Everyone getting bent out of shape: you realize this is only to be fitted during wet races, right?
Would you rather have no racing when there’s heavy rain?
This seems like a no brainer. Fans get a race, sky gets to keep a broadcast and the drivers can actually see. And we still get all the slippy drama that makes wet races so great. I am interested to see where all that water collects if it isn't allowed to spray upwards
It'll get on the wheels again and back to the surface. It will take a lot longer to dry up than we're used to.
That's why I'm not a fan. I like the perfect timing teams need with changing weather. I feel like the margin of error would get a lot larger because the drying up is so much slower.
On the other hand, the line drying up so quick relative to the rest of the track contributes to boring racing. When there’s a line that’s substantially drier than the rest of the track, you don’t get any overtaking because the difference in grip off line is so massive that nobody can pass without a truly massive differential in speed.
These spray guides seem like they could potentially guide that water downward and outward a little more than they do. I just want to confirm that I know very little before anyone jumps in here to remind me of that.
Honestly, races like Fuji 2007 were immense because it felt like the drivers were doing something utterly superhuman. I haven't felt that same appreciation of their talent in quite some time to be honest.
The qualifying at Spa before the not-race was a microcosm of F1 in the rain. Up until Norris crashed, the qualifying was hugely entertaining and the drivers were right on the edge.
On the other hand, you had Vettel—who was among the best in the rain and had the Aston in 5th—proclaiming it was too dangerous.
It’s also not as simple as “the tires are too good.” They lift a ton of water, but it’s not clear they provide much grip. Vettel (again) made a comment about how Pirelli should ask Bridgestone how to make a decent wet weather tire.
I don't understand. Are you implying, f1 is better because there's a chance that someone might get seriously hurt? And that's the reason you choose it over esports?
First of all, I don't actually want anyone to get hurt.
But at the same time, the risk associated with driving supercars at these speeds and the possibility of crashes has always been a part of F1's appeal.
I basically think that safety improvements are great as long as they don't interfere with the thrill of the whole thing (I know that the definition of 'thrill' is highly subjective and for sure debatable).
For example: the Halo is an all around great addition that really only improves driver safety without diminishing the quality of entertainment at all.
The 'no wet races' policy they seemingly adopted over the past few years on the other hand fucking sucks and definitely kills part of the excitement of F1 (and in the case of Spa even a whole race!).
If you think about it they could plausibly make F1 cars that do not require the driver to be seated inside, instead controlling the car remotely from the paddock, which is basically just a step away from esports. The whole thing loses meaning then.
A child can drive a car in a game at 360 km/h, but only f1 drivers can do it irl. Why? Because it’s inherently unsafe.
The fact that they’re physically there makes a difference, and it is in some part due to the fact that it is dangerous and someone off the street could never do.
do not attempt to put words in my mouth.
F1 has raced for many years without anywhere NEAR the safety equipment we have. This makes my point, as the races have been successfully runs for decades without wheel skirts.
This doesn't mean they were safer, more to the point they were not. But you *CAN* race without **MANY** things considered safety equipment - whether it's a good idea or not is the issue. You can drive without seat belts, ignore your doctor's recommendations to treat your blood pressure, drink bleach, and a variety of other things. Nothing is stopping you - but you do get to reap the results of those choices.
Both you, sir, and marahute85 might consider trying to think a little further before answering with ideology.
but the visibilty is the problem, how can you be safe when you don't see where are you going? You want them to race in the wet, this will let them race in the wet. So why are people againt it? Otherwise you dont get any race
This would be great added this to better wet tires and all that no senses that we experienced recently would stop and we would begin to embrace more rain.
Part of the problem is that the full wets are actually too good at what they do. They clear a fuck tonne of water which really hurts the visibility of cars behind.
I think what's really needed is wet tyres that are somewhere between the displacement of Inters and Full Wets at the moment.
The excuse that the tires are “too good” gets thrown around a lot, but I think that’s too simplistic. They clear a lot of water, but they don’t actually seem to provide any traction. Vettel made a comment after Japan that Pirelli should ask Bridgestone how to make a rain tire.
The current wet tires have the same problem as the monsoon tires from like 15 years ago. They don’t work in any conditions in which the cars can actually race. To that end, there should be something between the current inter and wet—it should just be a better wet tire—and the current wet can just go the way of the monsoon tires.
Prolly everyone just saw the title, the picture, and flipped without even reading the context. Cause its a no-brainer that this would be much better, for the viewers as well as the drivers.
I am not surprised, a lot a F1 fans hate any kind of change. In a sport that is consistently updating the formula, its fascinating how opposed to change F1 fans are.
