Fix F1: Monoplane Front Wings

[RacerMalcolmnX]

I am a F1 fan of 40 years and I was even lucky enough to go to Austin in 2012. I am concerned by the decline for interest in the sport. I have a simple idea to fix Formula One.

Monoplane Front Wings.

No fins, slots, vortex generators or strakes. A single fixed area and the leading edge must be straight in plan and front elevation. side elevation angle and curvature of the wing would be limited. Flat end plates are allowed. Similar to 1990 era F1 front wings. Maybe a FIA spec aluminum (or carbon) airfoil tubular extrusion.

The resulting loss of front downforce will require a reduction at the rear wing for balanced handling. Less overall downforce and drag equals more speed and further adds to the challenge of a car with less grip. More power will not be required, more skill will. The most important reason to reduce reliance on the front wing is to make driving in the draft and passing easier. The proper height of the wing above the road would have to be researched to ensure reliable performance in hot and turbulent following conditions. I am guessing that a lower (ground effects) front wing would be more stable in the draft and help airflow to the under tray. It would be much cheaper to try than a new engine formula.

Please forward this idea to Jean Todt, Bernie Eccelstone and the members of FOCA.

Thank You, #FiixF1
Sincerely, Cort Anthony Byron

"All those who wander are not lost." J.R.R.Tolkien

[wesley123]

And that would fix what exactly?

[markp]

And that would fix what exactly?

It would loose F1 a major usp of being fastest circuit cars, they would be slower than WEC and maybe GP2. Its a car championship as much as drivers. Cars should be faster not slower. Maybe smaller wings but larger scope for df from the floor could = faster cars and easier to follow?

[sgth0mas]

I don't think that would get you much from this proposal. The main problem with aero is the degradation of the front tires when following close due to front wing wash. This is why everyone just makages the gap for way too much of the race. If you want to improve the race...

Proper tires, that allow racers to push against each other all race. I'd rather good racing than strategic pit stops

Real engines. After being at motogp this weekend...I realized just how much sound makes a difference. Nobody wants to watch a Prius race.

Either better revenue distribution or allow back marker teams to use just a bit more fuel flow. Its not fair to give winners more money and expect any lower team to catch up. In the NFL, NBA and other highly televised sports (in the US), draft preference is given to the worst teams to keep competition close...so while having different rules for lower teams may seem harsh, when you don't give them any money its the only help they can get help thats free.

[mertol]

1. Attract the big sponsors back to F1. To do so, make watching F1 on tv and internet free.
2. Remove the cost cutting, environment/fuel/tires/whatever saving, development freezing nonsense and let it just be a sport.

[RacerMalcolmnX]

If a car is more optimized for streamlining as opposed the generating downforce, drivers can race closer together in the aerodynamic wake. Indy Cars do it all the time on super speedways. It should make for more passing. In theory, I haven't run any CFD yet.
2. More exciting competition emphasizing driver skill over the best car. The cars and tires should slide more, ideally resulting in one more required tire change per race. Of course Pirelli would have to invent new tires to suit.
3. More speed from the same stable relevant engine package. The engines should be made louder.
4. Less aerodynamic budget in one small area of the car
5. I dunno, I have others have suggested Less Downforce too.

There are many issues to be fixed with Formula One.
My idea is for a quick inexpensive change that could be integrated into next years Formula.
A proof of concept test could be done with flat wing bonded to a current nose.
A comprehensive plan for the future survival of F1 should have started ages ago.
Well it did but the current management failed.

[sgth0mas]

It would make the cars too slow. Just watch super V8s or NASCAR...it fits your proposal well. As a matter of fact, Watkins glen and Sonoma are some of the most entertaining races to watch if you're a road race fan and don't care much for typical NASCAR oval tracks. Those guys define wheel to wheel

[wesley123]

If a car is more optimized for streamlining as opposed the generating downforce, drivers can race closer together in the aerodynamic wake. Indy Cars do it all the time on super speedways. It should make for more passing. In theory, I haven't run any CFD yet.

The rules are already designed for more passing. OF course teams try to create as much downforce as possible, why wouldn't they?
And then what? I don't see peoples obsession with passing, there's much more to racing than that. So you make overtaking easier, so overtaking becomes even less effort than it already, well, that sure is enjoyable! I'd rather see two cars fighting for position for a whole race than that easy overtaking.

