|
|
Post by ChrisM on Oct 5, 2018 19:28:08 GMT
Anything to discuss?
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Oct 6, 2018 16:21:32 GMT
Ocon has been handed a 3-place grid penalty for failing to slow sufficiently when red flags were waved, so as things stand at the moment it appears that he is the answer to the bonus question.
I wonder if things will change again overnight?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 18:47:07 GMT
Possibly but with variable weather it is yet to be seen how but Vettel is surely on the back foot. Hope the start goes well......
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Oct 7, 2018 17:43:43 GMT
I’m trying to understand why Vettel doesn’t think he’s at fault for his collision with Max? Such stupid errors are why he’ll never be remembered as the true great of his generation and Lewis will.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Oct 7, 2018 19:57:38 GMT
Stroll set the 5th fastest lap .....
|
|
|
|
Post by Sav on Oct 7, 2018 22:25:50 GMT
Unusually entertaining at Suzuka. Verstappen deserved the penalty for pushing Kimi off at the chicane. I like these five second penalties that can be served at the pitstops, it dishes out punishment without totally ruining someone’s race. Raikkonen shouldn’t have had to yield for someone returning to the track after making an error.
The incident at Spoon between Vettel and Verstappen was the formers fault. The entry to Spoon is so fast in an F1 car, it’s a bit like the entry to turn 1, they charge the entry and then start seriously slowing for the second part of the corner. With minimal braking into Spoon, you need to be fully alongside to make the pass. And have someone who wants to cooperate with you. Verstappen isn’t that driver.
I understand Vettel’s thinking; Verstappen started to run out of battery power on the straight before Spoon, leaving him vulnerable to Vettel. It was tempting, any race driver would find that tempting. But if that was Maldonado, everyone would have laughed.
If you watch a Super GT or GT3 car into Spoon, it’s like a different track. It’s much more of a passing zone in cars which aren’t so downforce-dominated, and have more weight.
What do Ferrari do about Vettel? In my view, Ferrari’s signing of Leclerc was a sign that Ferrari doesn’t have full confidence in Seb. Vettel made it quite clear that he liked Raikkonen as teammate. Ferrari ignored that and decided to put Leclerc as teammate. I’ll say it again, Ferrari needs the best, and right now that is Hamilton, come rain or shine.
In my view, Mercedes should ditch Bottas for Ocon. They have invested in a potentially great driver, who probably won’t be on the grid next year. Bottas can occasionally match Hamilton, is strong on certain tracks like Russia and Austria. However, for the most part he suffers from the Barrichello syndrome of not being able to consistently get near his superior teammate, or having terrible luck. Finishing more than twelve seconds behind Hamilton at Suzuka is surely too big a gap. Even Ferrari has promoted one of their development drivers, time for Merc to do the same.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2018 23:22:24 GMT
I cannot agree with that. Valteri is a fine foil for Da Ham. Ferrari made a questionable tyre choice for Q3 but when it works they are heroe's etc. Ocon for another Merc number two spot? Not really, he is not here yet. Max is too wild too so what Red bull will do without Daniel I do not know but Max with a power unit less reliable than a Renault will be interesting for those who still can watch. Will he match his ex team mate? I think not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2018 23:25:04 GMT
#Double post.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Oct 8, 2018 7:57:58 GMT
I cannot agree with that. Valteri is a fine foil for Da Ham. Ferrari made a questionable tyre choice for Q3 but when it works they are heroe's etc. Ocon for another Merc number two spot? Not really, he is not here yet. Max is too wild too so what Red bull will do without Daniel I do not know but Max with a power unit less reliable than a Renault will be interesting for those who still can watch. Will he match his ex team mate? I think not. I don’t hunk the Honda is less reliable than Renault right now. I think it’s much closer to where it should be and it’s a shrewd decision by Red Bull to change power supplier. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 10:24:52 GMT
I hope the Honda motor does the job and that the McLaren chassis makes leaps too. More competing teams not less. Not happy with the direction Liberty are taking the business tho'.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Oct 8, 2018 10:46:52 GMT
I think the Honda engine will come good too especially since they are a company steeped in engineering brilliance. I'd like to know though whether the Mercedes/Ferrari superiority is through mechanical or electrically derived power units. |
|
|
|
Post by Eff One on Oct 8, 2018 11:05:15 GMT
Not much wrong with Bottas, I think Hamilton is simply in the sort of form where any teammate would look ordinary. I find him hard to like, but his driving is sensational. Good as Ocon is - and it's a travesty that he's without a drive for 2019 - I doubt that replacing Bottas with him would improve matters for Merc right now.
