F1 driver fitness and G-forces

[Andres125sx]

Some time ago, when cars did all lap records, some drivers reported feeling sick because of the high Gs sustained over a race (combined with tiredness, dehydratation, etc.). Supporting 5Gs for a corner is very different to support 5Gs on several corners and braking points for 2 hours after you lost 2-3 litres of water and your muscles are exhausted

I´m wondering if this problem may be a problem next season again, since every opinion I´m reading from people with some knownledge agree 2017 cars will be faster than FIA anticipates

I hope not, but if it happens, it may be a serious problem wich could be a huge safety problem depending on intensity


Any toughts?

[Juzh]

Some time ago, when cars did all lap records, some drivers reported feeling sick because of the high Gs sustained over a race (combined with tiredness, dehydratation, etc.). Supporting 5Gs for a corner is very different to support 5Gs on several corners and braking points for 2 hours after you lost 2-3 litres of water and your muscles are exhausted

I´m wondering if this problem may be a problem next season again, since every opinion I´m reading from people with some knownledge agree 2017 cars will be faster than FIA anticipates

I hope not, but if it happens, it may be a serious problem wich could be a huge safety problem depending on intensity


Any toughts?

Corners in F1 are not cambered enough for this to be a major problem imo. I think it's good for drivers to feel exhausted after the race. Race pace will be most likely be equal or still slightly worse than lets say 2004 and everyone managed it fine then.

[godlameroso]

Some time ago, when cars did all lap records, some drivers reported feeling sick because of the high Gs sustained over a race (combined with tiredness, dehydratation, etc.). Supporting 5Gs for a corner is very different to support 5Gs on several corners and braking points for 2 hours after you lost 2-3 litres of water and your muscles are exhausted

I´m wondering if this problem may be a problem next season again, since every opinion I´m reading from people with some knownledge agree 2017 cars will be faster than FIA anticipates

I hope not, but if it happens, it may be a serious problem wich could be a huge safety problem depending on intensity


Any toughts?

I think the level of athleticism of the current crop of drivers is severely underestimated. All of them can easily do a 15km run. Although there's a big difference to jogging and being subjected to 5+ g's. It's going to be mental, it may make some tracks harder to drive, and others easier. It may be that some tracks become easier because you can go full throttle through turns where you may have had to have lifted, such as 13 in Baku. On the other hand it will make other races much more difficult because the increased limits may require a more dangerously on the edge line to go fast. Where the car is unstable if you try to follow the natural line, but it's much faster than if you follow the traditional line. Or like Riccardo said, that some drivers may not feel as comfortable going flat out where others would and could make a difference. When the limits are higher it requires more concentration and focus to straddle the line between the limit and loss of control, the margin for error becomes smaller because the speeds are higher.

If anything I think next year the first half of the season or at least the first few races is going to be ruled by the better drivers, the ones that adapt quickest, that take more chances, that have more skill and natural talent. The second half of the season is going to be ruled by the better teams that can out-develop the competition.

[timbo]

Some time ago, when cars did all lap records, some drivers reported feeling sick because of the high Gs sustained over a race (combined with tiredness, dehydratation, etc.). Supporting 5Gs for a corner is very different to support 5Gs on several corners and braking points for 2 hours after you lost 2-3 litres of water and your muscles are exhausted

I´m wondering if this problem may be a problem next season again, since every opinion I´m reading from people with some knownledge agree 2017 cars will be faster than FIA anticipates

I hope not, but if it happens, it may be a serious problem wich could be a huge safety problem depending on intensity


Any toughts?

I haven't heard drivers had fitness problem in 2004. Drivers did have problems back in early '80s on ground effect cars, but there were a lot of factors combined, lack of power steering, stiff suspension and overall level of fitness being lower (can you imagine Alan Jones in an F1 car today? that's not to belittle him in any way, same fitness increase happened in most other sports and when you compare Olympic medalists from, say, 50s with the guys today it's a bit weird).
Also there were some problems in 2009, when car designers were facing the need to incorporate KERS in a much tougher weight limit than we have today. Most drivers on the fit had to loose weight, sometimes too much, and at some races it backfired. It's also not much of an issue today.
And finally there were some issues in CART series on high banked oval during Firestone Firehawk 600 race, and the race had to be postponed. But that was due to very high sustained G-forces on a high banking track.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_Firehawk_600

I do not think that fitness would be a big problem.

[Andres125sx]

Now I can´t find any quote from that period, but I´m sure I read some driver felt dizzy due to G forces in pre-2004 era.

I wouldn´t be that sure about fitness will not be a problem, specially when nowadays F1 cars are so little demanding some drivers have complaint about this. If they don´t need too be extremely fit, they probably are not extremely fit, take Gutierrez and Verstappen as an example



If drivers don´t need to be very fit/strong, they´re not. If new cars become seriously more demanding, they will catch up, but meanwhile some driver could have some problem

The question should be what G forces will we see next season? If they go half G up (5,5 for braking, 4,5-5 for cornering) I don´t think there will be any problem, but if G forces go up further... I don´t think that will be the case, but I think someone should take this into consideration because many people think cars will be much faster than planned

[turbof1]

Now I can´t find any quote from that period, but I´m sure I read some driver felt dizzy due to G forces in pre-2004 era.