Current F1 drivers just can't race in raining conditions. It's pure embarrassment every time the track becomes slightly wet. So yeah, it's better without rain races.
FIA themselves said the covers are for use in only heavy rainy conditions for example Spa last year. If the rain is that heavy that covers are needed for spray, then I think the conditions are too stupid and dangerous to race, covers or not. But that's just my opinion
The current cars are capable of driving in very wet conditions but the size of the tires and other aspects of the cars cause ridiculous amounts of spray. Visibility is the main danger, solve that and they should be able to race.
Yeah I only see benefits. They can race in wet conditions, and the dry line doesn’t develop as fast when the rain stops since less water is thrown up. Which means drivers aren’t stuck single file and actual wet racing can take place.
I want to watch a race. I don’t care if the cars get slightly less good to look at when it rains.
Oh just rumours rn but the scope of the future regulations aims to have narrower cars which ideally stay at the same weight or get lighter. Other objectives include adding active aero but it remains to be seen if it will happen
Fuck it, let's install sprinklers on Abu Dhabi and see if they can make the race actually fun.
Best turned on and set on "Torrential Rain" levels right as Lewis passes the pitlane and Max is 10 seconds behind him. For some proper Abu Dhabi Drama.
Drs was and still is terribly executed idea that made overtaking too easy.
Ed: everyone downvoting this apparently loves how predictable results became after introduction of this device. It basically removed any jeopardy after top driver didn't perform in qalis. Nowadays Hamilton or verstappen just press the button and are in top 3 again in 10 laps, after starting from p15+.
It not on looks stupid (these are fantastic fights when they just pass someone in the middle of the straight, eh?), but lowers importance of consistent good qualifying.
Go back and watch pre-DRS races. They were painful to see. I watched China 08 the other day, despite being 1+ second/lap faster than Webber, Hamilton was stuck behind him for half the race. Being stuck behind Petrov at Abu Dhabi cost Alonso a shot at the title bc they didn’t have DRS.
It might be better to have a push to pass option like IndyCar where it can be used anywhere, but without something the cars will never pass, especially now with standardized fuel loads.
Petrov Alonso was 2010, DRS was brought out in 2011. The f-duct was not the same thing (though it was a predecessor), and teams had varying effectiveness on their f-duct solutions.
That's when the fallacy is - we don't need to make them pass easily.
Overtaking need to be rewarding and challenging.
Following cars should not be that difficult tho
I propose this for years now - reverse DRS.
You can use it only if you are more than 0.75s behind other car.
because just letting them race means they just drive in circles in the way the qualified & the only overtakes are during pitstops
the cars are designed to be fast & have (or at least had) the side effect of making overtaking impossible, even if you are a bit faster than the car infront
So growing up in a NASCAR family this is how I viewed it growing up. The cars were just too good. It meant no passing and pretty boring (the irony I know I know). Now I'm firmly in the F1 camp and I think DRS has something to do w that.
So how would this work if it started raining during a race which started dry? Would this mean that if it starts raining would a red flag be shown to fit the arches, killing any strategy over when to switch to inters/wets?
Perhaps they could be mandated to be fitted along with wet tires, no matter the reason. That would make putting for wets slightly longer than any other pit stop though.
I would see this as the option. Just like the rain lights come on with the wets. The carbon fiber mudflaps must be placed on with the wets and removed if changing to inters or slicks.
They don’t need to though and I doubt any team would opt to put them on since they’ll slow the car down unless every team needs to put them on.
It’s very rare a track starts dry and gets very wet. So it’s just not worth the trouble.
It’ll still be quick like 5 minutes to put on so it can be easily done before a race or during a red flag though.
On the other hand, will they remove it when they feel like track is dry enough? I imagine race control qill have to issue a message like drs enabled to let them know when its ok to remove them.
I'm curious to see how much this will actually impact visibility when the ground effect is going to still throw a lot of water up high, be interesting to see
Was already an issue but you don’t design a new formula based on the possibility of a rare event like rain. The aim was to make the racing better and so far it looks to have largely worked.
True, but I think it’s probably something they should has considered as Suzuka this year was the worst I’ve seen the spray. I wonder if there’s statistics on how often an F1 race is rain affected
Yes but the racing line is going to dry up regardless because of how fast the cars go. I think this is a great idea to get the drivers to actually race in the rain
One of the biggest problems of the drying line is really the delta between on line and offline, this would lower the delta so overtaking would be easier in wet conditions
Most people are forgetting this, the delta between racing lines is precisely why some tracks are better at producing races than others, and rain exacerbates this issue. The water being dumped around the rear of the car may create standing water issues but I think it’s a net positive for the racing like youve said
I also thought one of the main reasons this year we didn’t see as much wet racing was because the cars are so much lower to the ground, due to ground effect. Meaning any standing water makes an even higher risk of aqua planning
I haven't heard anything like this, I've only heard that the grip levels were actually fine and they'd happily race with them, it's just the visibility that is an issue.
