Is that the end of F1 then??

Deane, you said it!

quote:

Originally posted by Deane F:
a) there is a lot of overtaking (which to me means drivers making more mistakes rather than cars being more evenly matched.)

and what would be wrong with that? At the moment the cars are actually programmed for each individual corner on a track.
In interviews you hear them explaining how they now just plant the throttle halfway through a corner and absolutely nothing untoward happens.
That's not a test of driver skill, that's a test of engineering skills - fine if you just want an engineering championship, but might as well drive the cars remotely.
A series doesn't need to be single make for it to provide close and exciting racing. Just look at motogp which, although it's heading the way of F1 with engine control gimmicks, still leaves most of the work up to the rider.

John

I well remember the year that traction controls were ruled out of Formula One. It was the year that Ayrton Senna and Roland Ratzenberger died.

Anyway, the Formula One championship is a test of engineering skills as much as it is a test of driver skills. Were that not the case there would be no need for a constructors championship.

To suggest that the cars could be remotely driven is absurd - but I assume that the suggestion is merely to illustrate your argument. If it was that easy to drive the cars, and if traction controls had so much authority in the corners, then there would be no slides, locked brakes or flat spots would there?

The same drivers win many races over the course of their careers - no matter what they drive. They get to the top because they are better than other drivers - not because of traction controls.

Ahh yes, MotoGP. So, is Rossi making it boring yet - or will he have to dominate for a few years for everyone to start whinging?

Deane

quote:

Originally posted by Deane F:

The championship is also a test of:

Design
Engineering
Teamwork
etc

Single make series have never been successful. If the only point for you is to see who laps fastest then that is fine I guess. "The rest of us" doesn't include me though.

I agree with Deane, F1 has to be more than just the driver, if thats what floats your boat then there are plenty of one make series around. Its the other aspects that make F1 different. It is IMO supposed to be a test of engineering skills too..
What i object to is that IMO politics play a much bigger part than they should. It was interesting to hear BE at the weekend admiting on film that Max Mosely should be replaced by a better man. Not entirely sure what to make of that mind you!

Rgds

Hawk

Dear Chaps

I am going to be controversial. Tell me exactly what has F1 brought to your everyday car?

Paddle shift? Rubbish that is, ask Jeremy Clarkson, he almost drove a ? Merserati into the harbour whilst trying to make a 3 point turn, so slow it is from reverse to 1st and vice versa, for instance. ? Jeremy=Joke?

The only thing which is not expensive, to have benefited "Joe driver" came out of F1 more than 15 years ago. That is the Honda V-tec engine. What a screamer esp the Honda S2000. "Purfect " Even this was suspect, as rumour has it the engineer responsible, got the idea from watching "skewered food rotate whilst being cooked".

What about Rally? Now that is another story! Turbo, go turbo. Go WRX. Go EVO etc. 4WD excellent. Fancy a trash around a circuit? Brings a smile to your face?

So, chaps come on...........F1 = BORING!

quote:

Originally posted by wellyspyder:
Dear Chaps


The only thing which is not expensive, to have benefited "Joe driver" came out of F1 more than 15 years ago. That is the Honda V-tec engine. What a screamer esp the Honda S2000. "Purfect " Even this was suspect, as rumour has it the engineer responsible, got the idea from watching "skewered food rotate whilst being cooked".

I can agree with you on the Vtec point! there are plenty of other less high profile developements though...

You wait and see how long the latest Hondas can run on an orange (petrol warning) light

Hawk

Personally I don't give a rat's about the "F1 developing technology for everyday motorists" claptrap. It seems to be a line trotted out to justify the sport to people that have no interest in it anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by Deane F:
Personally I don't give a rat's about the "F1 developing technology for everyday motorists" claptrap. It seems to be a line trotted out to justify the sport to people that have no interest in it anyway.

Fair enough, but i know for a fact that at least one manufacturer does genuinely use F1 to develop their road going cars. Most people look for the highly visable stuff, but the manufacturer i talk of does a lot of work to improve reliability. The result...? they make some of the most reliable cars that money can buy!

Rgds

Hawk

This is also the role of the FIA - managing the trickle down of technology developed, amoung other places, in F1.

quote:

Originally posted by Deane F:
I well remember the year that traction controls were ruled out of Formula One. It was the year that Ayrton Senna and Roland Ratzenberger died.

and you're trying to suggest that Senna's steering column wouldn't have snapped if he'd had traction control?

quote:

Anyway, the Formula One championship is a test of engineering skills as much as it is a test of driver skills. Were that not the case there would be no need for a constructors championship.

it is possible to test engineering skills without removing so much of the driver's input.

quote:

To suggest that the cars could be remotely driven is absurd - but I assume that the suggestion is merely to illustrate your argument. If it was that easy to drive the cars, and if traction controls had so much authority in the corners, then there would be no slides, locked brakes or flat spots would there?

I didn't say it 'could' be done, I said it 'might as well' be done. As for slides, you don't see too many of them any more unless you happen to be lucky enough to be watching a minardi.

quote:

Ahh yes, MotoGP. So, is Rossi making it boring yet - or will he have to dominate for a few years for everyone to start whinging?

