Better racing - but is it fake? [Andrew Benson]

[BrightLampShade]

Andrew Benson has written this:

In Monaco before Christmas, Formula 1's governing body held a meeting to discuss one of the key and most controversial aspects of 2011 - the Drag Reduction System or DRS.

Introduced amid much controversy and no small amount of trepidation in some quarters, questions about the validity of the overtaking aid, not to mention the wisdom of employing it, decreased during the season. So much so that, at the Monaco meeting, it was decided that only small refinements needed to be made to its use for the 2012 campaign.

But while the FIA and the teams all agree that DRS has played a valuable role in improving F1 as a spectacle, they are determined to ensure it performs in the way intended. In particular, no-one wants to cheapen one of the central aspects of a driver's skill by making overtaking too easy.


To recap briefly, DRS was introduced in an attempt to solve the perennial problem of there being too little overtaking. After years - decades even - of discussions, F1's technical brains hit on what they thought could be a solution: DRS.

DRS does what it says on the tin. When deployed, the top part of the rear wing moves upwards, reducing drag and giving a boost in straight-line speed. In races, drivers could use it only if they were within a second of the car in front at a "detection point" shortly before the "DRS zone". The DRS zone was where DRS could be deployed, which was usually the track's longest straight.

The idea was to make overtaking possible but not too easy.

There is no doubt that racing improved immeasurably as a spectacle in 2011 compared with previous seasons. But how big a role did DRS play? And did overtaking become too easy at some tracks and remain too hard at others?

It is a more complex issue than it at first appears because it is not always easy to tell from the outside whether an overtaking move was a result of DRS or not.

In Turkey and Belgium, for example, several drivers sailed past rivals in the DRS zone long before the end of it, leading many to think the device had made overtaking too easy.

But, armed with statistics, FIA race director Charlie Whiting says appearances were deceptive. What was making overtaking easy at those two races, he said, was the speed advantage of the car behind as the two cars battling for position came off the corner before the DRS zone.

Whiting showed me a spreadsheet detailing the speeds of the respective cars in all the overtaking manoeuvres that happened in the Belgian GP.

"This shows very clearly that when the speed delta [difference] between the two cars at the beginning of the zone is low, then overtaking is not easy," he said. "But if one car goes through Eau Rouge that bit quicker, sometimes you had a speed delta of 18km/h (11mph). Well, that's going to be an overtake whether you've got DRS or not."

According to Whiting, the statistics show that if the two cars come off the corner into the DRS zone at similar speeds, then the driver behind needs to be far closer than the one-second margin that activates the DRS if he is to overtake.

"One second is the activation but that won't do it for you," Whiting said. "You've got to be 0.4secs behind to get alongside into the braking zone."

Confusing the picture in 2011 - particularly early in the season - was the fast-wearing nature of the new Pirelli tyres, which led to huge grip differences between cars at various points of the races. A driver on fresher tyres would come off a corner much faster and brake that much later for the next one. That would have a far greater impact on the ease of an overtaking move than DRS ever would.

Critics of DRS might argue that while it may be useful at tracks where overtaking has traditionally been difficult, like Melbourne, Valencia and Barcelona, for example, it is debatable whether there is a need for it at circuits where historically there has been good racing, like Turkey, Belgium and Brazil.

According to Whiting, DRS does not diminish the value of an overtaking move at tracks where it is usually easy to pass. It just means that DRS opens up the possibility for more. In other words, it works just as it does at any other track.

McLaren technical director Paddy Lowe is an influential member of the Technical Working Group of leading engineers which came up with DRS. He said people had been arguing for years that engineers should alter the fundamental design of cars to facilitate overtaking.

However, tinkering with the aerodynamics was never an option, according to Lowe, because it would only impact negatively on the spectacle.

"What's great [about DRS is] at least we can move on from this debate of trying to change the aerodynamic characteristics of cars to try to improve overtaking," added Lowe. "We've found something much more authoritative, much cheaper, easier and more effective, and adjustable from race to race."

Whiting thinks DRS worked as expected everywhere except Melbourne and Valencia.


So for next season's opening race in Australia, he is considering adding a second DRS zone after the first chicane, so drivers who have used DRS to draw close to rivals along the pit straight can have another crack at overtaking straight afterwards. As for Valencia, traditionally the least entertaining race of the year, the FIA will simply make the zone, which is located on the run to Turn 12, longer.

There is potentially one big negative about DRS, though.

There is a risk that its introduction could mean the end of races in which a driver uses his skills to hold off a rival in a faster car. Some of the greatest defensive victories of the modern age have been achieved in this way. One thinks of Gilles Villeneuve holding off a train of four cars in his powerful but poor-handling Ferrari to win in Jarama in 1981, or Fernando Alonso fending off Michael Schumacher's faster Ferrari at Imola in 2005.