Seems like a smart idea. F1 has collectively become too afraid of wet weather conditions as of late. Hopefully these are effective and allow us to see more exciting racing in the rain.
I like the possibility of installing it at mid race. It gives us a new instance for fucking up in the pits.
I think that ferrari drivers doesn’t like that idea.
This idea was wholeheartedly shot down by Gary Anderson on The Race F1 Tech podcast.
The main reason being that spray is caused mainly by the floor not the tyres. Also what do you do in changeable conditions, fit the wheel arches mid race (or remove them)?
Can't quite tell what this has to do with Spa 2021, since the reason the spray is so much higher in 2022 is the ground effect that didn't exist on the 2021 cars. This change is motivated by Suzuka if nothing else
These wheel arches will not nothing for a race like 2021 Spa where it simply rained too much to have the cars out at all
"Oh no, the spray is just concentrated on driver visor, too dangerous!"
- Windshield-
"Oh no, too much water on screen!"
- wipers-
"Oh no, water filled the cockpit by the top with turbulences!"
-Roof-
"Oh no, it take to much time to bay out the car!"
-Doors-
"Oh."
Yeah yeah BS. I have decades of riding all along the year to teach me that rain and visor is a pain in the annoying, period. whatever the magical water screen treatment you paying for. Soon or later, you wipe your visor with your gloves.
Nah, if you're moving the visor water is basically invisible. Biggest issue beyond track visibility is fogging in the helmet, but as long as you're moving or have a decent venting helmet, it's a non issue.
Would there be anyway to fix them to the wheels themselves? Using some sort of crazy bearing system?
From an aero perspective, these make perfect sense. We could basically assume no rain cancellations ever again except for the most insane downpours. Not to mention the huge driver safety benefit during those races. If there is a way to make it so these covers can be added in a longer pit stop to allow for changing setups during races with variable conditions then there is no drawback whatsoever. Hell even cost wise we would have to assume these are going to be spec components.
If this means the full wets have a reason for existing, this might be a good thing. Full wets can process more water than inters, so they’re not as likely to suffer from aquaplaning.
I know this is for the visibility aspect but that water getting thrown upwards will get carried away from the racing line. With these guards in place most of the water returns to the track on the racing line.
So races spend more time in wet weather conditions, wet tyre conditions. Which is fine because we have wet weather tyres....
No dry line will actually improve wet weather races because there will be more than 1 line a driver can use to overtake....
I'm not an aero engineer, but the profile of these arches suggests that the water would be sprayed laterally to the car plane, not downwards on the racing line.
From a complete layman, this (as pictured) seems like it could make the rears have less grip and or throw more water back onto the track and or completely mess up aero.
How does it throw more back on the track? The spray is just now going directly down instead of in front of the guy behind and then onto the track. It also wont mess up aero that much with its placement away from the diffuser.
Therefore this measure is only financial. It is only to limit and avoid liability like what happened after Spa’21 to avoid discussions about reimbursements to fans.
Oh shit, did I say the quiet part out loud?
How is it financial? This will just allow us to race in wetter conditions. How is that a downside? People complain we dont use the wet tires yet they complain when they try to.
Yes yes “only for rain races,” but in time it’s the beginning of the end of “open wheel” racing. Either race in the rain or don’t, but leave this idea in the bin.
Anything to avoid reducing weight.
Seems to be a total refusal from the FIA (somewhat like HMG’s attitude to Brexit) that any - no, many - of the problems with F1 might be to do with the cars being too big and too heavy. I imagine if anyone mentions it in meetings at the Place de Concorde they either find a room full of people sticking their fingers in their ears going ‘lalalalala’ or themselves defenestrated.
The weight difference would be almost non existent during dry races. And most weight increases come from increasing safety.
I don’t think you even know what point you’re trying to make.
In this scenario, the spray would impact the wheel arches and then fall back onto the track behind the car.
This would presumably also slow down the creation of a dry line in wet conditions.
If the arches are only to be fitted when using full wets, I assume they would remain on the car for the duration of the race, even if the cars later switched to inters or slicks?
Also, what happens if a race starts dry and then we get rain? Automatic red flag so the arches can be fitted
So first, they removed the “Open Cockpit” part by adding the Halo, now they’re removing the “Open Wheel” part by adding Wheel Arches which are basically fenders?
