Run-Off Area Alternatives

[strad]

Moxie, No offence.
I do follow IndyCars and as many other series as I have time for and availability of.
I have long since given up on F1 being the pinnacle of motorsport.

[Moxie]

Moxie, No offence.
I do follow IndyCars and as many other series as I have time for and availability of.
I have long since given up on F1 being the pinnacle of motorsport.

On that we agree!

An athletic event where the rules are changed randomly (FRIC), and enforced randomly (track limits) is no longer a sport. Instead it has become "sports entertainment" similar to WWE. My desires for F1 are not intended to reflect any love for the contemporary show. I do wish that F1 could once again become a competition of man and machine worthy of great drivers such as Fangio, Ascari, G.Hill, P.Hill, Lauda, and Andretti.

I honestly believe such a transformation is not difficult conceptually. Part of that transformation of course is nested in the current discussion...(The FIA won't enforce rules on track limits fairly or consistently, so how do we engineer the FIA out of the equation).

[bdr529]

Moxie, No offence.
I do follow IndyCars and as many other series as I have time for and availability of.
I have long since given up on F1 being the pinnacle of motorsport.

The introduction of grooved tyres In 1998, thats when I started to lose faith
Back in the Schumacher/Ferrari days of domination I told a friend I'd soon watch the 1992 BTTC season over again then watch a F1 race

[strad]

I have to say, People accuse me of wanting to see drivers die, if only they knew how much death I've seen on my job. What I miss is the drivers using their skill to overcome the danger and cheat death. I of course want to see them walk away, but I also miss the sense of danger that made the sport.

[SectorOne]

if only they knew how much death I've seen on my job.

What do you work with? If you say A you have to say B

[strad]

SectorOne;
I longshore..When I started it was considered more dangerous than coal mining, and I'm glad we have made safety improvements. I deleted a long description in part because I don't need to go into more detail. In short I have seen more than 4 people killed on my job.
This is the third rewrite because I think it's distasteful for me to list or describe them.

[GitanesBlondes]

I'd actually say for those who don't know, ride a motorcycle to understand the thrill of what old F1 was as a driver.

It's about the sensations, the thrill, the risk, the cheating of death. There's nothing else like it in the world.

MotoGP requires all of the skill that F1 used to while showing off the line between risk and reward.

[SectorOne]

SectorOne;
I longshore..When I started it was considered more dangerous than coal mining, and I'm glad we have made safety improvements. I deleted a long description in part because I don't need to go into more detail. In short I have seen more than 4 people killed on my job.
This is the third rewrite because I think it's distasteful for me to list or describe them.

Yea i never wanted a description of the kills itself so thanks for that, juts wanted to know what you worked with.

[Moxie]

Many of these arguments are to allow a driver to over drive the car or out drive his talent and the whole idea to my thinking is to stop exactly that. To make them slow down more so they don't go off.
I don't want to see anyone hurt but I do want them to be forced to respect the track, their ability and the cars ability.
IF there is some accident involved, with todays super safe cars it would still be one they can walk away from but ruin their race. They would then quickly change their driving styles and tactics.
Watch Button at Monaco, Webbers off unabated head on into the barriers and a dozen others and realize it would take a very special set of circumstances for them to even sprain an ankle. Many act as though ANY accident would be fatal.
Not so in todays cars.
Racing doesn't need to be totally safe there should be some danger.
If you would go back a few pages to my quotes you'd see that the drivers themselves think it's too safe and want some of the thrill and danger returned.

You do have a point here, but recognize that as the speeds increase, so does the danger. I have refrained from making the following argument because I know most people would just find it heretical to the religion of F1. I present it here for the sake of conversation, but I am pretty sure the response won't be positive.

Leave walls in place, or even build new ones, but slow the cars down. I'll leave the question of how much slower up for debate, but consider the possibilities.

