Grand Prix Rejects

I think sometimes fatherhood can affect a driver's concentration. Damon Hill pulled off that kamikaze on Schumacher at Silverstone 1995 just a few days before his daughter was born. Perhaps he was thinking about that. Just an idea.

good_Ralf wrote:I think sometimes fatherhood can affect a driver's concentration. Damon Hill pulled off that kamikaze on Schumacher at Silverstone 1995 just a few days before his daughter was born. Perhaps he was thinking about that. Just an idea.

There was also the flip side of that with the famous pass Alonso made on Schumacher in the 2005 Japanese GP when he passed him on the run to 130R. When asked after the race how he could have been sure that Schumacher would lift, Alonso's response reportedly was "Because I know that he has a family".

Mansell always baulked at the suggestion that having a family affected his commitment and looking back it certainly seemed that way for him.

mario wrote:

good_Ralf wrote:I think sometimes fatherhood can affect a driver's concentration. Damon Hill pulled off that kamikaze on Schumacher at Silverstone 1995 just a few days before his daughter was born. Perhaps he was thinking about that. Just an idea.

There was also the flip side of that with the famous pass Alonso made on Schumacher in the 2005 Japanese GP when he passed him on the run to 130R. When asked after the race how he could have been sure that Schumacher would lift, Alonso's response reportedly was "Because I know that he has a family".

That's also the same race where a Renault engineer said
"We have a genius(Alonso) and a w**ker(Fisichella) in our team"

Were podium interviews introduced before 2012? I've seen a video of Damon Hill being interviewed on the podium after scoring his first win in the 1993 Hungarian Grand Prix. Before Britain 2012 almost all FIA interviews took place in the press conference room.

good_Ralf wrote:Were podium interviews introduced before 2012? I've seen a video of Damon Hill being interviewed on the podium after scoring his first win in the 1993 Hungarian Grand Prix. Before Britain 2012 almost all FIA interviews took place in the press conference room.

Yeah Britain 2012 was the first time Podium Interviews were held and apart from Malaysia 2013 where Webbo made his feelings all too clear i haven't got anything out of them. They probably wanted to try it back in 1993 but didn't like it so they gave up for all i know? Of the current grid this is how many times they've done it

Alonso 14
Vettel 13
Raikkonen 9
Hamilton 6
Webber 6
Button 4
Grosjean 3
Massa 3
Rosberg 1
Perez 1
Kobayashi 1

Freeze-O-Kimi wrote:

good_Ralf wrote:Were podium interviews introduced before 2012? I've seen a video of Damon Hill being interviewed on the podium after scoring his first win in the 1993 Hungarian Grand Prix. Before Britain 2012 almost all FIA interviews took place in the press conference room.

Yeah Britain 2012 was the first time Podium Interviews were held and apart from Malaysia 2013 where Webbo made his feelings all too clear i haven't got anything out of them. They probably wanted to try it back in 1993 but didn't like it so they gave up for all i know? Of the current grid this is how many times they've done it

Alonso 14
Vettel 13
Raikkonen 9
Hamilton 6
Webber 6
Button 4
Grosjean 3
Massa 3
Rosberg 1
Perez 1
Kobayashi 1

Isn't it fitting that Schumacher was the last driver to be interviewed in the post-race press conference?

No it's not very fitting really, it's more ironic that Schumacher of all people, Michael Schumacher who had graced the conference every bloody time between 2000 and 2004 (or at least it felt like it), and enough times before and after that period of time too, was there to stuff the conference up by not remembering how to do it!

I would find it exciting if the FOM took their coverage of old races (from the 1970-2000s) and added modern graphics to it to make it more informative and understandable. The graphics could feature a lap counter, the running order at the bottom, pit stop info including times and in the refueling era an estimate of how much fuel was added and how many laps that would cover.

good_Ralf wrote:I would find it exciting if the FOM took their coverage of old races (from the 1970-2000s) and added modern graphics to it to make it more informative and understandable. The graphics could feature a lap counter, the running order at the bottom, pit stop info including times and in the refueling era an estimate of how much fuel was added and how many laps that would cover.

