That's just great, game over man, game over.

That's just great, game over man, game over.

Post by Mark Jon » Fri, 16 Jun 2000 04:00:00


My fellow F1 nuts, I bring bad news.  From Atlas F1:

Max Mosley interview:

"We are always told 'reduce the aerodynamics'. Trouble is we've
learned from experience that it never succeeds. For thirty years we've
been constantly trying to reduce the aerodynamic potential of the cars
to keep the speeds in check and this has failed.

So if you have a responsible governing body you must have a final
point of defense and that for us is the grooved tires. Now if we had
some magic way of reducing the downforce or, even better, reducing the
downforce and increasing the ability of the cars to run close to each
other in the corners we would take it but we know there isn't

<snip>

In the end, if they are on bicycle tires - and obviously you don't
want to go to that extreme - they could have 10,000 horsepower and all
the downforce they want and they will not go quick enough in the
corners to hurt themselves. So it is finding a balance that is our
objective.

But the grooved tires were probably the most important contribution to
keeping speed and therefore safety under control."

------------------------

So I think it can be fair to say we won't be seeing slick tyres coming
back soon, if at all.  And, therefore, we can pretty much say goodbye
to the expected/hoped for return of close racing.

This Sucks.

- Mark Jones
"People will mumble and say 'Prost is not brave'.  I'm brave.  I'm
brave to say that I won't take this sort of risk.  The people who
criticize you will not be the ones taking care of your legs when you
are in your wheelchair" - Alain Prost

 
 
 

That's just great, game over man, game over.

Post by G » Sat, 17 Jun 2000 04:00:00


Quote:

>So I think it can be fair to say we won't be seeing slick tyres coming
>back soon, if at all.  And, therefore, we can pretty much say goodbye
>to the expected/hoped for return of close racing.

Well, if it helps, when DC was asked about no passing (by Letterman),
he blamed the aerodynamics.
Not once did he say anything about tyres.

 
 
 

That's just great, game over man, game over.

Post by Igor » Sat, 17 Jun 2000 04:00:00

Well I think that the problem of Formula 1 are not the tyres. The problem
is, as Coulthard and all designers and engineers say, it is the
aerodynamics. FIA should increase aerodynamical grip. That can be achieved
by bigger wings and wider cars. Just that would change a lot. The
aerodynamic of todays cars is critical. Therefore it is very hard to
overtake. It seems to me a strange thing mystifying that people which
understand how formula one car works, let someone like Mosley (who
probably doesnt know how the car works, at least not much) to change the
regulations to the "better". Really strange.Think that FOA should take the
future of Formula into their hands and let Mosley to do his job against
the EU.

:o)

Mark Jones schrieb:

Quote:
> My fellow F1 nuts, I bring bad news.  From Atlas F1:

> Max Mosley interview:

> "We are always told 'reduce the aerodynamics'. Trouble is we've
> learned from experience that it never succeeds. For thirty years we've
> been constantly trying to reduce the aerodynamic potential of the cars
> to keep the speeds in check and this has failed.

> So if you have a responsible governing body you must have a final
> point of defense and that for us is the grooved tires. Now if we had
> some magic way of reducing the downforce or, even better, reducing the
> downforce and increasing the ability of the cars to run close to each
> other in the corners we would take it but we know there isn't

> <snip>

> In the end, if they are on bicycle tires - and obviously you don't
> want to go to that extreme - they could have 10,000 horsepower and all
> the downforce they want and they will not go quick enough in the
> corners to hurt themselves. So it is finding a balance that is our
> objective.

> But the grooved tires were probably the most important contribution to
> keeping speed and therefore safety under control."

> ------------------------

> So I think it can be fair to say we won't be seeing slick tyres coming
> back soon, if at all.  And, therefore, we can pretty much say goodbye
> to the expected/hoped for return of close racing.

> This Sucks.

> - Mark Jones
> "People will mumble and say 'Prost is not brave'.  I'm brave.  I'm
> brave to say that I won't take this sort of risk.  The people who
> criticize you will not be the ones taking care of your legs when you
> are in your wheelchair" - Alain Prost


 
 
 

That's just great, game over man, game over.

Post by Ross Cleme » Sat, 17 Jun 2000 04:00:00

: My fellow F1 nuts, I bring bad news.  From Atlas F1:
:
: Max Mosley interview:
:
: "We are always told 'reduce the aerodynamics'. Trouble is we've
: learned from experience that it never succeeds. For thirty years we've
: been constantly trying to reduce the aerodynamic potential of the cars
: to keep the speeds in check and this has failed.

[Note: I'm disagreeing with Max, not Mark]

If they wanted to reduce the aerodynamics they could do so easily, by
bringing in draconian regulations controlling the shape of the car,
ride height, and size/number of elements of the wings. Just because no-one
has yet had the guts to significantly limit aerodynamics, doesn't mean
that it can be done.

: So if you have a responsible governing body you must have a final
: point of defense and that for us is the grooved tires. Now if we had
: some magic way of reducing the downforce or, even better, reducing the
: downforce and increasing the ability of the cars to run close to each
: other in the corners we would take it but we know there isn't

It doesn't take magic to cripple the wings, just limit their size, and
surface area.

Cheers,

Ross-c

 
 
 

That's just great, game over man, game over.

Post by Sven ;- » Sat, 17 Jun 2000 04:00:00

my monthly Max Mosley rant... ;-)

Quote:

> Max Mosley interview:

> "We are always told 'reduce the aerodynamics'. Trouble is we've
> learned from experience that it never succeeds. For thirty years we've
> been constantly trying to reduce the aerodynamic potential of the cars
> to keep the speeds in check and this has failed.

