Back track on 2013 ground effect rule change.

[myelement]

URL:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/sport1/hi/formula_one/13326363.stm

I was looking forward to the return of slight ground effect F1 cars. It would have been an elegant solution helping with dirty air syndrome preventing overtaking.

Would development really be to expensive? Totally worth it in my opinion if it could get rid of DRS. It looks like moveable wings are staying for the foreseeable future though.

Does anyone else (more knowledgeable) think this is the wrong direction to take?

 

[Lizard]

It would cost alot to make sure it was safe the reason ground effect was banned in the first place was because it was unpredictable and led to many accidents

 

[NFSCARBON1]

I understand money needs to be saved and cars need to be safe but I really want to see some of the regulations relaxed. Lately every new idea that a team comes up with is banned soon after. Why was the F-Duct banned only to be replaced with DRS? Why not have both? What was wrong with double diffusers?

At least the 'snowplough' wings will disappear now.

 

[xX_F Alonso_Xx]

I wish they bring back the V10's. I want the cars to look and sound like they did back in 2005.
Jenson Button also agrees: http://uk.autoblog.com/2011/04/12/button-would-like-v10-engines-back-in-f1/
Never going to happen though.

 

[Alex.]

I, like all the drivers would love to see the powerful V10 or V12 return with 930BHP

 

[Peter.]

The problem was cost an efficiency. Engines take up half of a budget, more or less. For a big, expensive V10 used in only 1 race, costs were stratospherically high.

I know F1 can't go back to those inefficient, expensive V10's, but we don't need 1.4 liter 4 pots. That's a bit too much, or to little, rather. It seems as if these engine rules are being set up to attract manufacturers back into the sport, when they all only left because of bad economic conditions, and they will be back as soon as they are financially able to. Only one interested anyway was Porsche, who has quieted down now.

 

[Centura]

V6 Turbo?

 

[Pupik]

While we're at it, how about a giant sucker fan for the rear of the car, and a riding mechanic?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

and a riding mechanic?

Felipe Massa already has one.

 

[DK]

I think ground effects were removed because the tracks of the late 70s/early 80s weren't suitable for them. With today's relatively safer tracks, I wouldn't see a reason why ground effects can't be re-introduced.

 

[vfrmaverick]

I think ground effects were removed because the tracks of the late 70s/early 80s weren't suitable for them. With today's relatively safer tracks, I wouldn't see a reason why ground effects can't be re-introduced.

Then again do we need them? Tracks today are nothing more than 2 long straight with a couple of 90 degree turns slapped in for good measure. Yea theres that one or two turns that went rouge on what I said but lets face it the vast majority are like this. I say take away aero and return mechanical grip.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I say take away aero and return mechanical grip.

Good luck convincing the teams to agree on that. They know that the more aerodynamic grip they have, the faster they will go. and since they will always be able to get more aerodynamic grip, they will never reliquish the advantage - and if ever there is the suggestion that they do, they will fight with everything they've got to protect it.

 

[vfrmaverick]

Good luck convincing the teams to agree on that. They know that the more aerodynamic grip they have, the faster they will go. and since they will always be able to get more aerodynamic grip, they will never reliquish the advantage - and if ever there is the suggestion that they do, they will fight with everything they've got to protect it.

I dont mean take it all away. But reduce it by adding wider cars and tires. A wider car means they can place things in a wider space so they can lower the CG too.

 

[TopGearFTW]

I think F1 is brilliant as it is. Turkey and China were some of the best races I can remember that didn't involve ridiculous weather. Even the commentators were struggling to keep up with the constant overtaking, I don't feel anything really needs changing at the moment.
I would like to see bigger engines though. Did they scale down the engine sizes for environmental or economic reasons? Or both? I'm not saying bring back the V10s, but some middle ground between there and here would be nice. There's a reason basically every fastest lap was set in 04 (if the race was ran in 04 anyway).

