I would imagine that with no runoff areas the potential danger factor outweighs the sporting intent of the device. A failure could and probably would create a life threatening event.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
Printable View
I would imagine that with no runoff areas the potential danger factor outweighs the sporting intent of the device. A failure could and probably would create a life threatening event.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
If you do crash at Monaco you're *usually* going much slower than other tracks. And yes, I know, there is still an element of danger and we've seen some hairy moments there.
I have a few suggestions for F1, all in the name of improving the "racing"
1) Draw grids from hat
2) At a time chosen by the computer, the race leader has to stop his car for 15 seconds, all in the name of making "racing" better
3) At a time chosen by the computer, all drivers have to pit and put on rain tyres when it is dry, this will make the spectacle better
4) First lap has to be driven in reverse
5) Pitcrews will be replaced by highly trained Monkies
6) Every driver will have to start the race with 15 kg less fuel than they would need to finish the race - this will improve the racing, because at various times different drivers will be saving fuel. This will also make F1 more greener
7) Ban drivers from using wet tyres when it is raining, only dry tyres allowed.
These changes will improve the racing massively and will allow F1 to compete against WWF for the top position in sports entertainment.
It's a smart move in my opinion. KERS alone is a handful at Monaco, and the sport should never disregard safety in the pursuit of "the show".Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
When you say it would be the right "choice" for a track like Monaco, what do you mean exactly? Are you saying that every track ideally would have an overtaking aid tailored for it, KERS regulations here, DRS there? I'm not sure they could ever be that predictable but who knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
I read somewhere (can't remember where) that, as they learn more about the DRS, there is an option of different gaps for different tracks and Monaco was mentioned as a possibility for a different configuration.
You know that I'm not a fan of the DRS and would be OK with it being deactivated but I didn't get the impression, from the article, that the DRS was not being considered for Monaco rather Monaco might receive more of the DRS magic. :crazy:
DRS could be "banned" at Monaco:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/90914
I don't see the point in allowing it during practice sessions anyway.
When the FIA adopt all your suggestions, I shall hit you quite hard with a blunt instrument! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
I don't think it would help much at Monaco anyways, so I think they may as well limit its use there.
For safety reasons. So it's safe to use at some circuits but not others. I can't think of many other "innovations" where that was the case. Turbos? No. Bit of a handful around the streets but they didn't take them off the cars for Monaco. Double diffuser? No. Perfectly fine everywhere. Slicks. Fine too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave B
What is it about DRS? If it's not safe to use at Monaco then ultimately it's not the solution.