Formula 1 2018: General Discussion Thread

Adamocovic · 29-08-2018 12:21PM

Prisoner 6753 wrote: »

The writing for Bottas has been on the wall for a while in terms of a #2 role. The team orders issued earlier in the season just confirmed what we all knew. Kimi has been a #2 pretty much since the day he rejoined Ferrari, but the team radio in Germany was classic, he forced them to say it publicly.

Oh Kimi is definitely a support driver too. No argument in that.

But difference for me is that Kimi has been around and achieved so much. A world champion and 10 years older than Bottas. I think it annoys him at times but he's winding down his career and good friends with Vettel.

Bottas on the other hand was tipped to be one of the main men in F1, got his move to a top team and now sees himself as the assist or support driver. At his age Kimi was winning a championship. Different skill levels but must be hard for Bottas.

If he is content with the role fair enough, but it must be hard for a pro entering what you would imagine is his peak. Maybe he will emerge down the line as a number 1 driver at the top, but it hasn't gone to plan for him.

skipper_G · 29-08-2018 12:26PM

Adamocovic wrote: »

Oh Kimi is definitely a support driver too. No argument in that.

But difference for me is that Kimi has been around and achieved so much. A world champion and 10 years older than Bottas. I think it annoys him at times but he's winding down his career and good friends with Vettel.

Bottas on the other hand was tipped to be one of the main men in F1, got his move to a top team and now sees himself as the assist or support driver. At his age Kimi was winning a championship. Different skill levels but must be hard for Bottas.

If he is content with the role fair enough, but it must be hard for a pro entering what you would imagine is his peak. Maybe he will emerge down the line as a number 1 driver at the top, but it hasn't gone to plan for him.

Was he ever really that highly rated ? I suppose I'd have just put him in the same category as Perez / Hulk. Good drivers, could win races in the right car but not really number 1 material. Maybe he has the potential but he's lacking something, I can't quite put my finger on it

meeeeh · 29-08-2018 12:29PM

Adamocovic wrote: »

If he is content with the role fair enough, but it must be hard for a pro entering what you would imagine is his peak. Maybe he will emerge down the line as a number 1 driver at the top, but it hasn't gone to plan for him.

No it didn't but he still has more wins than he would have as no. 1 in Renault. Bottas got a chance in top team which is more than most get. But he is not a better driver than Hamilton and I don't believe he is better than Vettel or Verstappen. That means second in a top team or first in second tier team.

Adamocovic · 29-08-2018 12:36PM

skipper_G wrote: »

Was he ever really that highly rated ? I suppose I'd have just put him in the same category as Perez / Hulk. Good drivers, could win races in the right car but not really number 1 material. Maybe he has the potential but he's lacking something, I can't quite put my finger on it

Maybe it depends who you ask but quite a few had hyped Bottas up.

Valtteri Bottas hailed a world champion in waiting by speedy Williams

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jul/19/valtteri-bottas-williams-formula-one

Think in his second or third year he finished ahead of Vettel, Alonso and a few more highly thought of drivers in the WC.

I remember BBC would do pieces regarding him too, one was him and his race engineer clay pigeon shooting together. Maybe I'm remembering not as accurate but I always remembered a lot of hype around him.

chicorytip · 29-08-2018 04:57PM

Harika wrote:

Taller drivers tend to have their heads also higher, and as those cockpits are as small as possible designed every cm more hurts the aerodynamics. Additionally tall drivers carry more weight than their smaller colleagues what is a distinct disadvantage.

Ocon looks as skinny as a rake and must weigh little in comparison to somebody like Raikkonen, for example, who although quite short, appears quite bulky. Must be middle age spread!

El_Duderino 09 · 29-08-2018 05:40PM

chicorytip wrote: »

Harika wrote:

Taller drivers tend to have their heads also higher, and as those cockpits are as small as possible designed every cm more hurts the aerodynamics. Additionally tall drivers carry more weight than their smaller colleagues what is a distinct disadvantage.

