The Official 2017 Australian Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**

[Crafty_]

heretic

Seriously though, I hate highlight shows. Its a bit like reading the first chapter of a book and then skipping to the last page.

[HustleRussell]

Crafty_ said:

Then I very much doubt you'll ever see live F1 again, unless you do so by illegal methods.

...Unless you are willing to pay a fairly modest fee to watch it on demand or on the dedicated channel, or a more generous amount to see the race live and in person at one of the ~20 venues visited every season?

[amgmcqueen]

Predictions for the weekend:

Mercedes to blow everybody into the weeds.
Hamilton on pole, Bottas 2nd +1.000 ahead of 3rd.
Even less overtaking than last year due to wider track and more turbulent air.
McLaren to break down.
Lance stroll to bin it.
Coulthard wearing his hideous blue trousers.

[Crafty_]

HustleRussell said:

Crafty_ said:

Then I very much doubt you'll ever see live F1 again, unless you do so by illegal methods.

...Unless you are willing to pay a fairly modest fee to watch it on demand or on the dedicated channel, or a more generous amount to see the race live and in person at one of the ~20 venues visited every season?

Quite, but the poster said he wouldn't pay anything over his licence fee to watch, so I doubt he'd pay for NowTV etc.

[ajprice]

amgmcqueen said:

Coulthard wearing his hideous blue trousers.

Nah, Crazy Dave with the whitey tighties .

[tommunster10]

Crafty_ said:

heretic

Seriously though, I hate highlight shows. Its a bit like reading the first chapter of a book and then skipping to the last page.

It's really not like that though. Highlights of F1 will pick the good bits and edit out the dull bits. With F1 highlights sadly it means you find yourself watching the dull bits still as they have to fill out the time. I've found myself actually fast forwarding the F1 highlights with some of the 'races'.

Match of the Day is a perfect example of a sports highlights show that works perfectly and not at all how you described it. as they don't show you the first 5 mins then skip to the last 5 mins...which is how you explained it with your book reference...
For people with a family, kids and life, a highlights show is perfect.

Worst bit about this scenario is trying to not find out the result before the highlights though.

[Evilex]

I wouldn't pay extra to watch F1. I work every Sunday, so can't watch it as it happens. I can't be bothered to record it, as I'd be tied to the one Tv that has that facility. I occasionally watch the C4 highlights on catch-up, but the resolution and bit-rate are awful, as are the adverts.

I generally read the text commentary on BBC sport while the race is running.

Hopefully the LM take-over and its potential impact on current media contacts will present me with more options.

[kambites]

I could forgive the fact that we can only get half the races live on terrestrial TV more easily if C4's catch-up service wasn't quite so appalling.

[Elderly]

O/T. I liked the MotoGP highlights:

The start of the race is right at the beginning of the programme.
A MotoGP race live takes around 40 minutes and the highlights coverage of the MotoGP race (excluding commercial breaks and the Moto2 & Moto3 coverage at the end) can't be much less than ......


..... about 40 minutes .

I wonder how Channel 5 will handle it?

[rdjohn]

Vocal Minority said:

They were knocking on the doors of 5 seconds quicker from last years tests - the step up in performance will be significant

If the original intention of these changes happens, we should see a total race time nearly 5-minutes quicker than recent years.

My guess is that will not be the case. As ever, the objective will be to win the race in the slowest possible time.

We should not expect to see any significant difference outside of Q3.

[Vocal Minority]

I guess the limiting factor will actually be fuel on whether they go faster.

Because whilst the adage of winning the race in the slowest possible time rings true, if there are physical resources in reserve, drivers will still nudge the upper end of feasible, as if you pootle round at 85% and someone knows they can afford to do it at 90% they will do that and beat mr 85% if they have the fuel and tyres to do it.

Have the fuel regs been changed in any way this year?

[Vaud]

Vocal Minority said:

I guess the limiting factor will actually be fuel on whether they go faster.

Because whilst the adage of winning the race in the slowest possible time rings true, if there are physical resources in reserve, drivers will still nudge the upper end of feasible, as if you pootle round at 85% and someone knows they can afford to do it at 90% they will do that and beat mr 85% if they have the fuel and tyres to do it.

Have the fuel regs been changed in any way this year?

+5kg of fuel IIRC.

But then the weight has gone up anyway by 20kg to account for the tyres, so these will be heavier cars, spending more time on the throttle at higher speeds... so my guess is fuel saving may be even more important this year.

[suffolk009]

^^ And more downforce means more drag. Means more fuel.

[Evilex]

Ah... but they're greener and more relevant because they're hybrids!

[rdjohn]

...and they have 20% less engine life to achieve their season results with.

McLaren Honda excluded.

Edited by rdjohn on Tuesday 21st March 15:19

[kambites]

suffolk009 said:

^^ And more downforce means more drag. Means more fuel.

Since there's obviously a trade-off between down-force and drag (very few tracks are run in maximum down-force configuration) one has to assume that not only has the maximum achievable down-force increased, but for a given amount of down-force drag has decreased?

Otherwise the aerodynamics changes haven't really achieved anything in terms of performance except at Monaco.

[Dermot O'Logical]

kambites said:

Since there's obviously a trade-off between down-force and drag (very few tracks are run in maximum down-force configuration) one has to assume that not only has the maximum achievable down-force increased, but for a given amount of down-force drag has decreased?

Otherwise the aerodynamics changes haven't really achieved anything in terms of performance except at Monaco.

Much of the downforce increase comes from the bigger, more effective diffusers introduced for 2017, and downforce created by the floor and diffuser doesn't create as much drag as that created by wings.

[kambites]

That being true, presumably we can expect to see the cars running considerably less wing than last year. I suppose under-floor aero is also less effected by "dirty" air coming off a car in front?

[anonymous-user]

suffolk009 said:

^^ And more downforce means more drag. Means more fuel.

That depends on how you generate the downforce.

A 1982 ground effect car has more downforce but less drag than a 1983 flat bottom car.

The 1982 Ground Effect car has no front wing and a smaller rear wing that is mounted 100mm lower and 200mm further back than you find on a Flat bottom car, because most of the downforce is produced by the tunnels, which are very low drag compared to a wing. The Flat bottom car has a large front wing because the flat floor no longer generates much downforce.

The cars were roughly 5 seconds a lap slower in 1983 because of the reduction in downforce and increase in drag.

What the 2017 rules have done is pretty much the opposite of what they did at the end of 1982, they have reduced the drag from the wings and increased the underbody aerodynamics, so I expect the overall drag increase will be relatively small, even with the extra track width and wider tyres.

The front wings are now not only generating downforce, they are creating an air flow that generates an aero skirt up the side of the floor, to produce the same effect as a sealed ground effect tunnel skirt.

You can also add to this the trick suspension that lowers the rear at speed, to reduce drag with no loss of downforce at the corner speed range where you need it.

[kambites]

jsf said:

You can also add to this the trick suspension that lowers the rear at speed, to reduce drag with no loss of downforce at the corner speed range where you need it.

If that doesn't get banned.