Formula 1 2015: General Discussion Thread

flazio · 24-11-2015 9:22am

I would say an Aer engine would be the perfect way for a certain Irish airline to get into sponsorship but the word Lingus has come to mean some rather naughty bedroom antics so perhaps not. Shame Stobart rebrand Aer Arann to Stobart Air.

risteard7 · 24-11-2015 6:33pm

https://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=eGNxGDK8xf8

Spine tingling...

Anesthetize · 24-11-2015 11:03pm

I forgot the F1 season is still on...

oneofakind32 · 25-11-2015 2:49am

Anesthetize wrote: »

I forgot the F1 season is still on...

I know, it's a bit ****ing ridiculous at this stage. Indycar ended in August. The F1 championship as a competition has been over since about then also.

Andrew76 · 25-11-2015 12:07pm

risteard7 wrote: »

https://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=eGNxGDK8xf8

Spine tingling...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SoZiTxdQyw

Put your headphones on and lash the volume up. :cool:

muckwarrior · 25-11-2015 1:33pm

That car sounds more impressive on its own than the entire current grid all together.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-11-2015 3:21pm

https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2015/11/25/f1-alternative-engine-voted-down/

Proposed new engines voted down.

New rules on minimum number of teams supplied with engines per manufacturer.
Increased engine noise.
Decreased engine cost and complexity.

25-11-2015 3:51pm

How is the minimum number of teams provided going to work? There'll be 11 teams from next season. If they set the minimum at 2 it seems a bit needless. If they set it at 3 then it'll have to be 3-4-4 and only 3 manufacturers.
More bluster and bull**** it would seem.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-11-2015 4:08pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How is the minimum number of teams provided going to work? There'll be 11 teams from next season. If they set the minimum at 2 it seems a bit needless. If they set it at 3 then it'll have to be 3-4-4 and only 3 manufacturers.
More bluster and bull**** it would seem.

It would negate Ron Denis' veto on honda supplying engines for a start.

25-11-2015 6:49pm

In fairness if this year has shown anything it's that Honda has enough manufacturing capacity to supply the whole grid. :pac:

25-11-2015 6:50pm

OSI wrote: »

"Hello, we're Honda and we'd like to spend close to £200 Million a season developing an engine and investing in a team within your sport."
"How many teams will you be supplying?"
"Just the one for now."
"Bugger off so."

Meh, don't see how Honda have in any way improved the sport since they came back in. Same last time, lost patience and threw their toys from the pram when they were on the cusp of a dominant car/season.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-11-2015 7:23pm

Deleted User wrote:

Meh, don't see how Honda have in any way improved the sport since they came back in. Same last time, lost patience and threw their toys from the pram when they were on the cusp of a dominant car/season.

Are you saying they didn't improve the sport even though they built the chassis that won both world championships?

25-11-2015 7:27pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are you saying they didn't improve the sport even though they built the chassis that won both world championships?

Nah, just saying that since they returned they've not done much except cost McLaren an awful lot of money. The reference to last time was more about their reluctance to continue after wasting a huge amount of money. Though how much it was compared to what it's expected to be this time just to supply an engine is another thing.

Cookie_Monster · 25-11-2015 8:17pm

who would actually want a honda though...

El_Duderino 09 · 25-11-2015 9:07pm

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

who would actually want a honda though...

Red Bull

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/10049606/honda-red-bull-talks-over-2016-engine-supply-remain-ongoing

flazio · 26-11-2015 9:55am

You can always rely on Mark Webber to tell it like it is.
https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/669798443888545792

El_Duderino 09 · 26-11-2015 10:40am

flazio wrote:

You can always rely on Mark Webber to tell it like it is.

Yeah we all agree that this hasn't been a vintage season. What are the solutions though? That's the difficult part.

You can't hold it against Mercedes that they have done the best job

HighLine · 26-11-2015 4:50pm

Just saw this tweet and then read about the proposed aero changes for 2017.... seems unbelievably stupid to create a bigger wake of dirty air for cars following and trying to overtake.

Martin Brundel was talking about alternatives a few weeks ago and suggested more should be done underneath the car.. sort of like the ground effect days... whereby there would not be as much dirty air created.

https://twitter.com/ScarbsF1/status/669904475897913344

ScumLord · 26-11-2015 4:56pm

Heat seems like one of the major issues preventing cars from following each other. The other effects are manageable and are wear related mostly but the heat issue hurts the car following to the point it won't be able to put up a fight.

Formula E is the only way I can see of counteracting that. Combustion engines are always going to produce loads of heat.

Have they said anything more about going to a low profile tyre? That could prevent overheating brakes. Although it would require a complete redesign of the suspension.

HighLine · 26-11-2015 5:09pm

Heat effects are minimal compared to the aero.

Here is the article about the proposed changes. http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/new-2017-f1-aero-package-has-been-agreed-symonds/

ScumLord · 26-11-2015 5:16pm

HighLine wrote: »

Heat effects are minimal compared to the aero.

Here is the article about the proposed changes. http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/new-2017-f1-aero-package-has-been-agreed-symonds/

But in a race what seems to make the following driver back off is brake temps rising. I know they're destroying their tyres due to lack of downforce, and that lack of downforce is basically making the overtake on the next straight impossible because they're too far back. But what seems to put an end to the challenge as much as anything else is overheating brakes. The following driver could risk his tyres if it meant track position but he can't really risk his brakes.

Brakes always seem to come up as a common failure, they do have to ram a fairly powerful braking system into a tiny area.

Myrddin · 26-11-2015 5:55pm

ScumLord wrote: »

But in a race what seems to make the following driver back off is brake temps rising

True, but isn't that normally after a considerable amount of laps stuck in dirty air? One would imagine if passing were easier/more effective, the brake temp issue would be moot.

Harika · 26-11-2015 5:56pm

ScumLord wrote: »

But in a race what seems to make the following driver back off is brake temps rising. I know they're destroying their tyres due to lack of downforce, and that lack of downforce is basically making the overtake on the next straight impossible because they're too far back. But what seems to put an end to the challenge as much as anything else is overheating brakes. The following driver could risk his tyres if it meant track position but he can't really risk his brakes.

Brakes always seem to come up as a common failure, they do have to ram a fairly powerful braking system into a tiny area.

I think the misunderstanding arises when you stated that the heat from the engine of the car in front is the issue. But basically a F1 car is designed with driving in clear air, while when you are behind another car, the dirty air totally disturbs the air flow and the cooling of brakes and engine is not working perfectly anymore. Also the car looses grip as down force is lost and the tires are sliding more, what destroys them quicker.

El_Duderino 09 · 26-11-2015 6:07pm

ScumLord wrote:

Brakes always seem to come up as a common failure, they do have to ram a fairly powerful braking system into a tiny area.

I think that heating the air means that the air expands. The following car's brakes are not cooled due to reduced volume of air rather than air temp. All that is combined with relying on the brakes rather than aero drag to slow down.

Not sure where I got that info so I stand to be corrected.

ScumLord · 26-11-2015 6:10pm

Myrddin wrote: »

True, but isn't that normally after a considerable amount of laps stuck in dirty air? One would imagine if passing were easier/more effective, the brake temp issue would be moot.

I suppose it depends on the track too. The brakes are marginal on some tracks to start with and even the slightest temperature increase would cause problems that might not happen at other tracks.

Harika wrote: »

But basically a F1 car is designed with driving in clear air, while when you are behind another car, the dirty air totally disturbs the air flow and the cooling of brakes and engine is not working perfectly anymore.

Ya, I think I've been working with my own interpretation of dirty air. I've always taken "dirty air" to mean hot exhaust air, more so than just turbulent air that's generated by the aero of the car in front.

Santan · 27-11-2015 2:45am

Maybe this is totally stupid and unworkable but could the front wheels be covered in by mud guards essentially but for air to prevent degradation from the car in front would look crap but might help in letting cars follow for more than 1 or 2 laps

Frank Bullitt · 27-11-2015 7:35am

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/video/main-gallery/vettel-raikkonen-take-a-ride-on-formula-rossa/

Kimi, never change.

27-11-2015 1:56pm

Santan wrote: »

Maybe this is totally stupid and unworkable but could the front wheels be covered in by mud guards essentially but for air to prevent degradation from the car in front would look crap but might help in letting cars follow for more than 1 or 2 laps

They don't want to do that, would improve handling + speed through corners too much.

ScumLord · 27-11-2015 3:19pm

Santan wrote: »

Maybe this is totally stupid and unworkable but could the front wheels be covered in by mud guards essentially but for air to prevent degradation from the car in front would look crap but might help in letting cars follow for more than 1 or 2 laps

That's essentially what they've allowed in Formula-E. The front tyres are covered by the front wing, the back tyres are covered to. This also reduces the chance of the cars popping off each other when the wheels touch. The F-E wings are also much simpler which means they're not affected as much by turbulent air. They did have an awful lot of close racing in F-E, but they're all basically in the same car.

It actually looks like F-E is the solution to all F1s problems.

27-11-2015 5:55pm

ScumLord wrote: »

That's essentially what they've allowed in Formula-E. The front tyres are covered by the front wing, the back tyres are covered to. This also reduces the chance of the cars popping off each other when the wheels touch. The F-E wings are also much simpler which means they're not affected as much by turbulent air. They did have an awful lot of close racing in F-E, but they're all basically in the same car.

It actually looks like F-E is the solution to all F1s problems.

The much lower speeds help an awful lot as well. Also I love that fuel-saving is such an issue to so many in F1 yet the power-saving in Formula E is perfectly fine.

Formula 1 2015: General Discussion Thread

Comments