planetf1.com

If you have a question about F1 you'd like to ask without creating a thread of its own, post the question here!

I'll go first: Has there ever been an occasion where not all of the points-scoring positions have been given points? Or will they by some logic always give out all the points even if only e.g. 9 drivers finish the race? Assuming of course that the race wasn't red-flagged too early on in the race.

Covalent wrote:I'll go first: Has there ever been an occasion where not all of the points-scoring positions have been given points? Or will they by some logic always give out all the points even if only e.g. 9 drivers finish the race? Assuming of course that the race wasn't red-flagged too early on in the race.

4 finishers, points still awarded -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Monaco_Grand_Prix

Remember watching it. Such an odd race!

Terence wrote:

Covalent wrote:I'll go first: Has there ever been an occasion where not all of the points-scoring positions have been given points? Or will they by some logic always give out all the points even if only e.g. 9 drivers finish the race? Assuming of course that the race wasn't red-flagged too early on in the race.

4 finishers, points still awarded -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Monaco_Grand_Prix

Remember watching it. Such an odd race!

Thanks for this! Salo and Häkkinen indeed got the points too but they finished 70/75 laps so technically they were classified?

Terence wrote:

Covalent wrote:I'll go first: Has there ever been an occasion where not all of the points-scoring positions have been given points? Or will they by some logic always give out all the points even if only e.g. 9 drivers finish the race? Assuming of course that the race wasn't red-flagged too early on in the race.

4 finishers, points still awarded -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Monaco_Grand_Prix

from the text:

"And so 18 cars climbed the hill on the first lap. Hill began to pull away.."

Only one I can think of was the 2005 US GP in Indianapolis because only 6 cars started. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Unite ... Grand_Prix

Terence wrote:

Covalent wrote:I'll go first: Has there ever been an occasion where not all of the points-scoring positions have been given points? Or will they by some logic always give out all the points even if only e.g. 9 drivers finish the race? Assuming of course that the race wasn't red-flagged too early on in the race.

4 finishers, points still awarded -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Monaco_Grand_Prix

Go back another 14 years to the comedy of errors that was Monaco '82 and it gets even better:

1 finisher, full points awarded -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Monaco_Grand_Prix

Guia wrote:

Terence wrote:

Covalent wrote:I'll go first: Has there ever been an occasion where not all of the points-scoring positions have been given points? Or will they by some logic always give out all the points even if only e.g. 9 drivers finish the race? Assuming of course that the race wasn't red-flagged too early on in the race.

4 finishers, points still awarded -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Monaco_Grand_Prix

Go back another 14 years to the comedy of errors that was Monaco '82 and it gets even better:

1 finisher, full points awarded -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Monaco_Grand_Prix

Fair cop. I was about 4 months old at the time though

Here is one:

Is there a main reason for new technologies/innovations to become banned after a season?

I am thinking, flexi-wings/floor, blown diffuser, exhaust gasses being used to keep the tyres within a reasonable operating temperature, engine mapping - that kind of thing. (I mean other than the obvious cost of development.)

Nice idea for a thread BTW.

Blackcat75 wrote:Here is one:

Is there a main reason for new technologies/innovations to become banned after a season?

I am thinking, flexi-wings/floor, blown diffuser, exhaust gasses being used to keep the tyres within a reasonable operating temperature, engine mapping - that kind of thing. (I mean other than the obvious cost of development.)

Nice idea for a thread BTW.

things like the flexi wing etc were I believe banned for being in contravention of the spirit of the rules. As for the blown diffuser, there's a very good article of James Allen which explans it. In essence he claims the reason for banning was:

The performance gain is around half a second to one second per lap. But this drives fuel consumption up by around 15% and is very hard on engines, so it means costly reliability programmes. This is not the way the FIA wants the sport to go.

Blackcat75 wrote:Here is one:

Is there a main reason for new technologies/innovations to become banned after a season?

