after reading a bit I came across the CVT, banned before it even got to be raced while Williams were designing a system, amid fears that a team who could perfect a system (ie a rich team that was Williams rather than Ferrari) would dominate too much. However, as has been seen this decade, teams can find many ways to dominate, and who knows, HRT could be the team to crack it, after all it wasn't a big team that figured out flexi wings, RBR were strictly midfield until then. As they are now lip serving enviromentalism, isn't it time we unbanned such a fuel efficient transmission system?
Should be next to what? I think DRS should be scrapped for next season. The only time you ever really notice it is when it ruins what was promising to be a good scrap, the plenty of overtaking with the new tyres anyway.
well DRS is moving aero, so it's been unbanned, turbo's are back in 2013 so have been unbanned. As to DRS, I think when they get the rule right it will be seen as a great addition.
Ok I'm with you now. I don't think they'll ever get DRS right though. How can they without knowing beforehand what wing angles and gear ratios the teams will be running and making sure they'll all roughly similar? In the Bridgestone era I think there was a valid case for having it, but in the Pirelli era I think it's unnecessary.
well, we differ in our views on DRS, although I will agree with you that it is totally unsatisfactory at the moment, there is no tactical implementation for it, they use it everytime they can, unlike KERS, which teams and drivers implement into a varying tactical use dependig on the situation. I think if very similar rules were applied to the DRS rule it would become far more accepted by the more 'fundamental' racing fans. If it were upto me I'd have do away with detection zones, make every straight an activation zone and let them use it when ever and where ever they wanted, just limit it's use to a specified time limit per race. It will be phased out when we get turbo boost back so I doubt we'll get to see it changed to a system which most could be happy with.
What about wacky races style gadgets? The red bull ACME boxing glove, in case a McLaren gets too close.
Some good points here Miggs. The whole thing about DRS - even if it has helped increase excitement to the general public - is that it is currently a prescribed weapon: i.e. an artificially controlled one. I have said from the outset that the only way for DRS to become truly validated is for it to become less restricted. If it is allowed, ideally it should be a weapon at the disposal of every driver whenever he chooses, thus returning to greater driver discretion, rather than some artificial FIA controlled contrivance. N.B. In this sense, the more activation zones there are, the better.
I agree Cosi, the whole sport is too restrictive. These are the best drivers in the world, let them choose when to use such devices and takes risks. In terms of what I'd like to see back in the sport it would be 2 or even 3 tyre suppliers.
Ban all radio contact - back to the info boards !!! If not allow 1 channel so that stewards can inform all drivers of anything required. (SC - a drive through penalty - everybody hears the communication etc).
In season testing, as much as you can afford. Lets not kid ourselves, being the best at something isn't going to be done on a shoe string.
Talking of Stewards communication, does anyone know of a reason the stewards don't have direct contact with the drivers? Rather than having to play chinese whispers and go through the teams, why not allow the driver steward (who should know when is a good time to do so), to talk directly with a driver under investigation, to try and see their opinion of things directly, whilst the race is still in progress? Obviously, in the heat of the moment, drivers may say things they regret, but mostly I'd have thought a system like that would work. I think the best use would be when the drivers are behind the safety car in poor weather. Lap by lap feedback could be provided on the state of the track, and drivers could vote on whether they felt it was safe to pull in the safety car, or if the weather was getting worse, if a red flag was necessary. As for banned technologies, I always liked the Mclarens independent rear braking system of 1998 (See here). Very innovative and simple, and a shame in my view to see it banned.
An interesting post, Canary (and welcome back!). Stewards do not have direct contact with the drivers because communication with the driver is entirely within the structure of team effort. To put it another way, it is out of the Stewards' domain - and rightly so in my view - to be able to interfere with the operation of a team by communicating directly to its driver. The situation we currently have - that any such communication is passed on to a driver at the discretion of a team - is perfectly correct, since the team can pass any such message at what they deem to be an appropriate moment. It is also a perfectly adequate method - especially when used in conjunction with consistent judgements and decisions! However, during an extended Safety Car period (where the drivers are temporarily not competing) - such as you've mentioned - the idea could be viable, practical and useful.
It's good to be back! As I wrote that last post, the safety car situation did seem to be a lot more beneficial, with the other situation less so. Thinking about it more, I guess the current system has worked pretty much flawlessly since the introduction of radio transmissions, the only exception which comes to mine is Melbourne 2009. Perhaps better communication in the race between Hamilton and the Stewards could have cleared up the incident before it became a full blown 'scandal', but then equally it got sorted out in the end! I guess having the team as the only line of communication though keeps the driver happier, and avoids 2 groups trying to pass messages to the driver simultaneously.