Ocon looks as skinny as a rake and must weigh little in comparison to somebody like Raikkonen, for example, who although quite short, appears quite bulky. Must be middle age spread!

According to joe saward, Ocon had a seat fitting in the McLaren before they started talking about whether he might join the team. It sounded like a kind of pre-discussion fitting. He said it was a tight squeeze.

Does anyone remember Alex Wurtz considering an operation to break his legs and take out 4-6cm? It was 1998 I think. It was considered at least which tells you how seriously drivers and teams take drivers height.

skipper_G · 29-08-2018 05:45PM

Adamocovic wrote: »

Maybe it depends who you ask but quite a few had hyped Bottas up.

Think in his second or third year he finished ahead of Vettel, Alonso and a few more highly thought of drivers in the WC.

I remember BBC would do pieces regarding him too, one was him and his race engineer clay pigeon shooting together. Maybe I'm remembering not as accurate but I always remembered a lot of hype around him.

I remember the clay pigeon thing, it was a great feature! Although I'd say that was highlighting something which is expected of every F1 driver, the ability to absorb all that information, process it and take actions while driving really fast

ayux4rj6zql2ph · 29-08-2018 05:50PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

According to joe saward, Ocon had a seat fitting in the McLaren before they started talking about whether he might join the team. It sounded like a kind of pre-discussion fitting. He said it was a tight squeeze.

Does anyone remember Alex Wurtz considering an operation to break his legs and take out 4-6cm? It was 1998 I think. It was considered at least which tells you how seriously drivers and teams take drivers height.

I just looked up photos of Justin Wilson driving the Minardi, he was only 3 inches taller than Wurz and he was very clearly only just able to squeeze into that car.

Then when he moved to Jaguar to Partner Webber it was similar.

Harika · 29-08-2018 05:58PM

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/motor-racing/formula1/f1-tv-viewing-figures-sky-sports-channel-4-formula-one-crash-soar-2019-exclusive-deal-a8513276.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true

SKY numbers are going down and next year they will be paying twice the fee annually. Let's see if liberty makes something happen

Inviere · 29-08-2018 06:43PM

Harika wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/motor-racing/formula1/f1-tv-viewing-figures-sky-sports-channel-4-formula-one-crash-soar-2019-exclusive-deal-a8513276.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true

SKY numbers are going down and next year they will be paying twice the fee annually. Let's see if liberty makes something happen

From the article...

A gradual switch to Pay TV over the past decade has fuelled a 41.3 per cent drop in F1’s worldwide TV audience to 352.3m last year.

Absolute insanity. F1 has lost just under half its viewers over ten years, because of the shift to pay-tv viewing.

SCOOP 64 · 29-08-2018 06:48PM

This will be the last year for me watching F1 now that channel 4 will not be showing it next year.

flazio · 29-08-2018 07:12PM

This week's Beyond the Grid podcast is a fascinating chat with Eddie Jordan recorded last weekend in Spa.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YKkzrp623Y

Frank Bullitt · 29-08-2018 08:15PM

vectra wrote: »

I honestly cannot for the life of me see Red Bull rear wing wobbling like the Mercedes one does,!

As for having evidence ?

Did I suggest somewhere It does move under load?

To answer that question.
I would have as much evidence that it does move as you would have that it does not move under load.

Perhaps you could show us evidence that it does not move?

No, you don't. The car has passed all of the FIA stress tests. There is your evidence.

I dont need to provide a thing, you were the one who said "How do you know it doesn't bend enough under speed to reduce drag and give them a bit of a speed boost?", I know its not moving under load because the car has passed all the required FIA stress tests, there is your evidence.

You posted a video showing the cars at the slowest section of the circuit, where mechanical grip is paramount over aero. Aero gains come into play at higher speeds, just like the front flex in 2010 on the RB and Ferrari, it occurred at higher speeds to gain a potential advantage. Not only that, a "wobbling" rear wing like that will do nothing at slower speeds except destabilise the car.

skipper_G · 29-08-2018 08:57PM

flazio wrote: »

Just a reminder, there's a classic F1 Speed with Guy Martin, tonight at 9 on Channel 4.