The idea behind the introduction of DRS was for a much faster car to be able to overtake relatively easily but for passing still to be difficult between two cars of comparative performance. In theory, if that philosophy is adhered to rigidly, the sorts of races mentioned above will still be possible.

However, once an aid has been introduced that gives the driver behind a straight-line speed advantage that is an incredibly difficult line to walk, as Whiting himself admits. "You've got to take the rough with the smooth to a certain extent," he said.

Just thought I'd bring this up, it may fit into another thread so I'll have a look

 

[u408379965]

I hate DRS. It just doesn't work. It would only be useful if everyone had the same car, but because each car has different levels of mechanical and aerodynamic grip, and different gear ratios, and often different tyres (in terms of age or compound) DRS is usually rendered completely obsolete or makes overtakes insultingly easy. It rarely provides an opportunity to be snatched by the driver and it ruins more battles than it creates.

Whiting and Lowe are clutching at straws, to spineless to admit it's ****e.

 

[cosicave]

I hope this is going to make sense…

Analysis
For the most part, I agree with Whiting; and in terms of his technical assessment of its contribution to overtaking, I agree with him 100% - especially with regard to the example given at Spa, where overtaking is common-place without DRS in any case, due to relatively significant speed differences through Eau Rouge, followed by the long straight. Another consideration which should not be ignored is that the racing spectacle can be reduced if drivers are less able to put up a reasonable fight against a potential overtake.

What should we do?
I have always believed that if DRS is to overcome the 'gimmick' label, it has to be more available! For this reason, I was disappointed that it was rarely used at more than one location on a track, which tended to focus overtaking in that area alone, rather like a power-up pad on an arcade game: usually the place where it may have happened anyway.

At present, we have DRS at the discretion of rule makers and not the drivers! What I'd like to see is a transfer of this power, to allow far more driver discretion; thus reducing the reliance upon the FIA to 'get it right'. More DRS zones would increase the chance of a driver to reclaim a place lost a earlier in the lap; and to some extent, reduce the need for somewhat draconian rules about 'defensive moves' - which make the racing even more artificial. DRS should be the prerogative of any attacking driver, ideally all over the circuit; but a defending driver should not have his hands tied more than is necessary for safety alone - any transgression of which should be consistently penalised.

Conclusion

• What I would like to see is some means of timing the gaps between cars at many many more places over the circuit, and for attacking drivers to be able to deploy it more often against drivers who are also allowed to defend more.

- - -

Other considerations

• Contrary to my pre-season concerns, Pirelli made a huge contribution to the spectacle of 2011. It should not be ignored that a great many of the overtakes were the result of cars with tyres at different stages in their lives.

• KERS also contributed to overtaking. What I like about it is that, unlike DRS, a driver can choose to use it at any point on the circuit to attack or defend. It also makes a genuine contribution to the political aspect of F1 with significant technological potential for road cars. I would like to see the power limit doubled, and to see drivers allowed to use it for twice as long each lap! Power to the driver!

- - -​

A final thought
Overtaking is only part of the complete spectacle: its importance should be kept in perspective, and a balance must always be struck with another driver's ability to defend, in order to retain the ultimately vital element which keeps a viewer on the edge of his or her seat: excitement!
​

 

[u408379965]

Your posts are so hard to quote Cosi.

What I would like to see is some means of timing the gaps between cars at many many more places over the circuit, and for attacking drivers to be able to deploy it more often against drivers who are also allowed to defend more.

If this is possible (a detection zone at every meaningful apex) I'd be open to it. Only if they reduced the angle through which they currently adjust the wing so that it was less powerful.

Contrary to my pre-season concerns, Pirelli made a huge contribution to the spectacle of 2011. It should not be ignored that a great many of the overtakes were the result of cars with tyres at different stages in their lives.

This. Pirelli, in my opinion, were almost entirely responsible for the on track excitement this season.

KERS also contributed to overtaking. What I like about it is that, unlike DRS, a driver can choose to use it at any point on the circuit to attack or defend. It also makes a genuine contribution to the political aspect of F1 with significant technological potential for road cars. I would like to see the power limit doubled, and to see drivers allowed to use it for twice as long each lap! Power to the driver!

They're doubling the power of it for 2014. Annoyingly though they're changing the name to ERS, which just sounds stupid.

 

[TomTom94]

I think basically I agree with Cosi. Certainly I think the racing is better for the introduction of it, it may just need to be utilised more efficiently.

And the key example I will cite is: I may hate the man but Alonso missed out on the 2010 WDC in horrendously unfortunate circumstances in my view. With DRS we could have not had to witness the spectacle of him stuck behind Petrov for 40-odd laps for no good reason.

