Formula One 2018 - General Thread

[Dryce]

Very interesting that Vettle and Hamilton could not even seem to keep up, i think the lower speed made the tyres suffer which rendered any extra power as pretty useless.

I don't think the lower speeds made their tyres suffer. The tyres suffering meant lower speeds. The inability to overtake meant they had the dilemma of staying out on slow tyres - or switching to faster tyres but being unable to make up the time lost in the pit stop because Monaco is such an awful circuit for overtaking.

So the slower speeds combined with the rubbish racing characteristics of the circuit forced them to go with a strategy that sacrificed faster tyres for hanging on to positions they thought they wouldn't get back even if they switched to 'hypersoft' tyres.

I suspect also that Mercedes in particular didn't have enough confidence in their car's ability to to overtake even with significantly better tyres - and on that basis clinging on to third was as good as they thought the car was worth on the day as long as KR didn't look like he was threatening LH. I suspect that if KR had been quicker then they would have taken a gamble with LH and put him on a new set.

 

[Stratman]

As well as the Rosbergs demonstrating their cars Channel 4 also showed an in car lap from Graham Hill, interesting not just for his commentary but for how much narrower the cars were then. Dare I say it, they could actually have a proper race [/heretic]

 

[GeeJayW]

As well as the Rosbergs demonstrating their cars Channel 4 also showed an in car lap from Graham Hill, interesting not just for his commentary but for how much narrower the cars were then. Dare I say it, they could actually have a proper race [/heretic]

And yet, even then in the pre-aero era, I think overtaking at Monaco was not common place amongst the leading drivers.

Vercrashem showed that overtaking is possible at Monaco, but even then requires a large degree of yielding to the overtaker by the overtakee. No way the Williams drivers for example are going to get in the way of the top teams. It was interesting(?) to see Ocon yield to one of the Mercedes boys (don't remember which, I was dosing off a bit at the time).

 

[Mactech]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I think the Americans must have some sort of competition to find the most appropriate name for their racing drivers and this year it was "Will Power"
It could have been Lake Speed or Stirling Marlin
Having said that, we have had some wonderful oxymorons like Stirling Moss....
or how about Jensen Button as shown on Mika's McLaren steering wheel some 15 year ago

 

[Deleted member 113659]

Canadian Grand Prix: Daniel Ricciardo faces grid penalty after Monaco victory

Just wait until Bruce Miller reads this!!!

 

[guhvies]

Shame about that. Oh well, life goes on. It's still early days yet...

 

[grober]

And the FIA , after long deliberation have decided that Ricciardo did in fact change the PP9 battery in the TV remote in his mobile home in direct contravention of the rule resulting in a 5 place grid penalty-- an FIA official said "we would have made it an entire lap if we could but that would mean he might have started on the front row of the grid- again" . In an unrelated incident the FIA ruled that the small nuclear reactor found in Sebastian Vettels Ferrari was broadly within the spirit of the regulations and would incur no penalty.

 

[zipdip]

Well Ricciardo has a penalty,but Verstappen is nearly in the same boat,the fact is the Red Bulls are going through spare parts like they are going out of fashion,this has led to rumours that they could repair parts but given that some had caught fire and been burnt out this is very unlikely.

 

[Dryce]

Well Ricciardo has a penalty,but Verstappen is nearly in the same boat,the fact is the Red Bulls are going through spare parts like they are going out of fashion,this has led to rumours that they could repair parts but given that some had caught fire and been burnt out this is very unlikely.

It's a sad joke. The MB dominance of the last few seasons has to some extent masked the stupidity of the penalty system.

F1 is very very lucky that the last three WDCs have not actually been decided on penalties between two or three dominant teams.

 

[zipdip]

Well I can understand why these penalties were introduced,it was aimed at the big teams being able to afford and source vast amounts of parts for their cars,what has happened is that the Red Bull team are dealing with a serious problem with a number of parts and will almost certainly not challenge the top two teams,also it has to be remembered that Mercedes took it easy at the start of this season,even now they are not going flat out,I believe that they have thought out this penalty system and are sandbagging most of the time,Ferrari started the season gung ho but have now adopted the Mercedes way of doing things,the last race saw Ferrari settled for second,even though the Red Bull did not have the extra power from the rear electric system,maybe because of the difficulty of passing at Monaco.