I wouldn´t be that sure about fitness will not be a problem, specially when nowadays F1 cars are so little demanding some drivers have complaint about this. If they don´t need too be extremely fit, they probably are not extremely fit, take Gutierrez and Verstappen as an example
https://www.caracteres.mx/wp-content/up ... 9rrez1.jpg
http://cdn.uinterview.com/wp-content/up ... 40072b.PNG

If drivers don´t need to be very fit/strong, they´re not. If new cars become seriously more demanding, they will catch up, but meanwhile some driver could have some problem

The question should be what G forces will we see next season? If they go half G up (5,5 for braking, 4,5-5 for cornering) I don´t think there will be any problem, but if G forces go up further... I don´t think that will be the case, but I think someone should take this into consideration because many people think cars will be much faster than planned

Ehm? Verstappen and Guitterez actually look very, very fit. They just do not have a whole lot of muscle tissue. Muscle tissue is very heavy. What you are seeing there are very efficient bodies, very comparable to for instance Christian Froome, with a lot of power per kg of body weight. Compared to a normal person with the same body silhouette, they can easily have double the power output.

[timbo]

If they don´t need too be extremely fit, they probably are not extremely fit, take Gutierrez and Verstappen as an example

Look at their necks.

[PhillipM]

If they don´t need too be extremely fit, they probably are not extremely fit, take Gutierrez and Verstappen as an example

Look at their necks.

I think Andres is confusing being 'really fit' with musculature. They're not related, all the drivers are incredibly fit athletes.

[Just_a_fan]

Fitness? Jenson Button does triathlons for fun. You can't get much fitter than that.

F1 drivers are supremely fit - not only in general but also in specific areas. They train with weight machines designed to mimic car loads e.g. steering wheels that lift weights as they're turned, helmets linked to weights to train the neck. The cardio fitness is only one part of it. Oh, and the diet is carefully controlled to maximise performance too.

[Andres125sx]

If they don´t need too be extremely fit, they probably are not extremely fit, take Gutierrez and Verstappen as an example

Look at their necks.

I think Andres is confusing being 'really fit' with musculature. They're not related, all the drivers are incredibly fit athletes.

Errr, no, being fit and musculature are related. If you´re a cyclist you don´t need any musculature since your sport is purely aerobic and muscles would be a dead weight, but if you´re a F1 driver you also need some musculature to hold your body weight multiplied by a factor of 5 even after one and a half hours doing that effort. We all have seen F1 drivers using his hands to hold his head/helmet at corners because he was exhausted

Not so long ago when drivers made his F1 debut, they usually pointed to their surprise when realicing how demanding F1 was, they had to change their training to adapt to F1 requirements, specially the neck, also the legs. I´ve not read anything related in many seasons, because today F1 is not so demanding any more. Alonso also pointed to this several times saying F1 should be more similar to past seasons with faster and more demanding cars

And that´s what they´re trying with this new rules, but since many people think 2017 cars will be much faster than planned, I was wondering if they finally are *much* faster than planned, if they could go too far. Looks like most people here think that´s not posible, but I´m not sure, FIA has some experience messing up things

Take Alonso as an example, he´s asking for more demanding cars, but nowadays he´s not the twentyish he was when cars were more demanding, so now at 35 years old he could struggle if cars become *much* faster. Similar toughts come to my mind when watching thin drivers like Esteban or Max. I know they´re not thin as myself, they´re extremely fit, but anycase I see them too thin. Jenson is a good example, he´s also extremely fit, but not that thin, he has more muscles.

Today for F1 drivers need aerobic training basically, for that Max and Esteban shape is perfect, but if cars become much faster I can see a scenario with drivers exhausted at final part of the races because they´re not trained for the big efforts *much* faster cars would demand


*much*: used to note it all depends on how much faster 2017 cars will be. Probably some seconds will not be a huge difference, but teams always find the way to make faster than planned cars, so if they do it again, depending on how much, it may be a problem.... or maybe not and I´m overreacting

[godlameroso]

They won't be much faster than now, not at first anyway. I see a 3 or 4 second improvement, the true speed comes later, or next year when teams have gotten to grips with the madness. If we see faster race pace than in 2010 right away I'll be impressed.

[turbof1]

I think Andres is confusing being 'really fit' with musculature. They're not related, all the drivers are incredibly fit athletes.

Errr, no, being fit and musculature are related. If you´re a cyclist you don´t need any musculature since your sport is purely aerobic and muscles would be a dead weight, but if you´re a F1 driver you also need some musculature to hold your body weight multiplied by a factor of 5 even after one and a half hours doing that effort. We all have seen F1 drivers using his hands to hold his head/helmet at corners because he was exhausted

I'm sorry, but that is wrong. You can perfectly have lean muscles and still push out a lot of power. I can know: I train for years now in function of increasing both peak and average power! Just look at Froome, who can push out a peak power of 525 watt, which is really astounding. Cycling is NOT purely aerobic by the way: doing mountain stages they are deep into anaerobic territory.