 

[Forza Bianchi]

Whiting thinks DRS worked as expected everywhere except Melbourne and Valencia.

That can't be a good sign for next year.
Whiting needs to understand that easier overtaking can also ruin races.

DRS is bad enough in the races, but in qualifying it gives the teams with more downforce a bigger advantage, further separating the gap between two teams.

 

[cosicave]

Your posts are so hard to quote Cosi.

If this is possible (a detection zone at every meaningful apex) I'd be open to it. Only if they reduced the angle through which they currently adjust the wing so that it was less powerful. …

They're doubling the power of it for 2014. Annoyingly though they're changing the name to ERS, which just sounds stupid.

Haha It is designed to! But seriously, you make some good points here.

Yes, reducing the angle change in the wing-element is something which would go hand in hand with more DRS zones, but the most important aspect of this is that it would allow a driver to use it with more discretion. (Power to the driver to make his own decisions more often!).

2014 is at least a year later than it should have been!

I think basically I agree with Cosi. Certainly I think the racing is better for the introduction of it, it may just need to be utilised more efficiently …

I hope what I said was not too confusing. Yes, I think DRS has been a good thing, over all. It's just a shame that it is so much out of a driver's hands. That is what makes it somewhat artificial: some outside agency dictating how a driver can control his own car! Argh! - it is anathema to me!

That can't be a good sign for next year.
Whiting needs to understand that easier overtaking can also ruin races.

DRS is bad enough in the races, but in qualifying it gives the teams with more downforce a bigger advantage, further separating the gap between two teams.

Exactly. Actually, I think he does understand this, but striking the right balance is tricky. This is why I believe it is so important to put DRS squarely in the hands of the driver, however difficult this may be, in order to remove - or at the very least, reduce - the role of an outside agency playing an active part in how a driver uses his equipment.

 

[tribo32]

dont agree with it at all, its no longer if the faster car can overtake, but when it can overtake. it used to be exciting to see if the driver in front could prevent the driver in fornt form taking the place but this is less and less likely.

overtaking has become too easy, that skill is just as important as anything else in the sport

 

[u408379965]

That can't be a good sign for next year.
Whiting needs to understand that easier overtaking can also ruin races.

DRS is bad enough in the races, but in qualifying it gives the teams with more downforce a bigger advantage, further separating the gap between two teams.

I'd feel a lot more comfortable if it wasn't used at all at places like Spa and Montreal.

I think the use of it in qualifying is one of the few advantages of it. Teams can optimise it for qualifying or the race so there's a bit of mystery like in the refuelling era. I don't think it necessarily gives the teams with more downforce more of an advantage than they'd have any way, as the teams with low downforce can run a more aggressive wing angle without suffering in qualifying. They'll always be at a disadvantage, I don't think DRS really exaggerates it in any way.

 

[EternalMSC]

DRS should be tailored to certain tracks, not all of them. Simple.
Either that or remove it completely.

 

[Di Resta is faster than u]

I wonder what it would be like if each driver had a total of say 7 minutes per race that they can use drs after the 1st 3 laps.

also if they could only use it for 1 lap in the whole of qualifying

 

[EternalMSC]

I wonder what it would be like if each driver had a total of say 7 minutes per race that they can use drs after the 1st 3 laps.

also if they could only use it for 1 lap in the whole of qualifying

Nonsense mate, nothing personal but F1 is complicated enough 10 years on from what I would call "proper" racing.

 

[El_Bando]

Nonsense mate, nothing personal but F1 is complicated enough 10 years on from what I would call "proper" racing.

10 years ago it was all about aerodynamics, who could build the best engine, who had the best tyre brand, money money and money.

 

[cosicave]

Nonsense mate, nothing personal but F1 is complicated enough 10 years on from what I would call "proper" racing.

Well EMSC, that is interesting indeed. I wonder if this has more than a touch of nostalgia? Very few people I know believe the racing of 10 years ago to be better than what we have now. Ten years ago we had Ferrari in almost full (ahem) 'control' of the FIA, with a heavy influence upon their race stewards (in my opinion). Ten years ago we had very little overtaking. Ten years ago, with rapidly falling audiences, F1 was looking down the barrel of a gun.

In terms of complication, I do not think Sea-Man's idea is "rubbish" at all! In fact, relative to what we have now, it sounds rather simple! It would do away with all the headache of calculating where to have a DRS zone's detection point; where to have its activation point; and how far a car is likely to travel once activated. Whether or not it is practical is an entirely different matter, but Sea-Man's idea is - at least in principle - surely simpler than what we have at the moment?

