collapse

* Welcome

Welcome to GPWizard F1 Forum!

GPWizard is the friendliest F1 forum you'll find anywhere. You have a host of new like-minded friends waiting to welcome you.

So what are you waiting for? Becoming a member is easy and free! Take a couple seconds out of your day and register now. We guarantee, you wont be sorry you did.

Click Here to become a full Member for Free

* User Info

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Newsletter

GPWizard F1 Forum Newsletter Email address:
Weekly
Fortnightly
Monthly

* Grid Game Deadlines

Qualifying

Race

* Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • Wizzo: :good:
    March 05, 2024, 11:44:46 PM
  • Dare: my chat button is onthe bottom rightWiz
    March 03, 2024, 11:58:24 PM
  • Wizzo: Yes you should see the chat room button at the bottom left of your screen
    March 02, 2024, 11:39:55 PM
  • Open Wheel: Is there a Chat room button or something to access “Race day conversation”
    March 02, 2024, 02:46:02 PM
  • Wizzo: The 2024 Grid Game is here!  :yahoo:
    January 30, 2024, 01:42:23 PM
  • Wizzo: Hey everybody - the shout box is back!  :D
    August 21, 2023, 12:18:19 PM

* Who's Online

  • Dot Guests: 131
  • Dot Hidden: 0
  • Dot Users: 1
  • Dot Users Online:

* Top Posters

cosworth151 cosworth151
16182 Posts
Scott Scott
14057 Posts
Dare Dare
13030 Posts
John S John S
11303 Posts
Ian Ian
9729 Posts

Author Topic: Views on the Chinese GP  (Read 11694 times)

Offline Irisado

Re: Views on the Chinese GP
« Reply #30 on: April 17, 2013, 05:52:40 PM »
A driver can plunge straight into the guard rail at Eau Rouge without using DRS.  You can't seriously be using that as an argument.  If one is so stupid to use it there, well...  :DntKnw:

It's very unlikely that a driver will go off at Eau Rouge in this era, unless his car suffers some kind of suspension breakage, or a stuck throttle (neither of which happen with anything remotely bordering regularity any more).

It's a perfectly legitimate argument.  As soon as one driver starts using DRS all over the place, the others will follow suit, because they cannot afford to lose even 0.1s on such a close grid, and then when someone has a serious accident through using DRS in a completely inappropriate place on a track, there would be all manner of criticism of the FIA for allowing DRS to be used without regulation.

Quote
Define inappropriate.  And for whom?

Any fast corner entry/exit worthy of the name, and inappropriate for modern Formula 1 safety standards.

Quote
I didn't say I liked the overtaking, I said I liked the 'position changes'. What really drove me nuts pre-DRS was that it was a real event to have the finishing order differ from the starting grid except for the odd accident, but more often mechanical DNF or if someone really screwed up their Q time or pit stop.

You forgot rain in that list ;).

I've already acknowledged that lack of overtaking in the late 1990s and early 2000s was a problem, but making overtaking ridiculously easy doesn't solve the problem.  It swings the pendulum to the opposite extreme.

As for the idea that there is still wheel to wheel action with DRS, I can't go along with that.  The overtakes are a foregone conclusion.  Senna/Mansell 1991 at the Cataluņa circuit it is most emphatically not.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2013, 05:56:00 PM by Irisado »
Soņando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

Offline Scott

Re: Views on the Chinese GP
« Reply #31 on: April 17, 2013, 06:09:49 PM »
When a driver makes a stupid move causing a serious accident, we don't generally criticize the machine or the FIA, but the driver.  Same goes here.  An F1 car has so much potential for catastrophic accidents even without DRS.  It's just another feature on the car.  The drivers are given the responsibility to drive a machine with an insane power to weight ratio as it is, surely they can handle the responsibility of having 10 minutes or so per race to have an extra 60-70hp.  It is far more likely to have a serious accident when cars collide, which would happen even more with wheel to wheel racing like you suggest. 

My whole point is that instead of simply using DRS as a boring straight line booster system (leading to artificial passes), let the drivers (and teams) figure out the best strategy for when and where to use it.  Throw in a time limit and you have your regulation.  Who knows, they might all discover that it only works effectively on long straights, but then again, maybe not.  I'd be happy to see the results of the experimentation.  There are so many safety features on the cars and at the tracks now that the kind of accident DRS might cause would in almost all cases be injury-free.

And my final point was that although I don't really care for the artificial passes under DRS, I do enjoy the position changes.
The Honey Badger doesn't give a...

Offline Irisado

Re: Views on the Chinese GP
« Reply #32 on: April 17, 2013, 07:38:50 PM »
You're not winning me over I'm afraid.

We had a sample of unregulated DRS in free practice, and qualifying, during its first year, and led to some pretty lurid moments.  The drivers already have enough to do in the cockpit without adding that to the races too.  I get what you're trying to say about limiting it, and letting them choose their own point at which to use it, but I still don't think that it's wise, unless its use is simply outlawed at certain corners for safety reasons.

Either way, the discussion about DRS, regardless of our views on whether it's a good thing, or a bad thing, is smoke and mirrors, because the real issue is aerodynamics.
Soņando con una playa donde brilla el sol, un arco iris ilumina el cielo, y el mar espejea iridescentemente

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal
Menu Editor Pro 1.0 | Copyright 2013, Matthew Kerle