It's on catch up for anyone who missed it. Doing so myself, nice look at the Williams simulator! Guy is brilliant, love how he just rolls up his sleeves and gets stuck in

HighLine · 29-08-2018 09:09PM

flazio wrote: »

This week's Beyond the Grid podcast is a fascinating chat with Eddie Jordan recorded last weekend in Spa.

Great interview. Particularly liked the Italian Court injunction story

AMKC · 29-08-2018 09:22PM

Harika wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/motor-racing/formula1/f1-tv-viewing-figures-sky-sports-channel-4-formula-one-crash-soar-2019-exclusive-deal-a8513276.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true

SKY numbers are going down and next year they will be paying twice the fee annually. Let's see if liberty makes something happen

Good. I hope they keep going down and Sky decide to pull out and it comes back onto a freeview channel. The reason people watched F1 was because it was exciting, it offered a glimpse into very expensive high tech cars going very fast and it was free. Oh and the beautiful models too.

Inviere wrote: »

From the article...

Absolute insanity. F1 has lost just under half its viewers over ten years, because of the shift to pay-tv viewing.

Its going to keep happening until its back of freeview TV and even then it might be too late to get some back.

I will be one that will unfortunately not be watching it next year. I might or might not watch the highlights but they will be recorded highlights if I do watch them.

SCOOP 64 wrote: »

This will be the last year for me watching F1 now that channel 4 will not be showing it next year.

Same here. They will have highlights of all the races next year if your bothered.
I am just going to follow it here and use my imagination.

skipper_G wrote: »

It's on catch up for anyone who missed it. Doing so myself, nice look at the Williams simulator! Guy is brilliant, love how he just rolls up his sleeves and gets stuck in

I agree. He is brilliant. Am going to watch it at the weekend have it recorded just very busy at the moment and no time to watch it.

vectra · 30-08-2018 12:27AM

Gintonious wrote: »

Not only that, a "wobbling" rear wing like that will do nothing at slower speeds except destabilise the car.

So are you actually expecting me to believe that Mercedes has a rear wing on their car that the know destabilises it at slower speeds? :rolleyes:

Jordan 199 · 30-08-2018 12:34AM

On this date twenty years ago:

LollipopJimmy · 30-08-2018 12:46AM

Jordan 199 wrote: »

On this date twenty years ago:

https://www.grandprixradio.nl/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Spa4.jpg

Yes Sam

Frank Bullitt · 30-08-2018 04:57AM

vectra wrote: »

So are you actually expecting me to believe that Mercedes has a rear wing on their car that the know destabilises it at slower speeds? :rolleyes:

I dont think you are grasping how little sense you are making here.

A destabilised rear wing is not an advantage, its the opposite. Not only that, the aero generated at slower speeds is obviously lower that that at higher speeds.

You have shown one video, where the car hits the kerb, the wing wobbles (as they do when the car hits a bump etc), and you think that is some sort of trick advantage...right, makes total sense to me.

Can you explain then, from your technical knowledge, how a moving, destabilised (your words there, think about that), rear wing is an advantage on any car, not just the Merc.

ayux4rj6zql2ph · 30-08-2018 07:54AM

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

Yes Sam

“Ralf you heard what I said about not overtaking Damon didn’t you?”

“Ralf, acknowledge”

That recording is on YouTube.

Ghost Train · 30-08-2018 08:56AM

When watching it back a few days ago I liked how Ron Dennis was there with Eddie for the last lap or two... All smiles, gives him a quick shoulder rub

ayux4rj6zql2ph · 30-08-2018 09:18AM

Ghost Train wrote: »

When watching it back a few days ago I liked how Ron Dennis was there with Eddie for the last lap or two... All smiles, gives him a quick shoulder rub

Fast forward to Brazil 2003 and it was very different between them.

vectra · 30-08-2018 01:41PM

Gintonious wrote: »

I dont think you are grasping how little sense you are making here.

