@Enigma If it’s early onto the straight, the attacking driver could still get a big advantage while accelerating. If you both reach 320 km/h, the first person to do so will still have an advantage. KERS is usually left alone in discussions like these, because you can defend yourself, if you still have KERS left. Perhaps allowing DRS to have a defense mechanism would be favorable, if it’s kept in the future, over shortening the zones even further.
Plus, as I said earlier, the FIA needs a good, hard look at what tracks need DRS, where these tracks need it and how to not influence existing overtaking spots. Canada doesn’t really need any, but a track like the Hungaroring could use some help, but not on the overly obvious places. Instead of the usual ‘start finish/other longest straight’, go for something like between 11-12 and 12-13 or something crazy.
If it’s early onto the straight, the attacking driver could still get a big advantage while accelerating. If you both reach 320 km/h, the first person to do so will still have an advantage.
Exactly, just like good-old slipstreaming. Since DRS is introduced because slipstreaming is hardly possible, it might as well work like slipstreaming. DRS should stop working once you pull alongside the car you want to pass. Best is if that could be arranged technically, but if not, the solution is to shorten the DRS zone (by ending it earlier rather than starting it later).
@npf1 but with enigma’s suggestion no one would reach 320kph. as the DRS becomes deactivated half way down the straight their non DRS speed would never reach that high. this means the driver now behind can slipstream to the braking point and overtake.
@npf1 Let’s say both drivers have got the same top speed. If the attacker uses DRS for the first half of the straight, he’ll reach the top speed quicker, but it’ll be the same as the defender’s top speed (in theory; and I’m not taking slipstream into account). So the drivers are more or less alongside each other and then they can have a proper battle.