GTPNewsWire
Contributing Writer
- 21,443
- GTPHQ
This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Michael Leary (@Terronium-12) on April 7th, 2018 in the Formula One category.
Formula One Wants to Increase Overtaking Opportunities for 2019 Season
- Thread starter GTPNewsWire
- 25 comments
- 2,003 views
- 5,051
- Netherlands
I vote for banning all these small wing attachments etc. They make the car way too fragile and too much dependant on "clean" air. This will also reduce costs for the teams.
- 2,605
- Newport
- NFSCARBON1
I'd ban DRS altogether it hasn't improved anything and can spoil fights between faster cars making their way past slower cars.
Simpler aero all round will help.
Also multiple fuel and engine modes should be scrapped. Allow teams one mode for qualifying and one for the race and leave it to the driver to modulate how much fuel they use with their right foot.
Simpler aero all round will help.
Also multiple fuel and engine modes should be scrapped. Allow teams one mode for qualifying and one for the race and leave it to the driver to modulate how much fuel they use with their right foot.
- 3,177
- St helens, merseyside, England.
- crazybuttocks198
- Crazybuttocks19
Wasn't some of the improvements from last season partly aimed at improving overtaking?
Could go all gts and give them flashing hazard lights to try to distract other drivers.
Could go all gts and give them flashing hazard lights to try to distract other drivers.
- 258
- Bulgaria
How about narrower cars, so they don't occupy half the track?
Not sure about just making it hard for the leading car and easier for the chaser. I'm not just interested in overtakes for the sake of overtakes in an endless carousel... Maybe its good for tv highlights, but its not what racing is.
Not sure about just making it hard for the leading car and easier for the chaser. I'm not just interested in overtakes for the sake of overtakes in an endless carousel... Maybe its good for tv highlights, but its not what racing is.
Last edited:
- 5,051
- Netherlands
Old fashoned slipstreaming should be possible. That is much more fun to watch.
Corsa
Premium
- 2,104
- United States
They need to do something I almost fell asleep watching the Australian Grand Prix.
The most excitement I saw was Verstappen spinning out.
As a spectator I want to watch like it's 1991 with Senna/Mansell rivarly or 2007 with Kimi winning it by a point.
We just need some wheel to wheel racing these Gran Turismo style A.I. races are exhausting for us and I imagine the drivers as well.
The most excitement I saw was Verstappen spinning out.
As a spectator I want to watch like it's 1991 with Senna/Mansell rivarly or 2007 with Kimi winning it by a point.
We just need some wheel to wheel racing these Gran Turismo style A.I. races are exhausting for us and I imagine the drivers as well.
- 509
- Nevada
- racing_JOHNSON
My opinion is they should ditch this hybrid V6 crap as well and go back to the snarling small V8 again. It sounded AMAZING and it would lower the cost to the teams .
- 5,051
- Netherlands
Yes but it won’t improve overtaking.
- 3,600
- Middelburg
After the extra meeting about this they concluded there is no agreement (yet)
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
That's gone with the fixed ratios. Overtaking on long straights is like watching two trucks playing the 56.01mph overtaking game on the motorway.
That's an agreement then
- 811
- United Kingdom
Sounds like they are considering some steps in the right direction. The problem is simple to understand but difficult to fix. The cars rely on downforce to go quickly but lose it following another car so can't keep close.
But reducing the downforce means they'll be slow.
Personally I'd love basic aero and 1000bhp engines in small cars. Hardly the pinnacle of racing technology tho is it
But reducing the downforce means they'll be slow.
Personally I'd love basic aero and 1000bhp engines in small cars. Hardly the pinnacle of racing technology tho is it
- 6,293
- Canada
How about a Speed Reduction System? If the car behind gets within 1 second, they get DRS, and then on the lead car, a parachute is deployed to make them even more of a sitting duck.
I'm actually growing quite fond of introducing red and blue shells though, along with banana peels and Star Mode...queue the Mario Star music
I'm actually growing quite fond of introducing red and blue shells though, along with banana peels and Star Mode...queue the Mario Star music
LeGeNd-1
Premium
- 7,264
- Australia
- GTP_LeGeNd-1
They are just going round and round with the rules. Smaller and more simpler wings will lead us back to ugly 2009 era cars, with the added halo ugliness on top 
I don't know why they don't just remove all upper body downforce elements (maybe leave vestigial front and rear wings ala current year Indycar for aesthetic and historical reasons), and add an underbody fan to generate the same amount of downforce? Program the fan so it increases suction with speed, and vice versa, to simulate wing downforce increasing with speed (and partly to make slow corners not too fast for safety). Standardise the fan size, power and underbody venturi tunnel shape so everyone is producing same amount of downforce, regardless of leading or following car. The differentiating factor between cars will then be body aero efficiency (relevant to low drag road car aero development), engine and chassis (and driver of course).