I am thinking, flexi-wings/floor, blown diffuser, exhaust gasses being used to keep the tyres within a reasonable operating temperature, engine mapping - that kind of thing. (I mean other than the obvious cost of development.)

Nice idea for a thread BTW.

The exhaust blown diffuser didn't look good for F1 from an environmental perspective. Cars had to burn fuel even when they were off the throttle.

Another reason could be costs. If I remember correctly, to get a good exhaust blown diffuser you needed a very clever floor. A clever design team to design the floor and all the costs associated with manufacturing and design. The performance gain from having the EBD was so huge that it was a necessity to remain competitive.

I've always had an issue with the blown diffuser because you are using the engine as a compressor to create airflow and enhance aero. It's not really that big a step from the Brabham 'Fan Car' of 1978. It could make an interesting argument as to whether the engine being used for downforce constituted a "Movable Aerodynamic Device". I think downforce should only be generated by the passage of the vehicle through the air and the exhaust should point straight out into the open.

What is it with Germans and Formula 1?

Blackcat75 wrote:Here is one:

Is there a main reason for new technologies/innovations to become banned after a season?

I am thinking, flexi-wings/floor, blown diffuser, exhaust gasses being used to keep the tyres within a reasonable operating temperature, engine mapping - that kind of thing. (I mean other than the obvious cost of development.)

Nice idea for a thread BTW.

There have been many reasons that technologies/innovations have been banned. From slowing down the cars, drivers, costs, you name it. FIA loves to let them innovate and then pull the plug when things get too wild.

Thanks guys. ^^

It always seemed a little odd to me, personally I like the innovation, and I agree that there are some technologies that detract from the racing. Also there is a small cynical part of me that thinks "Hmm, is it because 'one' team can't master a certain innovation and then veto the technology?" Does anyone know if that 'one' team still have a veto over new rules, or was that rescinded after 2008?

Money always plays a part too, as the axiom goes 'it's usually down to money' (i.e. it costs too much for every team to catch up).

Juzzy82 wrote:What is it with Germans and Formula 1?

I think that's a social thing. When you get an individual who is spectacularly successful in a certain area (i.e. Michael Schumacher) it draws an interest to the sport in that country, more people in that country try it and it becomes like a national sport. Look at motorcycle racing in Spain, or the UK when Wimbledon is on.

Michael's popularity in Germany, along with a strong (and cash-rich) automotive sector made racing cars a viable sport to get into. It's a little strange Japan hasn't followed suit (with the exception of Sato!).

Blackcat75 wrote:Thanks guys. ^^

It always seemed a little odd to me, personally I like the innovation, and I agree that there are some technologies that detract from the racing. Also there is a small cynical part of me that thinks "Hmm, is it because 'one' team can't master a certain innovation and then veto the technology?" Does anyone know if that 'one' team still have a veto over new rules, or was that rescinded after 2008?

Money always plays a part too, as the axiom goes 'it's usually down to money' (i.e. it costs too much for every team to catch up).

That's another golden rule in F1; If you can't beat them, ban them. (Or something like that)

After the tragic death of Gilles Villeneuve, Formula 1 begins with such an odd/weird/strange race. Patrese gets his debut win.

And the first race after Jacques Villeneuve retires from F1; we have another odd/weird race, this time Jenson Button gets his 1st win.

is it a coincidence?

Blackcat75 wrote:

Juzzy82 wrote:What is it with Germans and Formula 1?

I think that's a social thing. When you get an individual who is spectacularly successful in a certain area (i.e. Michael Schumacher) it draws an interest to the sport in that country, more people in that country try it and it becomes like a national sport. Look at motorcycle racing in Spain, or the UK when Wimbledon is on.

Michael's popularity in Germany, along with a strong (and cash-rich) automotive sector made racing cars a viable sport to get into. It's a little strange Japan hasn't followed suit (with the exception of Sato!).

I think you're on the right track but it goes farther back than that. I'd put the start of the country's passion for racing back in the pre-WWII era when Mercedes and Auto Union were in an arms race of sorts trying to beat each other's records.

