Formula 1 2012: General Discussion Thread

SnowDrifts · 11-11-2012 2:34am

Jordan 191 wrote: »

There was a grass run-off there before, so all they did was put tarmac where the grass was. Completely unnecessary.

But unfortunately they will get traction on tarmac.

Jordan 191 wrote: »

Turn 1 always reminds me of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9Ve9BOIIac

I remember watching that wondering who this new feisty Colombian driver was. It is a shame he didn't last longer in F1.

11-11-2012 4:34am

Turn 1 at Interlagos was a unique beast. Despite the odd camber and the big risk if one didn't make the corner drivers were somehow invited to charge down the inside or to turn in and squeeze the other guy against the apex. Until now it was a brave move, now it's just going to be a half a second lost. FFS.

the culture of deference · 12-11-2012 3:10pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Turn 1 at Interlagos was a unique beast. Despite the odd camber and the big risk if one didn't make the corner drivers were somehow invited to charge down the inside or to turn in and squeeze the other guy against the apex. Until now it was a brave move, now it's just going to be a half a second lost. FFS.

What are they going to do about cars rejoining the track?

Last time out Perez went fully off the track and then just pulled straight back onto the racing line.

vectra · 12-11-2012 5:43pm

HRT put up for sale by owners Thesan Capital

http://en.espnf1.com/hrtf1/motorsport/story/94651.html?CMP=chrome

Top Dog · 12-11-2012 6:38pm

vectra wrote: »

HRT put up for sale by owners Thesan Capital

http://en.espnf1.com/hrtf1/motorsport/story/94651.html?CMP=chrome

Jaysus! They only owned it barely over a year :eek:

12-11-2012 6:48pm

Top Dog wrote: »

Jaysus! They only owned it barely over a year :eek:

It often doesn't take long to take all the value out of a company.

smellslikeshoes · 12-11-2012 6:58pm

They really aren't going to go anywhere until a long term investor takes over, hopefully someone with deep pockets also.

Jordan 199 · 12-11-2012 8:13pm

smellslikeshoes wrote: »

They really aren't going to go anywhere until a long term investor takes over, hopefully someone with deep pockets also.

Yup. They need a serious cash injection.

The thing about that team is that in order to have a good car, you need to have money, and to get sponsors to back the team, you need a good car.

It's a vicious circle.

Daniel S · 12-11-2012 9:46pm

Jordan 191 wrote: »

Yup. They need a serious cash injection.

The thing about that team is that in order to have a good car, you need to have money, and to get sponsors to back the team, you need a good car.

It's a vicious circle.

To get experience you need a job, to get a job you need experience!

They need a reasonable pay driver or at least get rid of Narain to have some hope.

Rascasse · 12-11-2012 10:07pm

Daniel S wrote: »

They need a reasonable pay driver or at least get rid of Narain to have some hope.

Depending on the nationality of the buyers (assuming there is one and this isn't a stunt to find one) I'd say Pedro's contract for next year looks shakey. Also their base in Spain might go. If you want to attract talent you should really be in the UK. Even Ferrari used to have their design office in the UK so Barnard and his team could keep their families in Britain. Sauber being the exception of a smaller team doing well from the continent.

freestyla · 12-11-2012 10:21pm

Interesting stuff from Gary Anderson, about RedBull car setup and Ferrari rear wing issue..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/20210164

freestyla · 12-11-2012 11:08pm

so Redbull has flex nose once flexi wings are banned

Newey genius.

Ghost Train · 13-11-2012 12:21am

here's some images showing the flexy nose
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/645/boomer.gif
http://www.gaiaconscience.com/img/trucorb2.gif

recyclebin · 13-11-2012 10:24am

Ghost Train wrote: »

here's some images showing the flexy nose
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/645/boomer.gif
http://www.gaiaconscience.com/img/trucorb2.gif

Hopefully these are banned for Texas to give Alonso a chance.

I can't believe the FIA let Red Bull get away with this. Either that or the rule book is a pile of ****e.

Myrddin · 13-11-2012 10:47am

Just embedding those

Very noticeable indeed

Frank Bullitt · 13-11-2012 1:12pm

It was mentioned in the F1 show that the camera was damaged when Vettel hit the DRS board, hence the rubbery look of it during the pitstop, the other opinion is that it is acting like a mass damper, like what renault had in 2006.

Myrddin · 13-11-2012 1:26pm

Gintonious wrote: »

mass damper, like what renault had in 2006.

Whats was that?

Muff_Daddy · 13-11-2012 2:15pm

EnterNow wrote: »

Whats was that?

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/05/31/banned-tuned-mass-dampers/

I can't wait to hear Christian Horner explanition for this latest Red Bull flexi wing.