MotoGP isn't at all boring even if Rossi dominates as he still has to work hard for his wins.

I reckon they should all speed down the M6 in Wiltshire like everybody else, but only with the right kind of tyres naturally, innit

Though with the average coppers driving skills today, they'd probably overtake them

No, I'm certainly not suggesting that Senna's sterring column wouldn't have failed etc - I was merely remarking that the year that traction controls were ruled out was the first year in twelve that F1 suffered driver fatalities.

Personally, I think that if the playing field were to be levelled a better way to do it would not be to change the rules but to distribute money from television revenue among the teams more evenly.

I find it strange Deano me old Cocker that a Kiwi's a F1 fan, to me it's a bit like a geezer from Muaritious being into slaalem skiing, innit ?


Fritz Von Conkers anybody ?

quote:

Originally posted by Berlin Fritz:
I find it strange Deano me old Cocker that a Kiwi's a F1 fan, to me it's a bit like a geezer from Muaritious being into slaalem skiing, innit ?

never heard of Bruce McLaren or Denny Hulme then?

quote:

Originally posted by John Sheridan:

quote:

Originally posted by Berlin Fritz:
I find it strange Deano me old Cocker that a Kiwi's a F1 fan, to me it's a bit like a geezer from Muaritious being into slaalem skiing, innit ?

never heard of Bruce McLaren or Denny Hulme then?

Wasn't Denny Bruce a Comedian ?

quote:

Originally posted by Deane F:
I was merely remarking that the year that traction controls were ruled out was the first year in twelve that F1 suffered driver fatalities.

it seems you're trying to link the two.

quote:

Personally, I think that if the playing field were to be levelled a better way to do it would not be to change the rules but to distribute money from television revenue among the teams more evenly.

I agree entirely but I'd still like to see more driver input than is currently the case.

quote:

Originally posted by John Sheridan:

quote:

Originally posted by Deane F:
I was merely remarking that the year that traction controls were ruled out was the first year in twelve that F1 suffered driver fatalities.

it seems you're trying to link the two.

I guess that's the problem with discussing things on forums like these. Every post is like drawing up a legal document - trying to extinguish every unintended implication and ambiguity.

quote:

Originally posted by John Sheridan:

quote:

Originally posted by Deane F:
I was merely remarking that the year that traction controls were ruled out was the first year in twelve that F1 suffered driver fatalities.

it seems you're trying to link the two.

quote:

Personally, I think that if the playing field were to be levelled a better way to do it would not be to change the rules but to distribute money from television revenue among the teams more evenly.

I agree entirely but I'd still like to see more driver input than is currently the case.

Hear! Hear!

Also what was banned with traction control was programmed anti lock brakes, programmed steering control and programmed throttle controls. The driver just mashed the throttle, maxed the brakes and steering and the computer did the rest. I think the computer suspension had already gone by this time. All it needed was a radio link and a hand contrller and they COULD have "driven from the pits (or a high grandstand).
Gilles had the best idea almost no wings a 1000+ horse power and slicks. I'd reduce the braking efficiency too BTW.

Howard

Right, so if the Padded Cell committee was running Formula One we would have:

Slick tyres (one make, one tyre for everybody)

No electronics

Wider tracks (and wider corners with no apex to help overtaking?)

Top drivers would be penalised for winning more than two races in a row because it detracts from the spectators' enjoyment if one driver and car combination is better than the others.

The points spread would be evened out before the last race of the season, or hey, what the hell, before *every* race so that the spectators enjoy themselves more.

Deane I think we've already established that it's possible to have exciting racing and still have the same winner every time.
I believe those who were complaining about Schumacher making the sport boring weren't doing so just because he was winning but because he wasn't being challenged by anyone - not even his team mate.
For my wishlist of changes see the proposed 2008 regulations

Well John, all I can say is that I never found it boring watching Schumacher win all the races because I am a Ferrari fan.

And I think I need to make it clear that I am a FERRARI fan - *not* a Schumacher fan.

No TV Revinue² unless it's private pay stuff

John. Can I loop it back a few posts?

I know that the focus of the investigation surrounding Senna’s death was on a modified steering column which was believed to have failed.. Was this definitely nailed down as the cause of the crash? I remember reading articles and seeing a programme on the telly which pushed the theory that the ride height had been reduced due to reduced tyre pressure following the safety car. On race resumption, he hit a bump which due to the decreased ride height caused a bigger rebound, which in turn caused significant loss of down force as ground effect was essentially lost for a moment. This turned the car into a projectile which went through the air in a straight line, hitting the wall at a steep angle instead of making the corner.

Not saying this was proved as the cause. But I’m not sure that the steering column was either. If it could be said for certain that the column broke, I would imagine that the case against Williams would have been ‘straightforward’ to prosecute. If you have any links that can enlighten me I’d be very grateful. Not wishing to be ghoulish, but I was under the impression that Senna’s death had remained a mystery.

Thanks