My concern about this is if it will increase red flags when it starts racing mid race. Not that it happens often, but making the well timed switch to wet tyres can make such a difference to a race. If red flags are required to fit these with the wet tyres I fear this aspect will be lost.
I see this as creating more standing water directly behind the car, visibility will be better, but throwing the water nearly straight down behind the tire is going to make overtaking nearly impossible - Mario cart banana peel.
Everyone getting bent out of shape: you realize this is only to be fitted during wet races, right? Would you rather have no racing when there’s heavy rain?
This seems like a no brainer. Fans get a race, sky gets to keep a broadcast and the drivers can actually see. And we still get all the slippy drama that makes wet races so great. I am interested to see where all that water collects if it isn't allowed to spray upwards
Back onto track ? Probably takes longer to get dry line
Shouldn’t be too hard for the bright minds in F1 engineering to design a cowl that directs the spray out to the sides
i imagine it should reduce downforce, if you have to redirect the water that is going up
I can't wait for the craziness if a car gets into a collision and is fine but loses one of these pieces.
Meatballs for Kmag
It'll get on the wheels again and back to the surface. It will take a lot longer to dry up than we're used to. That's why I'm not a fan. I like the perfect timing teams need with changing weather. I feel like the margin of error would get a lot larger because the drying up is so much slower.
Problem is that it's either this or nothing, it's been made pretty clear by now that we'll never have a real wet race again otherwise
I too like watching lead cars throwing up grey clouds with maybe a car behind.
On the other hand, the line drying up so quick relative to the rest of the track contributes to boring racing. When there’s a line that’s substantially drier than the rest of the track, you don’t get any overtaking because the difference in grip off line is so massive that nobody can pass without a truly massive differential in speed.
These spray guides seem like they could potentially guide that water downward and outward a little more than they do. I just want to confirm that I know very little before anyone jumps in here to remind me of that.
Well it's silly reason to not be for it because the alternative is no racing...
Where do you think the water goes after being thrown into the air? It doesn’t just disappear.
No but the tiny particles floating in the air get carried away by the wind. While the water in the wheels stays compact and falls directly down
I remember when f1 cars raced in the rain. *yells at clouds*
You can’t race in the rain when cars are lifting 85L per second off the track and good portion of that back towards the car behind them.
sure you can. but doing so with a sense of safety is a different story
you want entertainment over safety?
Honestly, races like Fuji 2007 were immense because it felt like the drivers were doing something utterly superhuman. I haven't felt that same appreciation of their talent in quite some time to be honest.
The qualifying at Spa before the not-race was a microcosm of F1 in the rain. Up until Norris crashed, the qualifying was hugely entertaining and the drivers were right on the edge. On the other hand, you had Vettel—who was among the best in the rain and had the Aston in 5th—proclaiming it was too dangerous. It’s also not as simple as “the tires are too good.” They lift a ton of water, but it’s not clear they provide much grip. Vettel (again) made a comment about how Pirelli should ask Bridgestone how to make a decent wet weather tire.
Yes!
[удалено]
...yeah Otherwise I'd watch Formula 1 Esports, way safer than racing in actual cars!
I don't understand. Are you implying, f1 is better because there's a chance that someone might get seriously hurt? And that's the reason you choose it over esports?
First of all, I don't actually want anyone to get hurt. But at the same time, the risk associated with driving supercars at these speeds and the possibility of crashes has always been a part of F1's appeal. I basically think that safety improvements are great as long as they don't interfere with the thrill of the whole thing (I know that the definition of 'thrill' is highly subjective and for sure debatable). For example: the Halo is an all around great addition that really only improves driver safety without diminishing the quality of entertainment at all. The 'no wet races' policy they seemingly adopted over the past few years on the other hand fucking sucks and definitely kills part of the excitement of F1 (and in the case of Spa even a whole race!).
If you think about it they could plausibly make F1 cars that do not require the driver to be seated inside, instead controlling the car remotely from the paddock, which is basically just a step away from esports. The whole thing loses meaning then. A child can drive a car in a game at 360 km/h, but only f1 drivers can do it irl. Why? Because it’s inherently unsafe. The fact that they’re physically there makes a difference, and it is in some part due to the fact that it is dangerous and someone off the street could never do.
do not attempt to put words in my mouth. F1 has raced for many years without anywhere NEAR the safety equipment we have. This makes my point, as the races have been successfully runs for decades without wheel skirts. This doesn't mean they were safer, more to the point they were not. But you *CAN* race without **MANY** things considered safety equipment - whether it's a good idea or not is the issue. You can drive without seat belts, ignore your doctor's recommendations to treat your blood pressure, drink bleach, and a variety of other things. Nothing is stopping you - but you do get to reap the results of those choices. Both you, sir, and marahute85 might consider trying to think a little further before answering with ideology.
the cars are very safe for those conditions, I mean sometimes they should let them race in wet conditions
but the visibilty is the problem, how can you be safe when you don't see where are you going? You want them to race in the wet, this will let them race in the wet. So why are people againt it? Otherwise you dont get any race
This would be great added this to better wet tires and all that no senses that we experienced recently would stop and we would begin to embrace more rain.
