That’d be awfully tough to manage. As it is, a team knows that their car is legal before they start to build it. Then they spend millions to build it and bring it to the first test session; maybe it’ll suck, but at least they know they can race it and try to improve it. If the car has to pass a wind tunnel test to be allowed to race, what happens to the teams that fail? Even if they have the money to build a new car, they may not have the time.
And one reason I’ve heard that the teams don’t want to give up wings is that it would give them less advertising space to sell to sponsors. Under a wingless formula teams might have to get by with lower budgets.
True, you’d have less speed coming out of the corners, and less traction, but I think the top speeds would still be so high that they’d leave all the current chicanes in place.
I’m sure Rosberg would have loved to out-qualify Hamilton in any of the last four races, and to lead from the start; but once that didn’t happen he didn’t press nearly as hard as he could have to get ahead. In the last race, he came in for tires on the lap after Hamilton did. Nico was content to just cover Lewis’s moves rather than take a risk that might put him ahead.
They think it is legal before they start. They could actually finish the race, and be disqualified because they wore too much off the plank on the bottom of the car. It’s happened.
All of the teams already use wind tunnels and CFD, and can measure the amount of turbulence their design will make before they take it to be certified by the FIA. Like with ground clearance and the plank, they’ll eventually know not to push it.
I hadn’t thought about that. But, this wouldn’t necessarily be a wingless formula, depending on how turbulent the air behind the car is allowed to be.
Again, you’d have less speed going into and in the middle of the corners too. As you pointed out, they’d have to start breaking earlier. That’s not just because of their potentially higher speed, but because there’d be less downforce keeping the tires from locking. It seems that slower in, slower out, breaking earlier would amount to a much lower top speed. However, I know bupkis about really designing F1 tracks, and it would totally depend on how turbulent they allowed the air to be behind the car.
They’d learn not to push it? I think they’d push it for every millimeter they could get, just like they do now. Teams would take their own measurements in their own wind tunnels, using every trick they could think of; wait until a stormy day when the air pressure is low so the turbulence would be minimized. Then they’d squabble with the FIA about how it passed their test so it should be allowed to run.
Take the wings off a car and the top speed will go up; it’s just a question of how long a straightaway a wingless car needs to make up the speed deficit it has coming out of the last corner. I remember watching races at the old Hockenheimring; teams would make special wings just for that track. They looked like they’d rather run with no wings at all. My gut tells me they’d still want chicanes in some places to keep the speeds down and make the races safer. Good lord, can you imagine the speeds through the Curva Grande at Monza if there wasn’t a chicane before it? And there’s not much runoff room there.
It does make me wonder why they’re so wedded to the current formula, though. I understand keeping the cars open-wheel. Apart from that, wings, engine size, tire width, everything could be fair game. While they’ve tweaked things a lot over the years (and significant changes are coming for next year), it seems like the basic recipe is the same as it was 40 years ago. The Powers That Be must think that what they’re doing works. Considering how the sport has grown, it’s hard to argue with them.
I was meaning that it would be a hard number, like the millimeters left on the plank. They’ve learned how to manage ground clearance under the car to where it’s rare for anyone to be disqualified for it. I can’t see how they’d find managing turbulence behind the car as long as they’re given a clear method of how it is to be measured.
Well, there was no requirement for any team to run a wing after 1967, but they all have. They certainly minimize drag at the faster circuits, but the wings still provide traction. A light car will have problems putting the power to the ground without them. Even dragsters that have no corners to deal with use wings to provide traction while accelerating in a straight line. Streamliners need very long distances to reach high speed.
Depending on how much the rule changes restricted the aero, we could conceivably end up with speeds from before they put in the chicanes. Monza didn’t get them before wings came into the picture, and the ones that are there often seem to cause crashes.
Well, there’s inertia and the fact that the teams have sunk cost in the existing formulas. It’d probably be best to make any changes gradually, at any rate.
Yeah, wings are just not going away. The fact is, F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of the sport, and like most sports it’s less chaotic - and therefore less exciting - at the top than in lower tiers. If you want lots of overtaking, watch touring cars or NASCAR. I personally think the DRS system has done enough to moderate the effects of running in dirty air. I am concerned that next year’s bigger-wing regulations might change that, but in theory they should also increase the relative utility of DRS.
I don’t think I was proposing that wings would necessarily go away, I was proposing a way to limit the effect of the aero package on the following car. If that would allow them to move from wings to aerodynamic effects that may have some more actual real-world benefit in them, all the better. But my original intention is to make what’s supposed to be the pinnacle of the sport less of a parade.
Did not see this coming. But it makes sense. Having a daughter has obviously changed him and his priorities, and he basically admitted that he doesn’t want to make the sacrifices he did this year to win another championship.
I’ve never cared for him, even though he’s the sort of driver I love - not as naturally gifted as some, but able to make up the difference with hard work, car setup and preparation. I’ve suddenly gained tremendous respect for him, though; he set a goal, he made it, and walked away at the pinnacle of the sport. Good for him.
Meanwhile, a dozen drivers are frantically calling their agents to find out how to get released from their current contracts. Hulkenberg would have been the ideal replacement but he’s signed a multiyear deal with Renault, so it will probably be Wehrlein if McLaren won’t release Button.
I want to see Perez in the seat for some reason; I’ve been really impressed with the progress he’s made the past few years, and looking down the grid at the Mercedes powered cars, he’s the driver I’d most like to see challenge Lewis.
Perez isn’t good enough. He’s ultra-smooth and can make his tyres last an age, but he doesn’t have the qualifying speed to really challenge Lewis. Perez never qualified any higher than sixth; Hulkenberg was in fifth twice and even had one front row start. Hulkenberg outqualified Perez 12-9 this year overall and would have outscored him if not for his incredibly bad luck. In races both finished, they were 8-8 head to head. In any event, Force India is not going to let Perez leave after already losing Hulkenberg. At least, not without some ridiculous compensation package from Mercedes like a five-year guaranteed engine supply deal.
Bottas might actually be a candidate for the seat. He’s one of Mercedes’ program drivers and Williams could leverage a lot of money and/or technical assistance out of a deal.
Carlos Sainz makes a lot of sense, too. There is essentially nowhere for him to go at Red Bull with Ricciardo and Verstappen likely to be the main team’s driver lineup for two or three years. On the other hand, he’d be a better fit at Ferrari, which doesn’t like to run two top drivers. He’s the perfect #2 - quick, but not quick enough to challenge for a title, but incredibly consistent.
My sources say that Perez was ahead 9-8 in races they both finished. He also led more laps despite the inferior qualifying performance. Yes, his qualifying needs to improve, but he’s plenty quick once the race starts and he’s gobs more interesting to watch than Hulkenberg.
Bottas does seem to be the logical choice but he’s just too nice. Mercedes needs someone who’s going to stand up to Lewis.
eta: In any case, I think it’s fair to say that this is pretty exciting – everyone who has a realistic shot already has a contract for next year, so pretty much everyone is on the table. Alonso? Vettel? Shit, Verstappen? Why not!
I’m glad I’m not the only one who didn’t see Rosberg retiring coming. I’ll admit I hadn’t been paying that much attention the last few weeks of the season and I wondered if I missed something.
I totally did not see it coming, either. But it makes more sense when you realize his dad did largely the same thing, retiring from F1 shortly after his child was born.