Also your own point defeats itself: you say you need more muscle volume in order to cope with the multiplied weight. If you bring down your body weight through reduced muscle volume, G forces are also minimized.

The key is V02max concerning the muscles used. Increased V02Max and therefore increased aerobic treshold will decrease anaerobic excercise. The less anaerobic metabolism, the longer you can sustain the excercise.

So no: they are not necessarily related. If this was 100m sprint, then you would have been right where as much as muscle tissue as possible is doing fast anaerobic metabolism. However, as you said the strain on the body lasts for more then one and a half hour, meaning you can't do this anearobically, but you can aerobically. Aerobic excercise puts heavy emphasis on low muscle volume - high V02max.

[SR71]

I think Andres is confusing being 'really fit' with musculature. They're not related, all the drivers are incredibly fit athletes.

Errr, no, being fit and musculature are related. If you´re a cyclist you don´t need any musculature since your sport is purely aerobic and muscles would be a dead weight, but if you´re a F1 driver you also need some musculature to hold your body weight multiplied by a factor of 5 even after one and a half hours doing that effort. We all have seen F1 drivers using his hands to hold his head/helmet at corners because he was exhausted

I'm sorry, but that is wrong. You can perfectly have lean muscles and still push out a lot of power. I can know: I train for years now in function of increasing both peak and average power! Just look at Froome, who can push out a peak power of 525 watt, which is really astounding. Cycling is NOT purely aerobic by the way: doing mountain stages they are deep into anaerobic territory.

Also your own point defeats itself: you say you need more muscle volume in order to cope with the multiplied weight. If you bring down your body weight through reduced muscle volume, G forces are also minimized.

The key is V02max concerning the muscles used. Increased V02Max and therefore increased aerobic treshold will decrease anaerobic excercise. The less anaerobic metabolism, the longer you can sustain the excercise.

So no: they are not necessarily related. If this was 100m sprint, then you would have been right where as much as muscle tissue as possible is doing fast anaerobic metabolism. However, as you said the strain on the body lasts for more then one and a half hour, meaning you can't do this anearobically, but you can aerobically. Aerobic excercise puts heavy emphasis on low muscle volume - high V02max.

+1

This is why F1 drivers look like triathletes and not 100m sprinters.

[Jolle]

I think Andres is confusing being 'really fit' with musculature. They're not related, all the drivers are incredibly fit athletes.

Errr, no, being fit and musculature are related. If you´re a cyclist you don´t need any musculature since your sport is purely aerobic and muscles would be a dead weight, but if you´re a F1 driver you also need some musculature to hold your body weight multiplied by a factor of 5 even after one and a half hours doing that effort. We all have seen F1 drivers using his hands to hold his head/helmet at corners because he was exhausted

I'm sorry, but that is wrong. You can perfectly have lean muscles and still push out a lot of power. I can know: I train for years now in function of increasing both peak and average power! Just look at Froome, who can push out a peak power of 525 watt, which is really astounding. Cycling is NOT purely aerobic by the way: doing mountain stages they are deep into anaerobic territory.

Also your own point defeats itself: you say you need more muscle volume in order to cope with the multiplied weight. If you bring down your body weight through reduced muscle volume, G forces are also minimized.

The key is V02max concerning the muscles used. Increased V02Max and therefore increased aerobic treshold will decrease anaerobic excercise. The less anaerobic metabolism, the longer you can sustain the excercise.

So no: they are not necessarily related. If this was 100m sprint, then you would have been right where as much as muscle tissue as possible is doing fast anaerobic metabolism. However, as you said the strain on the body lasts for more then one and a half hour, meaning you can't do this anearobically, but you can aerobically. Aerobic excercise puts heavy emphasis on low muscle volume - high V02max.

Plus, in winter testing they did two GP's a day, a few times a week.

Mansell and Alonso have wide necks. Senna, Schumacher, Hill, etc etc, not so extreme.

[Cold Fussion]

I think Andres is confusing being 'really fit' with musculature. They're not related, all the drivers are incredibly fit athletes.

Errr, no, being fit and musculature are related. If you´re a cyclist you don´t need any musculature since your sport is purely aerobic and muscles would be a dead weight, but if you´re a F1 driver you also need some musculature to hold your body weight multiplied by a factor of 5 even after one and a half hours doing that effort. We all have seen F1 drivers using his hands to hold his head/helmet at corners because he was exhausted

Just look at Froome, who can push out a peak power of 525 watt, which is really astounding.

I'm gonna need a source for that. Froome's peak power is absolutely not 525 watts, there is no way a professional cyclist is going to have a peak power that low. Froome's peak power is going to be at least 1000 watts. If his TFP is 525 watts then yes that would be truly incredible but I doubt it would be much over 450 watts.