2. More exciting competition emphasizing driver skill over the best car. The cars and tires should slide more, ideally resulting in one more required tire change per race. Of course Pirelli would have to invent new tires to suit.

Just like how that would happen when all electronic aids were banned from 2008? We all know how that turned out.

Drivers will adapt to it without much effort because they are very good at what they do.

4. Less aerodynamic budget in one small area of the car

So they spend it somewhere else

[RacerMalcolmnX]

I also have drawn up plans for a fleet of hi-speed jet engined vacuum cleaner Zambonis that would suck up all the marbles during safety car periods.
Drivers could take any line for a short restart period!

[SectorOne]

More downforce, more power, bridgestone tire and refuelling.
I dont give two s....ts about having 1 overtake in a race if i see drivers going flat out like the old days.

Im sick of tires that penalises you if you god forbid, happen to actually use them.
It literally makes no sense.

"Heres a car, its yours, but if you drive it over 30km/h it will detonate. enjoy"

[Jon]

All proposals have some merit.

However, before going radical, let's change the ONE thing that would be felt the most: BRAKES.

Yes, modern carbon brakes are so darn effective that braking distances are ridiculously small. The result is there's almost no time to outbreak anyone, even if you are glued to its diffuser for the whole lap.

Bring back steel brakes, and within a few laps you'll have cars with totally different stopping characteristics and distances. THEN, you will see cars behave differently in a more dramatic way and stopping distances increase/decrease according to how the drivers manage the brakes.

It also brings back the need for the drivers to manage something else with their driving.

You can go a step further and make them spec brakes...

[turbof1]

I don't think decreasing the amount of downforce is a wise idea. You need the cornering grip in order to follow closely behind your competitor.

What these cars need is both more downforce and less sensitivity, and more drag. The more drag a car can shed by slipstreaming, the better. It will put the tailing car much quicker next to the one in front, but will also making overtaking from that point on much more difficult since now he's getting again in the wall of air. It could result in much more wheel to wheel action.

[Moose]

I don't think decreasing the amount of downforce is a wise idea. You need the cornering grip in order to follow closely behind your competitor.

That's actually exactly why decreasing the amount of downforce helps. The cars have a level of grip proportional to (Mc + L) (where Mc is the mass of the car, and L is the downforce). When following closely aero is affected, and you get (Mc + p * L) where 0 < p < 1. Thus, the change in grip when following a car closely is proportional to (1 - p) * L. You can see trivially, that the difficulty in following another car is directly proportional to the level of downforce the cars generate. Thus, reducing downforce helps you follow closely.

You can see this in action by watching any racing series that doesn't have downforce - it's trivially easy to follow closely in karts for example.

[langwadt]

I don't think that would get you much from this proposal. The main problem with aero is the degradation of the front tires when following close due to front wing wash. This is why everyone just makages the gap for way too much of the race. If you want to improve the race...

Proper tires, that allow racers to push against each other all race. I'd rather good racing than strategic pit stops

Real engines. After being at motogp this weekend...I realized just how much sound makes a difference. Nobody wants to watch a Prius race.

Either better revenue distribution or allow back marker teams to use just a bit more fuel flow. Its not fair to give winners more money and expect any lower team to catch up. In the NFL, NBA and other highly televised sports (in the US), draft preference is given to the worst teams to keep competition close...so while having different rules for lower teams may seem harsh, when you don't give them any money its the only help they can get help thats free.

it is quite telling that in the US of all places, pretty much every major sports league has some form of budget restriction and other forms of equalizers. It's not like they have suddenly become socialists, they just realize that it is not only sport but also entertainment and close competition is good entertainment which is good for business

But trying to make a budget cap work in F1 would be like trying to get multinational companies pay tax

[SectorOne]

F1 should have went with the fan in the floor that was discussed very early on when talking about the new (current) regulations of Formula 1.
It would have solved many issues with following cars closely in high speed corners.

It was shot down by the teams almost immediately if my memory serves me correct.
can´t even find an article about it but i´m 99,9% certain it was discussed.