I know there's the issue of sudden total grip loss when the car goes over a bump or fan failure, but today's safety tech (car + circuits) is so much better than in Chaparral 2J/Brabham BT46 era so it should be ok. Also because of the limit on fan power, they won't really be going any faster around corners. A sudden loss of grip will be no different to a freak tyre failure for example.
Then there's also the issue of the fan flicking up road debris to the car behind. Probably we can implement the aeroscreen (bye bye halo) or put a mesh titanium filter behind the fan to catch the smaller pieces from being flicked back. There's also (possibly) increased water spray during wet races, but current cars already produce huge rooster tails anyway. And the constant mechanical grip might actually make wet races safer.
I don't know why they don't just remove all upper body downforce elements (maybe leave vestigial front and rear wings ala current year Indycar for aesthetic and historical reasons), and add an underbody fan to generate the same amount of downforce? Program the fan so it increases suction with speed, and vice versa, to simulate wing downforce increasing with speed (and partly to make slow corners not too fast for safety). Standardise the fan size, power and underbody venturi tunnel shape so everyone is producing same amount of downforce, regardless of leading or following car. The differentiating factor between cars will then be body aero efficiency (relevant to low drag road car aero development), engine and chassis (and driver of course).
I know there's the issue of sudden total grip loss when the car goes over a bump or fan failure, but today's safety tech (car + circuits) is so much better than in Chaparral 2J/Brabham BT46 era so it should be ok. Also because of the limit on fan power, they won't really be going any faster around corners. A sudden loss of grip will be no different to a freak tyre failure for example.
Then there's also the issue of the fan flicking up road debris to the car behind. Probably we can implement the aeroscreen (bye bye halo) or put a mesh titanium filter behind the fan to catch the smaller pieces from being flicked back. There's also (possibly) increased water spray during wet races, but current cars already produce huge rooster tails anyway. And the constant mechanical grip might actually make wet races safer.
- 253
- Sydney
- zdenko
Hold on, ignore the overtaking stuff.
What's this 80KG minimum driver weight they are pushing?
Don't they already have a minimum car weight including the driver?
Or will they now penalise drivers over 80kg. Example minimum car weight including driver and ballast of 80kg is 700kg (620kg car). If driver is 90kg, then bad luck you are now 710kg total?
Are any of the current drivers even over 80kg? Not many of them are exactly tall, nor are they short and fat. Yes muscles = heavy to.
The small guys will always have the advantage with ballast anyway.
What's this 80KG minimum driver weight they are pushing?
Don't they already have a minimum car weight including the driver?
Or will they now penalise drivers over 80kg. Example minimum car weight including driver and ballast of 80kg is 700kg (620kg car). If driver is 90kg, then bad luck you are now 710kg total?
Are any of the current drivers even over 80kg? Not many of them are exactly tall, nor are they short and fat. Yes muscles = heavy to.
The small guys will always have the advantage with ballast anyway.
- 29,579
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
I wholeheartedly agree that overtakes for the sake of overtakes are not good racing. Frankly, it's pathetic. But finding the balance between close racing and genuine overtaking opportunities is tricky. There's no one quick panacea.
Some of the best races I can think of involved excellent defensive driving where the attacking car actually isn't able to overtake or they constantly trade places with one another; Steve Soper & Andy Rouse in touring cars and Jean Alesi and Nigel Mansell in Formula One.
DRS seems to have been around long enough now that Brundle has stopped disparagingly calling it the overtake button.
Some of the best races I can think of involved excellent defensive driving where the attacking car actually isn't able to overtake or they constantly trade places with one another; Steve Soper & Andy Rouse in touring cars and Jean Alesi and Nigel Mansell in Formula One.
DRS seems to have been around long enough now that Brundle has stopped disparagingly calling it the overtake button.
- 5,051
- Netherlands
- 2,605
- Newport
- NFSCARBON1
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
Exactly that. There needs to be 80kg added to the car, and that is made up of the driver and any ballast needed to make up the difference.
- 3,211
- Brisbane
- Punknoodle_Nick
I believe its because a lot of people considered a 70kg target weight to be unhealthy for some of the taller drivers as it meant they needed to starve themselves to get down to the weight or else their team would have a disadvantage. This way they can be heavier and the teams with lighter drivers will run ballast.
Similar threads
