Soldato
They could introduce a minimum ride height. Make the barge board thicker to ensure teams are sticking to it. Would do away with the majority of the porpoising problems.
Poll: Azerbaijan Grand Prix 2022, Baku - Race 8
- Thread starter chrismscotland
- Start date
- Status
Realistically, the only thing the FIA can do in the short term is this.
I wonder if they will be hesitant, because they know that will likely mean Red Bull win the season at a canter.....
No doubt the fight at the top between Ferrari and Red Bull is playing well for entertainment etc. It wont be a good look for their brand new regulations if one team is hideously faster than everyone else.
There are plenty of other Formula out there that do exactly that. Formula 1 needs to be at the bleeding edge of technology, it's a key element to the Formula. Also, I'm really not sure we are at "the end of the era of ICE". When looking at a global perspective for light vehicles and beyond personal transportation for the developed world that is a very narrow minded view.
Interestingly Sainz, Gasly and Ricciardo have all come out recently to say something needs to be done too, so whilst Merc shows the worst example of it, i think it is getting bad for all/most of the drivers now.
Soldato
In your opinion, and mine is different, its a beautiful world we live in.
F1 IMO offers little to nothing anymore to standard road going vehicles, that could not be achieved by spending the same amount of research elsewhere or on a fixed car/power unit for the entire series.
Soldato
Standard road going vehicles - has it ever? There weren't many 20,000rpm V12's on the roads in the 80's either. Probably why Honda decided to pull out.
Soldato
Well obviously I meant trickle down technologies, but I mean if you want to be a pedant then go for it.
Soldato
Isn't that what forums are for.Well obviously I meant trickle down technologies, but I mean if you want to be a pedant then go for it.
Soldato
Bottas wasn't on it all weekend. Zhou was only a place behind him in FP1 and FP2 (understandably for a rookie), then outqualified him by a sizeable 0.7 seconds in Q2. Passed him in the race too, before his PU did what Ferrari's did this weekend.
This is usually a good track for Bottas too.
Associate
Indeed if someone is a doubt for a Grand Prix because he drove a week before then that surely raises alarm bells, even if it maybe exaggerated.
I do remember reading that when ground effect was around before, drivers needed neck massages and Williams were about to experiment with g-suits!
Must admit I don’t like the new FIA president after he moaned about drivers being too political and that drivers in the 70s and 80s “just drove”
I do remember reading that when ground effect was around before, drivers needed neck massages and Williams were about to experiment with g-suits!
Must admit I don’t like the new FIA president after he moaned about drivers being too political and that drivers in the 70s and 80s “just drove”
Who says it has to? Can't a sport have innovation for innovations sake?In your opinion, and mine is different, its a beautiful world we live in.
F1 IMO offers little to nothing anymore to standard road going vehicles, that could not be achieved by spending the same amount of research elsewhere or on a fixed car/power unit for the entire series.
I'm playing Devil's advocate here of course because if the teams / sponsors didn't think they were getting a return of some sorts on their cash they wouldn't bother funding it.
Soldato
Indeed if someone is a doubt for a Grand Prix because he drove a week before then that surely raises alarm bells, even if it maybe exaggerated.
I do remember reading that when ground effect was around before, drivers needed neck massages and Williams were about to experiment with g-suits!
Must admit I don’t like the new FIA president after he moaned about drivers being too political and that drivers in the 70s and 80s “just drove”
Pretty sure there was a driver's strike before South African GP in 82 when the drivers weren't happy about the proposed contract changes, it was resolved before the race started and not affected any racing. He doesn't know what he's talking about
Soldato
Totally true, and I agree, the sponsorship and advertising is what pays for the sport at the end of the day, what they get out of it is exposure for their brands. I am not even sure how much the actual manufacturers spend that isn't written off against other ventures. I can't imagine the manufacturers of engines for example lose out much given how much they charge for them to the third party teams.
Sometimes though innovation has to have a purpose other than just fun/sport, which is why I firmly believe a Formula-E will take over, in the next 5-10 years as the benefits that trickle down, and things that can be tested will be a big deal.
Man of Honour
Should do some big walkouts over safety like they did for that American GP and the Michelin tyre. I'm sure the FIA would quickly allow the teams to fix the issues with porpoising if only three teams went to the grid.
Soldato
The teams themselves voted against any changes to reduce porpoising before the start of this season according to Martin here https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/1...must-help-themselves-not-wait-for-rule-change
Associate
Yes there was but that wasn’t to do with safety IIRC but tying drivers to multi-year contracts (God bless Balestre, another muppet of a president).Pretty sure there was a driver's strike before South African GP in 82 when the drivers weren't happy about the proposed contract changes, it was resolved before the race started and not affected any racing. He doesn't know what he's talking about
Only cos every team would have comical litigation against them if something would have happened.
Drivers did want to race but certain parties were too pig-headed to come to an agreement
Deleted member 651465
D
Deleted member 651465
I’ll be interested in seeing if any outgoing driver launches a civil claim for ill health caused from the porpoising.
Any driver could launch a claim but it would torpedo their relationship within the team, hence why I’d expect it to come from an outgoing driver or a recently released driver. Don’t forget the statute of limitations (the time in which you can claim for these things) is 3 years.
The prove negligence they’d have to prove:
1- Duty of care toward the driver (tick)
2- Breach of that duty (tick)
3- Damages
A driver like Hamilton or Ricciardo with lucrative contracts who successfully argue that they’ve suffered ill health which stopped them racing would look to gain millions in compensation and that’s before the media attention it would attract.
It’s very much a problem that the teams are trying to avoid / eliminate so I can only imagine the pressure is mounting on the teams (e.g Merc) who can’t get a handle on it.
Any driver could launch a claim but it would torpedo their relationship within the team, hence why I’d expect it to come from an outgoing driver or a recently released driver. Don’t forget the statute of limitations (the time in which you can claim for these things) is 3 years.
The prove negligence they’d have to prove:
1- Duty of care toward the driver (tick)
2- Breach of that duty (tick)
3- Damages
A driver like Hamilton or Ricciardo with lucrative contracts who successfully argue that they’ve suffered ill health which stopped them racing would look to gain millions in compensation and that’s before the media attention it would attract.
It’s very much a problem that the teams are trying to avoid / eliminate so I can only imagine the pressure is mounting on the teams (e.g Merc) who can’t get a handle on it.
Soldato
The real answer of course is side skirts lol
- Status