 

[Azure Flare]

I, like all the drivers would love to see the powerful V10 or V12 return with 930BHP

Me too, mainly because of sound. Though I do kinda like the V8s, but they don't compare to V10s and V12s.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I dont mean take it all away. But reduce it by adding wider cars and tires. A wider car means they can place things in a wider space so they can lower the CG too.

I don't think that would work, since wider cars means easier blocking and wings would most likely be wider too.

 

[Ardius]

It would cost alot to make sure it was safe the reason ground effect was banned in the first place was because it was unpredictable and led to many accidents

Its pretty clear that its purely a money reason due to development, rather than particularly safety. As was explained in the article, the current knowledge base is with wings...not many engineers know a lot about ground effects these days so it will be expensive for the teams to go down this avenue - i.e. expensive if they mess it up.

I seem to remember that Ground Effects were banned purely on a speed concern rather than on specific safety concern. The cars were getting faster and faster, going beyond the abilities of the drivers with that era's tyres and safety standards.
Employing ground effects today is perfectly safe if they don't go overboard with it..Indycars/Champ cars have used mainly ground effects.

I'm disappointed to hear this because wings are quite clearly a major limitation to overtaking, not just demonstrated in F1 but in GP2, GP3, Formula Renault, Indycars...while some have more overtaking than others they are all series which struggle with close car-combat. This partly because of the fragile nature of the cars, but also to do with the loss of grip when following cars in the corners, which makes it difficult to keep up on a straight or into a following corner. Grounds effects are quite an easy and very effective solution to this because the car no longer relies on the air in front to create the downforce, and much more natural way of creating overtaking than wearing Pirelli tyres or DRS/KERS.

I was happy to see DRS being used as a temporary measure until the ground effects rules, but these comments make me worry its going to become permanent. I'm not sure I like this path for F1.

I don't think that would work, since wider cars means easier blocking and wings would most likely be wider too.

It did work - before 1998 we had wider cars and the statistics are there for you. More mechanical grip, the closer you can run following other cars in the corners because the loss of front downforce is lessened.
The wings can be kept a certain width through a simple rule (as they already are) and there already is a rule against blocking. Not many tracks are so narrow that making a car being slightly wider means a huge amount more blocking moves easier. Only really places like Monaco and Singapore..where overtaking isn't easy anyway.

Indycars have wider bodies and they still have plenty of overtaking.

 

[hawkeye122]

May i suggest a 2-class Formula 1 World championship?

I first thought "Do it the way Le Mans does it" which is fairly open in terms of Displacement and Turbocharging. Loosen up the regs on Displacement and cylinders, and allow turbocharging.

But then i thought "Yeah, lets see how far down Force India, Virgin, HRT, Lotus, and Williams can be by Silverstone". Obviously the economic factor is kinda a "Big Deal"

So do a class of 2011 regs, and then a "Super" class. I know 2 classes in F1 would be really dumb, but just a thought.

 

[lmanion]

Get rid of the stupid wide front wings and open the engine regs up like they were in the mid 90's. Maybe 2.5 litre with an option to use how ever many cylinders as they like.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

May i suggest a 2-class Formula 1 World championship?

That was one of the main reasons why we had that political firestorm a few years ago. Under Max Mosley's budget cap regulations, cars that ran certain configurations - such as foru-wheel driver - would be governed by a second set of rules. The teams violently objected to this because they felt it turned the sport into a two-tier championship.

 

[Matti_Dude]

I was hoping that DRS wouldn't be a permanent thing, as much as it is a solution to creating more overtaking opportunities I still think it is a little bit cheap. The driver behind gains an advantage with no repercussions, you always hear about how they had the boost button back in the 80s when the turbos were used but that used up more fuel which caused the drivers to back off later in the race. With the DRS they can just use it over and over without compromising themselves and it's an unfair advantage. They should try and fix what caused the problem in the first place by simply reducing the aerodynamic grip produced by the wings. Widening the cars may not be that bad of an idea either, giving the cars more mechanical grip so the cars are no slower.

