Forum Replies Created
22nd October 2014, 13:33 at 1:33 pm #279881
@keithedin Yeah, average speeds are intriguing. I’ve looked at them ever since I read books of Nigel and Ayrton from the 1980s, where average speeds were often explicitly emphasised for some reason. I like to compare those to nowadays’.
For example, I also like it, when I stumble upon a strange one, like the Red Bull Ring for this year. I’d have never imagined it’d be that high up on the list alongside Silverstone and Suzuka, given that it has much lower average corner speeds (at least in the first two thirds of the lap) and it arguably has lot much longer straights than Suzuka. What catched me out, I guess, was the short lap and the fact that those full throttle parts are much longer in this relation. (Also, as the previous formula, which ran on the track in 1997-2003 was more of an aero formula than an engine formula, it was ranked a tad lower back then. Last, but not least, the average speeds across the calendar decreased with the Tilkedroms as well, further elevating the Red Bull Ring.)20th October 2014, 18:06 at 6:06 pm #279785
Nice and tidy analysis, extremely well-formulated. I agree with your conclusions as well, although I’d especially wish to highlight that point 1 is not surprising and oyu might even have done a lot more work compared to what we can deduct from the car-to-track characteristics we’ve seen so far this year.
The average speed is a good proxy, I think, but getting into the details one can say that the more flat-out sections and full throttle % a track have, the better Williams will be owing to their extremely efficient aero design and strong power unit. Vice versa, the sheer downforce level of the Red Bull gives them the advantage when there are less of the above features on the tracks.
Another very good thing to consider – and once again, this correlates with average speeds a bit – are the aero configurations.
Red Bull sweeps the floor with the Williams on the maximum downforce tracks (Monte-Carlo, Hungaroring, Singapore) and vice versa, Williams is by far ahead on the low downforce (Monza) and the medium downforce circuits (Montreal, Spa). What we generally term as ‘high downforce’ rounds are in fact also two categories, one being closer to the medium levels (Sakhir, Shanghai, Red Bull Ring, Hockenheim, Suzuka, Sochi, Interlagos) and one being closer to the maximum levels (Melbourne, Sepang, Barcelona, Silverstone, Austin, Abu Dhabi). In the case of the former, Williams is closer to or beat Red Bull, in the case of the latter, they generally fall a bit short.
Furthermore, it’s interesting to note the exceptions: e. g. Red Bull, unusually, ran its low downforce aero kit in Spa, when everybody else ran on medium downforce. This gave them an unlikely advantage over Williams – but the fact that the Williams itself is so aero efficient enabled them to run Montreal and Spa in their usual high downforce configuration and still remain fairly competitive, especially in Montreal.
And there are a couple of nice car characteristics to cross over as well – e. g. the Ferrari’s fondness of the high-speed corners, the McLaren’s excellent low speed traction and short gearing, the Force India’s short wheelbase and long gearing, etc.
This season is a goldmine from an engineering point of view due to teams reacting slightly, but – even for the outsiders – noticeably differently to the new rules.20th October 2014, 8:25 at 8:25 am #279413
Well, one can say thing business model worked well for EA in the past – of course, the biggest loosers were the fans and the players back then as well. They are simply not motivated to do better and the sales should still come in strong with the fanboys – not us, true fanatics – supposedly still jumping at the opportunity to be someone they are not (i. e. be Daniil Kvyat for example), regardless of the physics, features, etc.13th October 2014, 11:32 at 11:32 am #278662
Definitely Vergne re-passing Magnussen hanging around the outside of T3 to get the inside line into T4.12th October 2014, 0:40 at 12:40 am #278431
I got to like Scott McLaughlin when I saw his battle with Whincup in Adelaide at the end of the season opener.