> So if you have a responsible governing body you must have a final
> point of defense and that for us is the grooved tires. Now if we had
> some magic way of reducing the downforce or, even better, reducing the
> downforce and increasing the ability of the cars to run close to each
> other in the corners we would take it but we know there isn't

A blatant lie.

FOC has agreed on higher front wings and 4 segment rear wings,
and about every engineer agrees this will decrease downforce to
an extend that will at least compensate the expected progress from
the 2001 tire war.

Other measures reducing downforce would include
-smaller wings
-worse aspect ratio of the wings
-completely flat underbody, ie. no diffuser & Venturi tunnels
-higher ride height
-ban of turning vanes, eg. by defining a rectangular
 "aero-device free" box around tires

Quote:
> In the end, if they are on bicycle tires - and obviously you don't
> want to go to that extreme - they could have 10,000 horsepower and all
> the downforce they want and they will not go quick enough in the
> corners to hurt themselves. So it is finding a balance that is our
> objective.

> But the grooved tires were probably the most important contribution to
> keeping speed and therefore safety under control."

True for the cornering speeds, however he conveniently
fails to mention that his '98 rule change increased the *top*
speeds. The reason is quite simple; smaller cars mean smaller
frontal area, mean faster top speeds.

This is the main problem with Mosley's blind regulations rampage;
the most dangerous accidents don't happen when drivers lose it
in fast corners -- anyone witnessed both BAR drivers crashing in
Eau Rouge and walking away, joking about it.
(coincidentally, Eau Rouge became more dangerous with grooves)

The most dangerous moments are when something goes wrong on
the straights, at top speed. Usually brake, wing or suspension
failures; Ratzenberger, Senna, Wendlinger, Panis, M Schumacher,
Zonta and Sarrazin's crash all fall within this category.

Mosley hasn't done anything about it, despite a simple solution;
larger frontal area (eg. wider track, larger tires).

MM also defends "his equations". The article mentions Mosley's
a physics major able to comprehend the mathematics involved.
This is hilarious, any ninth grade student with a reasonable
education can understand them.

While the logic behind his equations holds true, their assumptions
and application to F1-reality are ridiculous. Considering we're
talking about driver's safety here, they're malicous manipulation.

"energy of impact is proportional to tire grip" matters only when
something goes wrong *in* the corner. Usually it doesn't, it goes
wrong *before* the corner, at the end of the straight.

"braking distance equals half the curve's radius" is even worse.
The assumption is that the entire run off has the same coefficient
of grip as the track. This is ridiculous; gravel and grass provide
only a tiny fraction of grip on asphalt. The 2nd assumption is the
car retains it's aerodynamic performance, which is again utter
bullshit; the underbody downforce is completely lost once off track,
and for the wings to work the car must point exactly forward[1].

Max Mosley is either an ignorant fool, or a lying bastard.
Probably both.

He managed to do what nobody considered possible -- he's a worse
president than Jean Marie Balestre. Unfortunately, MM is a much
better professional lier^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hpolitician.

Sven.

[1] This BTW explains why most drivers don't steer when they leave
    the track at high speeds.
--
there's *always* something tempting

 
 
 

That's just great, game over man, game over.

Post by Chris Help » Sat, 17 Jun 2000 04:00:00

The fact that CART has for years succesfully reduced aerodynamics and
promoted passing with wide, slick tires, is evidently a fact too
insignificant to merit any attention  from the giant intellect of the great
Max Mosley.

Apparently CART will be running in Britain and Germany in 2002, perhaps even
next year - on road courses I believe, since the anti-competitive oval-only
agreement they signed with Bernie is due to expire. Perhaps Max will start
to notice the unfavorable comparisons at that point ...

Sky


Quote:
> My fellow F1 nuts, I bring bad news.  From Atlas F1:

> Max Mosley interview:

> "We are always told 'reduce the aerodynamics'. Trouble is we've
> learned from experience that it never succeeds. For thirty years we've
> been constantly trying to reduce the aerodynamic potential of the cars
> to keep the speeds in check and this has failed.

> So if you have a responsible governing body you must have a final
> point of defense and that for us is the grooved tires. Now if we had
> some magic way of reducing the downforce or, even better, reducing the
> downforce and increasing the ability of the cars to run close to each
> other in the corners we would take it but we know there isn't

> <snip>

> In the end, if they are on bicycle tires - and obviously you don't
> want to go to that extreme - they could have 10,000 horsepower and all
> the downforce they want and they will not go quick enough in the
> corners to hurt themselves. So it is finding a balance that is our
> objective.

> But the grooved tires were probably the most important contribution to
> keeping speed and therefore safety under control."

> ------------------------

> So I think it can be fair to say we won't be seeing slick tyres coming
> back soon, if at all.  And, therefore, we can pretty much say goodbye
> to the expected/hoped for return of close racing.

> This Sucks.

> - Mark Jones
> "People will mumble and say 'Prost is not brave'.  I'm brave.  I'm
> brave to say that I won't take this sort of risk.  The people who
> criticize you will not be the ones taking care of your legs when you
> are in your wheelchair" - Alain Prost

 
 
 

That's just great, game over man, game over.

Post by Mark Jon » Sun, 18 Jun 2000 04:00:00


Quote:

>>So I think it can be fair to say we won't be seeing slick tyres coming
>>back soon, if at all.  And, therefore, we can pretty much say goodbye
>>to the expected/hoped for return of close racing.

>Well, if it helps, when DC was asked about no passing (by Letterman),
>he blamed the aerodynamics.
>Not once did he say anything about tyres.

Well, yeah, but he didn't say anything about his team mate either, it
still doesn't mean there wasn't a problem there.

- Mark Jones
"Anything can happen in motor racing,
and it usually does." - Murray Walker