That looked like classic grip differential from curbing v asphalt.
Edit: Yeah, outside rear over the curb unloaded it.
That looked like classic grip differential from curbing v asphalt.
Both Ocon & Perez gave that curb a good hammering as well! Ocon was very lucky to save his moment!!!
Mick had oversteer in the 2 turns before he crashed, and he had an oversteer moment before he went on the kerb. Then mounted the kerb, likely different grip as you say, and surely a loss of floor suction at the worst possible time.Hoffman900 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2022, 20:28That looked like classic grip differential from curbing v asphalt.
Edit: Yeah, outside rear over the curb unloaded it.
This one for sure seems a little dangerous, especially the way the inside wall come back towards the trajectory of the cars if they do have a spin. Not at all forgiving
High curbs might in general affect the car more, this one is particularly dangerous because it potentially launches the car right at a wall and on to the path of oncoming traffic.Mchamilton wrote: ↑27 Mar 2022, 10:49This one for sure seems a little dangerous, especially the way the inside wall come back towards the trajectory of the cars if they do have a spin. Not at all forgiving
Ocon in particular might've saved because he steered into escape zone instead trying to keep the car between the lines.Stu wrote: ↑27 Mar 2022, 10:38
Both Ocon & Perez gave that curb a good hammering as well! Ocon was very lucky to save his moment!!!
That curb does not look particularly high, but is high enough that when the cars are loaded up the floor hits it; the curb looks as though it has been placed/designed to discourage abuse of track limits (corner-cutting).
Yes.
I'll add it's worth noting that RB have somewhat abandoned this philosophy for 2022 by flaring out their sidepods over top the rear floor, whereas Merc did not. Even Ferrari are still somewhat using it by exposing their rear floor in the same area..
2008, which means they essentially made this with a Pentium 2 running DOS. Respect for that.vorticism wrote: ↑10 Apr 2022, 10:47Todt and Brawn et al trying to play car stylist while being bureaucrats. The maturing of the formula til 2008 gave us some of the best looking cars imo, since then they look either more boring (2009 on) or more contrived with the 2018(?) mandated swooping angles, and the 2022 mandated MORE swoopy angles. Well, we had swoopy angles once before, and it didn't arrive from a downloadable FIA spec swoopy angles database.
I strongly disagree. The minimum radius rule was a very welcome and very important change IMO. Restoring the rear wing to full height was good, making the rear wing look comical and narrow was not good, but it was what it was.
They sweat when there are more variables, not fewer. That's what drives some of the bodywork regs; the teams know they can spend fewer hours on conceptualizing and validation if you're only allowed to shape something like an egg rather than a chicken.JordanMugen wrote: ↑10 Apr 2022, 17:07Make the aerodynamicists sweat and try to achieve more with less vanes I say!