Maybe a lap counter and running order, but please don't meddle with the old yellow-box graphics. They make me feel nostalgic.

andrew2209 wrote:

good_Ralf wrote:I would find it exciting if the FOM took their coverage of old races (from the 1970-2000s) and added modern graphics to it to make it more informative and understandable. The graphics could feature a lap counter, the running order at the bottom, pit stop info including times and in the refueling era an estimate of how much fuel was added and how many laps that would cover.

Maybe a lap counter and running order, but please don't meddle with the old yellow-box graphics. They make me feel nostalgic.

Maybe I'd have the current graphics or the 2004-9 graphics with the cube boxes, with the names simply consisting of surnames and the lap counter counting down and not up.

Would f1 be better if they had 2.65 litre twin turbo v8's producing 1050hp (CART produced 900+ hp in 2000) and the cars had manual gearboxes with SWOL (Shift WithOut Lifting) and mild ground effect.
Also what would the lap times be like.

roblomas52 wrote:Would f1 be better if they had 2.65 litre twin turbo v8's producing 1050hp (CART produced 900+ hp in 2000) and the cars had manual gearboxes with SWOL (Shift WithOut Lifting) and mild ground effect.
Also what would the lap times be like.

I'm guessing the fuel consumption would be extremely high (that means refueling might be back, yay! ) and also the G-forces might be too much even for the fittest drivers. The races would probably have to be split into two or more heats.

good_Ralf wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:Would f1 be better if they had 2.65 litre twin turbo v8's producing 1050hp (CART produced 900+ hp in 2000) and the cars had manual gearboxes with SWOL (Shift WithOut Lifting) and mild ground effect.
Also what would the lap times be like.

I'm guessing the fuel consumption would be extremely high (that means refueling might be back, yay! ) and also the G-forces might be too much even for the fittest drivers. The races would probably have to be split into two or more heats.

I was thinking of about 15-25 degree maximum upsweep on the ground effect venturis with no skirts

roblomas52 wrote:I was thinking of about 15-25 degree maximum upsweep on the ground effect venturis with no skirts

TBH I don't know much about ground effect apart the fact that it was used to suck cars onto the ground and was pioneered by Lotus to sweep the opposition in 1978 before getting banned after 1982 IIRC.

good_Ralf wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:I was thinking of about 15-25 degree maximum upsweep on the ground effect venturis with no skirts

TBH I don't know much about ground effect apart the fact that it was used to suck cars onto the ground and was pioneered by Lotus to sweep the opposition in 1978 before getting banned after 1982 IIRC.

Mario! Here, now!

watka wrote:

good_Ralf wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:I was thinking of about 15-25 degree maximum upsweep on the ground effect venturis with no skirts

TBH I don't know much about ground effect apart the fact that it was used to suck cars onto the ground and was pioneered by Lotus to sweep the opposition in 1978 before getting banned after 1982 IIRC.

Mario! Here, now!

If you insist...

Although Lotus are perhaps best known for their work on sculpted underbodies that lead to the phenomenon known as "ground effects", they were not the first to realise the potential of such a scheme. Jim Hall tried to develop a ground effect car in the 1960's (although he could not get it to work properly, which was what drew him to develop the famous 2J), whilst Tony Rudd also tried to develop a ground effect car whilst at BRM (it is sometimes called the P142, although it does not appear to have had any official designation) in 1969 but, due to pressure exerted on the management by Surtees (who feared that Rudd's work was drawing away resources from the development of their current car), was forced to abandon that project.
Wright, who had been working alongside Rudd at the time, tried using a similar scheme at March on their 701, with the sculpted underside of the outboard fuel tanks intended to take advantage of ground effects (although the inability to seal the sides and the fact that the fuel tanks were too far away from the ground meant that it wasn't that effective). Some designers also unintentionally managed to take advantage of ground effects too - Forghieri noted that the wider chassis of the 312T produced more downforce in the wind tunnel (which he later found out to be due to ground effect), and Murray later realised that the chronic oversteer of the BT46 at high speed was because the front wing was working in ground effect too, and the increased downforce at the front of the car was throwing the handling out of balance.