I’m glad he made as great start as he did. :)11th October 2014, 10:51 at 10:51 am #278262
Will pop into the coverage once or twice. I just love the track, I consider it the most difficult, at least certainly in GRID Autosport and one of the most difficult (as a custom track) in GP4. It’s hilariously challenging and I love it, when drivers are on the edge while racing on it. This February’s 12h race finish and Jamie Whincup’s pole for last year’s 1000km are the ones that stand out for me.10th October 2014, 14:32 at 2:32 pm #278098
Is it the recently laid new tarmac which caused these times to drop from the previous years, or the cars got quicker? (Or both.)8th October 2014, 23:01 at 11:01 pm #277724
I agree with the previous speakers; that’s roughly what I supposed may be the reasoning behind the move when I tried to explain it to a fellow F1 Fanatic under an article.11th September 2014, 9:21 at 9:21 am #274309
Well, most of the pit-to-car changes are banned anyway, I think since about 1998-2001-ish, but yeah, that was for a completely different set of car components.
On the other hand, some management of performance-enhancing elements is actually favourable – mostly that means ‘building energy around’ certain situations, a term Red Bull used on Ricciardo’s radio in Canada and I pretty much like it. It creates more overtaking or spirited defenses. And it helps putting energy revovery systems more into spotlight, which is exactly the kind of thing F1 needs to remain relevant in this new environment-conscious era (of car industry and motorsport).
They are not easy to pull off in the first place. But obviously when we talk about stuff that makes life easy for the drivers, we don’t really want something that makes it too easy, such as the aforementioned kind of ‘launch control’. Or the engine mapping Red Bull used last year to absolutely nail that blown diffuser concept which practically worked – from the outside – like traction control in effect (without it, Sebastian would have hardly been able to have that distinctive style of ‘jabbing the throttle mid-corner to exit’ – as Horner once said in an interview – to maximise grip and traction on the way out of the corner).
That’s what I talked about, there no need to go radical and ban something altogether, because there’s always a plus side and a flip side to everything. It’s a careful assessment of distinguishing between elements of this area that is needed – and most importantly, a change of approach in which a more independent (they can’t be fully independent, can they) regulatory body aims for good, exciting racing (the ‘product’ so they’d say) instead of serving the interests of the biggest teams.27th August 2014, 12:12 at 12:12 pm #272417
Despite being an Alonso fan, I think rounding Pérez in Rivage was made a lot easier by the different aero configurations of the two car. Alonso’s high downforce kit enabled a lot more cornering speed than Pérez’s medium downforce aero package, just enough for Alonso to nullify the disadvantage the outside line meant.
Now one can say ‘blah, that’s not quite easy, just look at what Magnussen did to him’, but in the context of the Magnussen-Alonso battle we have to take into account the almost unbeatable traction of the MP4/29 out of low-speed corners. It’s not the first time this helped them preserve their positions (Malaysia against Massa, Barcelona against Massa and Silverstone against Alonso comes to mind).
…So I’d also go for Rosberg on Bottas. It was unnervingly difficult: being on the debris on the inside and being on the inside alone necessitated a much tighter line into Blanchimont and it required some skill – and bravery most of all – to complete the pass by not lifting at all.27th August 2014, 0:19 at 12:19 am #272379
Haha, I literally laughed out loud. :)20th August 2014, 11:25 at 11:25 am #270809
He did choose Fernando in the end. :)5th August 2014, 23:08 at 11:08 pm #269574
Which brings us to a very peculiar problem with these cars. F1 is the fastest autosport category in the world, but its discipline might not inherently be the fastest as an open-wheeler has a disadvantage compared to higher endurance classes (e. g. LMP1) per se…5th August 2014, 18:43 at 6:43 pm #269546
Yeah, I agree with the latter. It would require Jedi-like reaction times and skills to pass.2nd August 2014, 22:31 at 10:31 pm #269392
Yeah, I kind of knew about Newey’s X1, X2014, etc. designs, but I would not go that far in theory – I’d open up only a few elements of the rules regarding car dimension, certainly not all, so no closed wheels, cockpit, etc. So what I’m speculating on is specifically how the front wings and the sidepods would look like if only the dimension rules of those two parts would change.
In short, I’d think the IndyCar and Formula E solutions are the way to go, but I’m curious what the forum members think about it – if they have other ideas, or not.