I mean, it could be that Adrian Newey is pushing design and innovation to the nth degree and within the regulations, and if he is, he truly is a genius and Red Bull deserve nothing but credit, but I just don't believe it at this stage. There is too much smoke - there's been the illegal floors, the engine mapping, the flexi wings and that is just this season! And yet not so much as a grid penalty from the governing body. Plus, everytime I hear Christian Horner on TV it sounds like he is hiding something.

I'm not a huge fan of Alonso, and I NEVER thought I'd say this about a Ferrari driver, but I hope more than anything he takes the title out from under the nose of Finger boy.

frostie500 · 13-11-2012 2:28pm

The problem for the other teams is that Red Bull meets the letter of the law and their car passes static load tests in the areas that the weights are placed.

As every engineer will always say there is no spirit of the law, simply the law. I dont think that anything will happen against the team for this but I'll wait and see what Charlie has to say about it

the culture of deference · 13-11-2012 2:42pm

Gintonious wrote: »

It was mentioned in the F1 show that the camera was damaged when Vettel hit the DRS board, hence the rubbery look of it during the pitstop, the other opinion is that it is acting like a mass damper, like what renault had in 2006.

Alan Mc Nish does a nice slow-mo of it. It does clearly look like the camera housing is broken.

But who knows what RB are up to

recyclebin · 13-11-2012 2:42pm

It seems that the rules are there outlawing this kind of stuff. The problem is the forces applied in scrutineering don't replicate the forces involved in racing.

It will probably be banned for next season. The FIA never seem to punish the teams and drivers that are in contention for the championships. It would be too much bad publicity.

Infoanon · 13-11-2012 2:49pm

recyclebin wrote: »

It will probably be banned for next season. The FIA never seem to punish the teams and drivers that are in contention for the championships. It would be too much bad publicity.

Kimi and JP Montoya might disagree with that statement......the Michelin tyre incident, not to mention JV and the yellow flag, Ayrton and the dq for missing a corner....

Maybe Bernie is losing his touch but I won't be too surprised if this goes down to interlagos.

Muff_Daddy · 13-11-2012 3:07pm

Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not 100% sure on this, and Google isn't giving me the answers I need, but are moveable aero parts on cars not banned outright, or is there a grey area somewhere?

Clearly, the above gifs are displaying a moveable front wing, the Webber one more so than the Vettel one (which could be explained by the collision with the poleystyrene board). To the naked eye and for someone who is uninformed of the exact text of the FIA regulations, it certainly looks like Red Bull are gaining an unfair advantage here, unless we get slow-mo gifs of other cars to compare with them.

If it is getting past scrutineering, do questions need to be asked about how it can be passed or how lenient the governing body are on these flexi wings?

NTMK · 13-11-2012 3:32pm

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not 100% sure on this, and Google isn't giving me the answers I need, but are moveable aero parts on cars not banned outright, or is there a grey area somewhere?

Movable aero (except DRS) is banned Completely

Clearly, the above gifs are displaying a moveable front wing, the Webber one more so than the Verrel one (which could be explained by the collision with the poleystyrene board). To the naked eye and for someone who is uninformed of the exact text of the FIA regulations, it certainly looks like Red Bull are gaining an unfair advantage here, unless we get slow-mo gifs of other cars to compare with them.

Usually RB and all teams for that matter dont break any rules but find lots of loopholes until someone calls BS on them

If it is getting past scrutineering, do questions need to be asked about how it can be passed or how lenient the governing body are on these flexi wings?

The rules regarding the test is fairly rigid weights are applied to the rear of the wing and the flex is measured it must be below a certain level of flex to be permitted

The problem is that if theirs a crack in the nose wing it can cause it to become unstable and the platypus design does no favours for keeping the nose stable

a crack could easily be caused by the wing hitting Kerbs or a bump

i found a video of the Mclaren having a similar wing motion at the 1.40 mark nose doesn't move though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGIMYnyqbyw

freestyla · 13-11-2012 3:33pm

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/05/31/banned-tuned-mass-dampers/

I can't wait to hear Christian Horner explanition for this latest Red Bull flexi wing.
....
I'm not a huge fan of Alonso, and I NEVER thought I'd say this about a Ferrari driver, but I hope more than anything he takes the title out from under the nose of Finger boy.

Hopefully Horner will be grilled properly on Thursday press conference if he got involved.

What comes to Ferrari success - it doesn't depend much of Redbull anymore since their own updates failed, or at least didn't gain any advantage, twice this year.

the culture of deference · 13-11-2012 7:29pm

freestyla wrote: »

Hopefully Horner will be grilled properly on Thursday press conference if he got involved.

The stewards and FIA will be unable to punish them again.