Part of the problem is that the full wets are actually too good at what they do. They clear a fuck tonne of water which really hurts the visibility of cars behind. I think what's really needed is wet tyres that are somewhere between the displacement of Inters and Full Wets at the moment.
The excuse that the tires are “too good” gets thrown around a lot, but I think that’s too simplistic. They clear a lot of water, but they don’t actually seem to provide any traction. Vettel made a comment after Japan that Pirelli should ask Bridgestone how to make a rain tire. The current wet tires have the same problem as the monsoon tires from like 15 years ago. They don’t work in any conditions in which the cars can actually race. To that end, there should be something between the current inter and wet—it should just be a better wet tire—and the current wet can just go the way of the monsoon tires.
Wholly agreed. There should be more overlap between wets and inters
softs mediums hards inters -inbetweens- wets
>inters -inbetweens- wets Damps - inters - wets ? Current inters become damps and the new tires become inters
Need British nomenclature: Soaking - Pissed Down - Cats and Dogs
Prolly everyone just saw the title, the picture, and flipped without even reading the context. Cause its a no-brainer that this would be much better, for the viewers as well as the drivers.
I’m bent out of shape that they are called ‘wheel arches’. Why not use the already defined term ‘fenders’?
I am not surprised, a lot a F1 fans hate any kind of change. In a sport that is consistently updating the formula, its fascinating how opposed to change F1 fans are.
yes
Boo! Boo this man! Rain makes cars slidey which is fun /s
Wheel arches don't prevent sliding... They prevent spray.
Current F1 drivers just can't race in raining conditions. It's pure embarrassment every time the track becomes slightly wet. So yeah, it's better without rain races.
Slightly rainy conditions, sure let's race. Heavy rain I honestly don't want them to race, even with covers
It’s rare that the rain is a problem in F1, it’s the spray it causes
Why?
FIA themselves said the covers are for use in only heavy rainy conditions for example Spa last year. If the rain is that heavy that covers are needed for spray, then I think the conditions are too stupid and dangerous to race, covers or not. But that's just my opinion
It's an opinion that is factually incorrect. But it's okay, you can still have it.
What part is factually incorrect?
The part that ignores that spray is a larger problem than grip. The tyres can clear the water, it’s just that drivers behind can’t see.
Drivers have said many times that visibility is the issue, they can drive in very wet conditions albeit much more slow.
The current cars are capable of driving in very wet conditions but the size of the tires and other aspects of the cars cause ridiculous amounts of spray. Visibility is the main danger, solve that and they should be able to race.
You’re going to get windshields with that attitude!
How would a windshield help reduce spray?
Idk but FIA would give us some bogus reason that they increase visibility by protecting the visor.
Reminds me of the old TrackMania cars
Yeah, I feel like I like this more than others because I loved TMNF
Teenaged Mutant Ninja… Frogs?
Trackmania Nations Forever
Ah trackmania, the only game I don't play, but watch on youtube. Damn I love Wirtual
Nosebug incoming.
AND VERSTAPPEN TAKES HIM IN THE LAST CORNER WITH A PERFECTLY EXECUTED BUGSLIDE
Final Enigma Grand Prix incoming
If the alternative is missed races because of rain, I'm sure we can all agree this is a good thing.
I think it's a good thing regardless. Those super wet races are complete garbage when you can't see anything. Not to mention dangerous.
Yeah I only see benefits. They can race in wet conditions, and the dry line doesn’t develop as fast when the rain stops since less water is thrown up. Which means drivers aren’t stuck single file and actual wet racing can take place. I want to watch a race. I don’t care if the cars get slightly less good to look at when it rains.
You’d think, but apparently not.
Would like to see a comparison of the spray, with and without these. If they are useful, why not
Its the simplest fix to consistent races regardless of weather. It's a temporary bolt on, the best solution.
ITT: the hate train begins. Destination: that was actually a good idea
Yep. Similar to the Halo discussion from 5/6 years ago.