I'm sure that POB will come along shortly and give a nice lineage of German drivers from that era up through the current crop to help me out. The earliest I can think of Carraciola, but I'm sure I've spelled it wrong and that he isn't the earliest.

I've got to stop trying to post things before my first coffee.

RaggedMan wrote:

Blackcat75 wrote:

Juzzy82 wrote:What is it with Germans and Formula 1?

I think that's a social thing. When you get an individual who is spectacularly successful in a certain area (i.e. Michael Schumacher) it draws an interest to the sport in that country, more people in that country try it and it becomes like a national sport. Look at motorcycle racing in Spain, or the UK when Wimbledon is on.

Michael's popularity in Germany, along with a strong (and cash-rich) automotive sector made racing cars a viable sport to get into. It's a little strange Japan hasn't followed suit (with the exception of Sato!).

I think you're on the right track but it goes farther back than that. I'd put the start of the country's passion for racing back in the pre-WWII era when Mercedes and Auto Union were in an arms race of sorts trying to beat each other's records.

I'm sure that POB will come along shortly and give a nice lineage of German drivers from that era up through the current crop to help me out. The earliest I can think of Carraciola, but I'm sure I've spelled it wrong and that he isn't the earliest.

I've got to stop trying to post things before my first coffee.

Yea, I wasn't thinking that far back - but all good points. I guess you can say the same for a lot of sports. Powerful European countries decided that fighting each other wasn't a particularly productive enterprise, so sport has taken over as a new source of domestic pride.

I've not lived in the UK for a number of years but I keep up to date with current events and I know that before the 2012 Olympics, the government invested in developing athletes in events that Britain had done well in, in previous Olympic events - and the results showed. I guess something similar is happening here.

Blackcat75 wrote:

RaggedMan wrote:

Blackcat75 wrote:

Juzzy82 wrote:What is it with Germans and Formula 1?

I think that's a social thing. When you get an individual who is spectacularly successful in a certain area (i.e. Michael Schumacher) it draws an interest to the sport in that country, more people in that country try it and it becomes like a national sport. Look at motorcycle racing in Spain, or the UK when Wimbledon is on.

Michael's popularity in Germany, along with a strong (and cash-rich) automotive sector made racing cars a viable sport to get into. It's a little strange Japan hasn't followed suit (with the exception of Sato!).

I think you're on the right track but it goes farther back than that. I'd put the start of the country's passion for racing back in the pre-WWII era when Mercedes and Auto Union were in an arms race of sorts trying to beat each other's records.

I'm sure that POB will come along shortly and give a nice lineage of German drivers from that era up through the current crop to help me out. The earliest I can think of Carraciola, but I'm sure I've spelled it wrong and that he isn't the earliest.

I've got to stop trying to post things before my first coffee.

Yea, I wasn't thinking that far back - but all good points. I guess you can say the same for a lot of sports. Powerful European countries decided that fighting each other wasn't a particularly productive enterprise, so sport has taken over as a new source of domestic pride.

I've not lived in the UK for a number of years but I keep up to date with current events and I know that before the 2012 Olympics, the government invested in developing athletes in events that Britain had done well in, in previous Olympic events - and the results showed. I guess something similar is happening here.

Yea, sometimes a country gets behind a particular sport for whatever reason whether it's the government or something more grassroots.

Sometimes it's not even a sport that has a history in that country. Annika Sorenstam comes to mind there. For some reason they went through a period where they were really pushing youth golf initiatives and ended up with a legend in womens golf. Now there's the Chinese with gymnastics and diving.

Has Grosjean been paid any money this year ?

Blackcat75 wrote:

Juzzy82 wrote:What is it with Germans and Formula 1?

I think that's a social thing. When you get an individual who is spectacularly successful in a certain area (i.e. Michael Schumacher) it draws an interest to the sport in that country, more people in that country try it and it becomes like a national sport. Look at motorcycle racing in Spain, or the UK when Wimbledon is on.