Remember this from July this year

Red Bull's Illegal Wheel Hub Explained SKY

And this
Red Bull boss Christian Horner denies team has made illegal parc ferme changes

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101572

FIA declare Red Bull car illegal and floor must be modified before Canadian GP

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/formulaone/article-2153762/FIA-declare-Red-Bull-car-illegal-changes-Canada-GP.html

German GP: Red Bull cleared of illegal engine mapping

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/18943608

And whatever happens next this will be the outcome.

"While the stewards do not accept all the arguments of the team, they however conclude that as the regulation is written the map presented does not breach article (insert article number here) of the technical regulations," the statement said.
In effect, the stewards say the rules are not written clearly enough.
The likely result will be that the FIA will issue a clarification of the rules in the near future. It is not known whether this will be in time for next weekend's (insert GP name here) Grand Prix.

Ghost Train · 13-11-2012 8:28pm

here's an italian video explaining redbulls active suspension with english explaination from other forum (not sure how plausable this is)

http://video.gazzetta.it/analisi-cura-fabiano-vandone-/425175ae-25cb-11e2-9964-c1692606ca0e

basically and in great sum, he's talking about an active suspension system, only used in free practices to quickly find the right front heigh. The driver can set it on his own even while driving, saving much time in finding and trying setups.

14-11-2012 2:33am

frostie500 wrote: »

The problem for the other teams is that Red Bull meets the letter of the law

Just because they can't show that it's breaking the law doesn't mean that it's within the law. The last 2 seasons have shown how inadequate the FIA's tests are.

Gintonious wrote: »

It was mentioned in the F1 show that the camera was damaged when Vettel hit the DRS board, hence the rubbery look of it during the pitstop, the other opinion is that it is acting like a mass damper, like what renault had in 2006.

The whole nose is moving, I'm not buying it.

EnterNow wrote: »

Whats was that?

Wikipedia has a nice graphical diagram of a mass damper. They're visible on mains power cables and pylons. Imagine a wind hitting a cable that's tight on each end, it'll go with the wind. Instead imagine each end has a spring. If a freak gust comes along it'll move for longer but with far less amplitude, it'll just slightly sway for a bit. Like I said, the wikipedia page describes it well :P

antodeco · 14-11-2012 9:34am

vectra wrote: »

HRT put up for sale by owners Thesan Capital

http://en.espnf1.com/hrtf1/motorsport/story/94651.html?CMP=chrome

So tell me this, who here, if they won the euromillions (€130+ Million) would buy HRT?

Daniel S · 14-11-2012 12:04pm

antodeco wrote: »

So tell me this, who here, if they won the euromillions (€130+ Million) would buy HRT?

Not a chance, but I would buy a seat in one of their cars (or possibly a higher one).

Jordan 199 · 14-11-2012 1:45pm

Daniel S wrote: »

Not a chance, but I would buy a seat in one of their cars (or possibly a higher one).

Sauber?

14-11-2012 2:34pm

Regarding the Red Bull nose, we have known for some years that Red Bull have taken the flexi-nose/wing concept as far as they can. This is just a further illustration, nothing new really.

Other teams have tried also but it seems Red Bull have done a better job of getting around the regs and load tests.

This seems to be a very rubbery nose tip and outer covering. The FIA are allowing it because some give is necessary in the nose anyway for safety and crash reasons.

I would be looking further back at the slot gap on the nose. If the tip of the nose flexes down significantly at high speed then naturally its going to have some effect on the flow around and into that slot. Nobody knows what that slot is feeding but if you can change whether or not it gets air at different speeds then you can certainly do some interesting things further back.

Jordan 199 · 15-11-2012 2:49pm

Sauber sure it can beat Mercedes without further development.

From Autosport:

Sauber has not made a development push to try and catch Mercedes for fifth in the constructors' championship because it believes it can do the job just by 'getting its act together'.

With Mercedes having not scored at all since September's Singapore Grand Prix, Sauber has closed to within 12 points of taking a top-five Formula 1 championship place for only the third time as an independent constructor.

Sauber has now secured four podium finishes in 2012 compared to Mercedes' three, the last of which came back in June in the European GP.

Asked by AUTOSPORT if she now felt overhauling Mercedes was achievable in the remaining two races, Sauber team boss Monisha Kaltenborn replied: "It is, but it's very tough. And we fully aware of that."

She is sure Sauber's current package is quick enough to beat Mercedes provided the team delivers its potential in America and Brazil.

"This is about optimising things. It's not about developing anything," said Kaltenborn.

"We know that we have a competitive car.

"If we get our act together during a race weekend, especially during the race but also in qualifying to start with, things can look good.

"But we are fighting against a very good team, so it's going to be very tough."

Does anyone here think that Sauber can finish ahead of Mercedes in the Constructors Championship?

I think they can

They have a quick car, and if both their drivers can qualify in the top ten and avoid trouble in the race both their drivers should come away with points.

the culture of deference · 15-11-2012 10:35pm

antodeco wrote: »

So tell me this, who here, if they won the euromillions (€130+ Million) would buy HRT?

