long enough in Spain!

Too long in Turkey, too short in Spain... given the advanced simulators the teams have available, I have to wonder why the FIA can't figure out where to put the DRS zone. You'd think they could get a couple of teams to try it out in their simulators and tell them what the advantage is.

[Mark]

Or just get some teams to try it out in Friday practice!

[Sonic]

Personally I thought DRS was spot on here. No one was breezing past, it just put the chasing driver in position to either banzi up the inside into turn 1, or be close enough for another stab later in the lap.

[Daniel]

Personally I thought DRS was spot on here. No one was breezing past, it just put the chasing driver in position to either banzi up the inside into turn 1, or be close enough for another stab later in the lap.

But it didn't really seem to help at all.

[ioan]

But it didn't really seem to help at all.

It did help Lewis gain 0.3 seconds on straight every lap and not fade away behind Vettel.

[Mark]

Didn't know they could use it to overtake backmarkers. That seems a bit odd.

[Sonic]

But it didn't really seem to help at all.

In terms of breezing by before the braking zone? No it didn't. But no one wants that. There were a handful of passes that were 100% DRS assisted, but as Ioan says Lewis was piling on the pressure thanks to it.

[Sonic]

Didn't know they could use it to overtake backmarkers. That seems a bit odd.

I don't think they can. Martin kept saying it, but I thought it was established that DRS was only for position battles.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I don't think they can. Martin kept saying it, but I thought it was established that DRS was only for position battles.

They do use it for backmarkers. I don't know how the system works but it doesn't distinguish between racing for position or if is lapped traffic.

[ioan]

They do use it for backmarkers. I don't know how the system works but it doesn't distinguish between racing for position of if is lapped traffic.

One of the many faults with the DRS, however a way smaller fault then the existence itself of this device.

[Dave B]

This race was a good example of how DRS should be: it gave the overtaker a fighting chance down into turn one, but still made him do a lot of work once he got there. Used properly, I don't really understand the opposition to the system.

[AndyL]

Didn't know they could use it to overtake backmarkers. That seems a bit odd.

I agree, that doesn't seem to make any sense.

[wedge]

Used properly, I don't really understand the opposition to the system.

We've gone from one extreme to the other: processional-good dry races to very good-excellent (and leaving a sour taste of being manufactured) races.

Even Brundle was coming round to concluding that tyres was making the greater difference.

[Dave B]

I fail to see where this "manufactured" or "artificial" tag is coming from. Five races in, and the best drivers and teams are coming to the fore. To me, artifical would be something like reverse grids or ballast where we see Force India or Toro Rosso winning races simply because they are handed an advantage.

[steveaki13]

I fail to see where this "manufactured" or "artificial" tag is coming from. Five races in, and the best drivers and teams are coming to the fore. To me, artifical would be something like reverse grids or ballast where we see Force India or Toro Rosso winning races simply because they are handed an advantage.

Yes thats true.

For all the supposed Gimmiks, the best Driver and Car are where they deserve to be, at the front.

[Daniel]

I fail to see where this "manufactured" or "artificial" tag is coming from. Five races in, and the best drivers and teams are coming to the fore. To me, artifical would be something like reverse grids or ballast where we see Force India or Toro Rosso winning races simply because they are handed an advantage.

Exactly. Watching a driver who is clearly a good deal quicker than the one in front struggle to get past isn't my idea of fun.

[truefan72]

I fail to see where this "manufactured" or "artificial" tag is coming from. Five races in, and the best drivers and teams are coming to the fore. To me, artifical would be something like reverse grids or ballast where we see Force India or Toro Rosso winning races simply because they are handed an advantage.

agreed :up:

[truefan72]

Personally I thought DRS was spot on here. No one was breezing past, it just put the chasing driver in position to either banzi up the inside into turn 1, or be close enough for another stab later in the lap.

...which never happened

[ioan]

Yes thats true.

For all the supposed Gimmiks, the best Driver and Car are where they deserve to be, at the front.

Just wait for the next round of gimmicks, or you believe that Bernie is happy with Vettel walking it?
How long before the car in front will not be allowed to run more than 95% of the revs of the car behind, all this on top of KERS and DRS most probably?! Plus 'randomly' turned on sprinklers around the track!

[truefan72]

Just wait for the next round of gimmicks, or you believe that Bernie is happy with Vettel walking it?
How long before the car in front will not be allowed to run more than 95% of the revs of the car behind, all this on top of KERS and DRS most probably?! Plus 'randomly' turned on sprinklers around the track!

I am not worried about what-ifs or the future, i am worried about now, and at the present I am pretty happy with the racing
no race has been processional and great drivers still drive great, but now there is more action and intrigue

[ioan]

I am not worried about what-ifs or the future, i am worried about now, and at the present I am pretty happy with the racing
no race has been processional and great drivers still drive great, but now there is more action and intrigue

And you never watch Wrestling?