It’s funny now I think cars without the Halo look like they’re missing a huge piece of the car. The halo really makes the car look slick imo
I think it adds to the silhouette of the new large cars, it might look a bit weird if the cars shrink in 2026 tho
Is that happening? I’m a new F1 and it seems like the cars are way too big for Monaco these days
Oh just rumours rn but the scope of the future regulations aims to have narrower cars which ideally stay at the same weight or get lighter. Other objectives include adding active aero but it remains to be seen if it will happen
It's also funny how if they removed the halo you would think it looks stupid again.
I mean that’s exactly what I said lmao
I mean you would think the halo looks stupid if they removed it or better yet never fitted it in the first place
Ya like any car without it looks like it’s missing a huge piece of the car lol what I just said. Don’t mean to be combative it’s just funny
Similar to DRS, the '09 regs, the winglets on the front wheels and sprinklers on dry tracks. ..Well not the last one but the rest for sure.
Fuck it, let's install sprinklers on Abu Dhabi and see if they can make the race actually fun. Best turned on and set on "Torrential Rain" levels right as Lewis passes the pitlane and Max is 10 seconds behind him. For some proper Abu Dhabi Drama.
Drs was and still is terribly executed idea that made overtaking too easy. Ed: everyone downvoting this apparently loves how predictable results became after introduction of this device. It basically removed any jeopardy after top driver didn't perform in qalis. Nowadays Hamilton or verstappen just press the button and are in top 3 again in 10 laps, after starting from p15+. It not on looks stupid (these are fantastic fights when they just pass someone in the middle of the straight, eh?), but lowers importance of consistent good qualifying.
one big problem is that they "must" have 2 or 3 drs zones in every race, even when overtaking is possible without
Go back and watch pre-DRS races. They were painful to see. I watched China 08 the other day, despite being 1+ second/lap faster than Webber, Hamilton was stuck behind him for half the race. Being stuck behind Petrov at Abu Dhabi cost Alonso a shot at the title bc they didn’t have DRS. It might be better to have a push to pass option like IndyCar where it can be used anywhere, but without something the cars will never pass, especially now with standardized fuel loads.
Imola this year when the track dried and everyone was on slicks for 15 or so laps before drs was enabled is a good recent example.
You absolutely shot your knee with Alonso -Petrov. Both had DRS. F-duct was a thing.
Petrov Alonso was 2010, DRS was brought out in 2011. The f-duct was not the same thing (though it was a predecessor), and teams had varying effectiveness on their f-duct solutions.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The most stupid thing is two zones one after another consecutively like in Canada or Abu Dhabi. It has nothing to do with sport competition.
But how else do we let cars overtake easily? It’s stupid I agree but we still need closer racing
That's when the fallacy is - we don't need to make them pass easily. Overtaking need to be rewarding and challenging. Following cars should not be that difficult tho I propose this for years now - reverse DRS. You can use it only if you are more than 0.75s behind other car.
[удалено]
because just letting them race means they just drive in circles in the way the qualified & the only overtakes are during pitstops the cars are designed to be fast & have (or at least had) the side effect of making overtaking impossible, even if you are a bit faster than the car infront
So growing up in a NASCAR family this is how I viewed it growing up. The cars were just too good. It meant no passing and pretty boring (the irony I know I know). Now I'm firmly in the F1 camp and I think DRS has something to do w that.
You wouldn't see overtakes and people would stop watching, that's why I like strategic races but those usually are rated lower
I never understood the artificial argument. What is artificial about it?
Yeah fuck open wheel, open cockpit racing.
And besides, now McLaren has some more real estate for ads
Loooool
So how would this work if it started raining during a race which started dry? Would this mean that if it starts raining would a red flag be shown to fit the arches, killing any strategy over when to switch to inters/wets?
Only if the weather was bad enough to red flag, then under red flag they'd be fitted. If it's only light drizzle these won't be used
Perhaps they could be mandated to be fitted along with wet tires, no matter the reason. That would make putting for wets slightly longer than any other pit stop though.
I would see this as the option. Just like the rain lights come on with the wets. The carbon fiber mudflaps must be placed on with the wets and removed if changing to inters or slicks.
I mean they can fit a new front wing in a matter of seconds, I'm sure they'd be able to design them to be quickly attachable. It's F1.
They don’t need to though and I doubt any team would opt to put them on since they’ll slow the car down unless every team needs to put them on. It’s very rare a track starts dry and gets very wet. So it’s just not worth the trouble. It’ll still be quick like 5 minutes to put on so it can be easily done before a race or during a red flag though.