 

[EternalMSC]

Well EMSC, that is interesting indeed. I wonder if this has more than a touch of nostalgia? Very few people I know believe the racing of 10 years ago to be better than what we have now. Ten years ago we had Ferrari in almost full (ahem) 'control' of the FIA, with a heavy influence upon their race stewards (in my opinion). Ten years ago we had very little overtaking. Ten years ago, with rapidly falling audiences, F1 was looking down the barrel of a gun.

In terms of complication, I do not think Sea-Man's idea is "rubbish" at all! In fact, relative to what we have now, it sounds rather simple! It would do away with all the headache of calculating where to have a DRS zone's detection point; where to have its activation point; and how far a car is likely to travel once activated. Whether or not it is practical is an entirely different matter, but Sea-Man's idea is - at least in principle - surely simpler than what we have at the moment?

I meant to put it in terms of racing on the track, not the "backroom deals" and "influences", that you seem to have quite a lot of intelligence and evidence of.
Overtaking was acheived by slipstreaming the opponent, not by pressing some buttons on the steering wheel.

 

[cosicave]

I meant to put it in terms of racing on the track, not the "backroom deals" and "influences", that you seem to have quite a lot of intelligence and evidence of.
Overtaking was manipulated [achieved(?) - ©] by slipstreaming the opponent, not by pressing some buttons on the steering wheel.

Aah yes. On this point, I very much agree with you EMSC.

It is indeed a shame the racing is less 'pure' than it was. This is the very reason I'd like to see a driver given the power to use his equipment as he likes, without it being manipulated or influenced in any way from outside agencies - which deservedly attracts the label: 'gimmick'. Then again, it has been a success. Many other thoughts went into the think-tank of the Working Overtaking Group (OWG) in an effort to improve the spectacle. After several years of hard effort, DRS came out well ahead as a clear winner amongst all other proposals.

It has undoubtedly worked; but accomplishing a similar increase in overtaking without being artificial whilst retaining F1's crucially important position at 'the pinnacle', is an entirely different matter isn't it? A very difficult matter indeed.

But in principle; yes, something feels out of place to me too…

 

[ErnieBecclestone]

Well, in my opinion DRS is a contrivance and add's false and irrelevant entertainment to F1 and should not be used if outside the total control of the pilot and is subject to "other" external influences. KERs on the other hand seems to me to be a natural and highly efficient virtually free power source and it can be used at the drivers discretion and is well worth retaining and further development.

KERs I'm certain will be a common feature on road vehicles particularily trucks within ten years, just imagine a truck with an extra free 200hp pulling off from a junction, what a saving in diesel exhaust fumes !!!

Allegedly F1 KERs will be uprated for 2014 to around 160 hp, now, this will be a massive issue for some drivers, 160 hp of variable braking force dependent upon the level of charge in the batteries or capacitors, now this aspect could really sort the men from the boys, already we have heard drivers mention the braking variances after using up their KERs.

Only 70 odd days now before the first F1 event, seems a long way away, don't you think

 

[EternalMSC]

Thanks for the correction pointer, as my original sentence kind of defeated the object. But to the point, I agree fully with you.
F1 has seemed to move to the audience's favor rather than watching the athletes themselves push their bodies and minds as well as their machines to the maximum.
I am afraid, to bring in more people into the mele of F1, they have lost others because the whole foundation stone is being eroded away.

 

[cosicave]

… Allegedly F1 KERs will be uprated for 2014 to around 160 hp, now, this will be a massive issue for some drivers, 160 hp of variable braking force dependent upon the level of charge in the batteries or capacitors, now this aspect could really sort the men from the boys, already we have heard drivers mention the braking variances after using up their KERs …

Yes Ernie: an instantaneous extra 160bhp will be a significantly difficult thing to manage. Not only will it give drivers double the headache, but it will also make huge demands upon the rear tyres. And we should remember that the rear tyres will get this loading 'jump' in both directions, since they make a similarly significant contribution to braking. I can envisage the more capable teams of investing considerable effort in damping both the power delivery and the braking effect, so as not to destroy the rear tyres in a couple of laps!

… F1 has seemed to move to the audience's favor rather than watching the athletes themselves push their bodies and minds as well as their machines to the maximum.
I am afraid, to bring in more people into the mele of F1, they have lost others because the whole foundation stone is being eroded away.

Yes. Such is the nature of commercialisation. Audiences will always be ignorant to the inner workings of their preferred spectacle (relative to participants and organisers); but their demands become overwhelming when the sport itself becomes ever more reliant upon them.

Let us hope that someone proves capable of putting Sky's brakes on…

 

[ErnieBecclestone]

Cosi, yes, interestingly KERs would surely be much more effective if the cars were 4 wheel drive, then we could really exploit the development of KER systems, would that improve the entertainment value whilst retaining the unique authenticity of F1 engineering, maybe a step too far, eh.