[truefan72]

And you never watch Wrestling?

strong comeback ioan...strong

perhaps you should sit this year out since it gets rather tiresome, 5 races into the year listening to continued complaints about kers, drs, tires and yet still posting blow by blow race analysis in the wrong thread. Perhaps if Massa was leading the WDC instead, you would be heaping praise on systems, or better yet, spend less time fixated on it.

[ioan]

strong comeback ioan...strong

perhaps you should sit this year out since it gets rather tiresome, 5 races into the year listening to continued complaints about kers, drs, tires and yet still posting blow by blow race analysis in the wrong thread. Perhaps if Massa was leading the WDC instead, you would be heaping praise on systems, or better yet, spend less time fixated on it.

I highly enjoy watching Vettel driving, especially because he has no KERS most of the time and he rarely is allowed to use DRS, and still winning! :D
Why should I not criticize the gimmicks that took racing away and replaced it with an artificial show?!

PS: Massa should have left Ferrari last summer after the German GP and he would be doing much better, but each to his own.

[steveaki13]

I highly enjoy watching Vettel driving, especially because he has no KERS most of the time and he rarely is allowed to use DRS, and still winning! :D
Why should I not criticize the gimmicks that took racing away and replaced it with an artificial show?!

PS: Massa should have left Ferrari last summer after the German GP and he would be doing much better, but each to his own.

Do you think Massa will leave or be forced to leave Ferrari next year.

I was just wondering what the options in terms of teams for next year for Massa would be.

Renault? or Sauber? If Perez moves on up.

[Mark]

An interesting topic but one for the Massa thread, not this one.

[steveaki13]

Sorry I went off topic.

Back to DRS.

I am still not sure about DRS even after these races.

In China and Turkey I thought it made it too easy.

Now in Spain it didn't look so bad, and its not going to do anything in Monaco.

Overall I still think I would prefer F1 without DRS, but until they tackle the real issues in inability to follow other cars closely.

[Mark]

Sure. But I see DRS as bridging the gap between the distance the cars have to keep due to 'dirty air' and where they would be if they could follow closely.

[ioan]

Sure. But I see DRS as bridging the gap between the distance the cars have to keep due to 'dirty air' and where they would be if they could follow closely.

If the gap under which they are allowed to turn it on would be 0.5 seconds I would maybe agree, however 1 second is way too much.
They can easily follow each other down to 0.4 seconds gaps which means that the DRS activation gap is way to high and the advantage given to the driver behind is not only for overcoming the turbulence.

[Sonic]

If the gap under which they are allowed to turn it on would be 0.5 seconds I would maybe agree, however 1 second is way too much.
They can easily follow each other down to 0.4 seconds gaps which means that the DRS activation gap is way to high and the advantage given to the driver behind is not only for overcoming the turbulence.

??????

So it a gimmick and produces fake racing at 1 sec, but half the gap and you're on board?

Plus, I've never heard any driver say, 'well I got within 4 tenths and then I hit the dirty air', it's always been around the 1 second mark.

[ioan]

??????

So it a gimmick and produces fake racing at 1 sec, but half the gap and you're on board?

Plus, I've never heard any driver say, 'well I got within 4 tenths and then I hit the dirty air', it's always been around the 1 second mark.

What part of 'maybe I would agree' with Mark didn't you get?

And if it has always been the around the 1 second mark, how do you explain that they were/are often following each other at 0.4 seconds difference around the track? :crazy:

[Sonic]

What part of 'maybe I would agree' with Mark didn't you get?

And if it has always been the around the 1 second mark, how do you explain that they were/are often following each other at 0.4 seconds difference around the track? :crazy:

Maybe. Definition: used to indicate that something is possible or that something might be true.

I understand just fine ta, you're the one who doesn't seem certain of his opinion. I was trying to clarify what you were saying. As I've not got any closer to understanding your POV, perhaps you can explain?

As to the dirty air question, I'm surprised you are even asking! Even if you have never driven a winged racing car, it is obvious that you don't just hit a solid wall of disturbed air, the effects build the closer you get. It is accepted that an F1 car starts to be adversely affected at around 1 second behind. The closer you get the more you suffer. It's simple really.

[wedge]

Exactly. Watching a driver who is clearly a good deal quicker than the one in front struggle to get past isn't my idea of fun.

There's a procession and there's defensive driving. The former as witnessed in Abu Dhabi last year shows there is something inherently wrong with F1 and the latter is equally thrilling than overtaking.


I fail to see where this "manufactured" or "artificial" tag is coming from. Five races in, and the best drivers and teams are coming to the fore. To me, artifical would be something like reverse grids or ballast where we see Force India or Toro Rosso winning races simply because they are handed an advantage.

Completely agree but Martin Brundle at the Turkish GP made a number of references to Webber commenting that he felt the overtakes were cheapened and felt little satisfaction when he overtook Alonso in China.

At the Malaysian GP Brundle in his deadpan way felt Webber went easily round Massa at the first corner.

Overtaking in F1 should be rewarding.

I feel that the changes have been far too radical. It's should be one or the other, preferably keeping the softer tyres and see how the racing progresses then, if need be, work on revising KERS.