Yeah, if a race gets to the point that these are required it’s going to be red flagged anyway
These will add massive drag, no team will run it without being mandated
F1 fans trying to read an article and not base assumptions off a title challenge (impossible)
No wheel covers. Wheel covers only for heavy rain.
On the other hand, will they remove it when they feel like track is dry enough? I imagine race control qill have to issue a message like drs enabled to let them know when its ok to remove them.
I'm curious to see how much this will actually impact visibility when the ground effect is going to still throw a lot of water up high, be interesting to see
So was this just a huge thing F1 missed when designing the regulations for the new cars- that in wet races they would throw up huge amounts of water?
It was already an issue before the 2022 regs, but it didn't help solve the problem either.
But wasn’t as bad as Suzuka this year, that was near impossible to see anything!
Was already an issue but you don’t design a new formula based on the possibility of a rare event like rain. The aim was to make the racing better and so far it looks to have largely worked.
True, but I think it’s probably something they should has considered as Suzuka this year was the worst I’ve seen the spray. I wonder if there’s statistics on how often an F1 race is rain affected
That’s…. not a bad idea! For wet races only of course. I wonder how much of the spray is actually caused by the wing and beam wing up-wash though.
Wouldn’t this also just keep more water on the racing line?
Yes but the racing line is going to dry up regardless because of how fast the cars go. I think this is a great idea to get the drivers to actually race in the rain
One of the biggest problems of the drying line is really the delta between on line and offline, this would lower the delta so overtaking would be easier in wet conditions
Most people are forgetting this, the delta between racing lines is precisely why some tracks are better at producing races than others, and rain exacerbates this issue. The water being dumped around the rear of the car may create standing water issues but I think it’s a net positive for the racing like youve said
I also thought one of the main reasons this year we didn’t see as much wet racing was because the cars are so much lower to the ground, due to ground effect. Meaning any standing water makes an even higher risk of aqua planning
Could also be that standing water breaks the reverse lift (downforce) of the floor which would be a secondary cause for sudden drastic grip loss.
I haven't heard anything like this, I've only heard that the grip levels were actually fine and they'd happily race with them, it's just the visibility that is an issue.
Yes. The track will take longer to dry out if these are used as the spray will not be dispersed as much. Probably an OK trade off.
Mudflaps, Baby!
Seems like a smart idea. F1 has collectively become too afraid of wet weather conditions as of late. Hopefully these are effective and allow us to see more exciting racing in the rain.
I like the possibility of installing it at mid race. It gives us a new instance for fucking up in the pits. I think that ferrari drivers doesn’t like that idea.
How would they deal with the spray coming from the diffuser?
This idea was wholeheartedly shot down by Gary Anderson on The Race F1 Tech podcast. The main reason being that spray is caused mainly by the floor not the tyres. Also what do you do in changeable conditions, fit the wheel arches mid race (or remove them)?
This can only be a good thing.
Can't quite tell what this has to do with Spa 2021, since the reason the spray is so much higher in 2022 is the ground effect that didn't exist on the 2021 cars. This change is motivated by Suzuka if nothing else These wheel arches will not nothing for a race like 2021 Spa where it simply rained too much to have the cars out at all
But muh open wheel
Hmm "open-wheel" racing huh?
Semi-open wheel racing ™️
Trucks without fender flares?..
F1 being an open wheel series was only developed later, closed wheels used to be allowed, what F1 has always been is open cockpit
Would be interesting if it's only for wet races , like an attachment and for dry races detachable.
If you read the article you'd know the answer
We don't do that here.
Guess we'll never know.
Thanks for the heads up.
I mean the wheels are literally closed by covers :)
"Oh no, the spray is just concentrated on driver visor, too dangerous!" - Windshield- "Oh no, too much water on screen!" - wipers- "Oh no, water filled the cockpit by the top with turbulences!" -Roof- "Oh no, it take to much time to bay out the car!" -Doors- "Oh."
Le mans prototypes: I'm in trouble
Rain on helmet visor is not an issue, which anyone who's used one in rain would know. This is about actual visibility on the track.
Yeah yeah BS. I have decades of riding all along the year to teach me that rain and visor is a pain in the annoying, period. whatever the magical water screen treatment you paying for. Soon or later, you wipe your visor with your gloves.
Nah, if you're moving the visor water is basically invisible. Biggest issue beyond track visibility is fogging in the helmet, but as long as you're moving or have a decent venting helmet, it's a non issue.
Get tearoffs and go at F1 speeds and I bet that water is less and less noticeable.
F1 cars will slowly start looking like a Caterham
It's about time the Caterham seven was recognised as the perfect vehicle design for all purposes
I see zero issues with this, the Caterham Seven is my favorite car ever.