As for the engines, I don't mind the V8s at the moment but as many others would agree the V10s and V12s that were used sound much better and chucked out plenty more horses. I'd definately welcome a return to those. I wouldn't be too happy with F1 using 1.6 litre 4 cylinder engines. Even if they have turbos it would lose a lot of it's appeal for me. If anything the cars aren't powerful enough as it is, but reducing them to around 600bhp would be suicidal.

To sum it all up, < aerodynamic grip, > mechanical grip and > power!

 

[Tired Tyres]

I take that you don't remember the 1.5 BMW 4-Cylinder Turbo engine? 1350 BHP in race boost. The next engine will be heavily restricted yes, but the potential is there.

Personally I don't like DRS but it does do the job it was meant to do. Whether it is really needed given the tyre situation is debatable though.

 

[Matti_Dude]

I take that you don't remember the 1.5 BMW 4-Cylinder Turbo engine? 1350 BHP in race boost. The next engine will be heavily restricted yes, but the potential is there.

Personally I don't like DRS but it does do the job it was meant to do. Whether it is really needed given the tyre situation is debatable though.

Well I kind of assumed they would heavily restrict the pressures. I can't remember where I read it but I can remember that the engines would produce around 600-650bhp and the KERS would be 100bhp to get it up to around todays power levels. But I'm not that big of a fan of KERS either. Getting rid of the double diffusers and changing tyre manufacturer were the best rule changes for this season in my opinion.

 

[The Outlaw]

Good luck convincing the teams to agree on that. They know that the more aerodynamic grip they have, the faster they will go. and since they will always be able to get more aerodynamic grip, they will never reliquish the advantage - and if ever there is the suggestion that they do, they will fight with everything they've got to protect it.

Actually, I think a good majority of teams (especially Ferrari) have an opposite perspective on this, especially being that there is such a large focus on aero atm in order to achieve lap time. Aerodynamics is probably the biggest "black art" in F1 - This has allowed genius visionaries like Newey (who continues to leave other designers on their back foot), to basically single handedly keep his team one step ahead, especially with the continual aero regulation changes we've seen in the past few years...something most of the teams are probably becoming quite frustrated with by now (being that there aren't too many Adrian Newey's around )

Of course the teams want F1 to be the pinnacle of motorsports, but there are many other ways to achieve performance even if downforce was decreased dramatically (or at least produced in different way, or with tighter regulations on aero in general). I'm sure teams like Ferrari who have always prefered to focus on the powerplant, wouldn't mind making up for a reduction in DF, by throwing in a normally aspirated V12, 1500hp fire breathing monster with some huge slicks On the other hand, it is likely in RB's best interest to keep the regulations the way they are (with a large importance on aero) as they aren't an engine builder like Ferrari, and have the best aerodynamicist in the business by a long shot.

 

[Ardius]

Actually, I think a good majority of teams (especially Ferrari) have an opposite perspective on this, especially being that there is such a large focus on aero atm in order to achieve lap time. Aerodynamics is probably the biggest "black art" in F1 - This has allowed genius visionaries like Newey (who continues to leave other designers on their back foot), to basically single handedly keep his team one step ahead, especially with the continual aero regulation changes we've seen in the past few years...something most of the teams are probably becoming quite frustrated with by now (being that there aren't too many Adrian Newey's around )

Of course the teams want F1 to be the pinnacle of motorsports, but there are many other ways to achieve performance even if downforce was decreased dramatically (or at least produced in different way, or with tighter regulations on aero in general). I'm sure teams like Ferrari who have always prefered to focus on the powerplant, wouldn't mind making up for a reduction in DF, by throwing in a normally aspirated V12, 1500hp fire breathing monster with some huge slicks On the other hand, it is likely in RB's best interest to keep the regulations the way they are (with a large importance on aero) as they aren't an engine builder like Ferrari, and have the best aerodynamicist in the business by a long shot.