Michael's popularity in Germany, along with a strong (and cash-rich) automotive sector made racing cars a viable sport to get into. It's a little strange Japan hasn't followed suit (with the exception of Sato!).

Between the wars, there was a lot of restriction on what engineering development was allowed in Germany. To cut a long story short, there is a lot of crosover between racing machines and war machines, superchargers etc, and also, Germany was big on national pride, so Alfred Neubauer was given a lot of backing.

Over simplified, but worth researching if you are interested.

A2jdl wrote:Has Grosjean been paid any money this year ?

Interesting question! I'd like to know the answer to this too. I think I heard earlier in the season that both drivers are supposed to get bonuses depending on the points they score but obviously that was before all the money issues popped up.

On the same note, is Heikki getting paid for the two races he's doing?

Volantary wrote:

A2jdl wrote:Has Grosjean been paid any money this year ?

Interesting question! I'd like to know the answer to this too. I think I heard earlier in the season that both drivers are supposed to get bonuses depending on the points they score but obviously that was before all the money issues popped up.

On the same note, is Heikki getting paid for the two races he's doing?

What I've heard is that he's still under contract to Caterham, so Lotus aren't paying him. Word on the paddock seems to be that for Heikki's services, Lotus are letting Caterham use some of their engineers for these races...

Covalent wrote:

Volantary wrote:

A2jdl wrote:Has Grosjean been paid any money this year ?

Interesting question! I'd like to know the answer to this too. I think I heard earlier in the season that both drivers are supposed to get bonuses depending on the points they score but obviously that was before all the money issues popped up.

On the same note, is Heikki getting paid for the two races he's doing?

What I've heard is that he's still under contract to Caterham, so Lotus aren't paying him. Word on the paddock seems to be that for Heikki's services, Lotus are letting Caterham use some of their engineers for these races...

In an article on James Allen site it sounds more like Lotus is losing staff to Caterham.

RaggedMan wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Volantary wrote:

A2jdl wrote:Has Grosjean been paid any money this year ?

Interesting question! I'd like to know the answer to this too. I think I heard earlier in the season that both drivers are supposed to get bonuses depending on the points they score but obviously that was before all the money issues popped up.

On the same note, is Heikki getting paid for the two races he's doing?

What I've heard is that he's still under contract to Caterham, so Lotus aren't paying him. Word on the paddock seems to be that for Heikki's services, Lotus are letting Caterham use some of their engineers for these races...

In an article on James Allen site it sounds more like Lotus is losing staff to Caterham.

Ok, I might've misheard what they were saying in today's practice commentary.

Q: What aspects of a car can be modified between qualifying and race?

Covalent wrote:Q: What aspects of a car can be modified between qualifying and race?

alotta stuff can be done, so i'll just post the link

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 5/fia.html

All other things being equal, how much time does a driver lose to his team mate per lap if he weighs, for example, 15 kilograms heavier (due to balast distribution, centre of gravity, etc.)?

purchville wrote:All other things being equal, how much time does a driver lose to his team mate per lap if he weighs, for example, 15 kilograms heavier (due to balast distribution, centre of gravity, etc.)?

While I don't think there is way to come up with "time per lap" number for differences in the center of mass on the two cars in a team I did find an interesting article on the subject of how weight transfer is affected by CoM in racecars when trying to see if there was.

It's a NASCAR oriented site but will apply to ant car.
http://www.stockcarscience.com/blog/ind ... n_t_turn_1

PrancingRocket_ wrote:

Covalent wrote:Q: What aspects of a car can be modified between qualifying and race?

alotta stuff can be done, so i'll just post the link

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 5/fia.html

Thanks!

purchville wrote:All other things being equal, how much time does a driver lose to his team mate per lap if he weighs, for example, 15 kilograms heavier (due to balast distribution, centre of gravity, etc.)?

About 4 championships
Joking aside, interesting question but pretty impossible to give an exact answer to I'd guess!