If I won the euromillions I would pay 20 grand a race weekend to red bull or ferrari for a full access VIP pass.

Rascasse · 15-11-2012 10:55pm

Adam Cooper (@adamcooperf1) just tweeted that from 2013 DRS will only be available in DRS zones in ALL sessions. Something a lot of people here have asked for.

Edit: now Andrew Benson of the beeb has tweeted that from 2013 front wing load tests will incorporate 3 testing points rather than the one now. One of these will be further back on the wing.

Frank Bullitt · 16-11-2012 10:30am

Its about right in relation to the DRS, it will close up the field more in qualifying.

Myrddin · 16-11-2012 11:40am

Rascasse wrote: »

Adam Cooper (@adamcooperf1) just tweeted that from 2013 DRS will only be available in DRS zones in ALL sessions. Something a lot of people here have asked for.

Excellent, makes a lot of sense! Good news re the wing tests too, if anything the start of this season compared to the latter part of it is a direct comparison between the excitement of closely matched cars, versus the sheer boredom of one cars dominance

Andrew76 · 16-11-2012 1:50pm

More info on the DRS change: link.

Top Dog · 16-11-2012 5:22pm

Excellent news - hopefully qualifying in 2013 will be much closer as a result.

ScrubsfanChris · 16-11-2012 6:33pm

For the week that it is...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTg2rUx3xDM

I wasn't following F1 when this happened and only found out about it a couple of months ago when D.C. mentioned it during BBC coverage.
Tyres aside, would teams now days even consider a boycott this size? For whatever reason.

Top Dog · 16-11-2012 6:53pm

ScrubsfanChris wrote: »

Tyres aside, would teams now days even consider a boycott this size? For whatever reason.

One might hope that if there was an issue where the teams felt that the saftey of their drivers was in serious risk, then they would do it again.

No doubt Bernie has some new laws implemented since though that would severely penalise the teams if they were to try it, and basically blackmail them to race. :rolleyes:

16-11-2012 8:03pm

ScrubsfanChris wrote: »

For the week that it is...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTg2rUx3xDM

I wasn't following F1 when this happened and only found out about it a couple of months ago when D.C. mentioned it during BBC coverage.
Tyres aside, would teams now days even consider a boycott this size? For whatever reason.

It wasn't a boycott, they simply couldn't race.

The other 3 teams were massively at fault, particularly Ferrari. Bernie for once wasn't to blame.

Top Dog · 16-11-2012 8:28pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It wasn't a boycott, they simply couldn't race.

The other 3 teams were massively at fault, particularly Ferrari. Bernie for once wasn't to blame.

I'd agree with you for the most part, except for leaving Bernie blame-free. He's the ringmaster for the whole circus, and if he wanted to I'm sure he would have had the power to do something about the situation.

Though I could of course be wrong about just how much power he has.

Jordan 199 · 16-11-2012 8:45pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It wasn't a boycott, they simply couldn't race.

The other 3 teams were massively at fault, particularly Ferrari. Bernie for once wasn't to blame.

Indeed. Michelin came with tyres that weren't up to the job.

Top Dog wrote: »

I'd agree with you for the most part, except for leaving Bernie blame-free. He's the ringmaster for the whole circus, and if he wanted to I'm sure he would have had the power to do something about the situation.

Though I could of course be wrong about just how much power he has.

Article on wikipedia about the 2005 US GP.

Top Dog · 16-11-2012 10:07pm

Jordan 191 wrote: »

Article on wikipedia about the 2005 US GP.

Never thought I'd see the day but ... apologies to Bernie

donspeekinglesh · 16-11-2012 10:35pm

I think Mosley has to take a lot of the blame.
Lost a lot of respect for Charlie Whiting too. His suggestion that the cars use the pits every single lap was moronic.

ScrubsfanChris · 16-11-2012 10:56pm

Sorry, maybe "boycott" was the wrong word, after reading the wiki article above I see Michelin and FIA were the one's to blame more than the teams themselves.

Cookie_Monster · 19-11-2012 9:38am

Teams could have safely raced and simply not gone 100% flat out in that corner...

21-11-2012 1:15am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Teams could have safely raced and simply not gone 100% flat out in that corner...

How not flat out would've been safe? Would they all go at an agreed speed or what? Any decent speed difference on an oval is a recipe for disaster.

Cookie_Monster · 21-11-2012 1:27am

Deleted User wrote: »

How not flat out would've been safe? Would they all go at an agreed speed or what? Any decent speed difference on an oval is a recipe for disaster.

up to the teams in consultation with Michelin I suppose, any running would have been preferable to that farce

Formula 1 2012: General Discussion Thread

Comments