I think even Ferrari are hesitant giving up all the billions they have spent on their windtunnel, gathering data on aerodynamics and generally building up their capability in this area. 60 years ago you might have a point about them being better for engines, but nowadays they have invested a lot of money in aerodynamics, it wouldn't be easy or cheap for them to give it all up and pursue a pure engine route.
This is the same reason all the teams, not just small teams, are going to resist huge changes to aerodynamic rules, they don't want to lose the investments they have already made.

Its debatable whether it would really benefit the bigger teams or manufacturers more than small teams. The bigger teams stand to have a lot more investment to lose, while they might be able to afford the change in money terms, it would be much more costly with regards to staff, facilities, etc etc. There is more to it than simply money spent on the next big thing, there is money that has already been spent.

This is why they are not going down the ground effects route now - they are afraid of the sheer cost of it all. Suddenly the staff they have are no longer experts, as very few of them have any ground effects experience - at least at F1-levels. They are also afraid of the cost of a bad design, they could potentially miss the mark quite dramatically (we're talking seconds off difference here!), whereas a simple evolution of aero like say from 2007 to 2008 is easy to get right again if your design is already sorted.

I take that you don't remember the 1.5 BMW 4-Cylinder Turbo engine? 1350 BHP in race boost. The next engine will be heavily restricted yes, but the potential is there.

Personally I don't like DRS but it does do the job it was meant to do. Whether it is really needed given the tyre situation is debatable though.

If I remember right, they never used 1300+bhp engines in races back then, only ever with special "qualifying engines" which were built to last one lap. I often hear figures quoted similar to modern F1 of around 700bhp with boost for a turbo engine back then in race conditions.
The FIA would never allow 1300bhp engines again.

 

[F1 fan]

The FIA would never allow 1300bhp engines again.

What a shame. I'm aware of these engines would make the sport too costly/dangerous/environmentally unsound, but what a spectacle it would be.

I don't think there's a racing fan out there that, deep down, business aside, wouldn't like to see/hear that.

 

[Tired Tyres]

If I remember right, they never used 1300+bhp engines in races back then, only ever with special "qualifying engines" which were built to last one lap. I often hear figures quoted similar to modern F1 of around 700bhp with boost for a turbo engine back then in race conditions.
The FIA would never allow 1300bhp engines again.

I'd agree they won't - unless viewing figures drop and people tell them that they want 1000+BHP engines to start watching again!

Brabham were reported in Autosport and Autocar magazines as using 1350BHP in the Monaco Grand Prix in race trim. They had more than that in qualifying trim. The other teams had almost as much and drivers still complained about not having enough power!

 

[Matti_Dude]

Well it's been confirmed that the teams don't want the shaped floors, but I wonder if Todt would push the idea through anyway. There is some tough opposition facing these rule changes, mainly in the shape of Ecclestone and Ferrari, I wonder if there will be any drastic changes at all.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/formula_one/13412925.stm

 

[Ardius]

Ecclestone and Ferrari are not happy about the turbo engines, not the ground effects regulations.
I kind of hope Todt does push them through anyway, because the alternative regulations the teams have proposed are pathetic - pretty much keep the current regulations and continue to restrict them further. As I said before, seems the teams are too worried about the costs if they screw up like in 2009. I'm disappointed in FOTA for lacking some backbone and falling back on the current regulations, have they all forgotten that overtaking without tyres and DRS is still a problem? They should really send out another fan survey and ask us if we prefer to see regulations continued as they are with overtaking requiring artificial elements or if we prefer them going for a completely different set of aero regulations and hopefully create more natural overtaking.

I don't want to see DRS kept for the future, it shouldn't be necessary.

 

[Alex.]

The FIA have clamped down hard on blown exhausts, banning the teams from running air when the driver is off the throttle. The conversation must've gone something like:


"Hey, a new idea, better ban that to slow the teams town and not focus on innovation"
"Why?"
"Well you know, that's a new idea to increase the car's pace, which clearly is not allowed"

The FIA banning various pieces of technology and innovation in the sport pisses me off so much. It's like it's a bad thing to invent something that makes the car faster.