I do think Vettel's going to come under pressure soon and rightly so. He isn't paid squillions to make silly lunges into non-existent gaps. And what on earth is going on at Ferrari? Some crazy decision making over the past couple of races.
I was hoping to see Toro Rosso do well in the race after a great qualy. No doubting Gasly's star quality but Brendan Hartley is no mug, and a hell of a lot better than the results show. It was disappointing to see them both slip back in the race.
|
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Oct 8, 2018 12:14:11 GMT
Don't think is Liberty's fault F1's in the position its in. Bernie was slow to embrace Social media, the FIA push the sport in the wrong direction and manufacturers demanding tech that goes against what the fans want. I think Liberty are trying to change things but are tied in by the current regulations, though I have to be honest, I know very little about the 2021 rule change.
If one things true it's that Bernie was right to control the sport the way he did, wasn't it Renault who demanded the changes to the power units and its those guys that have suffered the most.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Oct 8, 2018 12:45:42 GMT
I was hoping to see Toro Rosso do well in the race after a great qualy. No doubting Gasly's star quality but Brendan Hartley is no mug, and a hell of a lot better than the results show. It was disappointing to see them both slip back in the race. You weren't the only one who was disappointed.... both cars well inside the top 10 but they failed to score a single point in the race. Sad |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 17:02:59 GMT
It seems that Liberty are taking F1 away from the tv side over time to concentrate on internet media. It is one thing to add media but another to reduce its diversity. What about those who are not based on internet viewing? Additions to the hype include gambling ads and links on all media to increase "entertainment" potential. Are we supposed to be increasing the exposure of all viewers to this gambling culture or reducing it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Oct 9, 2018 13:13:25 GMT
I wonder if Ocon would actually flourish at Merc where Hamilton is clearly number 1.
It might not be the best training ground at the moment, perhaps best to wait another year.
Verstappen continues to come across as an increasingly arrogant dick.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2018 15:37:12 GMT
I’m trying to understand why Vettel doesn’t think he’s at fault for his collision with Max? Such stupid errors are why he’ll never be remembered as the true great of his generation and Lewis will. Like a four time Nico Rosberg... |
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Oct 12, 2018 17:07:23 GMT
I’m trying to understand why Vettel doesn’t think he’s at fault for his collision with Max? Such stupid errors are why he’ll never be remembered as the true great of his generation and Lewis will. Like a four time Nico Rosberg... Not saying his achievements during his Red Bull years aren’t worth celebrating and he will be remembered for them, I just think that in 20 years he won’t be thought of in the same bracket as Fangio, Senna and Schumacher whereas Lewis, I believe, will be. |
|
|
|
Post by Sav on Oct 12, 2018 23:50:47 GMT
Don't think is Liberty's fault F1's in the position its in. Bernie was slow to embrace Social media, the FIA push the sport in the wrong direction and manufacturers demanding tech that goes against what the fans want. I think Liberty are trying to change things but are tied in by the current regulations, though I have to be honest, I know very little about the 2021 rule change. If one things true it's that Bernie was right to control the sport the way he did, wasn't it Renault who demanded the changes to the power units and its those guys that have suffered the most. Indeed. I think Liberty has done a great job of improving the TV coverage in a relatively short space of time. The opening presentation is more like a movie, and showing highlights of previous incidents sounds so obvious and basic. But Bernie was reluctant to show viewers any more than they needed to. F1 has a vast bank of old footage, I’m glad that it’s finally being used – and not just for a one-off film like Senna. Showing the apex speeds of the cars is something that has particularly interested me, as sad as it sounds. During the closing laps at Suzuka, that data showed the knife edge that Bottas and Verstappen were on during Degner 1 last week, both trading a few kph on any given lap at the end, illustrating great consistency and skill. Again, this sort of data has been available for years, but the TV footage was always limited by factors discussed above. However, as good as improving TV and social media might be, successfully changing the technical regulations is where they must be judged. It’s not something that can be done overnight, or even perhaps in the short-term. Too many vested interests ensure this, from engines, aerodynamics and financial rewards. Liberty must hold firm on the plans they outlined earlier this year, and start firming up specific rules and regulations. Liberty quite rightly want the engines simplified and made louder, but all of the engine manufacturers are lobbying against this. It appears that the MGU-H will stay, and to be frank, not much will change. This is the issue with democratising things like this, nothing gets done, nothing improves. Keep asking everyone’s opinion on everything, and you can guarantee that anything decent suggested gets watered down. Bernie and Max had lots of disagreements with the teams, but they more or less agreed to most of their agenda. It wasn’t a democracy, they merely agreed to how the sport was being run. I believe Ross Brawn wants the best for the sport, and he isn’t suggesting a naturally aspirated V10 again – as nice as that would be. A turbocharged V6 would be