 

[st13phil]

It's a sad joke. The MB dominance of the last few seasons has to some extent masked the stupidity of the penalty system.

F1 is very very lucky that the last three WDCs have not actually been decided on penalties between two or three dominant teams.

It's a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. The penalty system was supposed to reduce costs by limiting the number of engines and transmissions that a team can use in a season by encouraging (ha ha!) teams to concentrate on reliability by sacrificing the last bit of performance.

What has actually happened is that the teams who had the biggest engine & transmission R&D budgets (Mercedes and Ferrari) poured engineering resource into creating relatively reliable power units that have resulted in their domination of the championship, while the other teams powered by Renault & Honda who were, and remain, behind the development curve struggle to become competitive because each time the engine supplier has a performance or reliability upgrade available the team is saddled with a penalty for deploying it or risks another DNF because they didn't. It's also put up a massive barrier to entry for any other potential engine supplier, further reinforcing the dominance of the top two and driving costs higher through lack of availability of competitive alternative power units.

The icing on the cake is that a shunt that damages a gearbox (not an unusual occurrence) also results in a penalty as the transmission is one of the restricted quantity items.

Overall, F1 has become a complete farce.

 

[Nat]

Overall, F1 has become a complete farce.

Totally agree.

While this season has had different winners, it's still the same shit, different bucket scenario to me. Too much corporate greed involved and cr4p circuits which will never make me want to pay to watch it on TV nor go and visit it again. Although listening to an F1 car go past is pretty much the best sound any petrol head will hear. Sad really ...

 

[Mactech]

It's a classic example of the law of unintended consequences.

Overall, F1 has become a complete farce.

When you have about a dozen clever guys making the regulations and about 6000 clever guys trying to work out the best way to be more competitive 'within' those regulations then I think the law of averages will apply.
Wether it is technical, financial or strategic constraints applied to F1, there are so many people out in the motorsport workplace hardwired to win that the regulation makers will always come off second best.
I've seen it from both sides!

 

[brucemillar]

When you have about a dozen clever guys making the regulations and about 6000 clever guys trying to work out the best way to be more competitive 'within' those regulations then I think the law of averages will apply.
Wether it is technical, financial or strategic constraints applied to F1, there are so many people out in the motorsport workplace hardwired to win that the regulation makers will always come off second best.
I've seen it from both sides!

Nail on head.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GeeJayW]

I don't know if it's still the case, but the F1 regulations used to be published in both French and English. Sometimes there were advantages to be gained by choosing a particular language version of a particular regulation as there were inevitable 'gaps' or differences when taken literally.

F1 drivetrains need to be simplified as this will reduce costs, improve reliability and provide less wiggle room for those with deeper pockets. This hybrid nonesense doesn't work for me, especially in a racing car.

 

[Deleted member 113659]

This hybrid nonesense doesn't work for me

Can you explain why Jay?

 

[Dryce]

When you have about a dozen clever guys making the regulations and about 6000 clever guys trying to work out the best way to be more competitive 'within' those regulations then I think the law of averages will apply.

Technology tends to smooth things in some ways as well. In the days of old mechanical engine controls and simple electrics and manual gearboxes there are are more tradeoffs.

Digital technology allows you to finesse the engine and anything else you are allowed to manage on the car.

 

[LTD]

Would we have the Maclaren P1, LaFerrari or the Porsche 918 without F1 insisting on hybrid technology ?

 

[Deleted member 113659]

Would we have the Maclaren P1, LaFerrari or the Porsche 918 without F1 insisting on hybrid technology ?

Did the above cars not arrive before the F1 Hybrid Era Steve?

 

[LTD]

Did the above cars not arrive before the F1 Hybrid Era Steve?

I genuinely don’t know when development in both areas began.