Smaller displacement engines can still be technologically wonderful. Imagine a lawn mower sized engine pushing a F1 car in excess of 150mph.

More mass with the requirement that most of the added mass be used to meet increased front, rear, lateral and offset front and rear impact standards.

This strategy will also have a couple of knock on effects that might be viewed as positive, if the views expressed in other topics are any indication.

As the speeds reduce so to will the effect of aero including the negative consequences of following. This is not to say that the cars will be bricks. Well financed teams will still strive to maximize aero efficiency, but the return on investment analysis will change.

As mass increases there would be an increased need for mechanical engineering solutions and driver ability. (Especially in light of the reduced aero)

Increased mass and need for driver ability would reduce the temptation to stick a driver in the cockpit just because he has big sponsorship money.

Yes I am quoting myself here, please forgive me, but I have has an additional thought.

Another way to slow the cars down, is to get away from the Tilke tracks and run on more tight street circuits. Return to the feel of vintage F1. Walls everywhere, crests, and man way covers. Exciting as Monaco, atmosphere of the host nation. Obviously Franchitti's crash last year shows that this suggestion is not without risk to the driver. But I dare speculate that slower speeds, and stronger crash structures will allow for exciting racing at a relatively low level of risk.

[strad]

Many of the old tracks were country roads.
Stavelot the corner was actually where you turned off to go to Stavelot.

[andylaurence]

So about 10% lower grip surface, requiring the extra run-off because of reduced retardation.

Not really because there´s more run-off then F1 cars actually need, because of motorcycles which demand more of it.

So it requires more run-off for the bikes. Either way, I'm not seeing how the lower grip surface is helping. It appears to have the same effect for cars going off as it does for cars running wide. On that basis, why not make the whole run-off just a lower grip surface?

[SectorOne]

On that basis, why not make the whole run-off just a lower grip surface?

To keep the braking zones relatively identical to today but have some deterrent when going back on the circuit again.
And cost i´d say.

But yes, as a personal opinion i wouldn´t mind seeing the whole area covered in astro-turf or some kind of low grip material.
It could also improve the racing a bit i think because taking the racing line and force another guy off the circuit (as is legal at the moment) would not be something you would do if the other guy would get a DNF from it, due to crashing because of the slippery surface.
Just imagine all the time the guy on the outside has been forced out and then imagine a DNF for all those times.

Just need to change the rule that states a significant part is front/rear tire to half a car inside.
And change the wording so that it applies throughout the whole corner.

So it requires more run-off for the bikes

Nope, it will work just as good as today, remember it´s thin stripes now and not thick massive lines.
In fact now that i think about it, you could arguably only have it on half the run off area.

[FW17]

I actually don't mind the runoff areas being paved over, but they could at least paint it green and gravel to make it look better rather than painting it blue or leaving it black.

[andylaurence]

On that basis, why not make the whole run-off just a lower grip surface?

To keep the braking zones relatively identical to today but have some deterrent when going back on the circuit again.
And cost i´d say.

But yes, as a personal opinion i wouldn´t mind seeing the whole area covered in astro-turf or some kind of low grip material.
It could also improve the racing a bit i think because taking the racing line and force another guy off the circuit (as is legal at the moment) would not be something you would do if the other guy would get a DNF from it, due to crashing because of the slippery surface.
Just imagine all the time the guy on the outside has been forced out and then imagine a DNF for all those times.

Just need to change the rule that states a significant part is front/rear tire to half a car inside.
And change the wording so that it applies throughout the whole corner.

So it requires more run-off for the bikes

Nope, it will work just as good as today, remember it´s thin stripes now and not thick massive lines.
In fact now that i think about it, you could arguably only have it on half the run off area.

I give up.

[GitanesBlondes]

Watching FP2 at Monza, Ricciardo was putting 2 wheels off on the Parabolica. Looks like towards the exit everyone will be putting 2 off.

Good job FIA. Hide behind safety as the catch-all excuse.