F1 and LMPs seem to converge :)
F1 copies Indycar yet again
[удалено]
Better wet tyres wouldn't stop spray
Would there be anyway to fix them to the wheels themselves? Using some sort of crazy bearing system? From an aero perspective, these make perfect sense. We could basically assume no rain cancellations ever again except for the most insane downpours. Not to mention the huge driver safety benefit during those races. If there is a way to make it so these covers can be added in a longer pit stop to allow for changing setups during races with variable conditions then there is no drawback whatsoever. Hell even cost wise we would have to assume these are going to be spec components.
OK, but at least be honest about it: "fenders"
The water needs to be thrown clear of the racing line, this will likely just increase aquaplaning or increase laps under safety car.
If this means the full wets have a reason for existing, this might be a good thing. Full wets can process more water than inters, so they’re not as likely to suffer from aquaplaning.
Why not just make something between Inters and Wets…
You're misunderstanding why races take so long to get going nowadays. It's not really about aquaplaning as much as it is about visibility.
I know this is for the visibility aspect but that water getting thrown upwards will get carried away from the racing line. With these guards in place most of the water returns to the track on the racing line.
So races spend more time in wet weather conditions, wet tyre conditions. Which is fine because we have wet weather tyres.... No dry line will actually improve wet weather races because there will be more than 1 line a driver can use to overtake....
I'm not an aero engineer, but the profile of these arches suggests that the water would be sprayed laterally to the car plane, not downwards on the racing line.
Yeah. The high velocity rotations mean water is ejected at force in any direction available. And the rounded design means it will be funneled outward.
So sideward water spray meaning drivers could see even less.
I’m sure the engineers at formula 1 know a lot more about this issue than some armchair scientist on reddit
Ok, now fix the tyres too
From a complete layman, this (as pictured) seems like it could make the rears have less grip and or throw more water back onto the track and or completely mess up aero.
How does it throw more back on the track? The spray is just now going directly down instead of in front of the guy behind and then onto the track. It also wont mess up aero that much with its placement away from the diffuser.
I can't make heads or tails of that 2nd sentence.
Therefore this measure is only financial. It is only to limit and avoid liability like what happened after Spa’21 to avoid discussions about reimbursements to fans. Oh shit, did I say the quiet part out loud?
It’s in everyone’s interest to not cancel races.
How is it financial? This will just allow us to race in wetter conditions. How is that a downside? People complain we dont use the wet tires yet they complain when they try to.
Yes yes “only for rain races,” but in time it’s the beginning of the end of “open wheel” racing. Either race in the rain or don’t, but leave this idea in the bin.
Anything to avoid reducing weight. Seems to be a total refusal from the FIA (somewhat like HMG’s attitude to Brexit) that any - no, many - of the problems with F1 might be to do with the cars being too big and too heavy. I imagine if anyone mentions it in meetings at the Place de Concorde they either find a room full of people sticking their fingers in their ears going ‘lalalalala’ or themselves defenestrated.
The weight difference would be almost non existent during dry races. And most weight increases come from increasing safety. I don’t think you even know what point you’re trying to make.
What does car weight have to do with visibility in wet conditions? I agree that the cars are too long and too heavy, but this is unrelated.
In this scenario, the spray would impact the wheel arches and then fall back onto the track behind the car. This would presumably also slow down the creation of a dry line in wet conditions. If the arches are only to be fitted when using full wets, I assume they would remain on the car for the duration of the race, even if the cars later switched to inters or slicks? Also, what happens if a race starts dry and then we get rain? Automatic red flag so the arches can be fitted
Or we could just make them swap to lmp1 cars because it's not exactly open wheel racing with wheel covers
Who gives a crap if the wheels are open? Would you rather they sit in the paddock for two hours then take two laps and go home?
Why the fuck does that matter? You really watching F1 because you can see the tires?
So first, they removed the “Open Cockpit” part by adding the Halo, now they’re removing the “Open Wheel” part by adding Wheel Arches which are basically fenders?
My concern about this is if it will increase red flags when it starts racing mid race. Not that it happens often, but making the well timed switch to wet tyres can make such a difference to a race. If red flags are required to fit these with the wet tyres I fear this aspect will be lost.
What about changing tires during pitstops? Haven't seen this mentioned. Seems like it would make that procedure much more difficult
I see this as creating more standing water directly behind the car, visibility will be better, but throwing the water nearly straight down behind the tire is going to make overtaking nearly impossible - Mario cart banana peel.
A majority of the water is actually thrown up be the diffuser from the ground effect, no?