|
learnincurve posted:Can we talk about how Mercedes were not allowed to tell Nico that his brakes were about to explode, and decided not to retire him when they were at a critical level please? They were allowed, it's classed as a safety iasue if the driver is at risk of mechanical failure. Iirc Checo got a team warnibg about something similar
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 14:35 |
|
|
I do think whoever said it earlier got it right about this perhaps being the season the media turned on Are Lewis. Sky commentary had some comment about attending fashion shows and partying all off season, and called him 'one of the great all time talents' or similar, but added 'I know many of you at home might disagree, but that's my opinion' (both paraphrased)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:It's Jollyon. Max (not Are Max, Race Finisher Extraordinaire) was last seasons pick of the litter, but he isn't British. He won't be turned on, but the main attraction for commentators this season will be a certain Mr Palmer
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Tsaedje posted:http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2016/03/23/2016-australian-grand-prix-team-radio-transcript-2/ Wow good guys Big John and Danny Ric. gently caress off Max V.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Aye, Max is to be tolerated, but also criticised
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
Why hasn't Bernie realised that all the greasy money grabbing that goes on with subscription TV could be all his instead, if he just said "gently caress off we're not selling TV rights in countries X, Y and Z but instead moving to a subscription service online that empties straight into my pockets" and then keep it on TV for countries that still have bigger TV audiences and low streaming audiences Bleeding money out of punters is supposed to be something he's good at, idgi simplefish fucked around with this message at 16:39 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
I like Big John and while I was pretty meh about Haas, Gene was really nice following Alonso's crash that I couldn't help but like him. Although he did at times seem a little vague about some of the F1 rules but that makes me like him even more.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
I do wonder why some of the useless drivers who rarely win in these series don't quit and do something cheaper and more fun like autocross, instead of pootling around for years on end going nowhere fast
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Fake edit: Okay that was a lot more words on a lot more topics than I wanted to say. tl;dr Randomness in f1 is good, but too much is bad, and we can't largely get it these days without inducing it artificially ------------------------------------------------------ Alain Post posted:A lot of those things kick loving rear end. Well, kind of. Remember when Pirelli tyres were exploding everywhere? A lot of commentators/pundits got pissed off because you couldn't make a meaningful prediction or have meaningful expectations about performance, basically it all became a big game of tyre roulette where everything else that made F1 F1 (engine, aero, drivers etc) became so marginalised as to matter very little. If you wanna play roulette go to a casino. But on the other extreme we have FIArrai with Fighting Michael and the Vettelreich and now Das Merc Reich (loving Germans, right?) where everything is a foregone conclusion. yawnsville. There's a reason a football match lasts 90 minutes - it's long enough to allow team performance level to be a major factor but short enough that a big enough fuckup by the better team or a big enough scoop of luck for the underdog will shake things up and the crowd goes wild. Unfortunately as technology and measurement gets better The Best Solution begins to appear. Look at the early days of aviation, hell, even during the Cold War. New things were being tried and there were broadly differing solutions offered to the same problem. Now pretty much every fighter jet looks the same, and every airliner is more or less identical. For the current technology level, the optimum solution has been pretty well found. Cars too - even shitheaps start every time these days. Most cars solve the same problems in the same ways because the best solution had been found. Go back to the Rando era of F1. Did the engine explode because of design, defect, driver, or a weird combination or circumstantial factors? Welp, lacking good telemetry and QA and modelling it's actually quite hard to tell until we've run enough races to notice a trend. And changing one thing could have lots of knock on effects we can't accurately predict - I suppose we make our best guess and run with it. But those days are gone, at least in F1. I really like the innovation side of things. And the deception side, they usually go hand in hand. gently caress Pirelli mandating which way round tyres were run - let the teams take every risk they want with what's on the table, that's my view. But then gently caress the teams for blaming Pirelli and bitching when they didn't follow guidelines. That poo poo only served to make the marketing folks at Pirelli get defensive over brand reputation and force the tyres to be used as intended. Anyway, the point is that you need to have enough consistency to evaluate form, but enough of a fudge factor to shake things up once in a while. Since that is becoming less organic* you get Pirelli being told to make Crazy Rubber, you get Bernie suggesting sprinklers because wet races still have that shakeup effect, you get the Driver/Fan Boost or whatever it's called. DRS is a different kettle of fish and although I'm rambling I don't want to get off track too much. Personally, I think the answer is more options. The KERS button was good because it became a tactical decision of when to use it, In the driver's hands. I like the radio ban because it means that drivers