The basic concept takes advantage of Bernoulli's principle that, in a fluid flow, if the fluid is accelerated then the pressure of the fluid drops due to the conservation of energy laws. The idea that the design team at Lotus came up with was to sculpt the underbody of the car so any air stream beneath the car would be accelerated as it passed beneath the car causing a low pressure region to form beneath the car - they then coupled that with a skirt system that ensured that air could not simply flow from the sides of the car and back underneath it to equalise the pressure difference to increase the effectiveness of the system.
In the case of Lotus, though, they started running into problems fairly quickly - the Lotus 78 failed to fully capitalise on the idea as the low pressure region was too far forward, which meant that they had to significantly increase the size of the rear wing to provide enough rear downforce to restore the right handling balance. Their intended successor to the 79, the type 80, was a disaster though - the car suffered from an effect known as porpoising, where, as the car starts pitching when it brakes or accelerates, the centre of pressure shifts and can exacerbate the movement of the car, leading to very erratic handling.

That, at the very least, is a quite cut down and simplified version that I hope that it is useful for you nevertheless.

About domination...

People has used terms like VETTELWINSLOL and LOEBWINSLOL but why no-one is aware that 1952 is ASCARIWINSLOL?

FMecha wrote:About domination...

People has used terms like VETTELWINSLOL and LOEBWINSLOL but why no-one is aware that 1952 is ASCARIWINSLOL?

Why don't you try FormulaFord which is CAMMISHWINSLOL or Ginetta Juniors which is WOODHEADWINSLOL or even Moto3 where it's not only a same winner that's a SALOMRINSVINALESPODIUMLOL fest.

FMecha wrote:About domination...

People has used terms like VETTELWINSLOL and LOEBWINSLOL but why no-one is aware that 1952 is ASCARIWINSLOL?

Everyone is aware. 1952 just doesn't really come up in conversation much.

Sauber: the Mark Webber of teams?

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:Sauber: the Mark Webber of teams?

Webber had actually won races. I'd say Sauber is the Nick Heidfeld of teams, long tenures in F1 without any wins, plus they're somewhat synonymous with each other.

Whatever happened to Sergio Hernandez. He didn't do a lot in GP2 while in the WTCC he won at Brno in 2009 while in 2010 he easily had the measure of the other privateers. I haven't heard anything about him since

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:Sauber: the Mark Webber of teams?

I think if Mark Webber was a team, he'd be Ligier. Surprisingly good, won multiple races, but just never had that extra "edge" to win championships.

FullMetalJack wrote:

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:Sauber: the Mark Webber of teams?

Webber had actually won races. I'd say Sauber is the Nick Heidfeld of teams, long tenures in F1 without any wins, plus they're somewhat synonymous with each other.

DOSBoot wrote:

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:Sauber: the Mark Webber of teams?

I think if Mark Webber was a team, he'd be Ligier. Surprisingly good, won multiple races, but just never had that extra "edge" to win championships.

I should clarify that I meant the personality, not the results. Sorry

Would a F1 car work arround an oval EG: Texas Motorspeedway

roblomas52 wrote:Would a F1 car work arround an oval EG: Texas Motorspeedway

Yes.

Salamander wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:Would a F1 car work arround an oval EG: Texas Motorspeedway

Yes.

Explain? I.e. why you think the engine would last at full revs for the race distance?

watka wrote:

Salamander wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:Would a F1 car work arround an oval EG: Texas Motorspeedway

Yes.

Explain? I.e. why you think the engine would last at full revs for the race distance?

He didn't say anything about a race distance, he just asked if it would work. Which it would.

If there was any problems with the engines lasting the whole race distance, the teams could just lengthen the gears so they won't run at max power. Or turn down the engine power during the race. Probably a mixture of the 2.

And get rid of about 75% of the downforce. Would there be enough fuel or would they have to refuel mid race? It would hurt overall performance to lug all that fuel.

watka wrote:

Salamander wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:Would a F1 car work arround an oval EG: Texas Motorspeedway

Yes.

Explain? I.e. why you think the engine would last at full revs for the race distance?

Salamander wrote:He didn't say anything about a race distance, he just asked if it would work. Which it would.

If there was any problems with the engines lasting the whole race distance, the teams could just lengthen the gears so they won't run at max power. Or turn down the engine power during the race. Probably a mixture of the 2.