A destabilised rear wing is not an advantage, its the opposite. Not only that, the aero generated at slower speeds is obviously lower that that at higher speeds.

You have shown one video, where the car hits the kerb, the wing wobbles (as they do when the car hits a bump etc), and you think that is some sort of trick advantage...right, makes total sense to me.

Can you explain then, from your technical knowledge, how a moving, destabilised (your words there, think about that), rear wing is an advantage on any car, not just the Merc.

I think you need to remove your analizing hat a minute
Where did I once say a destabilised wing would be an advantage??

What you replied here is exactly what I was asking you.

So are you actually expecting me to believe that Mercedes has a rear wing on their car that the know destabilises it at slower speeds?

Inviere · 30-08-2018 03:33PM

Vectra, whatever the f is on their car, it aint working. They're second best now. Yes the wing is jumping around in that video, but I'm willing to bet that's down to approach vector, speed, suspension settings, angle of turn, and other factors. The following cars in the video, don't take the corner precisely the same way...and yes, the Red Bull is wobbly in that video too.

You give out about Hamilton making insinuations about Ferrari having an illegal advantage, and here you are doing that exact thing

The cars are all held to the same standard.

vectra · 30-08-2018 04:58PM

Inviere wrote: »

You give out about Hamilton making insinuations about Ferrari having an illegal advantage, and here you are doing that exact thing The cars are all held to the same standard.

And yet we have another poster that either
a)
can't read
or

Needs to go to specsavers.

Will you point out to me where I SAID they were doing anything illegal?

There is a Mega difference in asking a question and insinuating something.

muckwarrior · 30-08-2018 05:06PM

Inviere wrote: »

whatever the f is on their car, it aint working. They're second best now.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but just wanted to point out that it's a fallacy to assume that just because they're not that fastest, it's not working.

Frank Bullitt · 30-08-2018 05:46PM

vectra wrote: »

I think you need to remove your analizing hat a minute
Where did I once say a destabilised wing would be an advantage??

What you replied here is exactly what I was asking you.

You alluded to it with your "Maybe both of ye should get in touch with Arrivabene and tell him there is nothing to worry about then.?" comment.

Why even bring it up in the first place if you didnt think it was some sort of advantage when you see that the Merc wing was moving about, probably has something to do with the driver in the car than the actual car though

This is a non issue, nothing came of it other than an italian clip where they highlighted it.

The car has passed all stress tests, you said you had as much evidence as me in relation to the wing moving at high speeds (again going in the direction that they are doing something illegal, but haven't been caught), but in actual fact you dont have a shred of it.

PukkaStukka · 30-08-2018 05:59PM

This talk about Ferrari having and illegal car is getting ridiculous.

For the last 4 years, Mercedes has dominated in an unprecedented way and at no stage did anyone describe anything they did as illegal or cast any sort of aspersion. It was simply accepted that they had done a much better job than everyone else.

Fast forward to now and this year we have had

1. The Ferrari lubrication system and the lubricant itself queried and declared legal.

2. The Ferrari ERS system was repeatedly queried to the extent that the team provided an unprecedented detailed explanation to the FIA of how the system worked, after which the FIA installed monitoring software. Following this, the system was deemed perfectly legal.

3. Ferrari's new fuel was again queried, and those who know the rules are already aware that reference samples are provided at the start of a year and compared with samples taken at each race to verify compliance and legality. If something is illegal with the fuel, it would've been found by now.

In the last few years, Ferrari has invested heavily in a brand new. hybrid specific engine manufacturing division, composite / computational fluid dynamics facilities, and completely restructured most of its operation. Perhaps - just perhaps - they are starting to reap the benefit of all of this and are - like Mercedes has in the last few years - doing a better job than everyone else. As evidence of this, updates are appearing on the car at ervery single race that are working....

PukkaStukka · 30-08-2018 06:04PM

PS. I don't think Mercedes wing is illegal either. I've seen legal wings flex worse than Hams at Spa!

Formula 1 2018: General Discussion Thread

Comments