effectively have to evaluate how to make their machine go faster around a track under their control (the very definition of racing driver, no?), rather than a computer in Milton Keynes running 5 simulations simultaneously and some guy on the pit wall just acting as a relay mouthpiece. More tyre choices are good because they broaden strategic options and variation. Give teams a clear goal, set hard limits, change those limits by a good degree every season or two. "But simplefish," you cry, "changing things a lot hurts little teams and helps big fat ones because they have the resources to try lots of things!" Yeah, no poo poo. But keeping them the same doesn't help either. Chances are the one who gets closest to Best Answer will have room to improve AND a massive head start, so even the other big boys are stuck playing catch up (see: nowadays Merc and Ferrari). At least big changes remove or reduce the head start, and opens up innovation (see: Brawn GP). So no, I don't have a solution to "More Money = More Better", especially as costs continue to rise**. And I'm not sure there is one. But what you CAN introduce is an avenue for more variation in design solution approach. Like when turbos were new, I suppose, and people didn't know if the NA engine was truly dead yet (but there was a best answer: Turbos are better) *and really, who can be shocked that engineers of all people would be good at eliminating unwanted variation as they gained access to better technology? This is why testing is restricted. They are trying in vain to keep as much guesswork in the design process as possible. The problem with restricting testing is one that I thought of a lot when wicka was going on last week about the state of F1. Wicka is right in that F1 is currently in a state of balance, it's not keeling over. But others were right in questioning sustainability. It's the underlying point of everything from economic bubbles to Japanese RPGs: imagine a seesaw. A beam with equal and equidistant mass on both sides of the pivot will. Be balanced. But as the beam gets longer, although it remains in balance, it takes a smaller and smaller variation to upset the system in a bigger fashion. A system can be balanced but unstable. An economy can be growing but overheated. Your character at Level 100 can do more damage but so can the enemies. A sport can be making money but risk the long term. In anything that involves humans, from sociology to politics to economics to sport sponsorship, past performance is not an assurance of future success. No, the sky isn't falling, but questions do need to be asked about where the sport is headed. And that brings me back to testing and development. **There's a good documentary from the ( Those links: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1LkxGx5WJzA Part 1 - 5:30 duckworth (as a spectator) just says to the head of ford Motorsport "We ought to start again... Make a new engine". And they do. Which is what the rest of the documentary is about https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7RCdRKkt4ds Part 2 simplefish fucked around with this message at 09:02 on Mar 31, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
That's my point, the tyre problem has been Solved, so any attempts to introduce variation via them are wholly artificial On the other hand, letting teams choose whether to mount them back-to-front on the hubs for grip gains but increased wear was a good example of More Options
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 08:56
|
|
|
I believe Michelin can make as good a tyre as Bridgestone, and Pirelli, Goodyear and Dunlop (if they still exist) could do the same. The question then becomes did the Michelin soft go softer or harder than the Bridgestone soft? And that's not More Options because teams are locked in for a whole season*. May as well have standard compounds. Admittedly, I don't like tyre compounds changing mid season. A soft should be the same soft compound in race. 1 as the season finale. I don't mind single tyre manufacturers, but how the car is set up and driven will affect wear a lot. I think there should be more compounds to to choose from each race (so if more than one manufacturer, not making it illegal to switch from race to race, though teams may choose to stick with one manufacturer for sponsorship etc), and more range for the teams to set the car up in. *Compromise is the nature behind meaningful choices. If you can choose all of the gains and none of the drawbacks, it's not a choice at that point, but simply common sense. Selecting gear ratios for the season is good because you have to choose what you will compromise on a per track basis. Now, you may say the same about tyres. Assume that michelin run faster but wear faster than Bridgestone. Some tracks will be better for one supplier an another. Now, that does sound a lot like the gear ratio thing, but the difference is that it is each team that chooses their ratios, not an external supplier who has to try to keep lots of teams happy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 09:13
|
|
|
Cheese reference? Were we expecting one?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
Well that sounds pointless
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
McLaren pit wearing Designer Aprons or is that just a fashion disaster of a T-shirt that makes fat crew look even fatter?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 13:42
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:Sun is going down. Track is colder than it should be at this time of year, dusty from the wind, and very green from the rain yesterday. Tyres will be a thing. I guess for the rookie it'll be a steep... learnincurve 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:y'all will be pining for Bernie after Trump takes over F1. "Make F1 great again!" Perez and Gutierrez have to stay on one side of the pit wall
