Discussion
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/brown-good-idea...
I have no idea what Toto Wolff's quote at the end is supposed to mean?
"The DRS effect is actually something that is not now quite understood.
"I think it's an aerodynamic device, which I find quite attractive to the sport."
Is it just badly translated?
I have no idea what Toto Wolff's quote at the end is supposed to mean?
"The DRS effect is actually something that is not now quite understood.
"I think it's an aerodynamic device, which I find quite attractive to the sport."
Is it just badly translated?
I think he's basically saying that it should be kept, at least for now - and also that he approves of DRS in general for the sport/spectacle.
The reason DRS is again up for debate is that it was only added in the first place to solve the problem of cars being unable to pass due to dirty air, and to increase the likelihood of passes in general too. The new argument by DRS detractors is that the new regs are intended to solve the dirty air problem, so on that basis DRS should now be ditched.
Toto, Brown, Brawn et al think that at least it should remain for 22' on the basis that we don't actually know how effective the new regs will be in terms of passing, and beyond that it should perhaps remain anyway as it unquestionably allows more passing in general, and does make the sport more exciting for the masses. Naturally the purists don't like it... but they're in the minority.
The reason DRS is again up for debate is that it was only added in the first place to solve the problem of cars being unable to pass due to dirty air, and to increase the likelihood of passes in general too. The new argument by DRS detractors is that the new regs are intended to solve the dirty air problem, so on that basis DRS should now be ditched.
Toto, Brown, Brawn et al think that at least it should remain for 22' on the basis that we don't actually know how effective the new regs will be in terms of passing, and beyond that it should perhaps remain anyway as it unquestionably allows more passing in general, and does make the sport more exciting for the masses. Naturally the purists don't like it... but they're in the minority.
TheDeuce said:
The reason DRS is again up for debate is that it was only added in the first place to solve the problem of cars being unable to pass due to dirty air, and to increase the likelihood of passes in general too.
It was rev limits that drove the adoption of DRS. Dirty air isn't an issue on the straights.LP670 said:
just give them turbo overboost so it can be deployed strategically rather than the lead car being a sitting duck as is the case with DRS
They do already have the push-to-pass button, but are hemmed in as regard to the reliability regulations. Four or five engines for the season would be a better compromise, now that we are in the tail end of these regulations with most of the efficiencies achieved that are going to be. The major cost is in the development, rather than the construction of a handful of units. I much prefer Indycar's push to pass.
I was never a fan of any type of temporary boost mechanism of any kind incuding DRS. Formula E''s attack zone and fan boost is pure cringe.
But indycar's push to pass works great. 200 seconds, deployable in maximum 15 second bursts. available anytime. It makes it a much fairer competition. Its not just a free overtake if your witihn half a second and can be used in defense as well as attack. Trigger happy drivers will find themselves under attack towards the end. Can be used to try close/build a gap at any time. Whoover can get on the power quicker out the corner and manage push to pass will gain an advantage over the driver who delayed. It works perfectly, The only thing indycar miss out is it is not obvious when a driver is on it etc.
DRS has became just a blunt hammer, Almost guarantees overtakes once a certain point has been reached. Is undefendable against. Hearing croft getting all worked up over an overtake where one driver just sits there full throttle as another car wizzes by with no way of stopping it.
Remember when at abu dhabi that the DRS system didnt work at the start of the race. Think the timing lines werent being sent back to control, It actually made abu dhabi a good race for 10 laps till it was fixed then it was the usual spaced out affair and DRS overtakes only on a straight line.
I was never a fan of any type of temporary boost mechanism of any kind incuding DRS. Formula E''s attack zone and fan boost is pure cringe.
But indycar's push to pass works great. 200 seconds, deployable in maximum 15 second bursts. available anytime. It makes it a much fairer competition. Its not just a free overtake if your witihn half a second and can be used in defense as well as attack. Trigger happy drivers will find themselves under attack towards the end. Can be used to try close/build a gap at any time. Whoover can get on the power quicker out the corner and manage push to pass will gain an advantage over the driver who delayed. It works perfectly, The only thing indycar miss out is it is not obvious when a driver is on it etc.
DRS has became just a blunt hammer, Almost guarantees overtakes once a certain point has been reached. Is undefendable against. Hearing croft getting all worked up over an overtake where one driver just sits there full throttle as another car wizzes by with no way of stopping it.
Remember when at abu dhabi that the DRS system didnt work at the start of the race. Think the timing lines werent being sent back to control, It actually made abu dhabi a good race for 10 laps till it was fixed then it was the usual spaced out affair and DRS overtakes only on a straight line.
