Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
We all complain that with open wheel racing, F1 in particular, that there is a lack of passing. Usually blamed on sensitive areodynamics.
But also, I constantly hear TV commetators and newprint saying how "it's very hard to pass on this track", and similar things.
If that's the case, then why don't they simply design tracks and reconfigure tracks to make it easier to pass? And more turns where passing is easier. I know this wouldn't completely solve the problem, but it's constantly being mentioned about tracks having no area's to pass, regardless of the type of cars racing.
I thought this question especially relevant considering all the new tracks that Bernie is forcing on us all.
As two extreme examples (and I apologize for these not being F1) are the Barber Motorsports Park that the IRL just raced at, and the former CART/Champcar track of Cleveland International Airport, where passing could be done pretty much anywhere.
Jersey Tom wrote:Don't believe everything you hear.
In fact.. don't believe anything you hear.
Including that..?
Any post(s) made by this user are (semi-)educated opinion(s), based on random fact(s) blurred by the smudges of time.
Any fact(s) claimed by this user will be supplemented by a link to the original source of said fact(s).
If that's the case, then why don't they simply design tracks and reconfigure tracks to make it easier to pass? And more turns where passing is easier. I know this wouldn't completely solve the problem, but it's constantly being mentioned about tracks having no area's to pass, regardless of the type of cars racing.
most of the new tracks are deffinatley geared towards trying to be overtaking friendly. look at bahrain, valencia, abu dahbi etc. they all have places where the chorners have obviousley been designed to accomidate overtaking. its the same old story, long straight then big braking zone. this in principle is what creates a good overtaking spot, but how much overtaking did we se at bahrain this year or at valencia in the last two?
what i find most perplexing is that the track where i would say is the best place for overtaking (interlagos) was designed at a time when one of the least considerations in circuit disign was 'overtaking spots.' the fact that the dive in to the senna s and turn four are possibley the best places to see overtaking on the calender, when they wernt even especially designed to accomdate it, is not least astonishing. how come tilke, with all his millions cant come up with any corners that encourage overtaking like these do?
some of the overtaking corners he comes up with are good, but it should be asked, why are they good and why cant more corners be made suitable for overtaking.
'I'm an action transvestite really, so it's running, jumping, climbing trees... putting on make-up when you're up there!' Eddie Izzard
therealjackson wrote:
how come tilke, with all his millions cant come up with any corners that encourage overtaking like these do?
Most of all, it's quite astonishing that, being both an architect and a racing driver, Tilke can't come up with anything far more exciting than Monza or Spa. I understand that designing a circuit is not just a matter of drawing a few lines to expand into a circuit. Still, sometimes I wonder if someone else out there could have done a better job.
One question, though: is it possible to use different types of tarmac in the same track to change grip conditions and increase the challenge? Say, more grip on the braking zone and less in a complex turn or chicane?
davidc wrote:OK, this may be a newbie question, but here goes:
We all complain that with open wheel racing, F1 in particular, that there is a lack of passing. Usually blamed on sensitive areodynamics.
But also, I constantly hear TV commetators and newprint saying how "it's very hard to pass on this track", and similar things.
If that's the case, then why don't they simply design tracks and reconfigure tracks to make it easier to pass? And more turns where passing is easier. I know this wouldn't completely solve the problem, but it's constantly being mentioned about tracks having no area's to pass, regardless of the type of cars racing.
I thought this question especially relevant considering all the new tracks that Bernie is forcing on us all.
As two extreme examples (and I apologize for these not being F1) are the Barber Motorsports Park that the IRL just raced at, and the former CART/Champcar track of Cleveland International Airport, where passing could be done pretty much anywhere.
The cars have changed a lot from what they were back in early 90s and early 2000s... but who said wheel to wheel racing is completely gone.... chinese grand prix 2010... vettel and hamilton... alonso and mass... sutil and petrov...
i guess we can all agree upon the fact that the frequency in which we can see so much overtaking has dropped in an alraming rate....
but i think it does not depend on who the tracks are designed... more depends on which car's setup responds to the track well during that race weekday....
"Be the change that you wish to see most in your world" -- Mahatma Gandhi
davidc wrote:OK, this may be a newbie question, but here goes:
We all complain that with open wheel racing, F1 in particular, that there is a lack of passing. Usually blamed on sensitive areodynamics.
But also, I constantly hear TV commetators and newprint saying how "it's very hard to pass on this track", and similar things.
If that's the case, then why don't they simply design tracks and reconfigure tracks to make it easier to pass? And more turns where passing is easier. I know this wouldn't completely solve the problem, but it's constantly being mentioned about tracks having no area's to pass, regardless of the type of cars racing.
I thought this question especially relevant considering all the new tracks that Bernie is forcing on us all.
As two extreme examples (and I apologize for these not being F1) are the Barber Motorsports Park that the IRL just raced at, and the former CART/Champcar track of Cleveland International Airport, where passing could be done pretty much anywhere.
The cars have changed a lot from what they were back in early 90s and early 2000s... but who said wheel to wheel racing is completely gone.... chinese grand prix 2010... vettel and hamilton... alonso and mass... sutil and petrov...
i guess we can all agree upon the fact that the frequency in which we can see so much overtaking has dropped in an alraming rate....
but i think it does not depend on who the tracks are designed... more depends on which car's setup responds to the track well during that race weekday....