Covalent wrote:

PrancingRocket_ wrote:

Covalent wrote:Q: What aspects of a car can be modified between qualifying and race?

alotta stuff can be done, so i'll just post the link

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... 5/fia.html

Thanks!

No worries!

Covalent wrote:

purchville wrote:All other things being equal, how much time does a driver lose to his team mate per lap if he weighs, for example, 15 kilograms heavier (due to balast distribution, centre of gravity, etc.)?

About 4 championships
Joking aside, interesting question but pretty impossible to give an exact answer to I'd guess!

Agreed it's a very difficult question to answer, but you hear different figures depending on who it comes from. Jensen has said it costs up to 0.5 secs IIRC. Then others on this forum have said that it's only about 0.05 secs. That's a 10-fold difference...in fact just qualifies as an order of magnitude difference. My guess is it's worth something in between, maybe 0.2 secs, but it would be nice to get a solid answer from one of the teams.

When is the FIA gala?

purchville wrote:

Covalent wrote:

purchville wrote:All other things being equal, how much time does a driver lose to his team mate per lap if he weighs, for example, 15 kilograms heavier (due to balast distribution, centre of gravity, etc.)?

About 4 championships
Joking aside, interesting question but pretty impossible to give an exact answer to I'd guess!

Agreed it's a very difficult question to answer, but you hear different figures depending on who it comes from. Jensen has said it costs up to 0.5 secs IIRC. Then others on this forum have said that it's only about 0.05 secs. That's a 10-fold difference...in fact just qualifies as an order of magnitude difference. My guess is it's worth something in between, maybe 0.2 secs, but it would be nice to get a solid answer from one of the teams.

I thought 10kgs of fuel means a difference of about .3s (and this is ofcourse dependent of track length).
But that's an absolute difference of 10kg.
In the case of a driver's weight, there's no weight difference between the packages. It's only the ballast and CoG. I'd be very surprised if it was as much as .1s.

I think I once saw Hulk or Webber responding to this, saying it didn't matter much. But I can't remember it exactly.

Covalent wrote:When is the FIA gala?

http://www.fia.com/fia-events/fia-prize-giving-2013

The ceremony will take place on Friday December 6th 2013 from 19:00-23:30.

mds wrote:

Covalent wrote:When is the FIA gala?

http://www.fia.com/fia-events/fia-prize-giving-2013

The ceremony will take place on Friday December 6th 2013 from 19:00-23:30.

Oh, it's next week already! Cheers.

mds wrote:

purchville wrote:

Covalent wrote:

purchville wrote:All other things being equal, how much time does a driver lose to his team mate per lap if he weighs, for example, 15 kilograms heavier (due to balast distribution, centre of gravity, etc.)?

About 4 championships
Joking aside, interesting question but pretty impossible to give an exact answer to I'd guess!

Agreed it's a very difficult question to answer, but you hear different figures depending on who it comes from. Jensen has said it costs up to 0.5 secs IIRC. Then others on this forum have said that it's only about 0.05 secs. That's a 10-fold difference...in fact just qualifies as an order of magnitude difference. My guess is it's worth something in between, maybe 0.2 secs, but it would be nice to get a solid answer from one of the teams.

I thought 10kgs of fuel means a difference of about .3s (and this is ofcourse dependent of track length).
But that's an absolute difference of 10kg.
In the case of a driver's weight, there's no weight difference between the packages. It's only the ballast and CoG. I'd be very surprised if it was as much as .1s.

I think I once saw Hulk or Webber responding to this, saying it didn't matter much. But I can't remember it exactly.

"Button saying that every five kilos on the man behind the wheel could add 0.2 seconds to a lap."
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/o ... egulations

Admittedly this is in regards to next year's cars.
2014: 5kg = 0.2 seconds per lap
2013: 5kg = ? seconds per lap
2013: 15kg (the original question I posed) = ? seconds per lap

Despite the changes to come I find it difficult to believe that it was <0.1 secs per lap this year (and the previous few years for that matter).