FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Red_Five]

The cars now, because of carbon fiber are running much stiffer than they did during the ground effect era and with much higher downforce levels so none of the safety risks of ground effect have been negated by banning it! So now we have cars that are as stiff, corner faster and can't overtake.

As far as I'm aware the reason for banning ground effect is as valid today as it was then. It's true, as you say, that to make ground effect work the cars had to be run with almost solid suspension, but today's cars are nowhere near as stiff. The trouble arose when a near solidly suspended ground effect car caught a bit too much kerb, breaking the seal caused by the skirt, and allowing higher pressure to flood into the underbody venturis, causing the ground effect generated downforce to tail away abruptly, which invariably caused a departure, as Martin Brundle might say, straight to the scene of the accident. And because the car was relying on an artificial level of grip the resulting accident occured at a much higher speed.

[Gilles 27]

The trouble arose when a near solidly suspended ground effect car caught a bit too much kerb, breaking the seal caused by the skirt, and allowing higher pressure to flood into the underbody venturis, causing the ground effect generated downforce to tail away abruptly, which invariably caused a departure, as Martin Brundle might say, straight to the scene of the accident. And because the car was relying on an artificial level of grip the resulting accident occured at a much higher speed.

Agreed entirely. which is why it was a bad idea to ban the sliding skirts to begin with. With sliding skirts, the cars could be setup to be as soft or stiff as was needed. Aerodynamic stalling is still a possibility with today's wings, albeit less likely.

[Jensonb]

Passing has been banned in F1 for years.

Not true, that is a gross mis-representation of the rule.

It only bans passing which is in some way interesting, like overtaking. Passing because of pitting etc. is highly encouraged.



This is especially funny, because it is more or less true.

[cap-dude]

^^^Funny, because FOM is banning re-fueling in 2010.
Be prepared for long races where we watch cars trail each other for 2 hours straight. Truili train

Mark Webber already pointed out one of F1's biggest flaws, and thats braking distances. The cars all break extremely late, meaning there's little chance to dive down the inside and get your nose in. Of course, I'm not expert on how F1 cars work, but if there's a good way to lengthen the braking distances, that would be interesting.

[7UpJordan]

I say bring back ground effects! Thats why the Champ Cars could follow each other so closely.

I remember watching an F1 1983 preview a while back on Youtube which talked about the banning of ground effects. Murray was interviewing Derek Warwick and he said he thought overtaking would be easier without the ground effects. Mind you, this was the start of the Turbo era.

[Gaz]

Passing has been banned in F1 for years.

Not true, that is a gross mis-representation of the rule.

It only bans passing which is in some way interesting, like overtaking. Passing because of pitting etc. is highly encouraged.



This is especially funny, because it is more or less true.

Yeh also passing a red car is a illigal.



...Anyway i read today that Kubica thinks the same as glock really no much diffrence.

Intresting that Nick is saying one thing and RK is saying the opposite, so i wonder if its down to driving style and car setup?

[billindenver]

^^^Funny, because FOM is banning re-fueling in 2010.
Be prepared for long races where we watch cars trail each other for 2 hours straight. Truili train

Mark Webber already pointed out one of F1's biggest flaws, and thats braking distances. The cars all break extremely late, meaning there's little chance to dive down the inside and get your nose in. Of course, I'm not expert on how F1 cars work, but if there's a good way to lengthen the braking distances, that would be interesting.

There are many ways to increase stopping distance. Smaller brake pads, rotors, calipers, and/or cooling ducts would certainly do it without sacrificing everywhere like less downforce and thinner tires would. I like this idea personally. Reducing the braking ability will not affect speed everywhere else much and put out-braking maneuvers back in the game.

[Gaz]

its not really about the speed tho is it, i mean i'd rather let them go slightly slower to see alot more overtaking?

[Gilles 27]

i always favoured the skinny tires approach to increasing braking distances as it would create lovely slidings.
The problem is that wide slick tires are a massive help in slowing a car down in a spin, which is good.

Also I think teams would objects to reducing brake performance too much as it would have safety implications.

I reckon just schedule all the races to coincide with the wettest season of each country. never a dull race when it rains.

Another idea; allowing the teams to develop cars that can do 600mph would also increase braking distances

[darwin dali]

^^^Funny, because FOM is banning re-fueling in 2010.
Be prepared for long races where we watch cars trail each other for 2 hours straight. Truili train

They're also thinking loudly about shortening the race distance (maybe by 15 laps or so), thus, sprint races of 1 hr 15 min are entirely possible.

[Gilles 27]

They're also thinking loudly about shortening the race distance (maybe by 15 laps or so), thus, sprint races of 1 hr 15 min are entirely possible.

I think that was just Massa being a bit special

[darwin dali]

They're also thinking loudly about shortening the race distance (maybe by 15 laps or so), thus, sprint races of 1 hr 15 min are entirely possible.

I think that was just Massa being a bit special

Nope, I've seen mention of this idea quite a while ago - me thinks some FOTA member...