Long straights is not the answer anymore because nowadays the brakes are so efficient that the stop path is very short. I would think that a series of tricky fast corners followed by a straight or by a short straight ending with harpin may create more overtaking. If you screw up the fast tricky corners and have messy exit, then you may be taken on the next straight... Just a thought, may be wrong. To design a good track is not only important to have overtaking spots. On should also analyze what are the preconditions leading to successful overtaking move and try to work in that direction
Tilke designs tracks for F1 cars, a moving target year to year.
Older cars were designed to compete on tracks that were just made according to the lay of the land and a nice looking design.
This is a neat little read I am lifting from another forum.
Laguna Seca. A Spanish-to-English translation engine says it means "dry lagoon" or "dry gap". It sounds cooler in Spanish.
What is it about Laguna? Why does almost everyone struggle for speed and have their license bitch-slapped by this place, at least at first? It's always dangerous, even for the best drivers. It's dangerous if you push, maybe more dangerous if you don't push and lose your rhythm.
I do have a theory, as always:
Laguna consists of two distinct sections. There is the normal, almost modern-F1-sanitary section from T11 through T5. Difficult and technical, if you like, but nothing really special, except T2. Then there is T6 through T10, the part that climbs up the ridge and back down again. As we all know only too well, even the 'normal' section will bite you at the start as everyone funnels into T2, and I'll bet I have looped a car on my own going into that corner a hundred times or more. But the trip up and over the damn ridge is the crazy part.
Here is the Legend of Laguna, as told to me by . . . somebody I can't remember. However, the reader may be quite confident that I do, in fact, believe I heard this story somewhere before. Lends it a certain air of truth, I should think.
So there they were, laying out the track with a bulldozer. They had carved-out the more-or-less flat portion, presumably in the bottom of its namesake, the 'dry place'. In the desert. I'm just saying. Anyway, then they looked up at the ridge running alongside, shrugged, and told the bulldozer driver to find a path up there and back down again, such that the two ends of the flat portion, already conceived and achieved, were connected.
The bulldozer driver turned left at T5 and attacked the slope, choosing to hang another left at our beloved T6, proceeded up to the pinnacle of the local formation, paused, and looked over the side. What he decided to do next became the one of the most famous pieces of race track in the world; he just dove left off the side of the ridge-top, then hooked back to the right. Presto, one 'corkscrew' (you boys ought to be able to race yer sporty cars through there, no problem). From there he found a path around and down through T10 and back to the lagoon.
It is my understanding that drivers in the real world almost universally love Laguna. I have not personally raced there, but, you know, it looks lovable and all. But, so here's the theory part. No self-respecting road-builder would ever lay down a piece of road like that. No no no. He would reshape the land to suit his purposes. He would produce a path which conforms to accepted standards for gradient, radius, vector, and curvature. Something your mother would feel comfortable on.
But we have the goat-path the bulldozer guy laid out, preserved and enshrined in asphalt and FIA curbing. It's not a normal and predictable piece of road, and we don't have seat-of-the pants feel for our cars. FFB helps, of course. But without 'the feeling in the backside' as Hans Stuck used to say, it is very difficult to interpret. If you look closely at it, you discover the most unexpected shapes, angles, and distortions. It is actually possible to look too far ahead at Laguna, right past some quirky characteristic that must be accounted for with wheel and pedal. And that's the problem with Laguna. The End.
not that Laguna is the best passing track, but it has character, and it's because it was designed, not engineered.
Before I do anything I ask myself “Would an idiot do that?” And if the answer is yes, I do not do that thing. - Dwight Schrute
True about the braking zone's being very short so the usual long straight with sharp corner doesn't always work...but a long straight with a multiple line corner following it, with a second corner quickly so an over-under could be accomplished....
All the drivers would like to overtake more....why don't they just ask them what makes a track good for it?
davidc wrote:True about the braking zone's being very short so the usual long straight with sharp corner doesn't always work...but a long straight with a multiple line corner following it, with a second corner quickly so an over-under could be accomplished....
All the drivers would like to overtake more....why don't they just ask them what makes a track good for it?
The drivers do meet and discuss about the tracks and their layout and stuff but only some part of it is implemented....
"Be the change that you wish to see most in your world" -- Mahatma Gandhi
And don't forget that we have tracks that are 16-30 m wide like Sepang. On some corners at Sepang five cars can go round abreast and will never hit each other. The problem is that in a dry race nobody takes a different racing line because all alternatives are dirtier. So the myth that it is all about the tracks is just that, a myth. For good overtaking all you need is less downforce. The closer to zero the better but one ton probably isn't a bad point to start with as the old turbo cars probably had just about that much.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
@ WhiteBlue. There is only one racing line at Sepang even if you don't take marbles/dirt into account. Most Tilke circuits are wide but have only one option as to haw you take the corners.
There is no law that over taking must be done on the racing line. If you have more speed you can take a longer line. The problem starts where track off the line is dirty and only the racing line is sticky. You loose so much traction compared to the other guy that even more speed is no help. I do not believe in the myth of tracks with multiple racing lines. You will have drivers always favor one line and then you have a preferred rubbered in line again. The only cure is less downforce and harder compounds. The current compounds are too soft and make the racing line too sticky. You can see it perfectly when they race in the wet. With massively reduced traction you get fantastic racing.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
My thoughts are wiiiiiiider longer turns. This will give the drivers more time to overtake. There may be more more than one line as WB says, but In terms of racing line for my track, there is an optimum racing line but when it comes to passing there is a certain position the the drivers can go in to negate it.
I think we should have a track design thread if there wasn't one already.