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Did the Canberra Milk Kid race with a broken leg for half a season or am I misremembering #aussiegrit?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Norns posted:Yeah a broken leg and rib possibly puncturing a lung are totally the same. I wasn't trying to turn this into Incapacity Olympics, I was just drawing a parallel between the two, because unless I'm wrong (not sarcastic, I could well be) a broken leg should get you medically disallowed from racing, surely? And so posters are sitting in this thread like "oh yeah they should have seen the ribs thing" but apparently track docs can manage to miss a friggin broken leg? Which should be rather more apparent
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
Thanks for the details everyone, for some reason I thought he was hiding it actually being broken (like in a cast I suppose). Maybe he said 'hiding the pain' or something and I misremembered. But yeah, pinned and plated makes sense.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
poty posted:As a medical professional, all the tests and symptoms point to the same diagnosis: F1 is dead This post is a gem
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
re: customer cars and teams bitching, Williams started out that way and when Sauber joined in 1993 they were widely ras 'Mercedes in disguise'
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:I prefer Mate Shits Massive poo poo or Massa's poo poo
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
MustardFacial posted:And yet, here we are. - I would like to see closer points at the top with gappier points lower down, so 1st gets 25 points, 2nd gets 24, but the difference between 9th and 10th is like 10 points. I don't know, someone could do the maths, but the key thing of better places meaning points not penalties is kept, except you gotta work harder at the top because your rivals don't fall behind so quickly. - I do think there is a need, when considering major rule changes, to consider when it isn't "F1" in character but only in name and has become a poor imitation of another series. I'm not saying it has, but if you want X from your Motorsport and X isn't in F1 but is in Rallycross, go watch that instead. Hey we could do that as a fun thread thing: what are some of the defining features of F1 that should be present throughout changes, in your opinions?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
    
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Speaking of f1 books is cojawfee still knocking round the thread?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
More driver drama please. I hate all this lovely posting about posters rubbish. Posting about posers is much better.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
A bunch of millionaires, that's who
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 11:39
|
|
|
Hayday Williams wouldn't have flinched at booting a driver
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Do autocross/autograss/rallycross or whatever it's called in your area. Although it costs a bit depending on regulations to set up a car (roll cage, fire extinguisher etc) you can usally pick up a car from someone leaving the sport at a fair discount on ebay or whatever or by going to club meetings/forums and asking around. Or you know, buy the sim, it sounds like fun. I just think you can have more fun for your money. e: wait, just the pedals, not for a whole seat on hydraulic rams? gently caress that. Go buy something with an engine and drive it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Well hell man if that's your thing, do your thing. Clearly you've spent a lot more on that than I would have, so just make sure your outlay is equivalent to your added enjoyment and have at it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Human Grand Prix posted:He doesn't have a licence iirc. Plus $1500 will not buy you a car that you can do that with. E: If you do not have any mechanical experience. I don't know about the US but I saw two Class 1 Autograss on ebay a few weeks ago, cost ~£600 the pair. No licence required, sport allows 12 year olds in Class 1 simplefish fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Apr 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
F1 engine regs next time round should mandate rotary valves, not the old Desmond Romic ones
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 09:47
|
|
|
He calls his tweets "giving back"? Sorry, I think I can feel my lunch coming back...
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
I hope people keep pushing the conspiracy theories because it's fun to see Toto get wound up and Lewis probably isn't enjoying them either
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
Red Bull wanting a Ferrari engine next year? In any case Joss' wife better stock up on makeup and cancel her appointments for the next few days, ol' Bossman has something to celebrate
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2016 09:22
|
|
|
Y'all are saying dump Red Bull even when we just got more wtf-grade drama from them today, hot on the heels of yesterday? I like the soap opera aspect, they cause a lot of it. I'm fine having them in.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
andyf posted:Red Bull is sceptical [sic] that Formula 1’s new engine rules from 2017 will deliver what has been promised on either cost or performance grounds. Sceptical is the correct spelling, your snarky little [sic] is misplaced
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
Norns posted:Yeah don't go to Michigan for any reason, really. I skipped Detroit last time I was in the States... are you saying this time I should give it a michigan?
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
give it a miss = not bother to go I didn't go before = again give it a michigan = give it a miss again
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 14:35 |
|
|
It's no more than this thread deserves
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 19:37
|
|