HardtopManual said:
TheDeuce said:
The reason DRS is again up for debate is that it was only added in the first place to solve the problem of cars being unable to pass due to dirty air, and to increase the likelihood of passes in general too.
It was rev limits that drove the adoption of DRS. Dirty air isn't an issue on the straights.Nampahc Niloc said:
HardtopManual said:
TheDeuce said:
The reason DRS is again up for debate is that it was only added in the first place to solve the problem of cars being unable to pass due to dirty air, and to increase the likelihood of passes in general too.
It was rev limits that drove the adoption of DRS. Dirty air isn't an issue on the straights.Another aspect is that passing shouldn't generally be the preserve of the straights - there should be more passing under traction through the corners, which the new cars should help make more frequent too.
Keep it and let the fia decide if it’s needed or not after a race or two. Simples. They already have the tech so just fit it and then remove if not needed. If they remove it before the season and turns out it is needed that will very much be pie in face as getting it reinstated in the rules will be much harder than keeping it in just incase.
Carlososos said:
Keep it and let the fia decide if it’s needed or not after a race or two. Simples. They already have the tech so just fit it and then remove if not needed. If they remove it before the season and turns out it is needed that will very much be pie in face as getting it reinstated in the rules will be much harder than keeping it in just incase.
It's a factor in designing the cars. If they're not going to have DRS for the full life of the car, the designers would want to know ahead of time to enable them compensate their designs.TheDeuce said:
Carlososos said:
Keep it and let the fia decide if it’s needed or not after a race or two. Simples. They already have the tech so just fit it and then remove if not needed. If they remove it before the season and turns out it is needed that will very much be pie in face as getting it reinstated in the rules will be much harder than keeping it in just incase.
It's a factor in designing the cars. If they're not going to have DRS for the full life of the car, the designers would want to know ahead of time to enable them compensate their designs.Carlososos said:
Stipulate that you must have drs for the season but leave it to the fia to decide if it can be used or not. DRS has been the biggest help to spice up the racing since rain. It would be silly to throw it away without knowing if it’s needed.
One could argue that if it IS needed, the whole rule shake-up has failed in its primary objective and needs rethinking yet again. Carlososos said:
Stipulate that you must have drs for the season but leave it to the fia to decide if it can be used or not. DRS has been the biggest help to spice up the racing since rain. It would be silly to throw it away without knowing if it’s needed.
I think you’re right. Keep it in the technical regs for one season, and let the race director play with the number and length of the zones if required. Decide by the summer break whether to retain it for ‘23. Carlososos said:
TheDeuce said:
Carlososos said:
Keep it and let the fia decide if it’s needed or not after a race or two. Simples. They already have the tech so just fit it and then remove if not needed. If they remove it before the season and turns out it is needed that will very much be pie in face as getting it reinstated in the rules will be much harder than keeping it in just incase.
It's a factor in designing the cars. If they're not going to have DRS for the full life of the car, the designers would want to know ahead of time to enable them compensate their designs.Maybe even have it enabled for some races and not others (but always fitted so we don’t end up going down different wings for drs and none drs circuits).
If it’s an easier track to overtake at the then the FIA disable it. Get to a track where it’s near impossible to overtake enable it.
Personally I think I like the Indycar type suggestion above. X no of seconds of over-boost. Deploy it how you like.
kambites said:
Carlososos said:
Stipulate that you must have drs for the season but leave it to the fia to decide if it can be used or not. DRS has been the biggest help to spice up the racing since rain. It would be silly to throw it away without knowing if it’s needed.
One could argue that if it IS needed, the whole rule shake-up has failed in its primary objective and needs rethinking yet again. Everyone already has it, so put it on the car and if not needed turn it off.
carl_w said:
Maybe what Toto is saying is that at the moment we don't know what a 2022 DRS would look like. If more downforce is being produced under the car, presumably the rear wing doesn't have to be as draggy so what the DRS looks like may be different?
I think that's what he's saying - essentially 'wait and see'. Which is pretty sensible.And beyond that his comments support the positive effect drs has had to date, which is him simply saying he's not adverse to it remaining.
I think it's sensible to assume next season will feature drs throughout unless the combination of drs with the new less draggy aero is actually dangerous.. I doubt it though. I think it'll run for 22' and then they'll reflect on what is best.
TheDeuce said:
It's a factor in designing the cars. If they're not going to have DRS for the full life of the car, the designers would want to know ahead of time to enable them compensate their designs.
The DRS is closed for 99% of the race. Keeping it closed for the other 1% will not radically alter the conceptual design of the car. We will still see radically different rear wings at Spa and Monaco.It does need to be kept for next year, at least - just in case.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff