New rules for F1 in 2011.

[wedge]

*claps hands*

'Aggressive racing' regs will turn into Indycar

[youtube]2wHu6r28Ol4[/youtube]

[MAX_THRUST]

So if time is limiteed to repair a damged car, what happens when the nut isn't on properly and the car hits a wall and some one gets hurt. i know this is a What If? but stuff like that happens.

Agreed tired crew working in the pitts is a bad idea as well.

limit team members on pitt road. 1 guy for each tyre, two for fuel, and hydraulic jacks, I know that a little bit like indy car, but if some one gets it wrong in the pitts not so many people are gonna get hurt.

for example the bouncing wheel in the pitts scenario....less people around to be hit by the wheel also means more time to see the danger coming.

[MAX_THRUST]

In resspect of the clip, that was a crazy decision to penalise the lead driver. When a track is that wide and the guy trying to pass has gone even wider, whats the problem?

F1 an only hope cars over take as often as Indy cars.

[wedge]

In resspect of the clip, that was a crazy decision to penalise the lead driver. When a track is that wide and the guy trying to pass has gone even wider, whats the problem?

F1 an only hope cars over take as often as Indy cars.

Basically the lead car wasn't allowed to take the inside line to defend at T1 at Edmonton.

It'll be the same in F1 soon because of pansies* penalising aggressive defending and with gimmicks like FIA regulated-movable rear wings we're going to get artificial racing just for the sake of making overtaking easier.




*Stirling Moss once said "danger was the most important ingredient, like salt is to cooking."

[Malbec]

Will be interesting to see how the "aggressive driving" rule is enforced. What are the penalties? Will these rules keep Schuey from running Rubens into a wall or Hulkenburg from cutting through numerous chicanes?

My fear is that Kobayashi's spectacular overtaking will get penalized and a driver that actually adds excitement during a race will get be encouraged to play "follow-the-leader" like most everyone else.

What worries me is that there will sometimes be a huge speed differential at the end of straights with the moveable rear wings and KERS so it would be possible for drivers to be surprised by the car behind lunging in from a long way back. I think we're more likely to see high energy impacts due to accidents of this nature rather than dangerous driving per se.

[fandango]

The moveable rear wing is very gimmicky. I can't see it being popular.

If the problem for overtaking is so clearly and demonstrably that the car in front upsets the airflow of the chasing car, why don't they just make a rule that no car can disturb its wake by more than x%? They could have a standard wind tunnel test, just like the crash tests, and leave the expert designers to figure out how to design their car...

[SGWilko]

The moveable rear wing is very gimmicky. I can't see it being popular.

If the problem for overtaking is so clearly and demonstrably that the car in front upsets the airflow of the chasing car, why don't they just make a rule that no car can disturb its wake by more than x%? They could have a standard wind tunnel test, just like the crash tests, and leave the expert designers to figure out how to design their car...

The problem with ditching wings is a rather large loss of potential sponsor space.

Of course, the answer to that is to mandate benign wings - but that will just be a can of worms.........

[fandango]

The problem with ditching wings is a rather large loss of potential sponsor space.

Of course, the answer to that is to mandate benign wings - but that will just be a can of worms.........

Who said anything about ditching wings? I'm sure those clever designers could come up with a wing that gives downforce but doesn't disturb the trailing air more than a certain percentage.

And if it was all about and only about advertising space, the best rule would be to have flat, rather than curved wings. Back to the seventies, everyone, singing D-I-S-C-O....

[AndyL]

Who said anything about ditching wings? I'm sure those clever designers could come up with a wing that gives downforce but doesn't disturb the trailing air more than a certain percentage.

I'm sure they would also be highly adept at coming up with designs that would pass a standardised wind tunnel test, but generate a lot more turbulence in the more complex environment out on track.

The FIA struggle to even enforce rules about simple physical characteristics of wings (whether they bend or not). I think trying to prescribe their invisible effects would be even more difficult to enforce and less effective.