I don't think that it is necessarily just operating at max power that is the problem, rather that the engines are not really optimised to run at relatively high load for a sustained period of time. Yes, there are some tracks where the engines are under a long period of high load, but the longest stretch of full throttle running in F1, at approximately 17 seconds (which is the run from La Source to Les Combes at Spa) is still shorter than the current lap record at the Texas Motor Speedway (at about 22.5s) - furthermore, throughout that extended stretch of running, the driver is still shifting up and therefore only spends a short period of time at a relatively constant rpm in that run.

Sublime_FA11C wrote:And get rid of about 75% of the downforce. Would there be enough fuel or would they have to refuel mid race? It would hurt overall performance to lug all that fuel.

If it was the same length race as the IndyCar series runs (550km, or 342 miles), then yes, they probably would have to refuel given most of the races in F1 are about 190-200 miles in length.

Will different engine manufacturers make a bigger impact on performance next year? It's been a while since an engine that outright lacked HP. Even Marussia don't struggle with horses, they lack downforce mainly. Could we see some larger differences develop? And will they last longer then a season since engine development will be capped/frozen...

Sublime_FA11C wrote:Will different engine manufacturers make a bigger impact on performance next year? It's been a while since an engine that outright lacked HP. Even Marussia don't struggle with horses, they lack downforce mainly. Could we see some larger differences develop? And will they last longer then a season since engine development will be capped/frozen...

There will probably be some limited performance differences between the engines, but given that the regulations on the design of the engines themselves are fairly tight, I don't think that there will be large differences in performance in terms of power output. There could be some slight differences in other areas, though, such as fuel consumption, that could have a larger benefit, not to mention the differences in cooling requirements and arrangement of ancillaries that are likely to have a major impact on packaging.
As to whether those differences will persist, well, limited engine development is going to be allowed over the next few years - there is an indication that it will taper in from 2015 to 2018, with a few additional avenues being opened up as time goes on (variable intake trumpets seem to be permitted from 2015 onwards) but reductions in the number of upgrades that can be introduced to the engines acting to restrict development. It is possible that some engine equalisation may occur, but, equally, some performance differences may persist or even grow depending on development rates - there is also the question of what might happen to the energy recovery systems, since development of that system is less tightly regulated by comparison.

Does anyone know the music played on Brazilian TV everytime a Brazilian wins a Grand Prix? It hasn't been played since Italy 2009.

good_Ralf wrote:Does anyone know the music played on Brazilian TV everytime a Brazilian wins a Grand Prix? It hasn't been played since Italy 2009.

Tema da Vitória, by... someone

Aerospeed [JerMcC] wrote:

good_Ralf wrote:Does anyone know the music played on Brazilian TV everytime a Brazilian wins a Grand Prix? It hasn't been played since Italy 2009.

Tema da Vitória, by... someone

It was composed by Globo for whenever Ayrton Senna won a race. Hence it's know as the "Senna Victory Theme". However, it's subsequently been used at World Cup 1994 (which was won on penalties by Brazil) and subsequent wins in F1 by Brazilians.

Basically, the artist was whoever the in-house composer at Globo was in the late 80s.

Stramala wrote:

Aerospeed [JerMcC] wrote:

good_Ralf wrote:Does anyone know the music played on Brazilian TV everytime a Brazilian wins a Grand Prix? It hasn't been played since Italy 2009.

Tema da Vitória, by... someone

It was composed by Globo for whenever Ayrton Senna won a race. Hence it's know as the "Senna Victory Theme". However, it's subsequently been used at World Cup 1994 (which was won on penalties by Brazil) and subsequent wins in F1 by Brazilians.

Basically, the artist was whoever the in-house composer at Globo was in the late 80s.

Curious fact here, the first time the song ran it was when Piquet won...
Forgive me if I'm wrong...

Is the old F1 ident (used until 2003) by FOM with the rock tune the best ever? Or are the new intros better?

good_Ralf wrote:Is the old F1 ident (used until 2003) by FOM with the rock tune the best ever? Or are the new intros better?

It's always the one I've liked the best.

Ditto. I've also wondered who it was who wrote and/or performed it - there's more than a hint of Dire Straits in there. Want to own up to anything, Mr Knoepfler?

Also, will this thread last as long as "Caption This!" as it crashes through 2000 posts?