retained, so the 2021 or 2022 formula should satisfy the engine builders. The teams can dismiss Chase Carey, but it’s harder to do that with Ross, which is why Liberty employed him. But he isn’t some sort of Liberty poodle; he wants the best for the sport. Eddie is right; Renault effectively gave up winning to have this current engine. The perception of road relevance is seemingly more important, and despite numerous millions invested for mediocre performance and unreliability, it’s a more corporately palatable than a screaming V8 or V10. The same goes for Honda, they returned to F1 only to be completely embarrassed, but they want to try again with Red Bull. F1 should never have engine regulations like this again, with ballooning costs through open regulations and little chance for independent engine builders. However, the engine regulations are not the biggest problem. Engine development gets exhausted eventually, as areas of improvement diminish. It happened with the V10’s, V8’s and might happen with the V6’s. Particularly with the old V8’s, the FIA required the teams to homologate specs of engines and retain that for a long period. So even if you spent a lot more, it wasn’t possible to spend like crazy to achieve a significantly better performance. Red Bull won with a relatively inferior V8 because the differences between the engines became so insignificant. If the FIA were to homologate the current engines at a sensible date (perhaps before Melbourne 2019), maybe costs could be controlled. The real problem is spending on aerodynamics, which never goes away regardless of the year. I think Liberty need to be particularly bold about this, banning front wings all together for an LMP-style nose. The teams would go bananas, but I don’t see a way around it. Here is my conundrum: I don’t want spec-wings, like F2 or F3 – F1 should be about designing your own car. Small and simple spec wings would be fantastic for racing; no more DRS, no more dodgy tyres needed – people could follow effectively. But it would go against the DNA of F1. However, by allowing even a small avenue of wing development, the teams would exploit that and before you know it, someone will have managed to develop a five-element front wing due to vague wordings written in the regulations. So banning front wings is the way of problems just repeating themselves. Bargeboards, chintzy engine covers and aero-influenced wing mirrors would be totally outlawed, and the diffuser would be made much smaller – no multi-arrangement would be possible. Ross has the right idea; he wants to main a performance level that is close to today’s laptimes, whilst significantly reducing turbulence – it would negate the arguments that F1 has been dumbed down. Given how much performance is delivered from the wings and diffuser, it’s perfectly possible and achievable. And if laptimes to increase by a few seconds, nobody will notice or care. |
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Oct 15, 2018 8:45:44 GMT
I think you could retain front wings but the rules would have to clearly specify how many elements were allowed and in what size of space.
When you see the current front wings in closeup they're incredibly complex and yet so vulnerable.
Simplifying them would at least remove someof that and perhaps w=make the cars easier to set up, I assume the current style is pne of the reasons Williams and McLaren are struggling - if they have a small error/underperformaing bit it multiplies across the remainder of the length of the car with its complex aero.
I always think back a few (!) years to the early Super Touring era in BTCC - much was made of the E30 Evo aero kit but there was one race in particular at Silverstone where the 2 works cars - 'Fearless' Frank Sytner and James Weaver - were racing each othe rextremely hard.
Sytner's car ended up with no front bumper/spoiler/splitter and yet was just as quick as the sister car and, I think (it's 30 years ago so memory might be failing me here) lap times were just as fast.
I know touring car aero was much simpler than F1 but in the right circumstances it clearly made a negligible difference, despite the money undoubtedly spent on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Oct 15, 2018 9:38:13 GMT
^
Maybe a standard front wing should be specified?
It would be good if "smooth" bodywork could also be specified but I think it would prove difficult to write regulations to that effect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Oct 15, 2018 11:11:46 GMT
All these changes are difficult to implement as they’ve got to get agreement from teams who have invested a hell of a lot of money to develop aero set ups including paying people like Adrian Newey a kings ransom for their expertise and investing in some of the worlds most advanced wind tunnels. Telling them that front wings are to be outlawed would effectively be throwing a shit load of their money down the drain. As much as F1 has always been about great drivers it has also always been about innovation and the work of some of the brightest minds in automotive design creating world beating racing cars and it would be a shame if that were to be watered down.
But I guess the advantage is that it will add to the element of driver skill being the reason why a car is faster than another. When you look at how easily a current Williams is lapped by a Mercedes car despite having the same engine, the only conclusion is that it’s Williams inferior aero set up that is partly, or indeed mostly, to blame. It would surely mean more race winners and less chance of someone like Alonso having zero chance of winning simply because he’s in an inferior machine. When Liberty Media are placing so much emphasis on the drivers by parading them before races and having them strike poses for the opening credits, it’s slightly nonsensical that in a 20 Race season only three of them actually win a GP and of those one of them only wins one race.
|
|
